Sexuality

[nuisance]

OK then, so, do you think, an individuals sexuality is decided at birth or is it made up of the enviroment they grew up in. Or does their childhood merely repress the individuals sexual inclination, for example the stereotypical sexualities children are largely raised to conform to.

[RedAnarchist]

Sexuality is something you're born with. Noone has a choice whether they are heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual.

[Dean]

OK then, so, do you think, an individuals sexuality is decided at birth or is it made up of the enviroment they grew up in. Or does their childhood merely repress the individuals sexual inclination, the stereotypical sexualities children are largely raised to conform to.

Your environment compels your sexuality a lot. It represses a lot of sexuality, as a part of this.

[Pogue]

I hear alot of people say they're born with it, so I accept it as true that this is possible, but I also feel that environment must have a large affect on it, but not entirely. I mean, peoples sexuality can change, right?

[lvl100]

There was even an experiment for that 20-30 years ago in USA.
They took a boy and treat him like a girl from the very day he was born.
I dont remember all details `cause i saw it on TV a few years ago.

But that guy`s life was extremly miserable overall. Everything that they teach him thats is good for a women was against what his mind felt.
The different signals that come from all direction it almost drive him to insanity, but he was never able to "think" like a real women or at least be near to do that

The project failed and it was dumped when he was around 20.

[Demogorgon]

It seems to be the case that sexuality is decided during development in the womb, around the same time as gender is decided.

I guess environmental factors can sort out the details though. Our preference for certain hair colours etc must be learned.

[Holden Caulfield]

i think that it doesn't matter, to have to be able to say that it is inherent or not is rather homophobic,

why care if it is genetic or not?

[Decolonize The Left]

I'm going to agree with Holden on this one - it doesn't seem very important.

But another easy answer to this question is that all human beings are bisexual to a certain extent. It just so happens that we live in a heterosexual culture, and so our bisexual tendencies are suppressed from birth.

- August

[nuisance]

i think that it doesn't matter, to have to be able to say that it is inherent or not is rather homophobic,

why care if it is genetic or not?
Fundamentally you're right, in that it doesn't matter. That said, it doesn't stop curiousity.
What's homophobic about it? No one has said anything of the sort. Suggestions and opinions have only been given for possible explanations about why people have different sexual preferences, not that any particular perfence is 'correct' or 'natural' because that is all they are, preferences.

[jake williams]

Fundamentally you're right, in that it doesn't matter. That said, it doesn't stop curiousity.
What's homophobic about it? No one has said anything of the sort. Suggestions and opinions have only been given for possible explanations about why people have different sexual preferences, not that any particular perfence is 'correct' or 'natural' because that is all they are, preferences.
You're both generally right. I think Holden is referring to the tendency of having homophobes decry homosexuality as "unnatural", and to have its defenders say "no, it's natural". The point is that demanding it to declare its status is kind of homophobic. But the question as a matter of intellectual interest is both interesting and possibly useful.

I think sexuality is very complex, consisting of all sorts of emotions and beliefs and behaviour and biology and psychology, personal and social. The same is true of gender. Given that sexuality is much more complicated than genitals and entails things about gender identity, socialization and psychology and such necessarily have big effects. We know at least that people can't make conscious choices to change much about their sexual identity - and this doesn't just apply to whether you're attracted to guys or gals, this applies to things like fetishes and so on too. It may also be true for things like pedophilia, though I can't say I know much about pedophilia, and sex researchers don't know much about pedophilia, because it's so taboo and with many aspects of it it's practically illegal to study. Whether or not there's a gene or even anything like it that's biochemical though, I don't know and we don't know. It's a possibility that it has an influence, but only an influence. Biology has some effect on developing sexuality, but not all of it.

[Chapter 24]

There was even an experiment for that 20-30 years ago in USA.
They took a boy and treat him like a girl from the very day he was born.
I dont remember all details `cause i saw it on TV a few years ago.

But that guy`s life was extremly miserable overall. Everything that they teach him thats is good for a women was against what his mind felt.
The different signals that come from all direction it almost drive him to insanity, but he was never able to "think" like a real women or at least be near to do that

The project failed and it was dumped when he was around 20.


