1. Post #361
    Kanebro's Avatar
    December 2009
    627 Posts
    I skim read a bit of this and I don't think anyone was actually homosexual but I might be wrong.
    Well I'm gay. Until I was seventeen I thought I was straight because I'd had sex with 3 girls but met a guy that was awesome and 2 years later we're together.

    Choice, not gene.

  2. Post #362
    KillaBEe's Avatar
    October 2005
    427 Posts
    I have some gay friends myself, and most of them say it's genes. I guess it's just a combination of both, really.

  3. Post #363
    Gold Member
    Nabobalis's Avatar
    September 2005
    508 Posts
    It is part gene and part environmental factors (when the baby is in the womb). Wikipedia has an article on it and it is heavily referenced.

  4. Post #364
    Pelican's Avatar
    May 2011
    1,114 Posts
    it's definitely not a gene, that's for sure. if we can go as far as to compare it with food - some people like apples, some people don't. some people like alcohol, some don't. I think it's just something you're programmed to have - and yes you can say "thats genes" but you dont have genes to whether you like the taste of apples or not (correct me if I'm wrong here).

    hell you could even say that people change, and go from not liking, say, peanut butter to liking peanut butter (or vice versa) - you get my drift

    no idea how to explain bisexuality, just liking both I suppose - and whether it's a choice or not, I really think there's a heavy influence from nurture (so not necessarily a choice)

  5. Post #365
    Dennab
    August 2011
    3,724 Posts
    Think of it this way

    How many gorgeous girls would you need to be offered in order for sex with one attractive guy?

    I think it's Mostly genetic. I Like girls, but i have had rare moments where i have felt attraction towards a guy. There is a fence and you can be stuck on either side, You can also be on the top

  6. Post #366
    Gold Member
    Crimor's Avatar
    June 2008
    11,000 Posts
    I skim read a bit of this and I don't think anyone was actually homosexual but I might be wrong.
    Well I'm gay. Until I was seventeen I thought I was straight because I'd had sex with 3 girls but met a guy that was awesome and 2 years later we're together.

    Choice, not gene.
    You know it's not black and white right? You're bi.

  7. Post #367
    Gold Member
    The First 11'er's Avatar
    January 2011
    3,724 Posts
    Why the hell are we still arguing this? None of my peers in my field (biology) have found evidence to suggest that homosexuality is choice. However, there is ample amounts of evidence (which I and others have posted several times already) to suggest that it is purely biological.
    Because some don't believe in the science matter of the topic and like to express what they think in there pure opinion.

    Edited:

    You know it's not black and white right? You're bi.
    Doesn't exactly means he bi. I'm afraid that might happen to me. First person I had sex with was a girl, but guys seem to come up more to me equally then girls, and it's not even me forcing it.

  8. Post #368
    Gold Member
    Doom14's Avatar
    October 2006
    6,155 Posts
    To be honest, it feels like neither. Now don't take this the wrong way, it's time for one big opinionated spout and I'm not about to start quoting medical journals or psychologists, but from what I've seen between many of my bisexual, homosexual, and asexual friends - it's something people develop into. It's only a gene as far as genes tell you if you're willing to try a certain kind of fruit or new experience; and it's only a choice as far as.. about the same thing.

    People don't instantly flick a switch in their head and go "I like only men/women/both genders." The choice aspect can goes to the extent whether people accept the idea of not. However, I certainly wasn't born into my current position. I wasn't 6/12/18 and suddenly went "I'm open to the idea of loving men now in the same way most men love women." It was only after a few years of dating a guy did I even feel remotely comfortable with it - and it was still really awkward for me to think about at first; and culturally, I still don't think I'd come out of the closet (in real life) because that's just extra drama on the table with today's society.

    The absolute only thing that disgusts me about these discussions though is when people start trying to label it a disorder. As previous people have stated, it's only a disorder as far as being left-handed, or having heterochromia iridum (which I guess, medically, is one but has literally no bad side-effects). I know that the word disorder is medically suppose to be a neutral word, instead of using disease or illness, but that doesn't really make way for the fact it's still a way of saying that there's something wrong. The only thing 'wrong' about non-heterosexuals these days boils down to culture and reproduction. And since we don't have any laws, real or moral, that say "You have to have babies" - that just leaves the people too clung to their own ideals or scared of actually talking to their children about sex. That's my little ramble and two and a half cents.

