Hi all
As of 29 July 2022. What does the science say? What do you think?
Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Moderator: Moderators
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9197
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #1Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
- Clownboat
- Savant
- Posts: 9381
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
- Has thanked: 906 times
- Been thanked: 1260 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #31Post 9: "First, what does it matter to you whether it's a choice or innate? If it's a choice, then it's no different than religion and the people who choose to be queer should be free to live as they choose. If it's innate, then it's no different than being tall or short and the people who are born that way should be free to live as they are."Wootah wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 12:56 am [Replying to Purple Knight in post #23]
Personally, I think people would and do put their penises everywhere. The mating instinct is pretty strong (because it is essential).
However: knowledge is knowing what to say. Wisdom is knowing when to say it.
I think this applies here. Yes we can put our penis anywhere and wisdom is knowing where is correct.
Should we allow people to freely choose who they are attracted to?
Should we allow people to freely choose which god they want to worship?
Yes, we can put our worship in to any god, but wisdom is knowing which god is correct. Therefore, only Allah worship should be allowed.
What do you think of my reasoning?
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
- Purple Knight
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3502
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1134 times
- Been thanked: 733 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #32Well yes then sexual attraction can be nature. But it also has this weird component where it's nurture. It was not weird at all to exhibit homosexual behaviour in Rome. Someone already mentioned Rome. Now take some very straight male who is very put off by the idea of having anything shoved up his butt, especially that, clone him, and drop the baby in ancient Rome. Is that reaction still there? That's the question. If that reaction can be swept away then the behaviour is definitely nurture.Jose Fly wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 4:59 pmBefore we go down that trail, the question that's relevant to this thread is about sexual attraction, not how one actually has sex.Purple Knight wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 4:53 pm Let's say you have a baby you raise in a box, perhaps a couple of them, males and females. They might develop their own language, since the desire for language seems innate. But will they figure out successful mating, never having seen or heard of it? What do you think?
I had a similar conversation with someone I know about how innate our disgust against nudity is. It could be 100% cultural. But take a culture where nudity is expected. We're both nerds so we were using the Farengi from Star Trek as an example, for whom female nudity is the cultural norm. Take a human female baby and raise her there. My friend's take is, nudity would not bother her then. My take is, she would be disproportionately ashamed of her body even if it was fine and would grow up completely messed up and traumatised.
I take huge stock in twin studies and I tend to assume everything is genetic.
I agree. And since that's the point of the topic, well, yes.
I just don't know if those two would ever actually achieve successful sex.
- Jose Fly
- Guru
- Posts: 1462
- Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
- Location: Out west somewhere
- Has thanked: 337 times
- Been thanked: 906 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #33Interesting, but a moot point since there's no way to do that.Purple Knight wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 4:25 pm Well yes then sexual attraction can be nature. But it also has this weird component where it's nurture. It was not weird at all to exhibit homosexual behaviour in Rome. Someone already mentioned Rome. Now take some very straight male who is very put off by the idea of having anything shoved up his butt, especially that, clone him, and drop the baby in ancient Rome. Is that reaction still there? That's the question. If that reaction can be swept away then the behaviour is definitely nurture.
Kinda the same thing.I had a similar conversation with someone I know about how innate our disgust against nudity is. It could be 100% cultural. But take a culture where nudity is expected. We're both nerds so we were using the Farengi from Star Trek as an example, for whom female nudity is the cultural norm. Take a human female baby and raise her there. My friend's take is, nudity would not bother her then. My take is, she would be disproportionately ashamed of her body even if it was fine and would grow up completely messed up and traumatised.
I don't know about everything, but I do believe more things have a genetic component than a lot of people realize.I take huge stock in twin studies and I tend to assume everything is genetic.
I don't either. Thanks for the intriguing discussion!I agree. And since that's the point of the topic, well, yes.
I just don't know if those two would ever actually achieve successful sex.
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.
- Purple Knight
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3502
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1134 times
- Been thanked: 733 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #34Wootah wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 12:56 am [Replying to Purple Knight in post #23]
Personally, I think people would and do put their penises everywhere. The mating instinct is pretty strong (because it is essential).
However: knowledge is knowing what to say. Wisdom is knowing when to say it.
I think this applies here. Yes we can put our penis anywhere and wisdom is knowing where is correct.
Biologically speaking, only one place is correct and everything else is deviant, because everything else doesn't make a baby. That doesn't make it morally wrong to put it in a butt, and in fact it's probably morally wrong to stop people from it, just as it's morally wrong to stop humans from doing the other 95% of their behaviours that don't have a biological purpose anymore and are just outgrowths of our brains being too big (like playing video games for example) but it does sort of justify being weirded out by the thought of putting it anywhere except that one place.Clownboat wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:56 am "First, what does it matter to you whether it's a choice or innate? If it's a choice, then it's no different than religion and the people who choose to be queer should be free to live as they choose. If it's innate, then it's no different than being tall or short and the people who are born that way should be free to live as they are."
