Posted on 10/17/2015 2:48:31 PM PDT by xzins
This is going to make the LGBT crowd very unhappy (even though they knew this was the case from the start)
From Daily Wire:
An unpublished UCLA study challenging the societal born this way dogma of homosexuality has already been gaining traction in the public media since its presentation at an annual scientific conference last week.
The twin study conducted at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, finds that homosexuality may be triggered by environmental factors after birth. The research uses an algorithm covering epigenetic markers from several genomic sites of 37 sets of identical male twins to predict homosexuality in males, with 70 percent accuracy, as presented at the American Society of Human Genetics 2015 Annual Meeting in Baltimore.
The finding is highly controversial because it suggests that some men are not born gay, but are turned homosexual by their surroundings, Sarah Knapton of Telegraph suggested.
Wait a tick
Does that mean that kids raised by gay parents or who have been unfortunately abused are more prone to becoming gay?
You dont say?
I feel like conservatives have been saying this for years!
Does this prove beyond all reasonable doubt that gay people choose to be gay?
Yeah, it really does. And more likely than not, there will never be evidence of a gay gene (unless studies are highly falsified like they are with climate change analysis).
As weve known since the beginning of time, a baby boy or girl does not develop in the womb with a gene that tells them to be attracted to the opposite sex.
Why liberals still push the lie that people are born this way makes little sense, but because so many Americans are uninformed on the issues, they go along with whatever Hollywood celebrities and the mainstream media tell them to.
Sad.
Dont even get me started on transgender BS.
Everything in life is a choice, people.
SSA is merely the acronym for “same-sex attraction.” SSA does not refer to sexual acts at all. I don’t know what you are trying to say.
1) First, Faggotry is a behavior. Lying, drinking, using drugs, saving money are other behaviors. Even reading FR is a behavior.
2) Second, it is a good or bad behavior?
3) Third, and very important, behaviors are complex. There is seldom one cause, but several things coming together including reinforcement of behavior. Imprinting (do your own research) is one of the major factors. God designed an system for kids to model two good parents but a good system can be perverted.
4) Behaviors can be modified. Right now we are encouraging the behavior......................
Now one behavior we can all start right now is reminding everyone we encounter that faggotry is a BEHAVIOR.
It is known that the hormone and chemical levels experienced by the developing baby in the womb affect the way the babies brain develops or configures itself.
After birth the baby experiences environmental, and chemical input/ interference as it configures its brain.
This may affect the way the higher processing centers of the brain are connected to the more primitive and emotional centers of the lower brain.
Could this be the reason some people are unable to control the need to 'service' anything that moves of either gender, just the same as some of our more primitive cousins do?
As i say, a passing thought.
I have noticed a sort of "lesbian face", apple cheeks, a short and prominent nose, a round and fairly prominent chin, that doesn't seem to associate with PCOS signs.
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), also called hyperandrogenic anovulation (HA),[1] or SteinLeventhal syndrome,[2] is a set of symptoms due to a hormone imbalance in women.[3] Signs and symptoms of PCOS include irregular or no menstrual periods, heavy periods, excess body and facial hair, acne, pelvic pain, trouble getting pregnant, and patches of thick, darker, velvety skin.[4] Associated conditions include type 2 diabetes, obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, heart disease, mood disorders, and endometrial cancer.[3]
Wikipedia
Thank you for an honest report from your experience.
I’m saying that we have coined SSA to make it seem a separate phenomenon when really it is nothing more than another place where a person will relieve a sexual urge.
"Gay" doesn't mean a person is incapable of normal intercourse with a person of the opposite sex.
I think that throughout history, most of the individuals who would now call themselves "gay", did not have such a label available, but did experience these disordered appetites. My impression is that most of them did find opposite-sex spouses and did reproduce. And maybe engaged on homosexual vice on the side, and maybe not.
At least, most of the"famous" gays in history, had normal spouses and did produce offspring. Alexander the Great and all those pederastic emperors who had wives and children; Lord Byron, Oscar Wilde, Gene Robinson, Anais Nin, etc. etc.
In my opinion, in western culture women control sex. I see it the other way around
Sure they ‘can’. But most don’t. And the way genetics works, dominant traits reinforce at the expense of the weaker. When you have only one set of ‘gay’, there is nothing to reinforce it. The next gen, you likely get 2 straight parents. The next several gens in fact. And so ‘gay’ gets minimized more and more. Thats the path of extinction.
They do to a point. But like anything else, if you want X, you do what you have to to get X. Todays materialism relegated sex to a commodity. Ergo, anal sex becomes a tool for women to use as needed. And it is commonly used whether you believe it or not. It was back in the 80s so I doubt it lessened today.
Don’t forget the circles you run in. Most of the country/world doesn’t. They are very ‘of the world’ and that world is one where anything goes sexually.
SSA is same-sex attraction. It does not imply committing sodomy. It does not imply any particular “action,” and may involve no “action” at all.
SSA is a phenomenon whose fulfillment simply means how you’ll relieve your sexual urges.
In some instances, suicide seems to run in families, too, and, like homosexuality, has a negative impact on repoductive success. For instance, the rather well-known inter-generational woe in the family tree of novelist Walker Percy. Their pattern was that the males would marry, sire children, succumb to a melancholic temperament, and end up drowning themselves or blowing their brains out. Unfortunately, they had already passed on this personality tendency to work its misery in another generation.
It did not inevitably doom the males to suicide (Walker Percy did not kill himself) but it inclined that rather strikingly to that tendency, which can been seen in the family records.
Not everything that happens after birth is a choice. I don’t know if being gay is a choice or not. I personally think that some genes make it more *likely* that you’ll be gay, but then it’s triggered by events and surroundings . . . or *not* triggered, depending.
It occurs to me that “turning” gay may be much like getting PTSD. No one today would suggest that PTSD is a “choice.” It’s a very unfortunate mental condition, triggered by events, that may be somewhat influenced by genetics. (I’ve read a lot about PTSD, since I have it myself.) Being gay may possibly be similar to having PTSD: You’re not born with it, or choose it, but it happens to you if events conspire.
“Gay”is not genetically predisposed. It’s an attitude and set of behavioral patterns that is developed within the individual’s subconscious mind. Therefore, homosexuality does not become “extinct” and the potential is not minimized through family genetics.
I don’t think it’s attitudes and proclivities that influence behavior and events. I think it’s events and behavior that influences attitudes and proclivities.
But not inevitably.
I agree. To be clear, my point (made more clearly some posts back) was that if there was a gay gene, it would either have been extincted by now or massively regressed to junk.
It is behavioral to be sure and yes, cannot be extincted because of it.
... and homosexual men who knew they were “different” from an early age. One theory is that sexual preference may be thrown off course in utero. See http://news.sciencemag.org/evolution/2012/12/homosexuality-may-start-womb and http://scitechdaily.com/homosexuality-might-develop-in-the-womb-due-to-epigenetic-changes/ as examples. Just because some is born with a birth defect doesn’t necessarily mean it’s genetic. Cerebral palsy is a classic example. Fetal alcohol syndrome is another. And their are brain differences between homosexuals and normal folks, too. See for example http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm. There’s more to it than the distant father/domineering mother cliche.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.