i_want_to_be_a_homosexual Lucien I want to be a homosexual.....I want to take it up my punk rock ass 010208 ... Deputy_Mayor if you are a chick its tolerable but if you are a guy i swear to god if i ever find you i will kick you so hard my fucking shoe will get stuck in your ass. Hey wait a minute take that back you'll like that i will fucking hurt you lets just say that. 010209 ... Santos who appointed you to make that decision you say you don't believe in god or religion and they are the ones who declared that it was wrong. people will do what people will do it's just that simple get over yourself 010209 ... Deputy Mayor get over myself. what the fuck. I have never been stuck on myself i have nver even liked myself. I hate the person i am. 010210 ... Santos and by the sound of things you mean to take all that self-hatred out on someone whose sexuality you disagree with on the basis of an argument raised by a eligion you do not accept get therapy, child 010211 ... kx21 You can be ANYTHING you want to be from NOTHING to EVERYTHING:- SHIT or STAR...you have a choice... 010211 ... Miss_Megan It's all genetic a pre concieved code fuck with the code if you will, an interesting social experiment maybe. But it's all genetic and all relative... everything in this world right? 010212 ... Deputy_Mayor I probably do need help. dont judge me you dont know me you dont know the things that i have gone through as a kid so FUCK YOU !!!!!!!!!!! Santos 010212 ... kx21 ***Breaking News*** There is only one and only one GENE in this Universe. That is, the_GENE_of_NOTHING. The GENES of other U's STUFFs, all STARs and SHITs, and their GENEs, in particular YOU and the GENEs of thought such as "i_want_to_be_a_homosexual" are the products or byproducts of the_GENE_of_NOTHING and the_POWER_of_CREATIVITY... Copyright 2001. kx21.com 010212 ... satans bride sometimes i feel like a gay man (or perhaps a bi man) trapped in a woman's body. i know it's such a cliche, but it's so true. i'm bisexual, but i'm female, and so often i just want to ram my rock-hard cock into someone ... except there's just one problem ... i'm a chick and i ain't got a dick. damn. 010212 ... rats syd RATS Got it hit down spot knock inside a spider says: "That's love yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah!" "That's love yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah!" says: "That's love - All know it TV, teeth, feet, peace, feel it... "That's love yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah!" "That's love yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah!" 010212 ... Santos Dep. So no one else in the world ever had a bad childhood, eh? guess what, there is a difference between being queer and being some nasty thing who preys on children. you and me probably share a lot of common ground except for the queer part. my judgement is only in response to yours Fuck me? only if you ask nicely, i'm not into rough trade 010213 ... Deputy_Mayor that fuck part was ment not as an offer. sorry. Maybe you arent the ass i thought you were. 010213 ... Lucien I find it really funny...that the only reason I even started this little blather was because i was listening to a screeching weasel song and now everyones getting all philisophical, scientific, and just plain mean over it....oh well...... I still want to be a homosexual 010213 ... j_blue homosexuals rule 010214 ... birdmad i love that song 010214 ... Dafremen I don't want to be a homosexual, but I don't have a problem with people being homosexuals either. What I have a problem with is this absolutely LUDICROUS idea that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition and not a choice. It's a choice, plain and simple. For if it were genetic, where would all of these genes be coming from? They seem to be getting more and more prevalent these days, and yet by its own definition a true homosexual will not procreate. It DEFIES the laws of natural selection. Natural selection allows those things that are beneficial to the survival of a species to continue, to survive and multiply. Those genetic factors that make an individual more likely to survive and pass on it's genetic anomalies are spread and become more and more common. Homosexuality cannot be a benefactor of Natural Selection, plain and simple, therefore there are two possibilities: Either it is a commonly recurring genetic abnormality, or it is not genetic, but rather the result of some factor other than genetics. Homosexuality is seen in only a few other species of animal. Monkeys and pack wolves. In both cases it is a display of male domination, one over the other. (Female homosexuality does not occur in nature that I know of.) It seems unlikely that this is the result of recurring genetic abnormality, therefore it must be the result of some other factor, most likely psycho or sociological. Be homosexual, if that IS what you are...just don't blame it on genetics please. If it were genetic, homosexuality would have died