Hi.
Comments
-
No to chromosomal defect, no to psychological trauma.
While they may be contributing factors (at least the trauma), those aren't the only two explanations for homosexuality.
Neither no was about smileys, which you can disable in individual posts by clicking "Go Advanced" and "Disable smileys in text".
So what do you explain it with? It just happens?
Thanks for the information though. Didn't notice it before. -
Sure.' wrote:Sake;3959933']So what do you explain it with? It just happens?
Thanks for the information though. Didn't notice it before.
Sometimes it just happens. Sometimes its a very concious decision.
Mostly it's childhood or adolescent circumstances - not necessarily traumatic, but influential on ones perception of traditional gender roles.
Social norm matters too of course. I doubt homosexuality in a modern sense was very common in ancient Greece, but same-sex.. sex, was common simply because it was more acceptable and they didn't put as much of a stigma in it as we do.
There is no reliable evidence that I've seen that supports an actual neurological defect or hereditary components in terms of genetics, hereditary as in 'daddy is gay maybe I am too' is of course different. -
If you would ask me, no.
But I do pity them for their disturbed brain.
And the violence they use against them, like in Russia, is just awful off course.
But that is what i think about gays.
What makes you think they are disturbed?Vast majority of charon. It's a pain
I know that. Well I only know a few of them. But I was asking about other people around the forum. I got bored.
and I need an excuse not to play with henry' wrote:Sake;3959910']I have nothing against them, but it is a fact that being homosexual can only have 2 causes. It can either be an error in their chromosomes or the effect of psychological trauma(s) (this can be interpreted in many ways) or both.
It is not like they can do anything about it, but they should not rub it in others' face. Well, that's my opinion.
How did you type ':D' without it becoming that annoying emoji? Mod powers? :rolleyes:
I wonder who taught you that? The chromosomal thing?No, and no.
I just like you more. *-*No to chromosomal defect, no to psychological trauma.
While they may be contributing factors (at least the trauma), those aren't the only two explanations for homosexuality.
Neither no was about smileys, which you can disable in individual posts by clicking "Go Advanced" and "Disable smileys in text".
Now I like you even more!' wrote:Sake;3959933']So what do you explain it with? It just happens?
Thanks for the information though. Didn't notice it before.
'Just happens' .. well heterosexuality 'just happens' too.Sure.
Sometimes it just happens. Sometimes its a very concious decision.
Mostly it's childhood or adolescent circumstances - not necessarily traumatic, but influential on ones perception of traditional gender roles.
Social norm matters too of course. I doubt homosexuality in a modern sense was very common in ancient Greece, but same-sex.. sex, was common simply because it was more acceptable and they didn't put as much of a stigma in it as we do.
There is no reliable evidence that I've seen that supports an actual neurological defect or hereditary components in terms of genetics, hereditary as in 'daddy is gay maybe I am too' is of course different.
Aaaand now I love you. Marry me? *-* -
Sure.
Sometimes it just happens. Sometimes its a very concious decision.
Mostly it's childhood or adolescent circumstances - not necessarily traumatic, but influential on ones perception of traditional gender roles.
Social norm matters too of course. I doubt homosexuality in a modern sense was very common in ancient Greece, but same-sex.. sex, was common simply because it was more acceptable and they didn't put as much of a stigma in it as we do.
Trauma wasn't the best word for it. You specified what I meant with this:Mostly it's childhood or adolescent circumstances - not necessarily traumatic, but influential on ones perception of traditional gender roles.
Regarding the other causes and added information, I agree, it made me think it over, but there is a huge difference between being bisexual - which is rather some kind of curiosity - and being homosexual.There is no reliable evidence that I've seen that supports an actual neurological defect or hereditary components in terms of genetics, hereditary as in 'daddy is gay maybe I am too' is of course different.
I know you didn't mean it this way, but it has more to do with the mother, actually.I wonder who taught you that? The chromosomal thing?
Believe it or not, I heard it on National Geographic Channel. They can also be wrong, however, I find it a reliable source.'Just happens' .. well heterosexuality 'just happens' too.
In the perception of evolutionary approach, yes, it just happened, but it happened so because it was a fundamental element to survival.