Would you find a link to this story? I'm curious about it and would be interested in reading more on it.

[caston]

Well if it was completely hard wired it wouldn't called "orientation" would it. Orientation means inclination, position or adjustment.

Our genetics produce our gender which does make an impact on how "male" or "female" we are but very early childhood experiences shape our sexual orientation and this continues to develop as we get older.

Now what happens to a baby boy with a cruel mother compared to a baby boy with a loving mother? The baby boy with the cruel mother is more likely to become auto-erotic, gay or at least have trouble with women that he may never resolve.

The baby boy with the loving mother will be more likely to have successful heterosexual relationships.

[Module]

Well if it was completely hard wired it wouldn't called "orientation" would it. Orientation means inclination, position or adjustment.So why does that mean something influenced/'decided' by genetics can't be called an 'orientation'?


Our genetics produce our gender which does make an impact on how "male" or "female" we are but very early childhood experiences shape our sexual orientation and this continues to develop as we get older. How do very early childhood experiences shape our sexual orientation? I can't think of any early childhood experiences I've had which could possibly have shaped my sexuality. :confused:
What kind of early childhood experiences?


Now what happens to a baby boy with a cruel mother compared to a baby boy with a loving mother? The baby boy with the cruel mother is more likely to become auto-erotic, gay or at least have trouble with women that he may never resolve.

The baby boy with the loving mother will be more likely to have successful heterosexual relationships.... Why do I have a feeling you'll have no proof of this? :lol:
I've never heard of any gay person who has had 'trouble' with members of the opposite sex outside of just having a disinterest in them, sexually. The same way, no doubt, straight people have a disinterest in people of their own gender, sexually.

[Dean]

... Why do I have a feeling you'll have no proof of this? :lol:
I've never heard of any gay person who has had 'trouble' with members of the opposite sex outside of just having a disinterest in them, sexually. The same way, no doubt, straight people have a disinterest in people of their own gender, sexually.

You don't have to have trouble to be homosexual. I think hat it really takes is a felling of excitement or generally more positive experiences with a given sex to be oriented toward it. I think it is very naive to think that our sexual orientation is either fully genetic / biological or conditional.

[BobKKKindle$]

Our genetics produce our gender

Gender is not biological (which is what you seem to be suggesting, by drawing a direct causation between "genetics" and gender) but is a social construct, as shown by the fact that dominant gender roles have changed over time and also differ across cultures. Sex is a category based an individual's sexual organs whereas gender is a system of attitudes concerning how society expects people to behave and present themselves.


The baby boy with the cruel mother is more likely to become auto-erotic, gay or at least have trouble with women that he may never resolve.

So all gay people were abused as children, and their sexuality is a product of this childhood abuse? Do you have any evidence to support this? Have you ever spoken to a homosexual about this theory? What about people who were subject to prolonged abuse as children, and yet have never experienced any degree of attraction to members of the same sex - how does this "theory" account for them?

Seriously, are you fucking retarded? Half of the people on this fucking forum are so incredibly stupid, have you ever read a book in your life, or do you just make this stuff up in a sad effort to annoy other people? Go die, you sad piece of shit.

[Dean]

So all gay people were abused as children, and their sexuality is a product of this childhood abuse? Do you have any evidence to support this? Have you ever spoken to a homosexual about this theory? What about people who were subject to prolonged abuse as children, and yet have never experienced any degree of attraction to members of the same sex - how does this "theory" account for them?

Seriously, are you fucking retarded? Half of the people on this fucking forum are so incredibly stupid, have you ever read a book in your life, or do you just make this stuff up in a sad effort to annoy other people? Go die, you sad piece of shit.

That's enough. I agree that such a stereotype is unfair, but I hardly think its fair to flame a member, particularly when such a prejudice has been a common stance even among some of the more respected, often marxist psychologists and psychoanalysts.

[trivas7]

Gender is not biological (which is what you seem to be suggesting, by drawing a direct causation between "genetics" and gender) but is a social construct, as shown by the fact that dominant gender roles have changed over time and also differ across cultures. Sex is a category based an individual's sexual organs whereas gender is a system of attitudes concerning how society expects people to behave and present themselves.

You confuse gender with gender roles.

