Thread: The Real Problem With Homosexuality

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Idolfan, don't you realize that many homosexual and bisexual animals exist in nature?

I am sorry for getting so angry again, but are you all retards? So what there are homosexual animals. There is no doubt that there is a physical predetermination of physical attraction, but are the animals you speak of bonded in any emotional way? And if they are, is it because one partner has the brain structure of the opposite sex? And even if they did not, and they were both the same archetype, just for the sake of argument, once again so what? That says nothing at all about human beings because these are animals! They are leagues and leagues away from the complexity of relationships that humans get into.

I think it's amazing how an incredibly clear topic can end up getting interpreted as something completely different. This was never about "Is homosexuality natural?" It is about since homosexuality is not in the mainstream natural order and it is a brain abnormality*, then how can it be expected to function in society as if we had been evolving for that purpose for millions of years? On topics like homosexuality, people seem to go into a stupor and even the liberals become dogmatic. It's the one topic where all of a sudden everyone seems to forget that evolution is a BLIND WATCHMAKER.

*It is abnormal, plus it's in the brain. So you can't really deny that it's a 'brain abnormality' unless you actually want to insult homosexuals. And since it's abnormal, it has not been selected in any way to constitute as a successful system! Bonobos are very close to us and practically all are bisexual, but this is only an experimental way of living. It's all experimental, humanity's own acceptance of homosexuality is experimental. So it pisses me off that people talk about it as if it's something completely doubtless and flawless.


@ mowglycdb : I guess all I can really ask is how do you see the proportions of archetypally masculine or feminine gay people? If you've known enough. Which way would you testify?

It would be interesting to understand how another homosexual's personality and desires worked out, but if we were to just work off them then the thread would be pointless because there is no decent sample.

Eureka!

I was having a bit of new year cheer so I researched nothing, but it's only taken me less than a minute to find this:

The sexually dimorphic nucleus whatever that is located near or on the hypothalamus or something is the part of the brain that deals with physcial sexuality. It is said to be larger in homosexual animals, as well as, presumably, homosexual people. I also saw this in a text book once, I just didn't take it in properly.

(I am not contradicting myself because this is about physical attraction)

So I suppose that if you had either a genetic mutation or a birth abnormality which increased the number of neurones in this area, but did not change the gender characteristics of your brain, you could then be likely to turn out as same-sex attracted, but not have the emotional characteristics of the opposite sex. This is very likely a bit of a stretch though because it doesn't include any environmental aspects.

Okay this didn't really advance anything in a social aspect but at least it shows how these things can probably arise.

can you sum up your point in like, a sentence?

Originally Posted by nerve

can you sum up your point in like, a sentence?

definitely not i already tried --> http://dreamviews.com/community/show...7&postcount=13

oops, I missed that.

okay, I think I have a vague idea of what you're trying to say, Idol. basically you're pointing out that the ideal relationship consists of a dominant/masculine person and a submissive/feminine person (regardless of gender), and that the typical homosexual relationship consists of either two feminine men or (I don't know if you've included lesbians) two masculine women, which is problematic and potentially detrimental...? is that close? and have you proposed a solution somewhere in your jabberwocky that I overlooked?

also:

Ps. Xaqaria, your sig has epiphanied me!

LOL. I was not aware that the word "epiphany" could be used as a verb.

Well if it's not problematic then fine, but then I really just didn't know how human sexuality works.

Anyway, I've just considered something else

http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...815538,00.html

This article mentions that gay people usually retain many normal aspects of masculinity that straight women do not. So you might say that in some ways they were 'crosses' between male and female.

I could be very wrong after all. It would be quite bloody confusing.