Homosexuality is a deviation and such it must have causes. Evolution itself is about genetic errors becoming an advantage or a handicap.
I hope I worded that right, it is hard to speak in an other language at this level. -
'Just happens' .. well heterosexuality 'just happens' too.' wrote:Sake;3959971']
In the perception of evolutionary approach, yes, it just happened, but it happened so because it was a fundamental element to survival.
Homosexuality is a deviation and such it must have causes. Evolution itself is about genetic errors becoming an advantage or a handicap.
couldnt of said it better myself -
' wrote:Sake;3959971']Trauma wasn't the best word for it. You specified what I meant with this:
Regarding the other causes and added information, I agree, it made me think it over, but there is a huge difference between being bisexual - which is rather some kind of curiosity - and being homosexual.
I know you didn't mean it this way, but it has more to do with the mother, actually.
Well actually that's not what he meant.
The only difference between bisexual and homosexual is that you can develop feelings for both sexes not just one. Bisexual doesn't mean curiosity. Being sexually curious and wanting to try other things - just so you see what happens doesn't make you bisexual.
As for circumstances and childhood 'traumas' or whatever, that's not entirely true. Everyone develops in their own way. It is a factor, but its not necessary. For example two brothers in the same family, same environment same everything, one is homosexual the other is heterosexual. There has been no sexual or verbal abuse on the homosexual brother, no **** no nothing. Yet he is homosexual. It's all about your own perception. Of course growing up in whatever circumstances affects you, but that is personality related, not who you are able to have feelings for.' wrote:Sake;3959971']Believe it or not, I heard it on National Geographic Channel. They can also be wrong, however, I find it a reliable source.
Maybe National Geographic was insinuating that there are experiments to prove that theory, but for now its just a speculation, they have nothing concrete, they just try to find a reason.' wrote:Sake;3959971']In the perception of evolutionary approach, yes, it just happened, but it happened so because it was a fundamental element to survival.
Homosexuality is a deviation and such it must have causes. Evolution itself is about genetic errors becoming an advantage or a handicap.
I hope I worded that right, it is hard to speak in an other language at this level.
Actually, yes, you can not reproduce by having sex with a partner of the same gender, but that is not an abomination. There are tons of people that can not reproduce at all although they are not gay, there are some diseases that prevent that. And yes while for heterosexual people there are obstacles in reproducing, my point is that gay people aren't the only ones that can't reproduce. And we have already evolved and we are past the level of following instincts, like animals. Our life is not all about reproducing to perpetuate the species, our lives have other purposes too.
There are lots of species of animals that also have gay individuals. Such as lions, rabbits, dolphins etc. Giraffes are bisexual. All of them. Being gay is as normal as it gets, the only reason people don't see it as normal is because they are not past their prejudices. Most of them are enforced and have as source religion. The reason gays make parades and stuff its not to 'rub it in your face and not leave you alone' its simply for the sole purpose of showing other gay people that they shouldn't be afraid to come out of the closet and that in our days gay people are not killed with stones or burned alive or held in prisons and tortured. If gay people would have all their rights and there would be no homophobic people you wouldn't see gay parades. Or maybe you would but then you wouldn't find it offensive. And oh by the way, if you wanna make a parade for the town's day how would it be for me to say that I find it offensive just because I wasn't born in that town or I don't like that town? Stupid right? Yes, it's the same with gay parades. You don't like them? Avoid them, but shut up! - and that is to one guy here that has something against that and I forgot his nickname. -
That two men having sex can't reproduce is fairly obvious, for humans at least.
Where I get confused is when you put negative value in that fact.
It is an anomaly in the reproductive sense, but hardly in a broader human sense.
We are gifted with minds that can choose to do as we will. A man can choose to reproduce with a female if the species demands it, even if his sexual preference follows a different path.
It's not negative in any kind of evolutionary or biological sense, we as a species have already reached the pinnacle of natural evolution and can now develop ourselves so to speak, without natural selection.
PS: Found the 'chromosome' thing, even if "chromosomal defect" is a ridiculously negatively charged summary.
http://bit.ly/RfjyQw -
That two men having sex can't reproduce is fairly obvious, for humans at least.
