282 réponses à ce sujet

[Kimberly Shaw]

I don't even know where to start InfiniteOne, but how about that anecdotal evidence of your sisters friends cousins roomates is not evidence at all? Or that just about everyone, gay or straight or bi, has had some sort of traumatic relationship as you describe, and it doesn't make their sexuality change.



I know a gay person who had a perfectly normal Ward and June Cleaver upbringing; as sheltered as you could imagine. SO, by your logic, I can claim with 100% fact and certainty that everyone who has a normal upbringing should be gay? And that being straight is unnatural! I also know a straight person with a traumatic upbringing, verbally abusive mother, etc....uh oh, its unnatural to be straight. What a load of crap.



That would be using anecdotal evidence to prove non-causal relationships.



You are free to think homosexuality is not natural, but that's just your opinion. Not a fact. The reason that is your opinion is because you're an ignorant bigot who thinks everyone should be like just like you and only abnormal people with tragic upbringings are damaged enough to turn gay.

[Creature 1]

kcp12 wrote...

Is this the WND link you are talking about?

http://www.wnd.com/i...w&pageId=117131

People are getting angry over demon possesing children in fiction?
Its almost 2010...

LOL!  WorldNetDaily, always a good source of amusement.  "Dirty gay sex"?  Ok, so I know my party doesn't have ready access to showers, but if they did would it be ok?  And the obligatory screen shot so anti-gay readers can get appropriately, um, riled up.  I think they need a few more so the fundamentalists can truly comprehend how shocking it all is. 

[Teshar]

funny topic..



i feel like i need to say something here



2 girls are hot

2 guys are not

although i can see the fun in a dwarf male getting it on with zevran hahaha



But i do strongly believe that homosexualiy should be considered an mental illness as its obviously something thats not quite right with chemicals or w/e you hardcore gay specialists talk about.

[Kimberly Shaw]

But i do strongly believe that homosexualiy should be considered an mental illness

The 1950s called, it wants its post back.

[Heals.like.Jesus]

http://www.flipsidec...comic.php?i=911

Visit this and read up to the last page ( 6 in total). It makes a very interesting point about how and why different people view different types of sexualities and offers some insight if you are willing to receive it. Its an interesting discussion.

EX.

Modifié par Heals.like.Jesus, 03 décembre 2009 - 11:04 .

[Infiniteone2]

Avaraen wrote...

Infiniteone2 wrote...

I have never met a single lesbian or gay in my life that didn't have some abnormal-traumatic-persistent event/troubled relationship in their past.

I have never met ANY person in my life that didn't have some abnormal-traumatic-persistent event/troubled relationship in their past... everyone has difficult things in their lives. There is no such thing as a perfect life. Being gay or straight is not defined by one specific event or relationship.

Biggest trauma I think I had in my life was....

still thinking...

thinking....

My highschool sweetheart and I broke up.

That's all I got.  Straight btw. gg.

Probably should have specified my hypothesis on the age range I think too for the trauma/violation/defect/persistent unhealthy living environment, concievement - 2 (defects), 2-11 highest chance of becoming homosexual/having other severe disorders dependent on what exactly happened/took place ofc, 11-18 not so high chance (y helo thar mostly straight people, handful of bi-sexuals, and few homosexuals), 18-22 (late bloomers, el o el college and denial).

Modifié par Infiniteone2, 03 décembre 2009 - 11:11 .

[GHL_Soul_Reaver]

But yet it existed way back to the Greek and Roman empire?



I guess it is a matter of taste... and yes homosexuality is unnatural since you can get nothing out of it, but well it remains under love... would you then say that love is a mental illness?



I think people should be allowed to do whatever they want to do... what about people that like other fetishes in sex? is that a mental illness as well?... is the missionary position the only correct position when all the other positions are so much more fun with more gain in it?



What about Analsex? lol... I could keep on going... but there is to many that is holier than anyone else, it is a wicked society and religion is to blame for alot of it as well as people like to be in mobs to make other people feel bad or to be outcasts... it sickens me really lol.



Humans are stupid... simple as that.. instead of minding there own case they are so busy minding everyone elses, and yes people need targets to make themself feel better as it is.



One of my friends is an Homosexual... and I love going out with him because chicks flock around him, it didn't ruin our friendship at all as for him having another way is just his problem.. and that is about it really.