[JazzRemington]

No one really knows whysome people are born gay or straight. There's some evidence that there's a particular gene or gene combination that makes people gay, but there's some evidence that homosexuality is influenced by social factors. Meaning, there are people who have "the gay gene" but aren't gay and there are lots of people who don't have "the gay gene" but are gay.

Let me put it this way - straight people: can you point to the one thing that made you straight? That one thing and only that one thing that you can point to and tell your self, "yes, that made me straight"?

[Faction2008]

I am a heterosexual and you cannot make me gay so i can assume you cannot make a gay person into a hetero so therefore it must natural. So in the end it doesn't matter, we are all humans.

[Module]

You confuse gender with gender roles.They are (essentially) the same concept.


Let me put it this way - straight people: can you point to the one thing that made you straight? That one thing and only that one thing that you can point to and tell your self, "yes, that made me straight"?
Well (if pointing to the fact one doesn't fancy members of the same sex is not the kind of 'thing' you mean) nobody can do that because there is no evidence beyond reasonable doubt that it's one way or the other.

Meaning, there are people who have "the gay gene" but aren't gay and there are lots of people who don't have "the gay gene" but are gay.
What gay gene?



You don't have to have trouble to be homosexual.
That's what I said.

I think hat it really takes is a felling of excitement or generally more positive experiences with a given sex to be oriented toward it. I think it is very naive to think that our sexual orientation is either fully genetic / biological or conditional.What's your point?

[Demogorgon]

Gender is not biological (which is what you seem to be suggesting, by drawing a direct causation between "genetics" and gender) but is a social construct, as shown by the fact that dominant gender roles have changed over time and also differ across cultures. Sex is a category based an individual's sexual organs whereas gender is a system of attitudes concerning how society expects people to behave and present themselves.


Gender is not merely a social construct, it is a matter of identification, borne from the way the brain works. Regardless of how genders are expected to behave, almost all people identify them with one gender or another from a point long before they are old enough to recognise gender roles. The vast majority of people recognise themselves as being the gender their body corresponds to, but around one in every thousand people does not, hence the existence of transgendered people.

One's gender identity will not necessarily correspond to their behaviour or whether they conform to expected gender roles. A male to female transsexual can still be "boyish" for example and the same of course goes for female to male transsexuals. It all comes down to how the brain identifies one's own gender and this is probably decided in the womb.

It is all very well to repeat certain feminist slogans, but certain particular ones are increasingly being used to promote transphobia, something we are starting to see on this board, and that is not to be tolerated.

[JazzRemington]

They are (essentially) the same concept.


Well (if pointing to the fact one doesn't fancy members of the same sex is not the kind of 'thing' you mean) nobody can do that because there is no evidence beyond reasonable doubt that it's one way or the other.

My point being is that since we don't know why people are straight, how can we know why people are gay?


What gay gene?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_gene, specifically pay attention to the second paragraph in addition to the article in general. I say again, there is thought to be biological factors involved in determining one's sexuality, but that's not the whole story as there are people who could have whatever biology is necessary to make someone gay but not be gay.

[Drace]

Sexual orientation does not exist.

A human will do anything to get that pleasure. Male/female dog, or cat.

[Faction2008]

Sexual orientation does not exist.

A human will do anything to get that pleasure. Male/female dog, or cat.
I can say for sure I have never had an urge to commit bestiality or homosexuality.

[Drace]

That is because of society.
Bisexuals are those who realize that they will get the same pleasure from male or female.

Go do a dog and tell me how you feel.

If there is a gene that decides between human males or females, then there should be genes that determine whether dog, cat, pig, bird or human.
Each gene specifically saying "no no" to the rest of the species.

Now how does a gene determine male or female anyway?
You are born not knowing what a male or a female is.

[Faction2008]

Go do a dog and tell me how you feel.
I'd rather not thanks.

[Drace]

You would if you lived in a society where everyone was doing it.

[nuisance]

You would if you lived in a society where everyone was doing it.
Oh, you mean how homosexuals phiscally want to have sex with the other sex because that's what the majority are doing.
:rolleyes:

[Drace]

No thats why heterosexuals are attracted to females.
If the whole society was doing dogs, you would probably be doing dogs.