  9. Post #369
    Gold Member
    The First 11'er's Avatar
    January 2011
    3,724 Posts
    it's definitely not a gene, that's for sure. if we can go as far as to compare it with food - some people like apples, some people don't. some people like alcohol, some don't. I think it's just something you're programmed to have - and yes you can say "thats genes" but you dont have genes to whether you like the taste of apples or not (correct me if I'm wrong here).

    hell you could even say that people change, and go from not liking, say, peanut butter to liking peanut butter (or vice versa) - you get my drift

    no idea how to explain bisexuality, just liking both I suppose - and whether it's a choice or not, I really think there's a heavy influence from nurture (so not necessarily a choice)
    Well, like alcohol or not is based on taste buds; it's a set genetic still. You can't really change your taste buds besides by eating the foods that you hate frequently till you like it, or that sort of jazz.

    Edited:

    Automerge.

  10. Post #370
    Gold Member
    Rocko's's Avatar
    February 2011
    11,584 Posts
    I believe it's genes.

    From what I keep hearing from people is that a human has a certain amount of Male and Female chromosomes. And when they hit puberty, an extra chromosome is added. And it could be male or female.

  11. Post #371
    Dennab
    May 2010
    1,020 Posts
    What? Fuck, yes he's correct in saying that you don't need support to not be abusive. I don't give a shit that this is ad hominem, but holy shit you have no fucking idea at all what you are talking about do you? You seem to keep spouting the same, constantly counter-argued, argument in this thread, Are you purposefully being a moron or was this a "environmental factor" for you? Christ.

    People who are raised by abusive parents, and have no support from others do not necessarily become abusive themselves. People are inclined to certain behaviours, which can be effected by how they were raised. But that doesn't mean that the effect of this will make them abusive. Some people with abusive parents and upbringings will resent this, and try to avoid doing it because of how they felt during their upbringing. Others will latch onto it and continue it because the upbringing took their sense of empathy away.

    Fuck. Did you seriously just call someone out for lying, then post the dumbest shit I'm pretty sure I've ever read in this section as a counter argument? Just leave, you aren't fit for arguing in this thread as you've proven.
    I "spout" the same things because they just so happen to be the only logical explanation. To be honest, I'm not the only one resenting evidence. You guys are constantly denying our current knowledge of human behavior, and pretty much saying: "It doesn't matter because we have these studies!"

    So you guys are denying a form of logic that as far as I'm concerned is a much better source than a few guys contradicting it.

    My argument is fine. You guys just need to use your brain a little more and not rely so much on what an article tells you.

    Edited:

    "I'm right. If I'm not, I'm going to make wild claims without support against other arguments and exaggerate."
    Read above and learn not to use articles as your main form of logic.

  12. Post #372
    Wet Birds
    Levithan's Avatar
    September 2005
    8,151 Posts
    To be honest, it feels like neither. Now don't take this the wrong way, it's time for one big opinionated spout and I'm not about to start quoting medical journals or psychologists, but from what I've seen between many of my bisexual, homosexual, and asexual friends - it's something people develop into. It's only a gene as far as genes tell you if you're willing to try a certain kind of fruit or new experience; and it's only a choice as far as.. about the same thing
    I've noticed this too. Based on my own experiences (make of it what you will), it seems that people are born with certain possible extent of what their sexuality can include/disclude, and based on their experiences they extend or limit their horizon. Then again, I am bi, and my experiences most likely don't share many similarities to those limited to a single gender.

    As a side note, I'm not insinuating that being limited is a bad thing!

    I believe it's genes.

    From what I keep hearing from people is that a human has a certain amount of Male and Female chromosomes. And when they hit puberty, an extra chromosome is added. And it could be male or female.
    Your lack of understanding simple genetics makes me physically ill.

    Edited:

    Read above and learn not to use articles as your main form of logic.
    Just speechless.

  13. Post #373
    Gold Member
    Splurgy_A's Avatar
    February 2006
    1,106 Posts
    it's definitely not a gene, that's for sure. if we can go as far as to compare it with food - some people like apples, some people don't. some people like alcohol, some don't. I think it's just something you're programmed to have - and yes you can say "thats genes" but you dont have genes to whether you like the taste of apples or not (correct me if I'm wrong here).

    hell you could even say that people change, and go from not liking, say, peanut butter to liking peanut butter (or vice versa) - you get my drift

    no idea how to explain bisexuality, just liking both I suppose - and whether it's a choice or not, I really think there's a heavy influence from nurture (so not necessarily a choice)
    But this goes against what the scientific facts seem to indicate. How can you argue a science based argument based on personal pet theories?
    I believe it's genes.

