Author Topic: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"  (Read 114270 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #525 on: May 16, 2012, 05:01:57 PM »
There are congenital factors for homosexuality as well. The more babies a woman has, the more estrogen is present in the womb due to an immune response, increasing the chances of homosexuality. This explains why younger siblings have an increased likelihood of being gay, and why older brothers tend to look more masculine. With twins, it's often said that there's a dominant one and a submissive one. Twins will fight in the womb and sometimes even try to cannibalize each other. Maybe the submissive one has a higher chance of being gay? Just a thought.

Obviously, sexuality is complex and relates to a number of factors. The causes of homosexuality are worth exploring purely for curiosity, and have no bearing on whether or not it is moral.

Offline Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 36093
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #526 on: May 16, 2012, 05:42:01 PM »
There are congenital factors for homosexuality as well. The more babies a woman has, the more estrogen is present in the womb due to an immune response, increasing the chances of homosexuality. This explains why younger siblings have an increased likelihood of being gay, and why older brothers tend to look more masculine. With twins, it's often said that there's a dominant one and a submissive one. Twins will fight in the womb and sometimes even try to cannibalize each other. Maybe the submissive one has a higher chance of being gay? Just a thought.

Obviously, sexuality is complex and relates to a number of factors. The causes of homosexuality are worth exploring purely for curiosity, and have no bearing on whether or not it is moral.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to need you to cite quite a few sources to back all of this up. Especially the whole "the twin that loses the fight in the womb becomes gay because gay people are submissive or something" thing.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline slycordinator

  • Posts: 1303
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #527 on: May 16, 2012, 05:48:08 PM »
There are congenital factors for homosexuality as well. The more babies a woman has, the more estrogen is present in the womb due to an immune response, increasing the chances of homosexuality. This explains why younger siblings have an increased likelihood of being gay, and why older brothers tend to look more masculine.
Wouldn't highly increased estrogen levels lead to the exact opposite of what you're describing?

[edit]And for what it's worth, the "younger siblings have a higher chance of being gay" isn't supported statistically.

a boy's probability of growing up gay increases by about one-third with each older brother in his family

https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/27/GAY.TMP
[/edit]

With twins, it's often said that there's a dominant one and a submissive one. Twins will fight in the womb and sometimes even try to cannibalize each other. Maybe the submissive one has a higher chance of being gay? Just a thought.
I'm not sure what you mean by twins trying to cannibalize each other. Are you referring to how early on it's possible for one twin fetus to suddenly die, with the other becoming larger? Or instead referring to where a fetus can form with a parasitic fetus inside it (presumably formed by one fetus surrounding the other in an earlier stage of development)? Or something else, instead?
« Last Edit: May 16, 2012, 05:57:17 PM by slycordinator »

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 52785
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #528 on: May 16, 2012, 05:59:11 PM »
Omega, you have been asked repeatedly not to post in this thread.  This is the last time you will be asked.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #529 on: May 16, 2012, 06:15:05 PM »
And for what it's worth, the "younger siblings have a higher chance of being gay" isn't supported statistically.

a boy's probability of growing up gay increases by about one-third with each older brother in his family

https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/27/GAY.TMP


I must be reading this wrong, becuase it seems to be that if you have older brothers, you're a younger sibling, and if you have older brothers you're more likely to be gay, meaning younger siblings have a higher chance of being gay.

Is the immune response in woman due to testosterone being present?

Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #530 on: May 16, 2012, 06:17:48 PM »
I'm sorry, but I'm going to need you to cite quite a few sources to back all of this up. Especially the whole "the twin that loses the fight in the womb becomes gay because gay people are submissive or something" thing.
No need to apologize. That was pure speculation anyway.

And for what it's worth, the "younger siblings have a higher chance of being gay" isn't supported statistically.

a boy's probability of growing up gay increases by about one-third with each older brother in his family

https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/27/GAY.TMP
That seems like a contradiction. That article details precisely what I was talking about, though it does clarify that it's just a hypothesis.

I'm not sure what you mean by twins trying to cannibalize each other. Are you referring to how early on it's possible for one twin fetus to suddenly die, with the other becoming larger? Or instead referring to where a fetus can form with a parasitic fetus inside it (presumably formed by one fetus surrounding the other in an earlier stage of development)? Or something else, instead?
I read a book called Born Cannibal that talked about this. And no it wasn't using "born cannibal" in a purely metaphorical sense. It pointed out cases where twins literally tried to eat each other in the womb. If I find the book, I'll post the relevant information.