They become homosexuals for some unknown reasons:-$ Homosexuals are at a small rate for a reason.

[nuisance]

If the whole society was doing dogs, you would probably be doing dogs.
I'm sorry but what makes you think that humans are inclined to have sex with animals en masse? Has this ever been a largely practiced tradition as you appear to be claiming? I know in Argentina a high rate of poor males lose their virginity to pets but I definitely wouldn't relate these actions as typical for humans, and I highly doubt that many people would.


They become homosexuals for some unknown reasons. Theres many so I cant state them :-$ Homosexuals are at a small rate for a reason.
Social repression and general socialisation perhaps?

[trivas7]

Sexual orientation does not exist.

Nonsense.

[Drace]

Social repression and general socialisation perhaps?

Perhaps also fear. If you notice that you got happy when you see a penis which might be normal but if you take notice of it and fear that you are gay, you will be worried and search for answers . If you look for something you will find itt!

I once always saw the number 101. It was everywhere! See it was nothing divine. Its just that by coincidence I saw it a few times and took notice of it, and when I started looking for it I found it everywhere.

And I don't mean I was really "looking for it". For example, I'd keep looking at the time and would ignore it unless it was 101. I also started taking note of numbers like 202,404,505,1010...these are all multiples of 101. WOW! Lol, it was just that I looked for them.

Apparently, this happens to a lot of people because some crazy person even wrote a book saying that these numbers are a way of angels reaching you...

Define sexual orientation. You will find the same pleasure doing a dog as doing a female/male or just masturbating.

Also,

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1300464/posts

[nuisance]

Perhaps also fear.
Well one would assume so, as fear is a conseqence of repression.


I once always saw the number 101. It was everywhere! See it was nothing divine. Its just that by coincidence I saw it a few times and took notice of it, and when I started looking for it I found it everywhere.
I don't think observation can be acquired to general feelings of lust.
Also, say a white person wanted to be black, then fair enough, however just because they are 'looking' to change their skin colour doesn't mean that they will.


And I don't mean I was really "looking for it". For example, I'd keep looking at the time and would ignore it unless it was 101. I also started taking note of numbers like 202,404,505,1010...these are all multiples of 101. WOW! Lol, it was just that I looked for them.
Or maybe you have a slight dab of OCD, like I label upon myself.


Define sexual orientation. You will find the same pleasure doing a dog as doing a female/male or just masturbating.
You must be a virgin or very shit at sex if you think that a person can get the same pleasure from masturbating as sex, or as having sex with a gender or in this case species whom you are not attracted to.


Also,

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1300464/posts

I could also find many links which say the opposite.
How do you explain that homosexual men have a higher rate of grey matter upon their brain than straight men and homosexual women having less grey matter than straight women? Thus the grey matter upon the brain somewhat resembles that of the grey matter of the opposite straight sex.
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/lifestyle/homosexuality-lies-in-the-brain-study_10060510.html

[Drace]

Gay men like to color their hair.

Or gray haired man think they look cool if they are gay.

You pick :)

[Decolonize The Left]

Gay men like to color their hair.

Or gray haired man think they look cool if they are gay.

You pick :)

What? This absurd nonsense not only has no place on a board dedicated to serious discussion, it is also entirely unhelpful.

Furthermore, I believe that all humans are bisexual at birth. This would explain the different sexual orientations, including those individuals who do not 'fit' into any one category. If you need possible evidence, please see ifeelyou's thread in the Science section about bisexuality in animals - it is an easy read and very informative.

- August

[Drace]

Ahh yes August. Thats kinda what I'm saying.

Being bisexual pretty much means that there is no such thing as sexual orientation.

Animals don't have societies like we do and most of them end up having sex with both sexes. Its because of their instinct. They see that sex gives them pleasure, and to do it doesn't matter if its male/female.

http://www.narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html

[Decolonize The Left]

Ahh yes August. Thats kinda what I'm saying.

Being bisexual pretty much means that there is no such thing as sexual orientation.

I disagree.

"Sexual orientation" is just that, one's preference for sexual partners. If one is bisexual from birth, this only means that that preference is open. But it changes throughout life. Some people find themselves attracted only to one sex, others to both, it is their orientation. The idea that they may be 'naturally' bisexual does not negate their sexual orientation in any way...