[RunCDFirst]

GHL_Soul_Reaver wrote...

I guess it is a matter of taste... and yes homosexuality is unnatural since you can get nothing out of it, but well it remains under love... would you then say that love is a mental illness?

Unnatural because it doesn't occur in nature, amirite?

Oh keywords.

[Creature 1]

Infiniteone2 wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Infiniteone2 wrote...

I have never met a single lesbian or gay in my life that didn't have some abnormal-traumatic-persistent event/troubled relationship in their past, and I have met quite a few, my half brother is one in fact, and he fits the above description (bad babysitter, crazy grandma, ****** aunt, crazy dad, really bad adhd and medication, changing homes many times, etc)

This to me tells me that being homosexual is not natural, do I care? No. Is it natural? No, so I wish people would stop saying it is.

ya because anecdotal evidence is so solid.

My sister lives with 3 gay men, I know their pasts, and several of their friends.
My ex-gf has a les daughter, I know her past.
I know my step aunts past.
One of my goods friends since highschool I know her past.
Various people I've met at clubs, diners (after the club), friends of friends, I usually hear their stories too, surprisingly they've all been mostly open about it.

I could fill out a TL:DR list here if I wanted too, its not fact, but my hypothesis is that 99% of homosexuals fall into this category.

Have you heard the saying, the plural of anecdote is not data?  I have my own collection of anecdotes that contradict yours, but I know we can't determine the facts of anything by accumulating anecdotes.  So instead I turn to the scientific literature.  There's been a lot of research into sexual orientation, and it doesn't conclude that it's because of abuse or bad relationships.  In fact, it's clear there's a large genetic component.  You can read about one line of research here:  www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427196/  In summary, it's been found that some gay men come from families with an unusually large number of gay men, and that these gay men tend to be found along the maternal line of descent.  Additionally, women in these families tend to be more fertile than average.  This suggests an X-linked factor that when inherited by a woman causes her to produce more children than the average (which is evolutionarily beneficial), but when inherited by a man tends to produce a homosexual orientation.  Obviously this would be detrimental for his reproduction, meaning that in men this gene is evolutionarily detrimental.  Yet it continues to spread, meaning that the evolutionary benefit to women outweighs the detriment to men.  (It's possible that in some cases the benefit to female fitness could be increased even further if their homosexual relatives, not having children of their own, helped out in raising her children.) 

There is another pattern responsible for homosexual orientation in a large percentage of gay men.  This is related to fraternal birth order--the more older brothers a man has, the more likely he is to be gay.  This has been known for a long time and various explanations put forth.  One was that in large families the relationship between the parents is worse, leading to psychological harm of the younger sons.  This would be strange because the pattern is not found when a man has a large number of older sisters, and having a bunch of daughters is probably in some ways more stressful than having a bunch of sons.    When this hypothesis was tested, it was found to be false.  Another is that younger sons are more likely to be physically or even sexually abused by older brothers as the number of brothers increases.    Fortunately it ends out this was not true either.  Another important piece of information is that it is only biological brothers that affect sexual orientation, adopted or step-brothers do not affect a younger son's odds of being gay. 

The most likely explanation is some type of prenatal effect, generally thought to be a gradual activation of the mother's immune system against male fetal cells.  With each pregnancy a woman's immune system becomes more vaccinated against a male fetus, and eventually this immune response causes fetal changes that result in a homosexual orientation.  The details of this are not completely understood, but you can read some about the research that has been done that determined it's a prenatal effect depending upon fraternal birth order here:  www.pnas.org/content/103/28/10771.full

Female homosexuality is less well understood.  This may be in part because, as an earlier poster pointed out, women are more labile in their sexual orientation.  Men tend to be stable in their preference, but women are more likely to have both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, and switch from one to the other.  Sexual orientation is better thought of as a spectrum than a switch, and women's preferences can shift along that spectrum more easily than men's.  However, there is some research showing that prenatal exposure to high levels of androgens can make a female more likely to have a homosexual orientation.  Brains are immensely complicated structures, and develop under the control of hormones and other stimuli, so it's not surprising this development sometimes produces non-normative results. 

Sexual orientation is just a trait a person has, most people are heterosexual, but some people are homosexual.  Heterosexuality is not a mental illness, neither is homosexuality.  Both are natural variations found in all populations. 