out long ago. 010220 ... Santos if it is a choice, i don't think it is a conscious one, why would anyone CHOOSE to be part of a group that is and has frequently been target practice for the masses. I always knew i was queer, even when i was little, but of course, i had to hide it. i even had a few girlfriends beforei came out. There are pretty good odds that i may have even fathered a couple of little bastards before i had the resolve to stop lying about it. Fuck, why not, it was the early 80's and everyone was fucking everyone, AIDS was barely coming to public light. Even aware of the added risk (since back then HIV was almost exclusively a gay problem) i knew i could not stay in denial any longer. Why would i CHOOSE that. On my mothers side, i had an aunt who never married and who never spoke of any men even though our family has always been pretty frank and open about our personal entaglements, on the paternal side there has always been one in almost every generation who everyone "wondered about" even if they married and had children. Dad's side of the family does tend to be somewhat closed off and secretive and the vehemence of his homophobia always made we wonder if he wasn't hiding something, 'cause god knows when i was in denial about all of it, i used to be pretty anti-gay myself. The openly gay might not breed, but the closet cases do. Go into a gay bar one of these days and count the number of hands with wedding rings on them you'll be shocked. 010220 ... Dafremen I liked your first point better. "If it is a choice, it's not a conscious one." That's entirely plausible and fits into psycho or sociological factors causing the tendency toward homosexuality. I realize that through the history of our Western Civilization homosexuality has been shunned and persecuted and that this has led many individuals to go against their inclinations.(Notice I didn't say natural urges.) However history hasn't ALWAYS been so intolerant of homosexuality, and so through those periods, one would have seen a decline in the homosexual gene pool were there such a thing. As I stated before, I think you hit the nail on the head, it IS a choice, and as you have so poignantly pointed out, not one made lightly, but with severe reservations. As with all choices, we must weigh the consequences on either side of our decisions and then act accordingly. Persecution of homosexuals, while certainly not something that can be condoned, is a reality of our times and makes the consequences of the decision that much more grave. It is a unfortunate, I guess that you weren't born in a more tolerant time, perhaps things would be easier. Times are a changing however and perhaps it will be easier for people inclined to a homosexual lifestyle to follow their inclinations. One thing's for certain however, no matter how tolerant society becomes of homosexuality, it's never going to disappear. After all only genetic traits can lose to the law of natural selection. 010220 ... dB hmm... lesbians get more chicks, gay guys get more chicks. Does anyone see a pattern here? 010220 ... j_blue if homosexuality was a choice, social pressures have, for too long, made it the wrong choice. yet it occurs over and over again, generation after generation. anecdotally, it is known that homosexuality sometimes occurs with higher frequencies in particular families (even under circumstances when coming out is equivalent to being disowned). what the hell does that mean? it has been proven (by homosexual scientists and scholors) that homosexuality occurs with similar frequency throughout nature. the lie that it does not is based on incorrect anecdotal beleif, which has been proven wrong. the sad part is that such anecdotal knowledge will never be verified, except by gay scientists and scholars, and the subsequent scientific knowledge will only be propogated to homos. (who else is going to take the time to seek out gay facts?) the truth is that there are many genetic traits that are passed on, which may or may not be expressed, that may code for alot of different things, depending on how they are expressed. there are many various complex mechanisms regulating which genes are expressed, how they are expressed, and whether or not they are propogated to offspring. we have to acknowledge what we dont know, acknowledge what we do know, and try to make realistic observations. we can say that since it occurs in nature, it is not unique to humans. we can say that homosexuality may have genetic factors contributing to an individual identifying themself as a homosexual. we do not know enough to say anything definitive about the role genetics play (if any) in our behavior, but we know enough to say that genetics may play a role. i get so annoyed by dealing with ignorance, but i had to say it. too many people these days seem too willing to make the jump from likely possibilities to certainty for my comfort. one last thing (dB), homos have more sex in general (anecdotally at least). 