Where I get confused is when you put negative value in that fact.
It is an anomaly in the reproductive sense, but hardly in a broader human sense.
We are gifted with minds that can choose to do as we will. A man can choose to reproduce with a female if the species demands it, even if his sexual preference follows a different path.
It's not negative in any kind of evolutionary or biological sense, we as a species have already reached the pinnacle of natural evolution and can now develop ourselves so to speak, without natural selection.
And this is why I like you
-
Well actually that's not what he meant.
The only difference between bisexual and homosexual is that you can develop feelings for both sexes not just one. Bisexual doesn't mean curiosity. Being sexually curious and wanting to try other things - just so you see what happens doesn't make you bisexual.
We could argue about this, but this is way too far from what I originally wanted to speak about. True, same rules apply to bisexuals in many cases, but it is still different.As for circumstances and childhood 'traumas' or whatever, that's not entirely true. Everyone develops in their own way. It is a factor, but its not necessary. For example two brothers in the same family, same environment same everything, one is homosexual the other is heterosexual. There has been no sexual or verbal abuse on the homosexual brother, no **** no nothing. Yet he is homosexual. It's all about your own perception. Of course growing up in whatever circumstances affects you, but that is personality related, not who you are able to have feelings for.
Your example proves my point best. In this case the cause is genetic.Maybe National Geographic was insinuating that there are experiments to prove that theory, but for now its just a speculation, they have nothing concrete, they just try to find a reason.
They can't tell which genes affect sexual orientation yet, maybe they will never be able to tell for sure, but it does have to do with genes. They aren't just trying to find a reason, they already have many studies proving their theory.Actually, yes, you can not reproduce by having sex with a partner of the same gender, but that is not an abomination. There are tons of people that can not reproduce at all although they are not gay, there are some diseases that prevent that. And yes while for heterosexual people there are obstacles in reproducing, my point is that gay people aren't the only ones that can't reproduce. And we have already evolved and we are past the level of following instincts, like animals. Our life is not all about reproducing to perpetuate the species, our lives have other purposes too.
I don't recall saying that homosexuality is an abomination. I think that gays should be treated just the same way as others.
What I said applies to people not being able to reproduce despite being heterosexual as well. Though, in this case there can be much more causes.There are lots of species of animals that also have gay individuals. Such as lions, rabbits, dolphins etc. Giraffes are bisexual. All of them. Being gay is as normal as it gets, the only reason people don't see it as normal is because they are not past their prejudices. Most of them are enforced and have as source religion. The reason gays make parades and stuff its not to 'rub it in your face and not leave you alone' its simply for the sole purpose of showing other gay people that they shouldn't be afraid to come out of the closet and that in our days gay people are not killed with stones or burned alive or held in prisons and tortured. If gay people would have all their rights and there would be no homophobic people you wouldn't see gay parades. Or maybe you would but then you wouldn't find it offensive. And oh by the way, if you wanna make a parade for the town's day how would it be for me to say that I find it offensive just because I wasn't born in that town or I don't like that town? Stupid right? Yes, it's the same with gay parades. You don't like them? Avoid them, but shut up! - and that is to one guy here that has something against that and I forgot his nickname.
I know that it is present in other species too. This (once again) proves my point that it can have genetic roots. It being normal or being accepted is again different. People should accept it, they shouldn't differentiate between them and others.
I don't think your example with the town is valid. I would rather compare it with a religious parade. Religion and sexual orientation are both the business of the person having them. If you are so insistent on this, I will tell you I would be against heterosexual parades too. This may sound weird or ridiculous though.Where I get confused is when you put negative value in that fact.
It is an anomaly in the reproductive sense, but hardly in a broader human sense.
We are gifted with minds that can choose to do as we will. A man can choose to reproduce with a female if the species demands it, even if his sexual preference follows a different path.
It's not negative in any kind of evolutionary or biological sense, we as a species have already reached the pinnacle of natural evolution and can now develop ourselves so to speak, without natural selection.
I didn't mean to put negative value in it, but I already stated that. I totally agree with what you said.PS: Found the 'chromosome' thing, even if "chromosomal defect" is a ridiculously negatively charged summary.
http://bit.ly/RfjyQw
Hats off that you took your time looking deeper in the topic.