Modifié par Creature 1, 03 décembre 2009 - 11:15 .

[Viglin]

Um, who is Jimmy Kimmel..and yes l live in the USA.

Poor mans Conan?

[Smkswazi]

It's easier to focus peoples attention on fictional problems than real problems. It's easier to hate or point finger at someone else than yourself. So games will always be controversial boobies will be taboo.... bla bla bla jada jada jada the world goes on.

[RavenNightsight]

pathenry wrote...

RavenNightsight wrote...
I'm 22 with a 3 year old son and we let him watch us play. He even giggled when he saw my boyfriend's(24) character have sex with Morrigan, Leilana, and Zevran all in one go while hanging out at camp.

(snip)

... I'm not bashing how you parent, I just don't understand when people want to shelter their kids.

Hmm, maybe they don't want a 19 year old unmarried daughter who is already knocked up and shacked up with some random dude? You know, like what your parents ended up with..

When your 3-year-old asks about the trannys and beastiality in the game, what will you tell him?

Why does marriage have to factor into anything? Since when was marriage ever even brought up? Besides, if you really love someone, then what changes when you get married. Aside from the fact that you sign a piece of paper, one of your last names change and you wear a ring of some sort on your hand? 

Trannys and beastiality? I'll tell him that it happens. I have a guy friend with boobs, whoop-de-doo. Who cares? Not I. As far as beastiality goes, have you ever surfed the internet without your pop-up blocker on? Again, I would rather him ask and learn the truth about it from me and his dad, then find it randomly on the internet. Or in the case of his father, when he went to a party and some chick got really super drunk and had sex with her dog in front of everyone.

[Infiniteone2]

Creature 1 wrote...

Infiniteone2 wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Infiniteone2 wrote...

I have never met a single lesbian or gay in my life that didn't have some abnormal-traumatic-persistent event/troubled relationship in their past, and I have met quite a few, my half brother is one in fact, and he fits the above description (bad babysitter, crazy grandma, ****** aunt, crazy dad, really bad adhd and medication, changing homes many times, etc)

This to me tells me that being homosexual is not natural, do I care? No. Is it natural? No, so I wish people would stop saying it is.

ya because anecdotal evidence is so solid.

My sister lives with 3 gay men, I know their pasts, and several of their friends.
My ex-gf has a les daughter, I know her past.
I know my step aunts past.
One of my goods friends since highschool I know her past.
Various people I've met at clubs, diners (after the club), friends of friends, I usually hear their stories too, surprisingly they've all been mostly open about it.

I could fill out a TL:DR list here if I wanted too, its not fact, but my hypothesis is that 99% of homosexuals fall into this category.

Have you heard the saying, the plural of anecdote is not data?  I have my own collection of anecdotes that contradict yours, but I know we can't determine the facts of anything by accumulating anecdotes.  So instead I turn to the scientific literature.  There's been a lot of research into sexual orientation, and it doesn't conclude that it's because of abuse or bad relationships.  In fact, it's clear there's a large genetic component.  You can read about one line of research here:  www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427196/  In summary, it's been found that some gay men come from families with an unusually large number of gay men, and that these gay men tend to be found along the maternal line of descent.  Additionally, women in these families tend to be more fertile than average.  This suggests an X-linked factor that when inherited by a woman causes her to produce more children than the average (which is evolutionarily beneficial), but when inherited by a man tends to produce a homosexual orientation.  Obviously this would be detrimental for his reproduction, meaning that in men this gene is evolutionarily detrimental.  Yet it continues to spread, meaning that the evolutionary benefit to women outweighs the detriment to men.  (It's possible that in some cases the benefit to female fitness could be increased even further if their homosexual relatives, not having children of their own, helped out in raising her children.) 

There is another pattern responsible for homosexual orientation in a large percentage of gay men.  This is related to fraternal birth order--the more older brothers a man has, the more likely he is to be gay.  This has been known for a long time and various explanations put forth.  One was that in large families the relationship between the parents is worse, leading to psychological harm of the younger sons.  This would be strange because the pattern is not found when a man has a large number of older sisters, and having a bunch of daughters is probably in some ways more stressful than having a bunch of sons.    When this hypothesis was tested, it was found to be false.  Another is that younger sons are more likely to be physically or even sexually abused by older brothers as the number of brothers increases.    Fortunately it ends out this was not true either.  Another important piece of information is that it is only biological brothers that affect sexual orientation, adopted or step-brothers do not affect a younger son's odds of being gay. 