010220 ... dB That is true J_Blue. You seem to be well educated on the subject, good on ya. I suppose you are one of these generalist types who aquires vast amounts of knowledge on anything. Salutations to you. 010220 ... j_blue hm, more like a future lonely old man, who cant help most of his flaws 010220 ... kx21 Who is the best person or authority for giving final verdict on Appropriate Relationships between Men / Women / Animals / Everything Else, in pariticular the appropriateness of homosexual? GOD, Justice, Senate, Bill Clinton, Monical Lewinsky, The MOTHER NATURE of the Universe? 010220 ... silentbob because women confuse me 010220 ... j_blue you cant escape that shit by switching genders, mental_genitals usually dont coincide with physical_genitals among queers but it has its advantages (we only have to worry about disease when thinking about contraceptive failure) 010220 ... Dafremen What our esteemed colleague hopes to accomplish by stating that the facts will only be exposed by GAY scientists and scholars is that ALL heterosexuals in these fields are biased and therefore unable to come to objective conclusions. Pardon me for saying so, but what a huge crock of crap. There I said it. If ANYONE has more motivation to find...hell even FABRICATE a connection it is the homosexual scientist. Why? Because the heterosexual isn't being persecuted along with his fellow hets. If anything you are going to find more unbiased (certainly not all) opinions in the hetero community, simply because the search for truth is not a search for sanctuary from the constant hunting and hounding of societal finger pointing and name calling. Your assertions sir, are false, and your rhetoric is reminiscent of something I've read in the Village Voice. Do you subscribe? I do. The statements which you presented in your last blather as facts, are in fact questionable at best AND as you've already pointed out, not the findings of unbiased individuals, but gay researchers with a lot more to lose if they can't find what they are hoping to find. As for the frequency of occurrence within a family, I would point out that so MANY choices are made in common from generation to generation within a family that are definitely NOT genetic, that the jump from common occurrence within a family to GENETIC connection is a leap of faith! For instance, did you know that in many families there is a startling coincidence in their choice of cars? For instance there are actually Ford families, Chevy families, Chrysler families, Used Car families. Surely you don't want us to believe that vehicle preferences are a genetic trait?! There is a huge difference between propaganda and science. I agree that a grievious injustice has been heaped upon the homosexual community by the hetero and in great part christian hetero community. Jumping into the safety of a "genetic link" is perhaps your only recourse and hope for an end to this. If so, it is a feeble wimper rather than a strong gay voice screaming out "We aren't gunna take this anymore." P.S. I don't by any means wish to imply that all gay researchers are biased. In fact, nothing could be farther from the truth. 010221 ... Santos no, sir, i disagree. i stated my belief, i did not, in any way proclaim it to be FACT. I took a line of logic that seems, from where i sit to make a certain amount of sense and went from there. You're the one trying to shout me down, not vice versa. and since i'm in no mood to endure a protracted argument, you win. whatever you say. 010221 ... Santos whoops, wrong argument. anyway, i'm still out, this looks to be getting unpleasant. my bad 010221 ... the spork not to malign any of my gay friends or any in the audience, but if you think about it, but the whole thing with lemmings and cliffs doesn't jibe too well with the whole natural selection thing either and they do it in far greater numbers than anything we as humans do. There are more things under heaven (and in the cutlery drawer) than are dreamed of in your philosophy (all apologies to will shakespeare's ghost) 010221 ... j_blue while you said and still refuse to beleive many arguements, a primary one stands; that there is not enough evidence to say that homosexuality is not genetic, and that there is still evidence to say that it might be i read the nytimes, cnn.com, /., plastic, and sometimes even cnet (though i haven't for a while) i am an trained as an biochemichal engineer (which means lots of biology, which does include genetics), and try to keep up with gay facts i'm not suprised to hear you subscribe to one of those (i am assuming) liberal newspapers, opinionated ignorant people tend to do stuff like that to find 'proof' for their arguements your theory has merit, but there is not enough evidence to fully support it one could say that homosexuality may have purely environmental causes, and have no connection to genetics whatsoever (horribly unlikely), but one cannot say say that homosexuality is not genetic (did you catch the difference?) in science, english is the preferred language, because it is very precise and clear with regard to meaning. scientists pick their words carefully. joe public doesnt, and doesnt even listen carefully... 