Should we allow people to freely choose who they are attracted to?
Should we allow people to freely choose which god they want to worship?
Yes, we can put our worship in to any god, but wisdom is knowing which god is correct. Therefore, only Allah worship should be allowed.
What do you think of my reasoning?
Many males are very put off by the thought of homosexuality, especially of it being applied to them. Some may be overcompensating but some aren't. And that feeling of disgust has a strong biological basis and is just as natural and acceptable as the homosexuality it causes people to be bugged by. As long as nobody uses that disgust to go out and do anything to anyone, of course.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #35"Bologically speaking" homosexuality can be of, well, biological benefit if it reduces tension within a close knit group, such that "biologically beneficial" reproduction might occur more readily.Purple Knight wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 4:39 pm Biologically speaking, only one place is correct and everything else is deviant, because everything else doesn't make a baby.
If I'm warring with Billy Bob cause he too fancies Jane, and along comes Studly Doright to sweep Billy Bob off his feet, now me and Jane can hook up and have us a young'n, til it is, she too fancies ol Studly Doright there, and them two, or three, they raise up my child without my investment, and now I'm freed up to fetch after Cindy Lou, who she doesn't like that other bunch anyway, cause they used to tease her for wearing glasses.
Now I've had me the first offspring with no further investment, and since Cindy Lou got too shamed to wear her glasses, she can't tell her how ugly it is, I am, and now I've got me another, second offspring.
Homosexuality's only "deviant" to those who consider it a "deviancy".
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9197
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #36[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #35]
Which characters were the male and female ones?
What on earth did you prove by that?
Which characters were the male and female ones?
What on earth did you prove by that?
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6627 times
- Been thanked: 3222 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #37Am I correct in thinking that you therefore do not approve of any sex unless it is with the specific purpose of producing a baby.Purple Knight wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 4:39 pm Biologically speaking, only one place is correct and everything else is deviant, because everything else doesn't make a baby.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #38I'll leave an answer be, to encourage further study.Wootah wrote: ↑Sat Aug 06, 2022 6:34 pm [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #35]
Which characters were the male and female ones?
What on earth did you prove by that?
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- Purple Knight
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3502
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1134 times
- Been thanked: 733 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #39He's saying that homosexuality can have some survival advantage, at least group-wise. And I agree.Wootah wrote: ↑Sat Aug 06, 2022 6:34 pm [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #35]
Which characters were the male and female ones?
What on earth did you prove by that?
In fact, it's a similar story to what some people think about supergeniuses such as myself. We ourselves don't have to breed a lot (or even at all) for groups with us in them to flourish because of us, which means, groups with the genes to occasionally cook a few up, are groups which flourish. Homosexuality might do a lot of things for a group in a similar fashion.
But as far as the sexual act itself, you can't call humping a refrigerator or a tortoise shell or even a child less deviant. The category of things that might conceivably have such an advantage is everything. If some things are deviant, then there's only one logical line to draw and that line is what makes a baby versus what does not. And it may be a short-lived line anyway because we may soon find a way to make a baby from two parents of the same biological sex.
No, actually, what I don't approve of is putting stigmas on deviance when 95% of human behaviour either doesn't have a direct survival advantage anymore or even actively impedes the behaving organism's survival.brunumb wrote: ↑Sat Aug 06, 2022 8:36 pmAm I correct in thinking that you therefore do not approve of any sex unless it is with the specific purpose of producing a baby.Purple Knight wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 4:39 pm Biologically speaking, only one place is correct and everything else is deviant, because everything else doesn't make a baby.
There is a fairly clear line between what has a survival advantage and what doesn't. But our species really doesn't care to follow it in anything else so I don't see why we should care that Tommy the NEET dropped out of school to play video games and never bathes, or that Francesco will never make a baby because he's putting it in another male's anus.
Now, if we were in a primitive situation, a small group, and the only chance my daughter would have to mate with someone unrelated was Francesco's son, I might care.
But we're not, and I don't.
- Wootah
- Savant
- Posts: 9197
- Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
- Has thanked: 189 times
- Been thanked: 108 times
Re: Homosexuality: nature or nurture?
Post #40So you are warring with a man over a woman and another man comes sweeps Billy Bob off his feet - is that rape you are talking about? Why would Billy Bob get swept off his feet by a guy, is he bisexual?If I'm warring with Billy Bob cause he too fancies Jane, and along comes Studly Doright to sweep Billy Bob off his feet, now me and Jane can hook up and have us a young'n, til it is, she too fancies ol Studly Doright there, and them two, or three, they raise up my child without my investment, and now I'm freed up to fetch after Cindy Lou, who she doesn't like that other bunch anyway, cause they used to tease her for wearing glasses.
You have a kid with Jane and then she ditches you for Studly and has two more and you get with Cindy Lou.
How does Billy Bob continue his generations in this scenario? Why would Studly care about your offspring with Jane. This scenario ....
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."
Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826
"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image ."