    From what I keep hearing from people is that a human has a certain amount of Male and Female chromosomes. And when they hit puberty, an extra chromosome is added. And it could be male or female.
    Short of throwing in something about little men arranging the chromosomes or water having a memory, you could not be more wrong. Extra chromosomes don't get added like that, you might be getting confused with chromosomal disorders like downs syndrome along with the concept of sex determining chromosomes, but... well I'm not entirely sure you know what a chromosome is, so I suggest you have a read of this.

  14. Post #374
    Gold Member
    Doom14's Avatar
    October 2006
    6,155 Posts
    But this goes against what the scientific facts seem to indicate. How can you argue a science based argument based on personal pet theories?
    You can't tout newly found research or rough scientific guesses as fact - some of those things get disproved over night.. or over years. Science isn't a hard, cold and solid foundation to always build everything on - especially when it comes to societal and biological sciences. It'd be different if it was basic math. Remember, we once believed the Earth was flat and flies spontaneously sprouted from old meat.

    Could a certain gene sway people to be more or less open to the idea - potentially. I wouldn't argue that at all. I just highly doubt there's some magical gene that instantly makes a person hard-line homosexual. Or bisexual.

  15. Post #375
    Microcosm's Avatar
    March 2012
    299 Posts

    Why do we even have a thread for this

  16. Post #376
    Gold Member
    Rocko's's Avatar
    February 2011
    11,584 Posts
    But this goes against what the scientific facts seem to indicate. How can you argue a science based argument based on personal pet theories?

    Short of throwing in something about little men arranging the chromosomes or water having a memory, you could not be more wrong. Extra chromosomes don't get added like that, you might be getting confused with chromosomal disorders like downs syndrome along with the concept of sex determining chromosomes, but... well I'm not entirely sure you know what a chromosome is, so I suggest you have a read of this.
    So it is bullshit, my biology teacher is a lying cunt I guess.

  17. Post #377
    Gold Member
    Hentie's Avatar
    May 2010
    2,129 Posts
    it's definitely not a gene, that's for sure. if we can go as far as to compare it with food - some people like apples, some people don't. some people like alcohol, some don't. I think it's just something you're programmed to have - and yes you can say "thats genes" but you dont have genes to whether you like the taste of apples or not (correct me if I'm wrong here).

    hell you could even say that people change, and go from not liking, say, peanut butter to liking peanut butter (or vice versa) - you get my drift

    no idea how to explain bisexuality, just liking both I suppose - and whether it's a choice or not, I really think there's a heavy influence from nurture (so not necessarily a choice)
    There's no way to tell if liking an apple is just an genetic influence, as our ancestors depended on apples and other foods for survival; or if liking an apple is a psychological influence, apples remind us of some childhood event with our parents; or if liking an apple is a social influence, everyone else likes apples so I do too.

    Liking an apple, as with liking the same sex, should be taken with a biopsychosocial approach.
    Who are you to say that we don't have a gene for liking certain types of food? Our genes are a guidebook for surviving the climates in which we evolved in, it tells us where food is or what kind of food is safe to eat.

  18. Post #378
    Pelican's Avatar
    May 2011
    1,114 Posts
    There's no way to tell if liking an apple is just an genetic influence, as our ancestors depended on apples and other foods for survival; or if liking an apple is a psychological influence, apples remind us of some childhood event with our parents; or if liking an apple is a social influence, everyone else likes apples so I do too.

    Liking an apple, as with liking the same sex, should be taken with a biopsychosocial approach.
    Who are you to say that we don't have a gene for liking certain types of food? Our genes are a guidebook for surviving the climates in which we evolved in, it tells us where food is or what kind of food is safe to eat.
    I never downright stated that what I said was right, merely my opinion, and unless you can provide me with solid correct information, I'm going to be reluctant to think otherwise. And as I said, correct me if I'm wrong about that food gene thing (which you failed to) so please don't call me an idiot

  19. Post #379
    Gold Member
    fluke42's Avatar
    November 2011
    484 Posts
    Can we just close this thread? Clearly no new arguments are being presented. It's just filling up with trolls at this point.

  20. Post #380
    Dennab
    May 2010
    1,020 Posts
    Can we just close this thread? Clearly no new arguments are being presented. It's just filling up with trolls at this point.
    There isn't a whole lot to be discussed when everyone ignores the person with a different insight then them because that person doesn't have a shitty online article to use as his evidence. Then again, I guess it would be pointless since all I've been doing is trying to explain to people how human behavior works and they've been refusing to accept that thousands of other people more qualified than myself also believe the same thing.