010221 ... j_blue ps homosexuals rule we'r smarter, prettier, richer, more successful, and nicer damnit (when we arent being catty) so ooh on you with doggy doo! can i get an amen?! 010221 ... ripopo hello, it isn't genetic or environmental. homosexuals are just god's special children. no ifs, ands, or buts about it. thats my story and i'm stickin' to it, until somebody actually figures it out for sure (which they probably never will) 010221 ... unhinged i read an article years ago in a pretty reputable science magazine which i can't remember the name of that linked homosexuality to the make up of the brain. neuro science researchers have found the part of the brain that they think controls sexuality. in the article, they said that if you are attracted to males this part is a certain size and if you are attracted to females it is a certain size. they had thermo catscan type pictures illustrating this part of the brain and it's varying size. basically what the article said that in gay men this part of their brain corresponds to the size that indicates the person likes males. it's the same for heterosexuals. i'm not sure if i believe it but it does add an interesting fact to the argument of whether or not homosexuality is genetic. then again maybe it doesn't. the workings of the brain are still too much of an enigma, but what i do know is that your brain can't regenerate so i'm thinking it probably can't just shift a bunch of cells around over time. neurons are too touchy about stuff like that. and as far as the increase of the gay population goes, to say that more people are CHOOSING to be gay is the reason is just ludicrous. homosexuality has been documented as far back as the middle ages. and has always been persecuted. it is safer now for people to admit that they are gay. that doesn't mean that all of a sudden more of the population is gay. it means that it is easier for people to admit feelings of homosexuality from a young age rather than covering them up to fit a social norm. i don't think genetics is all that is involved in homosexuality but i do not think it is a choice. christianity just needs to be more tolerant of every way of life, not just their own. and if you are using the argument of natural selection, wouldn't you rather there were groups of people that couldn't procreate since we have no natural predators? i think god had a reason for everything and in his wisdom created homosexuality so that it would take us longer to destroy the planet. why do think viruses like AIDS and ebola have appeared on this planet over time? hhhmmm...natural selection... 010221 ... Dafremen No I actually read CNN regularly along with watchign the Today show and then of course I read The Spotlight, the Voice and some of the more "off-the-beaten-path" publications. Why? Well I'd rather not narrow my reading material to those publications that tend to support my own opinions, ill-formed, half-formed or otherwise. I am in fact as middle-of-the-road as they get and for you to judge me a liberal is something I take as a high compliment, simply because I supported Bush this last election, so I guess I am succeeding in keeping my perspectives in the middle. Why do I state so "ignorantly" that environmental factors are most likely the cause for homosexual tendencies? Simple, my father a registered clinical child psychologist with a PhD and over 35 years working with troubled children has over the years noticed a similar "family related" phenomenon to that which you spoke of. Excpet his observations dealt not so much with the SAME family over generations, as it did with different families with similar dysfunctions in the familiar dynamics. In plain ENGLISH as you apparently would prefer, the way the members of the family relate to each other, and the relationships between the members of families seems to demonstrate a fairly repeatable pattern in which one or young men in the family grow up to become practicing homosexuals. This is among DIFFERENT families. What I was pointing to with the car analogy holds true here; interpersonal dynamics between family members are LEARNED, not genetic responses. We learn how to interrelate from those who raise us. Thus similar results could recur from time to time in the same family line. As for my disdain for the "genetics" argument, it stems from a simple observation that I've made. It seems that by embracing the genetic argument so readily (and notice how easily you DO, while discarding the others which require you to make the astonishing admission that there WAS a choice involved, whether it was yours or someone who raised you) what the homosexual community is doing is giving in to the notion that what they are doing is a choice that MUST BE JUSTIFIED SOMEHOW. Instead