- August

[Winter]

I disagree.

"Sexual orientation" is just that, one's preference for sexual partners. If one is bisexual from birth, this only means that that preference is open. But it changes throughout life. Some people find themselves attracted only to one sex, others to both, it is their orientation. The idea that they may be 'naturally' bisexual does not negate their sexual orientation in any way...

- August

Actually it seems that everybody is A-sexual at birth because we do not develop sexual urges till puberty.

[Decolonize The Left]

Actually it seems that everybody is A-sexual at birth because we do not develop sexual urges till puberty.

Excellent point - overlooked by all in this thread.

- August

[ifeelyou]

Actually it seems that everybody is A-sexual at birth because we do not develop sexual urges till puberty.

freud totally disagreed with u. he argued that we r quite sexual throughout infancy. in fact, he asserted that as children we have a sexual aim, which "consists in obtaining satisfaction by means of an appropriate stimulation of the erotogenic zone which has been selected in one way or another" (p. 50, Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality). this satisfaction can come from such phenomena as thumb-sucking. according to freud, such is a "sample of the sexual manifestations of childhood" (p. 45). "sensual sucking involves a complete absorption of the attention and leads either to sleep or even to a motor reaction in the nature of an orgasm" (p. 46). other examples include masturbatory sexual manifestations, including activity of the anal and genital zones, etc..

what is important about puberty, to freud, is that a transformation occurs. infantile/childhood sexuality is largely auto-erotic and it's at puberty that our infantile sexual aim changes. moving away from being primarily self-oriented (i.e., auto-erotic), the sexual aim is now regarded "as being the union of the genitals in the act known as copulation..." (p. 15).

Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality is largely devoted to fighting against the idea that we are not sexual beings as kids.

Ps. Freud believed we are all bisexual as kids, and even as adults r able to make same-sex "object-choices."

[Winter]

freud totally disagreed with u. he argued that we r quite sexual throughout infancy. in fact, he asserted that as children we have a sexual aim, which "consists in obtaining satisfaction by means of an appropriate stimulation of the erotogenic zone which has been selected in one way or another" (p. 50, Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality). this satisfaction can come from such phenomena as thumb-sucking. according to freud, such is a "sample of the sexual manifestations of childhood" (p. 45). "sensual sucking involves a complete absorption of the attention and leads either to sleep or even to a motor reaction in the nature of an orgasm" (p. 46). other examples include masturbatory sexual manifestations, including activity of the anal and genital zones, etc..

what is important about puberty, to freud, is that a transformation occurs. infantile/childhood sexuality is largely auto-erotic and it's at puberty that our infantile sexual aim changes. moving away from being primarily self-oriented (i.e., auto-erotic), the sexual aim is now regarded "as being the union of the genitals in the act known as copulation..." (p. 15).

Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality is largely devoted to fighting against the idea that we are not sexual beings as kids.

Ps. Freud believed we are all bisexual as kids, and even as adults r able to make same-sex "object-choices."

I haven't read any Freud but what you have shown me makes a lot of sense.

[Drace]

Just because Freud wrote a book doesn't make it right.

Although, I did have a sex dream when I was 6 :-$
Not quite the one thats detailed, but ehh...
Well thing is I guess I had noticed women thingies at the age. So I say the body has a natural sexual impulse to "good feeling".


But see, who is to say that in this sex dream it was a women?
Sure as I recall, it was, but only because I have the thought in my head that men are suppose to like women.

So I just identified as "this thing" as a women.
It only became that I was attracted to women and not men because of this.

People can become attracted to a certain gender because of society.

[ifeelyou]

Just because Freud wrote a book doesn't make it right.

Although, I did have a sex dream when I was 6 :-$
Not quite the one thats detailed, but ehh...
Well thing is I guess I had noticed women thingies at the age. So I say the body has a natural sexual impulse to "good feeling".


But see, who is to say that in this sex dream it was a women?
Sure as I recall, it was, but only because I have the thought in my head that men are suppose to like women.

So I just identified as "this thing" as a women.
It only became that I was attracted to women and not men because of this.