  21. Post #381
    Oh no, what have I done!
    milkandcooki's Avatar
    November 2007
    22,044 Posts
    Deaded, we're getting pissed off at you because you're posting opinions as fact with no evidence. We've been doing the same thing WITH evidence, and are "dismissing your argument" because you have done absolutely nothing to back yourself up

  22. Post #382
    Gold Member
    wewt!'s Avatar
    July 2008
    12,341 Posts
    I don't recall ever choosing to be straight

    Edited:

    There's no way to tell if liking an apple is just an genetic influence, as our ancestors depended on apples and other foods for survival; or if liking an apple is a psychological influence, apples remind us of some childhood event with our parents; or if liking an apple is a social influence, everyone else likes apples so I do too.

    Liking an apple, as with liking the same sex, should be taken with a biopsychosocial approach.
    Who are you to say that we don't have a gene for liking certain types of food? Our genes are a guidebook for surviving the climates in which we evolved in, it tells us where food is or what kind of food is safe to eat.
    Food is a terrible example, as you can literally "train" your taste into liking any food, even stuff you don't really like

  23. Post #383
    Dennab
    May 2010
    1,020 Posts
    Deaded, we're getting pissed off at you because you're posting opinions as fact with no evidence. We've been doing the same thing WITH evidence, and are "dismissing your argument" because you have done absolutely nothing to back yourself up
    Right... the evidence that goes against everything we know about human behavior. I don't care if you're getting pissed off or not. Learn to stop relying so much on shitty ABC News articles and use your fucking heads.

    You know what? I'm going to go look up some equally shitty sources to prove my point - just to please all of your guys' stupidity.

  24. Post #384
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Right... the evidence that goes against everything we know about human behavior. I don't care if you're getting pissed off or not. Learn to stop relying so much on shitty ABC News articles and use your fucking heads.

    You know what? I'm going to go look up some equally shitty sources to prove my point - just to please all of your guys' stupidity.
    You do need to back up your points with credible sources, citing "common sense" won't get you anywhere in a debate.

  25. Post #385
    foxcock
    Bletotum's Avatar
    June 2008
    6,874 Posts
    Right... the evidence that goes against everything we know about human behavior. I don't care if you're getting pissed off or not. Learn to stop relying so much on shitty ABC News articles and use your fucking heads.

    You know what? I'm going to go look up some equally shitty sources to prove my point - just to please all of your guys' stupidity.

  26. Post #386
    Dennab
    May 2010
    1,020 Posts
    You do need to back up your points with credible sources, citing "common sense" won't get you anywhere in a debate.
    That's awfully shitty to be honest. Not that rule. But the sheer fact people these people will rely more on a "credible" article rather than something that actually makes sense just because "it wouldn't be debating".

  27. Post #387
    foxcock
    Bletotum's Avatar
    June 2008
    6,874 Posts
    There isn't a whole lot to be discussed when everyone ignores the person with a different insight then them because that person doesn't have a shitty online article to use as his evidence. Then again, I guess it would be pointless since all I've been doing is trying to explain to people how human behavior works and they've been refusing to accept that thousands of other people more qualified than myself also believe the same thing.
    automerge break

    I am highlighting the things you should not be claiming.

  28. Post #388
    foxcock
    Bletotum's Avatar
    June 2008
    6,874 Posts
    That's awfully shitty to be honest. Not that rule. But the sheer fact people these people will rely more on a "credible" article rather than something that actually makes sense just because "it wouldn't be debating".
    Edited:

    You are repeatedly assuming that you must be correct and that everyone else is wrong, but you can not support yourself. You also dismiss any other claims as 'shitty' and such, which does not count as a point.

  29. Post #389
    Dennab
    May 2010
    1,020 Posts
    If you're trying to make me look bad because I "flamed", then that's very nice of you.

    Seriously though, you guys ignore me because you know I (and many others) am right - not because "I don't have any evidence". Which making that claim is bullshit anyway. Just because it hasn't been posted on the internet, that doesn't make your claims right.

    Edited:

    Edited:

    You are repeatedly assuming that you must be correct and that everyone else is wrong, but you can not support yourself. You also dismiss any other claims as 'shitty' and such, which does not count as a point.
    Seriously? You guys must be really thick.