I didn't use the word 'defect' though, I said error, which isn't negative at all. We are also the result of billions of billions of genetic errors.Forumer999 wrote: »Makes a thread saying "hi"
Ends up talking about homosexuality.
*gif*
Yes, but it is in off topic, the thread didn't have any dedicated topic to begin with and the OP is also taking part in the argument, so I think it is ok. -
Look, people without legs arent suppose to be borned without legs. Same goes with being a homosexual, youre suppose to love your opposite gender instead of the same.
Either something is wrong with the outside or the inside, when youre not like youre suppose to be then something of you is disturbed. -
' wrote:Sake;3960150']We could argue about this, but this is way too far from what I originally wanted to speak about. True, same rules apply to bisexuals in many cases, but it is still different.
Your example proves my point best. In this case the cause is genetic.
They can't tell which genes affect sexual orientation yet, maybe they will never be able to tell for sure, but it does have to do with genes. They aren't just trying to find a reason, they already have many studies proving their theory.
I don't recall saying that homosexuality is an abomination. I think that gays should be treated just the same way as others.
What I said applies to people not being able to reproduce despite being heterosexual as well. Though, in this case there can be much more causes.
I know that it is present in other species too. This (once again) proves my point that it can have genetic roots. It being normal or being accepted is again different. People should accept it, they shouldn't differentiate between them and others.
I don't think your example with the town is valid. I would rather compare it with a religious parade. Religion and sexual orientation are both the business of the person having them. If you are so insistent on this, I will tell you I would be against heterosexual parades too. This may sound weird or ridiculous though.
I didn't mean to put negative value in it, but I already stated that. I totally agree with what you said.
Hats off that you took your time looking deeper in the topic.
I didn't use the word 'defect' though, I said error, which isn't negative at all. We are also the result of billions of billions of genetic errors.
Yes, but it is in off topic, the thread didn't have any dedicated topic to begin with and the OP is also taking part in the argument, so I think it is ok.
Well I want to see the proof they have because so far when I try to look into it it's all forums and such. But well the main point is this : It's not a disorder, it's not a disease, it's not something anyone can fix, so instead of everyone being sorry for them, or thinking they are crazy, they should just accept them and live their lives.Look, people without legs arent suppose to be borned without legs. Same goes with being a homosexual, youre suppose to love your opposite gender instead of the same.
Either something is wrong with the outside or the inside, when youre not like youre suppose to be then something of you is disturbed.
Supposed? And who exactly says you're supposed to love a person of a different gender?We pity people with no legs so should we pity people that love their own gender.
Who on this forum is homosexual by the way?
I don't pity people with no legs, and having a disability is different than being gay. Being gay is not a disability, it's something that you can't choose, and it's not some disease you catch from someone else, or something else. -
Look, people without legs arent suppose to be borned without legs. Same goes with being a homosexual, youre suppose to love your opposite gender instead of the same.
Either something is wrong with the outside or the inside, when youre not like youre suppose to be then something of you is disturbed.
Dear Dakotu
Well said ^ this. -
We pity people with no legs so should we pity people that love their own gender.
No, we should not pity either. We should help/accept them. They won't feel better from being pitied.Well I want to see the proof they have because so far when I try to look into it it's all forums and such.
Dot posted a link to a forum post, but if you really read it, you would know it had links to external sites and quotes.
If you are interested, then just see for yourself. Google is our friend.But well the main point is this : It's not a disorder, it's not a disease...
It being a disorder or not is subjective, we discussed what it is objectively already....it's not something anyone can fix, so instead of everyone being sorry for them, or thinking they are crazy, they should just accept them and live their lives.
True, I agree. -
For the sake of argument, let's say I am.We pity people with no legs so should we pity people that love their own gender.
Who on this forum is homosexual by the way?
How does it negatively impact humanity, more than say - another result of the social environment - obesity or religion?
Or another result of concious decisions to the detriment of human kind, war?