Offline Sigz

  • BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13537
  • Gender: Male
  • THRONES FOR THE THRONE SKULL
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #531 on: May 16, 2012, 06:39:08 PM »
Won't the odds of a gay child in a family increase with the number children that family has simply just due to probability?
Quote
The world is a stage, but the play is badly cast.

Offline theseoafs

  • When the lights go down in the city, and the sun shines on the bayyyyy
  • Posts: 5573
  • Gender: Male
  • Hello! My name is Elder Price
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #532 on: May 16, 2012, 06:44:27 PM »
That's a different concept. The odds of having at least one gay child in a family would certainly increase as the family amassed more children due to probability, eventually approaching 1. But (according to this article), the odds of a particular child's being gay will be higher if that child has more siblings. This isn't due to probability but due to genetics.

Offline slycordinator

  • Posts: 1303
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #533 on: May 16, 2012, 06:48:47 PM »
Won't the odds of a gay child in a family increase with the number children that family has simply just due to probability?
The odds of having a gay child in a family isn't the same as the odds of a particular child being gay.

For instance, I saw another article based on the same research I pointed to earlier that indicated that the first son has ~3% chance of being gay, whereas if there are 4 sons the 4th has a 6% chance.

Offline slycordinator

  • Posts: 1303
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #534 on: May 16, 2012, 06:54:49 PM »
I must be reading this wrong, becuase it seems to be that if you have older brothers, you're a younger sibling, and if you have older brothers you're more likely to be gay, meaning younger siblings have a higher chance of being gay.
No I'm the one who misread the post I was responding to. Him and I were saying the same thing; I just failed at life when he didn't. :lol

Is the immune response in woman due to testosterone being present?
Women have testosterone so it can't be that.

edit: In any case, the immune response is theorized to be related to antigens on the Y-chromosome which with subsequent pregnancies leads to mutations to eventually change the Y-chromosome to not have the proposed antigens.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2012, 07:00:31 PM by slycordinator »

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #535 on: May 16, 2012, 08:04:54 PM »
Quote
Women have testosterone so it can't be that.

Many things are fine in normal doses, but in higher than normal doses they can cause problems. I thought maybe the point you were making is that it's not necessarily when you're born, but how many brothers you have (the article didn't mention sisters). Was thinking maybe then that the testosterone present for a male child causes a different reaction in the female body than a female child. Was perhaps trying to read too much into what your "objection" to, even though apparently it wasn't a real objection.

Quote
In any case, the immune response is theorized to be related to antigens on the Y-chromosome which with subsequent pregnancies leads to mutations to eventually change the Y-chromosome to not have the proposed antigens

So it would still be related directly to male children, and not female children?

Offline lordxizor

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5313
  • Gender: Male
  • and that is the truth.
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #536 on: May 17, 2012, 07:22:12 AM »
There is obviously a nurture aspect to homosexuality. How else can you explain identical twins where one is gay and the other is not? It's not purely genetic.

https://discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/born-gay

Quote
Bocklandt has collected DNA from two groups of 15 pairs of identical twins. In one group, both twins are gay. In the second, one twin is gay, and the other is straight. Identical twins have the same DNA, but the activity of their genes isn’t necessarily the same. The reason is something called methylation.

Methylation turns off certain sections of genetic code. So even though we inherit two copies of every gene—one from our mother, one from our father—whether the gene is methylated often determines which of the two genes will be turned on. Methylation is inherited, just as DNA is. But unlike DNA, which has an enzyme that proofreads both the original and the copy to minimize errors, methylation has no built-in checks

Just becuase it's not purely genetic, doesn't mean it's someones "choice," or that differing social environments are what lead to this difference.
Cool. Did know that. Thanks. For the record, I've never thought that being gay was a choice.

Offline the Catfishman

  • Posts: 490
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #537 on: May 17, 2012, 09:05:19 AM »
And yet you still haven't given a single source or reason why marriage is such a historically fixed definition you make it ought to be.