The most likely explanation is some type of prenatal effect, generally thought to be a gradual activation of the mother's immune system against male fetal cells.  With each pregnancy a woman's immune system becomes more vaccinated against a male fetus, and eventually this immune response causes fetal changes that result in a homosexual orientation.  The details of this are not completely understood, but you can read some about the research that has been done that determined it's a prenatal effect depending upon fraternal birth order here:  www.pnas.org/content/103/28/10771.full

Female homosexuality is less well understood.  This may be in part because, as an earlier poster pointed out, women are more labile in their sexual orientation.  Men tend to be stable in their preference, but women are more likely to have both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, and switch from one to the other.  Sexual orientation is better thought of as a spectrum than a switch, and women's preferences can shift along that spectrum more easily than men's.  However, there is some research showing that prenatal exposure to high levels of androgens can make a female more likely to have a homosexual orientation.  Brains are immensely complicated structures, and develop under the control of hormones and other stimuli, so it's not surprising this development sometimes produces non-normative results. 

Sexual orientation is just a trait a person has, most people are heterosexual, but some people are homosexual.  Heterosexuality is not a mental illness, neither is homosexuality.  Both are natural variations found in all populations. 

So a defect then.

Cool, I like being told part of what I thought is right according to a FEW "scientists".  Course I wouldn't take it with a grain of salt because this is one of those things that will never really be figured out fully, because homosexuals will always lie about their past to make their lifestyle seem perfectly natural and a-okay, and because in my lifetime we'll never fully figure out/map the human brain.

[Trajan60]

Viglin wrote...

Um, who is Jimmy Kimmel..and yes l live in the USA.
Poor mans Conan?

Essentially.

[GHL_Soul_Reaver]

I doubt it has something to do with genetic defects as in it seem like alot of homosexuals are just alike the straight guy or gal next door... if anything it is a fascination thing rather I say...psychic in a way it is not a mental illness in the state we know as love, love technically is unnatural if you look at the wide spectrum of our fellow animals, tonnes of those just meet each other once or twice a year... reproduce for then moving on.

[Oliver Sudden]

Aidunno wrote...

Could ask why media always assumes games are meant for children.

I think they just look at the level of discourse on game forums, the language and spelling choices, and go from there.

[Hrodberht]

mathewgurney wrote...

I'm 29, my 5 year-old daughter watches me play this game.
I have absolutely no problem with her seeing the violence, in fact i see it as a positive thing for her to understand.
The world is violent and contains horrors worse than any she could see depicted in a video game, seeing it in a mild animated form now will only help her deal with it better should she ever encounter such things in reality.
Also man's problems throughout history have nearly always been solved conclusively with violence such as depicted in the game, having an understanding of such things makes her stronger.
However
Gay sex is not something i want her seeing, it's a non-productive "consumer" activity with no relevant application to a situation in her later life other than a basic way of understanding others motivations or seeking some transitory pleasure of her own.
The straight sex scenes if she were to see any and the inevitable questions she'd ask would lead to a useful discussion for her with me and her mother on reproduction, human evolution and a huge amount of related subjects geographical, medical, anthropological etc.

No offense, and I know the odds are against it, but how can you be sure your 5-year old daughter won't turn out to find gay sex scenes as relevant as straight ones?

[KalosCast]

Trajan60 wrote...

I really don't understand what is so engrossing about homosexuality. It has been around and been a part of human sexuality since humans have been around.

Perhaps, but I have this Bible that kind of references it a couple times and says it's as bad as a couple other forbidden things that nobody takes seriously in a couple books that may or may not actually be considered Christian canon SO IT'S THE MOST EVIL THING IN THE WORLD! AHHHHHHHHHH!

[Creature 1]

Infiniteone2 wrote...
So a defect then.

Cool, I like being told part of what I thought is right according to a FEW "scientists".  Course I wouldn't take it with a grain of salt because this is one of those things that will never really be figured out fully, because homosexuals will always lie about their past to make their lifestyle seem perfectly natural and a-okay, and because in my lifetime we'll never fully figure out/map the human brain.

