[Discussion] What is the reason for homosexuality?

[Kaneki Kun]

What do you mean I went ghost? :lol.

I haven't seen you comment or make a thread for a minute (except for the other day) other than that you disappeared bro lmao

 

[FreakensteinAG]

Notice they never asked me... or anyone i've ever met. Polls depending on where they are taken usually provide a very skewed view of reality. Why did they lose ****ing hard when the voting took place?

You must be registered for see images

This is even just an American study. Imagine Europe or Japan, two areas which are more tolerant than us about homosexuality! The percentages are higher.

 

[Multiply]

I haven't seen you comment or make a thread for a minute (except for the other day) other than that you disappeared bro lmao

Just been busy. I could blow this ****** up with all hot threads if you want me to. :bdpf:

 

[Kaneki Kun]

Just been busy. I could blow this ****** up with all hot threads if you want me to. :bdpf:

Nah you good lol life happens man, just good to see familiar members active here and there.

 

[slimreaper]

You must be registered for see images

This is even just an American study. Imagine Europe or Japan, two areas which are more tolerant than us about homosexuality! The percentages are higher.

You must be registered for see links

 

[wanderingcactus]

/thread.

this thread is based on scientific purpose NOT morals.

Each person have different set of morals due to psychological reasoning. It is the same with homosexuality.

To clarify, *** is used for passing genes for the survival of their species.

In scientific point, homosexuality does not exist and CANNOT exist. in fish, in mammals, even in reptiles, one must be male and one must be female in order to reproduce. Trees can reproduce in a different manner however it is not homosexual as they can reproduce asexual (by their own), plant life can have 2 reproductive organs so technically it isn't homo.

Do not turn this thread on the premise of what you think is right or wrong. That is your opinion. The OP already stated that he is neutral and is merely asking what homosexuality is for.

If you choose to take a moral stand point, you should not post anything on this thread.

 

[FreakensteinAG]

You must be registered for see links

Here, we have four states who oppose it. That much is shown. How about the rest of the states? Or in other countries like Canada, Sweden, Japan? So does "reality", as you put it, distort when you walk into a different state? Or should reality stay how it is based on how the Progressive World sees it?

In scientific point, homosexuality does not exist and CANNOT exist

I'm sorry, are you a scientist? Because if you are, I hope no journal has ever taken your theses seriously. That would damage any scientific journal's reputation.

I have shown to you, in simple scenarios, how homosexuality can and does occur to the point of being reproducible. We have evidence of homosexuality occurring in the wilderness, in the face of those who claim it's not natural. If you cannot take what is facts and evidence to a simple acknowledgement, you are not a scientist.

 

[slimreaper]

Here, we have four states who oppose it. That much is shown. How about the rest of the states? Or in other countries like Canada, Sweden, Japan? So does "reality", as you put it, distort when you walk into a different state? Or should reality stay how it is based on how the Progressive World sees it?

**** the world. We do as we see fit, they do as they see fit.

 

[Fresco]

You must be registered for see links

What was the point in posting this? States had desegregation forced upon them. Was that wrong?

/thread.

this thread is based on scientific purpose NOT morals.

Each person have different set of morals due to psychological reasoning. It is the same with homosexuality.

To clarify, *** is used for passing genes for the survival of their species.

In scientific point, homosexuality does not exist and CANNOT exist. in fish, in mammals, even in reptiles, one must be male and one must be female in order to reproduce. Trees can reproduce in a different manner however it is not homosexual as they can reproduce asexual (by their own), plant life can have 2 reproductive organs so technically it isn't homo.

Do not turn this thread on the premise of what you think is right or wrong. That is your opinion. The OP already stated that he is neutral and is merely asking what homosexuality is for.

If you choose to take a moral stand point, you should not post anything on this thread.

But it does tho?

 

[wanderingcactus]

What was the point in posting this? States had desegregation forced upon them. Was that wrong?


But it does tho?

it exist simply on psychologically. but scientifically on the premise on nature, it does not.

As stated, *** is to reproduce. sperm on sperm or egg on egg does not produce an offspring.

homosex is possible as it stimulates orgasm but orgasm does not mean reproduction.

 

[wanderingcactus]

Here, we have four states who oppose it. That much is shown. How about the rest of the states? Or in other countries like Canada, Sweden, Japan? So does "reality", as you put it, distort when you walk into a different state? Or should reality stay how it is based on how the Progressive World sees it?



I'm sorry, are you a scientist? Because if you are, I hope no journal has ever taken your theses seriously. That would damage any scientific journal's reputation.

I have shown to you, in simple scenarios, how homosexuality can and does occur to the point of being reproducible. We have evidence of homosexuality occurring in the wilderness, in the face of those who claim it's not natural. If you cannot take what is facts and evidence to a simple acknowledgement, you are not a scientist.

give me a proof that sperm on sperm or egg on egg reproduction and ill take back what i said.

It has to be natural occurring too.

It doesn't take a scientist to know this. What a narrow minded fellow you are. You simply cannot comprehend that his is a discussion on the purpose/reason for homosexuality.

psychologically it exists; naturally? impossible. the act of *** is very possible but what is the point? which is what we are tasked on answering.

Get it through your thick empty skull, this is merely a scientific discussion, no moral answer will be accepted as it will turn into an opinion war.

 

[slimreaper]

What was the point in posting this? States had desegregation forced upon them. Was that wrong?