I needn't. Even if I were to concede -- which I wouldn't for an instant -- that the historical, traditional and rational reason for the existence of the institution of marriage wasn't to oversee the obligations and responsibilities attendant upon procreation from a socio-economic viewpoint, that wouldn't at all affect the metaphysical absurdity of the idea of same-sex "marriage." For natural law and natural teleology entail that marriage is determined by its final causes, thus inherently procreative and thus inherently heterosexual. The thing about natural teleology, though, is that it isn't something that you can merely chose to "subscribe to" or not; natural teleology is self-evident and you'd be irrational to deny it (for example, the final cause of our eyes is to allow us to see; the final cause of our lungs is to allow us to breathe; the final cause of our sexual organs is to reproduce -- and expel waste -- etc).

Even if 'natural law' / 'natural theory' determines that marriage should between a man and woman, what's stopping us from changing it? would anything happen if we don't follow the 'natural law' ?

(also, I think it's a bit silly that Omega isn't allowed to post ITT anymore (I also don't really how or when it was decided), it wouldn't really be P/R if opposing views are banned from a topic).

Offline SeRoX

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2425
  • Gender: Male
  • The VoiceMaster
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #538 on: May 17, 2012, 09:53:34 AM »

Even if 'natural law' / 'natural theory' determines that marriage should between a man and woman, what's stopping us from changing it? would anything happen if we don't follow the 'natural law' ?


I'm stuck with this thought. What's natural law? I mean, who wrote them, who made them law? Marriage is just something humankind made up.

Quote from: Plasmastrike
SeRoX is right!
Quote from: Nihil-Morari
SeRoX is DTF's JLB!
As usual, SeRoX is correct.

Offline the Catfishman

  • Posts: 490
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #539 on: May 17, 2012, 10:20:23 AM »

Even if 'natural law' / 'natural theory' determines that marriage should between a man and woman, what's stopping us from changing it? would anything happen if we don't follow the 'natural law' ?


I'm stuck with this thought. What's natural law? I mean, who wrote them, who made them law? Marriage is just something humankind made up.

he explained it a few pages ago, but even then.. why should we adhere to them? like I mentioned, it has been legal here for a while now and all it did was make people more peaceful/happy... I can't see how it not 'fitting' in with natural law should be an argument against same sex marriage.

edit: the answer that same sex marriage is ' absurd' also isn't really an argument, the need is there and it has been done (in other countries)... so even it being absurd doesn't really change anything to gay people wanting to get married.

Offline SeRoX

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2425
  • Gender: Male
  • The VoiceMaster
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #540 on: May 17, 2012, 10:33:20 AM »

Even if 'natural law' / 'natural theory' determines that marriage should between a man and woman, what's stopping us from changing it? would anything happen if we don't follow the 'natural law' ?


I'm stuck with this thought. What's natural law? I mean, who wrote them, who made them law? Marriage is just something humankind made up.

he explained it a few pages ago, but even then.. why should we adhere to them? like I mentioned, it has been legal here for a while now and all it did was make people more peaceful/happy... I can't see how it not 'fitting' in with natural law should be an argument against same sex marriage.


Well, people are forced to fit people's laws not nature. If we literally want to mean "nature", nature itself has homosexual livings, biologically speaking.

I agree, I don't see anything wrong with same-sex marriages. It must be supported anyway. If we talk about rights, people have rights to be with someone who they want to. The only hadicap we have is moral matter just based on religions. Funny fact almost all religions have many immoral and conradictional statements, homosexuality is the only thing they seem come out against.
Quote from: Plasmastrike
SeRoX is right!
Quote from: Nihil-Morari
SeRoX is DTF's JLB!
As usual, SeRoX is correct.

Offline theseoafs

  • When the lights go down in the city, and the sun shines on the bayyyyy
  • Posts: 5573
  • Gender: Male
  • Hello! My name is Elder Price
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #541 on: May 17, 2012, 11:15:26 AM »

Even if 'natural law' / 'natural theory' determines that marriage should between a man and woman, what's stopping us from changing it? would anything happen if we don't follow the 'natural law' ?