People can become attracted to a certain gender because of society.

i dont disagree with u.

[Decolonize The Left]

I'm somewhat skeptical of Freud. He seemed a little too eager to throw sexuality into every possible facet of life. While your explanation makes sense, and I see the logical ties of it, I just have this 'raised eyebrow' of sorts towards Freud.

- August

[ifeelyou]

I'm somewhat skeptical of Freud. He seemed a little too eager to throw sexuality into every possible facet of life. While your explanation makes sense, and I see the logical ties of it, I just have this 'raised eyebrow' of sorts towards Freud.

- August

i understand ur skepticism. foucault had a big problem with him for the same reason. freud, in many ways, made sexuality the core of our very existence; essentially, everything about us could be traced back to our sexual desires.

nonetheless, freud made huge contributions to not only theories of sexuality, but to human knowledge, in general. we could learn a lot from his writing :)

[shorelinetrance]

The problem is it's such a complex issue, a lot of things can influence sexual orientation.

The realization of that both sexes can adequately provide pleasure can be a determining factor in declaring your sexual orientation.

I've always thought heterosexuality had to be natural because the penis and vagina are complimentary to each other, as in you need both for reproduction purposes. Reproduction is a natural act, so heterosexuality is natural.

[ifeelyou]

The problem is it's such a complex issue, a lot of things can influence sexual orientation.

The realization of that both sexes can adequately provide pleasure can be a determining factor in declaring your sexual orientation.

I've always thought heterosexuality had to be natural because the penis and vagina are complimentary to each other, as in you need both for reproduction purposes. Reproduction is a natural act, so heterosexuality is natural.

u might want to check out stephen o. murray's cross-cultural and historical analysis of homosexuality, titled Homosexualities. he shows, through ethnographic data, the pervasiveness of non-heterosexuality in space and time, and that different cultures conceive, and have conceived of, homosexuality to be just as natural as heterosexuality. its a wonderful read.

another book u might want to check out is called The Invention of Heterosexuality by jonathan ned katz. he outlines a history of how heterosexuality in the western and modern sense (which is generally understood as "natural") has come about.

cross-cultural and historical accounts, in my opinion, are useful because they juxtapose how different people understand sexuality and expose how our beliefs of such change over time. according to foucault, in an interview conducted by stephen riggins published in Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, “[prior to the nineteenth century] Homosexual behavior was only considered to be a kind of excess of natural behavior, an instinct that is difficult to keep within certain limits. From the nineteenth century on, you see that behavior like homosexuality came to be considered an abnormality” (1994, p. 128).

in terms of cross-species sexual variation, here is a link to an interesting essay about bisexuality i posted on revleft several days ago:

http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=bisexual-species

[shorelinetrance]

u might want to check out stephen o. murray's cross-cultural and historical analysis of homosexuality titled Homosexualities. he shows, through ethnographic data, the pervasiveness of non-heterosexuality in space and time, and that different cultures conceive, and have conceived of, homosexuality to be just as natural as heterosexuality. its a wonderful read.

another book u might want to check out is called The Invention of Heterosexuality by jonathan ned katz. he outlines a history of how heterosexuality in the western and modern sense (which is generally understood as "natural") has come about.

cross-cultural and historical accounts, in my opinion, are useful because they juxtapose how different people understand sexuality and how our beliefs of such change over time. according to foucault, in an interview conducted by stephen riggins published in Ethics: Subjectivity and Truth, “[prior to the nineteenth century] Homosexual behavior was only considered to be a kind of excess of natural behavior, an instinct that is difficult to keep within certain limits. From the nineteenth century on, you see that behavior like homosexuality came to be considered an abnormality” (1994, p. 128).

in terms of cross-species sexual variation, here is a link to an interesting essay about bisexuality i posted on revleft several days ago:

http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=bisexual-species


will check out those books if i can find them. :D

i know society plays a huge role determining sexuality and the morality of it etc etc., but from a pure biological perspective isn't heterosexuality "naturalistic" from a sense that it produces a offspring and passing on genetic material, and isn't that an objective goal to pass on your genes?


i happen to be bisexual myself, so please don't think i'm arguing against homosexuality. :lol:

[ifeelyou]

will check out those books if i can find them. :D

i know society plays a huge role determining sexuality and the morality of it etc etc., but from a pure biological perspective isn't heterosexuality "naturalistic" from a sense that it produces a offspring and passing on genetic material?


i happen to be bisexual myself, so please don't think i'm arguing against homosexuality. :lol:

the essay i posted a link to briefly touches on this topic. if i remember correctly, some person being cited in it argues that socio- and evolutionary-biologists give too much weight to the idea of procreation (i.e., heterosexual sex) and not enough to a stable environment (which could include both heterosexual and non-heterosexual kinship networks), which increases an offsprings chances of survival.

not to mention, evolutionary theories of altruism, which claim homosexuals exist, in an evolutionary sense, to participate in raising other members of the family.

[Drace]

How does a gene affect "sexual orientation"?

I don't suppose your even born knowing what a male or female is but somehow a gene makes you attracted to a certain sex?

Sexual orientation is in the head.
If you identify someone as a male or female then it is by the brain.

[tormenta]

ever wonder why there's such a division between the marxist left and the 'identify politics' left? (at least in the US)

its because marxists are so absorbed in workers and labor history - both of which are overwhelmingly male and white/european, that you all stay ignorant of even basic sociological questions like this. i guess its good that you're discussing and getting educated about here, but its dissapointing to see so much ignorance.

there's an aspect that's nature, an aspect thats social. just like race. in 1800, if you were born black, the social structures define you a slave and non-human, for example.

this world is patriarchal, the legacy of the first class division - that between men and women. heterosexuality had to become the norm to fit humanity into classes which were based on ownership of means of production which were originally the womb which can only become 'productive' economicall when empregnated which is the result fo heterosexual sex. all the gender roles flow from that primordial process which occurred initially in pre-history. the economic systems that developed subsequently all used that basic building block, just like racism of the American and South African type is coming to Europe today. an capitalism has found it useful to keep this oppression alive, so it persists and is reproduced by the class system.

homosexuality cant be tolerated to any significant extent because workers need to be reproduced. race cant fade away because labor is getting browner and browner every day. until marxists master this stuff, communism will stay marginal and women, gays, and racially oppressed people will stay away. Eugene Debbs, the American Socialist said socialism has nothing special to offer negroes, and that attitude still haunts us today, as the left stays overwhelmingly white and male adn straight.

[ashaman1324]

i have several friends that grew up in a very homophobic environment and one turned out a lesbian
several female bisexuals and one male bisexual
i think the difference in numbers is coincidental
but its not genetic i believe, simply the way some people are. its part of their identity if not their personality

[Decolonize The Left]

ever wonder why there's such a division between the marxist left and the 'identify politics' left? (at least in the US)

its because marxists are so absorbed in workers and labor history - both of which are overwhelmingly male and white/european, that you all stay ignorant of even basic sociological questions like this. i guess its good that you're discussing and getting educated about here, but its dissapointing to see so much ignorance.

there's an aspect that's nature, an aspect thats social. just like race. in 1800, if you were born black, the social structures define you a slave and non-human, for example.

this world is patriarchal, the legacy of the first class division - that between men and women. heterosexuality had to become the norm to fit humanity into classes which were based on ownership of means of production which were originally the womb which can only become 'productive' economicall when empregnated which is the result fo heterosexual sex. all the gender roles flow from that primordial process which occurred initially in pre-history. the economic systems that developed subsequently all used that basic building block, just like racism of the American and South African type is coming to Europe today. an capitalism has found it useful to keep this oppression alive, so it persists and is reproduced by the class system.

homosexuality cant be tolerated to any significant extent because workers need to be reproduced. race cant fade away because labor is getting browner and browner every day. until marxists master this stuff, communism will stay marginal and women, gays, and racially oppressed people will stay away. Eugene Debbs, the American Socialist said socialism has nothing special to offer negroes, and that attitude still haunts us today, as the left stays overwhelmingly white and male adn straight.

Shit man, I was going to respond to this post with constructive discussion until this last paragraph. You are headed straight for a restriction due to your homophobic, racist, and sexist speech.

- August

[eatbullets]

i believe in complete equal rights in all senses for all beings, including homosexuality and marriage.