    I'm not the only one who believes this. I'm sure there are sources (like I really need them...) out there somewhere proving my point. I just don't feel like looking for them all damn day.

    Edited:

    automerge break

    I am highlighting the things you should not be claiming.
    And why the fuck can't I claim that? Most of the shit you've highlighted are reasonable.

    Edit: Actually, all of it.

  30. Post #390
    foxcock
    Bletotum's Avatar
    June 2008
    6,874 Posts
    With that statement you are still simply brushing off opposing points rather than making any effort to prove them wrong. You are very ignorant, and arrogant, to claim that we do not agree with you 'because you are right'.

    You seem to be the only one debating your side of the argument by this point in the thread, and have consistently proven yourself to be incapable of mature debate. For this reason, I also support the locking of this thread.

  31. Post #391
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    That's awfully shitty to be honest. Not that rule. But the sheer fact people these people will rely more on a "credible" article rather than something that actually makes sense just because "it wouldn't be debating".
    Putting credibility in quotes doesn't suddenly mean it doesn't matter. You cannot make a sound argument on the basis of supposed common sense alone.

    Edited:

    I'm not the only one who believes this. I'm sure there are sources (like I really need them...)
    If there are then by all means posted them. Continuing to argue like this unsubstantiated is against the rules in this section.

  32. Post #392
    Wet Birds
    Levithan's Avatar
    September 2005
    8,151 Posts
    Deaded I highly doubt your common sense is peer-reviewed.

  33. Post #393
    Dennab
    May 2010
    1,020 Posts
    With that statement you are still simply brushing off opposing points rather than making any effort to prove them wrong. You are very ignorant, and arrogant, to claim that we do not agree with you 'because you are right'.

    You seem to be the only one debating your side of the argument by this point in the thread, and have consistently proven yourself to be incapable of mature debate. For this reason, I also support the locking of this thread.
    Brushing off? I'm brushing it off because it's ridiculous. I can say we're all being mind controlled by evil donkeys with sledgehammers in another land, but does that make it right? No. I have made an effort to prove them wrong. I just haven't done it the way all of you want me to:

    GO FUCKING LOOK UP A CREDIBLE ONLINE ARTICLE AND POST IT HERE SO WE CAN ALL SAY "NOPE" JUST LIKE WE ARE NOW!

    I don't see how I've even proven myself to be ignorant or arrogant. Maybe a little ignorant is some people's minds, but those are the people who don't understand a damn thing about human behavior (which you don't either, apparently). Saying that I'm arrogant is a very wild claim to make me look stupid. I am in no way full of myself. Also, you keep referring to my argument as if I'm the only one who believes it. Many people more qualified than I believe this, so stop with that right there.

    I can debate. I just won't make my claims based solely on some shitty internet article and nothing else. Hell, if I knew the Mass Debate section was going to be like that, I probably would've never even looked in this section. But you know what? I'll still keep posting whether you guys like it or not. You (and the others who want this thread locked) are little babies because someone posted something logical without a source. I may be "immature", but at least I think for myself.

  34. Post #394
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Brushing off? I'm brushing it off because it's ridiculous. I can say we're all being mind controlled by evil donkeys with sledgehammers in another land, but does that make it right? No. I have made an effort to prove them wrong. I just haven't done it the way all of you want me to:

    GO FUCKING LOOK UP A CREDIBLE ONLINE ARTICLE AND POST IT HERE SO WE CAN ALL SAY "NOPE" JUST LIKE WE ARE NOW!

    I don't see how I've even proven myself to be ignorant or arrogant. Maybe a little ignorant is some people's minds, but those are the people who don't understand a damn thing about human behavior (which you don't either, apparently). Saying that I'm arrogant is a very wild claim to make me look stupid. I am in no way full of myself. Also, you keep referring to my argument as if I'm the only one who believes it. Many people more qualified than I believe this, so stop with that right there.

    I can debate. I just won't make my claims based solely on some shitty internet article and nothing else. Hell, if I knew the Mass Debate section was going to be like that, I probably would've never even looked in this section. But you know what? I'll still keep posting whether you guys like it or not. You (and the others who want this thread locked) are little babies because someone posted something logical without a source. I may be "immature", but at least I think for myself.
    If you continue to go on this tirade and insist that people debating with cited sources are somehow less credible than your own unbacked positions, there will have to be consequences. I've given you more than one chance to redeem yourself, so just stop.

  35. Post #395
    Dragon Dildoes
    Dennab
    April 2009
    4,432 Posts
    So I thought I'd add my opinion on the matter too.