Has segregation worked though? Racial relations are freaking great now

 

[FreakensteinAG]

give me a proof that sperm on sperm or egg on egg reproduction and ill take back what i said.

It has to be natural occurring too.

Would you like a straw hat for your Strawman fallacy?

You must be registered for see images

Here's how it works: The monogenic or polygenic traits of homosexuality are passed on through the heterosexual unity of two individuals, thus producing the carrier genes that allow the offspring to display homosexual tendencies. It is that simple.

 

[wanderingcactus]

Would you like a straw hat for your Strawman fallacy?

You must be registered for see images

Here's how it works: The monogenic or polygenic traits of homosexuality are passed on through the heterosexual unity of two individuals, thus producing the carrier genes that allow the offspring to display homosexual tendencies. It is that simple.

sigh... give yourself a straw as well..

seems that you got lost in the arguement due to the moral debates from previous comments.

Let me again clarify it to you. *** is for reproducing.

Homosexual tendencies is psychological trait (yes your example is false as one can control/overcome those tendencies)
keyword: tendencies

So the question that was asked is that since homo *** has really no purpose, what is the point of it?

You might as well argue that masturbation can give an offspring if you do not get it.

You can answer for pleasure however that is psychological. people have different meanings for pleasure so that is basically just preference. So then we go to the scientific route.

 

[FreakensteinAG]

sigh... give yourself a straw as well..

I haven't misrepresented your argument to make it easier to attack. It just is easy to attack.

Homosexual tendencies is psychological trait (yes your example is false as one can control/overcome those tendencies)

The thoughts and behavior of a heterosexual and homosexual are psychological traits, as they come from the brain. The part of this that makes your argument fail is how you assume the traits of homosexuality cannot exist biologically. As if you imply homosexuality is a psychological disorder.

Have you ever given my backed up scenarios any thought? Have you read any of my previous posts which explains how the traits of homosexuality are passed on? These are actual published studies. You know, hypotheses. Meanwhile, going through Google Scholar, I see no mentions of homosexuality "not existing in science".

 

[Fresco]

Has segregation worked though? Racial relations are freaking great now

I assume you meant desegregation, so holy shit, what a racist insinuation. I'm glad you showed your true colors.

@FreakensteinAG: There has been something I've been wondering: What would be the evolutional function of gender dysphoria? Is it something you could classify as a biological mishap, and in the same sense, should homosexuality be grouped with GD as a medical condition? Note that I'm not implying there should be treatment for homosexuality since you can't treat it, and acceptance would be the best treatment in the same sense that transitioning is the best treatment for GD.

I know that in both situations, there's a combination of factors that contribute to both: pheromones, hormones, brain structure, etc.

 

[FreakensteinAG]

@FreakensteinAG: There has been something I've been wondering: What would be the evolutional function of gender dysphoria? Is it something you could classify as a biological mishap, and in the same sense, should homosexuality be grouped with GD as a medical condition? Note that I'm not implying there should be treatment for homosexuality since you can't treat it, and acceptance would be the best treatment anyways.

When you speak of gender dysphoria, do you mean asexuality or pansexuality (the attraction of a gender, but no sexual stimulation from it) or both? I don't think there has been any congealed thought on these two behaviors, but if you want an opinion of a simple Biology graduate, it must be that those with asexual or pansexual tendencies were focused to pursue other matters in life, and sought to make society easier. That's just the thoughts going through my mind at 5 in the morning so don't quote me on that lol

 

[Fresco]

When you speak of gender dysphoria, do you mean asexuality or pansexuality (the attraction of a gender, but no sexual stimulation from it) or both? I don't think there has been any congealed thought on these two behaviors, but if you want an opinion of a simple Biology graduate, it must be that those with asexual or pansexual tendencies were focused to pursue other matters in life, and sought to make society easier. That's just the thoughts going through my mind at 5 in the morning so don't quote me on that lol

Gender Dysphoria as in people not being comfortable in their own bodies, which would make them want to transition to the other gender. Caitlyn Jenner, for example, experienced gender dysphoria for a while before making the transition. As far as I know, its classified as a medical disorder.

 

[wanderingcactus]

I haven't misrepresented your argument to make it easier to attack. It just is easy to attack.



The thoughts and behavior of a heterosexual and homosexual are psychological traits, as they come from the brain. The part of this that makes your argument fail is how you assume the traits of homosexuality cannot exist biologically. As if you imply homosexuality is a psychological disorder.

Have you ever given my backed up scenarios any thought? Have you read any of my previous posts which explains how the traits of homosexuality are passed on? These are actual published studies. You know, hypotheses. Meanwhile, going through Google Scholar, I see no mentions of homosexuality "not existing in science".

you know what hypothesis are right? It is simply educated guesses.

Those types of researches are on the premise of preference. That's what makes it psychological.
Those data gather are imperical and not factual. How does one prove tendency traits? how can one prove that those traits will lead into homosexuality?

Very hard. We are not capable with our level of understanding when it comes to genes that leads to behaviour.

keyword: behaviour.

So to end all this debacle, find me proof of a natural occurring sperm on sperm/egg on egg reproduction.

your fault is you assume, you also assume that those research has been PROVEN facts. they are merely hypotheses.

 

[FreakensteinAG]

Gender Dysphoria as in people not being comfortable in their own bodies, which would make them want to transition to the other gender.

Okay okay I gotcha. The thing with this is that "gender switching" is a new concept, successful transitions being just a couple generations ago. So I'm not sure if there is any significance to it. Sorry about that