You can argue it's abnormal, though only to the extent that it's not as prevalent in our society as heterosexuality, but I'm not seeing the 'disturbed psyche' or 'handicap' logic.' wrote:Sake;3960208']
It being a disorder or not is subjective, we discussed what it is objectively already.
I'm curious what you think the consensus we reached is.
It's no more a disease than being athletic is a disease. -
I'm curious what you think the consensus we reached is.
It's no more a disease than being athletic is a disease.
I chose disorder instead of disease because it has a somewhat different meaning. Disorder is less negative and is closer to the causes I mentioned.
The consensus we reached, at least in my opinion, is that it is rather a tendency. Some people are more inclined to become gay because of their genetics meaning that homosexuality is in most cases the result of both genetics and environment.FrozenPizza wrote: »I don't hate gay people, I hate the flamboyant personality.
Me too. And to avoid argument on this, not only gay people can be flamboyant. -
Alright, replace "disease" with "disorder" in my post. It still applies.' wrote:Sake;3960724']I chose disorder instead of disease because it has a somewhat different meaning. Disorder is less negative and is closer to the causes I mentioned.
The consensus we reached, at least in my opinion, is that it is rather a tendency. Some people are more inclined to become gay because of their genetics meaning that homosexuality is in most cases the result of both genetics and environment.
Me too. And to avoid argument on this, not only gay people can be flamboyant.
The flamboyant in-yo-face parades annoy me terribly, I must admit.
But mostly because they're usually riddled with indecency. -
Dear Nephire
It seems that [MOD]dot and ]Sake are talking about homosexuality and going offtopic on an offtopic thread.
User Nephire , ]Sake should get infracted just like you infracted me.
User [MOD]dot should get demoted.
All the best, Robotics Club. -
Forumer999 wrote: »Dear Nephire
It seems that [MOD]dot and ]Sake are talking about homosexuality and going offtopic on an offtopic thread.
User Nephire , ]Sake should get infracted just like you infracted me.
User [MOD]dot should get demoted.
All the best, Robotics Club.
As I said before, we aren't going off topic since this thread is in Off Topic and it didn't have a specific topic to begin with.
Your reasoning is ridiculous. -
' wrote:Sake;3960819']As I said before, we aren't going off topic since this thread is in Off Topic and it didn't have a specific topic to begin with.
Your reasoning is ridiculous.
Dear ]Sake
Could you please say that to the person who gave me such an infraction.
I think he'll disagree.
All the best, Robotics Club. -
Forumer999 wrote: »Dear ]Sake
Could you please say that to the person who gave me such an infraction.
I think he'll disagree.
All the best, Robotics Club.
So you got an infraction for going off topic in a thread which was in Off Topic? If so, then are you sure it didn't have to do with anything else? -
' wrote:Sake;3960829']So you got an infraction for going off topic in a thread which was in Off Topic? If so, then are you sure it didn't have to do with anything else?
Dear ]Sake
I am 100% correct, I still am waiting for my other "infractions" to get removed.
Just because you removed 2 points it doesn't mean you can let the other infractions stay.
^ last sentence for someone else.
All the best, Robotics Club. -
Forumer999 wrote: »Dear ]Sake
I am 100% correct, I still am waiting for my other "infractions" to get removed.
All the best, Robotics Club.
So just because you were put under unfair treatment (if everything you say is true) you want others to suffer the same?
If it was about you getting kicked from that game in the GM event, then it was probably because you killed other players while they wanted to join forces against the GM. I saw a few getting kicked the same way from the rooms I participated in.
I don't know to what extent is this going off topic. If I shouldn't talk about this here, just tell me.
![]Sake](https://z8games.akamaized.net/cfna/forum/customavatars/33/navatar_6776233.gif){kind=avatar}
![[dot]](https://forum.z8games.com/uploads/customavatars/27/navatar_2942827.gif){kind=avatar}
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 15 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 2.5K CrossFire
- 715 CrossFire Announcements
- 714 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 323 Community
- 12 Modes
- 393 Suggestions
- 16 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 73 CF Competitive Forum
- 1 CFCL
- 16 Looking for a Team?
- 524 CrossFire Support
- 7 Suggestion
- 15 CrossFire Guides
- 37 CrossFire Off Topic