of standing up and saying, "This is what I am doing with my life, deal with it", you quickly embrace this questionable science that has become so trendy and which allows you to say, "Ohhh I don't want to be this way, but I was BORN like this! Now will you stop picking on me?!" I have met many strong forthright gay folx. They take complete responsibility for the decisions they make and don't NEED to MAKE it natural by making it genetic. They KNOW it's natural because it's natural for THEM. My father has spent entirely too much time helping the gay community for me to sit still while you spout out pro-gay-genetics propaganda, representing it as the "rational theory" when in fact there is PLENTY of evidence to the contrary. Is it a conscious choice? As I said at the beginning of this whole blathering rambling mess...no I don't believe it is, or at least not always. It's not wrong NOT because "You were BORN this way." It's not wrong because this is how you live your life, and you have as much right to live it gay as I do to live it as a heterosexual. Period. By looking for the easy out, the gay community serves only to present itself as a genetic aberration, this is a horrible way to present such a strong closeknit group of people. 010221 ... j_blue look girl, i said may may may may may may may may may may may may may may may may may may may may may hm but my original point stands, homos rule 010221 ... Dafremen Plus, unhinged, a good point is that not all brain development is the cause of genetic factors. Environmental and psychological factors affect the brain's development, particularly in the first 6 years of life. This does become something of a "chicken and the egg" conundrum however. Is the brain like this because of the psychology? Or is the psychology like this because of the brain? Heheh it can make for a pretty heated debate! In any case, I would much rather see the homosexual community stand up and DEMAND at least grudging respect, than to have it settle for begrudged pity. 010221 ... Dafremen Listen chickie-do0d-pie person...ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok ok!!! This much we CAN agree on...homosexuals are AWFUL damn cool!! 8) 010221 ... j_blue and knowing is half the battle 010221 ... Santos this conflict resolution gets the as-yet-unheard-of Zorro-snap in Z formation, even! (swish!) SNAP! (swish!) SNAP! (swish!) SNAP! (sorry, i'm just happy that somebody agreed on something and the drama of it all just got to me, hehe) sweet jesus, i'm getting fruity in my old age i used to be so butch. 010221 ... kx21 Who is the best person or authority for giving final verdict on Appropriate Relationships between Men / Women / Animals / Everything Else, in pariticular the appropriateness of homosexual? GOD, Justice, Senate, Bill Clinton, Monical Lewinsky, The MOTHER NATURE of the Universe? The answer is the forces and fields of the Communities. Each community, e.g. specific religion / country / club / organisation / etc. , is a special grouping of People, which possessed its own field and unique force to survive_adopt_evolve in its environment and to compete, balance and counter balance with other communities like WAR or never ending race. Is the survivor or winner always be the one with the stronger field and greater force? 010221 ... j_blue talking about winning only makes me think of 1984 1984 tells me there isnt any winning, not really 010222 ... Lucien 1984 was a good book... I was born in 1984 010222 ... johnny west those who view homosexuality as "deviant sexuality" should be smacked in the face with a cold fish. WAKEUPANDSMELLTHENOSES! 010304 ... Dafremen Is it Ok, though if you view ALL sexual behavior as deviant? - - 010427 ... el fagtastico satan's bride, you can ram me with your rock-hard cock anytime. Because I am El Fagtastico. 010510 ... nocturnal that's really cute. not to mention classy and tasteful. 010510 ... unhinged SSSHIIITTT...want..i freaking am right now. and boy do i love it. boys are ickie. blah, ick, ppffff, aaaahhh. give me some boobs and a pierced tongue and i will be very happy. ;) 010511 ... l_o_s_t i like boobs and a peirced tongue myself. I dont hate homosexuals. actually i only disagree with the lifestyle of gay men. i have nothing wrong with gay women. past experiences is the reason why i dislike gay guys. 010818 ... once again It is strange to me that I have never desired to be a lesbian. I have never wanted to kiss or touch any female in a sexual way and yet, there is a part of me that believes with an odd sort of certainty that women are more beautiful. Men are or can be handsome and rugged and entranceing, but few are genuinly beautiful and so it is that I can look at a female body and say she is pretty or beautiful or cute, I feel nothing. I think perhaps it is strange then that I can look at a male form that is not so beautiful, or even half so pretty, and feel desirous of him. I am strangely heterosexual. 031003 what's it to you? who go blather from