    From personal experience(which obviously is not a universal answer) I can tell that being homosexual is NOT a choice, accepting it and living a homosexual way however is a choice.

    In fact, it's kinda weird I never really felt attracted to men when I was younger, neither I was afraid of gay people, it just seemed rather awkward or "unknown".

    My attitude then changed within 2 or 4 month, when I was about 16 1/2.

    So the only real choice I could make was to either accept or suppress it.

    I thought a lot about why this happened and came to the conclusion that every human might have something like a "blockade" that's suppose to stop us from loving others with the same sex.

    I can't tell if it's a nature or a nurture barrier it's just a though, I'm not going to proof it or anything it's just what I think it is.

    Since I cannot tell if this barrier is real or not, assuming it is being homosexual is not a choice, if it isn't it would be a choice, even if it was one you can't controll.

  36. Post #396
    Tark's Avatar
    August 2010
    6,178 Posts
    So I thought I'd add my opinion on the matter too.

    From personal experience(which obviously is not a universal answer) I can tell that being homosexual is NOT a choice, accepting it and living a homosexual way however is a choice.

    In fact, it's kinda weird I never really felt attracted to men when I was younger, neither I was afraid of gay people, it just seemed rather awkward or "unknown".

    My attitude then changed within 2 or 4 month, when I was about 16 1/2.

    So the only real choice I could make was to either accept or suppress it.

    I thought a lot about why this happened and came to the conclusion that every human might have something like a "blockade" that's suppose to stop us from loving others with the same sex.

    I can't tell if it's a nature or a nurture barrier it's just a though, I'm not going to proof it or anything it's just what I think it is.

    Since I cannot tell if this barrier is real or not, assuming it is being homosexual is not a choice, if it isn't it would be a choice, even if it was one you can't controll.
    This is basically the same way I feel. Infact, I could measure how far right on the Kinsey scale I was going. Around only 6-7 months ago I felt that I was perfectly bisexual, and now I can only just barely get attracted to the idea of a woman.

    I don't think this is at all what other people have experienced, given how they've talked about it.
    I'm 16 1/2 right now, for reference.

    edit:
    Also, I was completely straight a year ago.
    I can't really remember when I started becoming/realizing I was attracted to the same sex.
    [sup][sup](though i started looking at gay dragon porn that might've had something to do with it)[/sup][/sup]

  37. Post #397
    foxcock
    Bletotum's Avatar
    June 2008
    6,874 Posts
    That is a nice model post for personal experience/opinion input.

    Since I cannot tell if this barrier is real or not, assuming it is being homosexual is not a choice, if it isn't it would be a choice, even if it was one you can't controll.
    We could talk about this more clearly if you would clarify whether or not you were ever attracted to the opposite sex, and if/when that stopped.

    As for myself, I would tell myself at an early age that I was attracted to women because I would not admit my attraction to men. After I accepted myself, psychological barriers in my ability to think rationally fell and I was able to clearly see that anything I felt for women was not attraction in any sense like that I have for men.

    Edited:

    post directed at wizard

  38. Post #398
    Glory To Victotzka
    NoaJM's Avatar
    November 2010
    1,298 Posts
    Choice is highly unlikely, if you take it in the literal sense i.e 'I will or will not homosexual today'. My general consensus is that it is genes, because I certainly didn't choose to be attracted to both sexes. It was more that once I realised, I just accepted it as a part of who I am.

  39. Post #399
    Dragon Dildoes
    Dennab
    April 2009
    4,432 Posts
    That is a nice model post for personal experience/opinion input.



    We could talk about this more clearly if you would clarify whether or not you were ever attracted to the opposite sex, and if/when that stopped.

    As for myself, I would tell myself at an early age that I was attracted to women because I would not admit my attraction to men. After I accepted myself, psychological barriers in my ability to think rationally fell and I was able to clearly see that anything I felt for women was not attraction in any sense like that I have for men.

    Edited:

    post directed at wizard
    Well, I certainly was attracted to the opposite sex (sexual and emotional), and I still am for a very very little part, only sexual though.

    But since my orientation changed I'm basically not capable to have feelings for girls/women.

  40. Post #400

    September 2010
    122 Posts
    I think it's a choice and a gene. Maybe everyone has such gene, but it's our own choice to choose who we want to be together with - friends wise - and who we don't want to. It'll eventually change the way we look at the world and act, all depending on whom we're spending much time with.