I reject your implication.  Homosexuality due to birth order might be considered a "defect" like, oh, situs invertus, a condition in which the internal organs are positioned mirrored left to right.  You observe it and say, "So fetal development took a slightly different route."  So what? 

What you are doing here is equivocation.  You're moving from "non-normative" to "abnormal".  The first is a neutral statement that just says it's different from the average.  The second, coming from you, is a value statement that says that it's wrong or undesirable.  From a scientific point of view you can't come to that conclusion.  From a rational point of view you can't come to that conclusion.  The only way a person comes to that conclusion is by reference to prior prejudices.  Heterosexuality and homosexuality are just developmental variations. 

The articles I linked to are components of the modern scientific consensus.  It's not the opinion of "a few scientists". 

Why should you assume they're lying?  It would be just as reasonable for me to assume you're lying about your remarkably stress-free life in order to add weight to your anecdotal evidence that psychological trauma results in homosexuality. 

Certainly the statistics don't lie--in some cases male homosexuality is linked to a gene or set of genes on the X chromosome that tend to produce heightened fertility in women and homosexuality in men.  This is undeniable. 

[LaztRezort]

99% of homosexuals fall into this category.

98.6% of all statistics are made up.

But seriously, the fact is, debating what is "mental disorder" is a pointless persuit since the definitions can be moved and manipulated to suit the argument, especially among us armchair psychologists.

What does seem certain, at least to me, is that homosexuality is less taboo that it used to be, and is continuing in that direction -- much like past examples of bikinis, birth control, and surgery.  If you protest too much against the changing zeitgeist, you may be looked at as "old fashioned."  If you raise your children that way, they may be unprepared for current social standards.

[RoudyRogue]

ughh... that only happens if you ask for it... right?

[Creature 1]

Creature 1 wrote...

Infiniteone2 wrote...
So a defect then.

Cool, I like being told part of what I thought is right according to a FEW "scientists".  Course I wouldn't take it with a grain of salt because this is one of those things that will never really be figured out fully, because homosexuals will always lie about their past to make their lifestyle seem perfectly natural and a-okay, and because in my lifetime we'll never fully figure out/map the human brain.

I reject your implication.  Homosexuality due to birth order might be considered a "defect" like, oh, situs invertus, a condition in which the internal organs are positioned mirrored left to right.  You observe it and say, "So fetal development took a slightly different route."  So what? 

What you are doing here is equivocation.  You're moving from "non-normative" to "abnormal".  The first is a neutral statement that just says it's different from the average.  The second, coming from you, is a value statement that says that it's wrong or undesirable.  From a scientific point of view you can't come to that conclusion.  From a rational point of view you can't come to that conclusion.  The only way a person comes to that conclusion is by reference to prior prejudices.  Heterosexuality and homosexuality are just developmental variations. 

Oh, and I meant to add, when homosexuality is due to a genetic component that increases fertility in women, it could be considered better and not a defect at all, since that gene/set of genes often results in the family producing more offspring than families without it. 

[Creature 1]

RoudyRogue wrote...

ughh... that only happens if you ask for it... right?

If you mean leaping in bed with Zevran, that's totally elective. 

I prefer Alistair, but Zevran's not that hideous!

[jsog]

Creature 1: Nice posts.   Good to see someone else is keeping up with literature, though that isn't my field so I'm sorely lacking in anything recent.  Your facts were enlightening!

Anyone else getting this feeling Mathewgurney is a troll? >.<  Too much time on other forums I suppose.  Otherwise, it sounds like he is saying that the persuit of violence is a worthy goal, whereas sex outside of reproduction is unworthy. =|

[xenophyros]

mathewgurney wrote...

I'm 29, my 5 year-old daughter watches me play this game.
I have absolutely no problem with her seeing the violence, in fact i see it as a positive thing for her to understand.
The world is violent and contains horrors worse than any she could see depicted in a video game, seeing it in a mild animated form now will only help her deal with it better should she ever encounter such things in reality.
Also man's problems throughout history have nearly always been solved conclusively with violence such as depicted in the game, having an understanding of such things makes her stronger.

Until today I wasn't sure whacko parents like you actually existed.   When will people ilke you realize that the capacity for violence is a weakness.  And why do people try to shelter their kids from their own bodies and instead try to prepare them for violence that is only likely to be realized if you go looking for it? 

Btw, you have no idea whether your 5 year old kid is gonna be gay or straight.