I'm stuck with this thought. What's natural law? I mean, who wrote them, who made them law? Marriage is just something humankind made up.

he explained it a few pages ago, but even then.. why should we adhere to them? like I mentioned, it has been legal here for a while now and all it did was make people more peaceful/happy... I can't see how it not 'fitting' in with natural law should be an argument against same sex marriage.

edit: the answer that same sex marriage is ' absurd' also isn't really an argument, the need is there and it has been done (in other countries)... so even it being absurd doesn't really change anything to gay people wanting to get married.
Probably shouldn't worry about it, considering that Omega will probably get into severe trouble if you convince him to post in this thread again. Best to drop it.

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12791
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #542 on: May 17, 2012, 11:22:20 AM »
^Agreed.  And it's not fair to punish him if people are going to entice him to post by responding to his posts.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline the Catfishman

  • Posts: 490
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #543 on: May 17, 2012, 11:35:02 AM »
Can I just ask why he is banned from this topic? he was one of the few who gave arguments for the 'other side', even if he was a bit harsh/stubborn (which I don't mind).

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #544 on: May 17, 2012, 04:24:03 PM »
Besides, you're butchering nature vs. nurture. There are somethings which are genetically determined. Period. My genetics determined that I have a penis, no amount of nurture is going to change that (okay, castration...). Gay men pretty much have the brains of a woman, gay women pretty much have the brains of a man. Nurture isn't going to just change that.
I'll say it again in a different way. There is rarely a straight line between genotype and phenotype. Yes, the fact that you have one X and one Y sex chromosomes is biologically fixed. But the fact that you have a penis isn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgen_insensitivity_syndrome

Just examine twins who grew up in different environments. They can look completely different and have completely different personalities.

You're really just avoiding the issue. "Nurture" is not some magical thing that can cause anything to happen, and showing twins that have different appearances and personalities is a far cry from saying their brain structures can somehow turn from male to female. To more properly use my example, I was born with a penis, and nothing that I experience in life will make me grow a vagina. What you're suggesting is pretty much this, that a male brain can suddenly turn into a female brain.

You started with the fact that sexuality is found to be a sliding scale, and then you just added some hypothesis that it's possible to move along this scale. That's not true. People's skin colors are found to be on a sliding scale as well, but ignoring Michael Jackson, people born black don't turn white. There would possibly maybe be slight movement, but nothing so much as going from homosexual to heterosexual, as you are claiming.


*edit*

By the way, doing a quick glance through that wiki article you linked to, they seem to be laying a lot of the cause for what happens on genetics and mutations. So even there, it's not so cut and dry as you make it out to be.


Actually, you've provided me a great example. My nature provides me with a neutral amount of melanin and pigmentation. Depending on my environment (nurture), my skin color can wind up between pale and fairly tan.


This leads to a great way to thinking about the connection between phenotype and nurture. Your nurture can trigger the expression of genes that might otherwise never be expressed.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12791
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #545 on: May 17, 2012, 04:31:16 PM »
I completely disagree.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #546 on: May 17, 2012, 04:35:05 PM »
That your environment, upbringing, and other elements of "nurture" can affect gene expression?
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline bosk1

  • King of Misdirection
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12791
  • Bow down to Boskaryus
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #547 on: May 17, 2012, 04:41:22 PM »
No, I agree with that.  I disagree that "Depending on my environment (nurture), my skin color can wind up between pale and fairly tan."  You're always pale.


"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #548 on: May 17, 2012, 04:42:09 PM »
Okay, maybe that's a bad example. :lol
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline SeRoX

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2425
  • Gender: Male
  • The VoiceMaster
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #549 on: May 17, 2012, 04:48:26 PM »
That your environment, upbringing, and other elements of "nurture" can affect gene expression?

I don't why you ignored my answer about this matter which I gave 2 pages ago. But you gave an example:

Actually, you've provided me a great example. My nature provides me with a neutral amount of melanin and pigmentation. Depending on my environment (nurture), my skin color can wind up between pale and fairly tan.


This leads to a great way to thinking about the connection between phenotype and nurture. Your nurture can trigger the expression of genes that might otherwise never be expressed.

A change of skin colour which is about phenotype matter names modification. (which can be temporary) If it'is being permanent the evolution starts and that is called mutation (in other name evolution.) The point is: phenotype and genotype are completely  different matter in genetic.
Quote from: Plasmastrike
SeRoX is right!
Quote from: Nihil-Morari
SeRoX is DTF's JLB!
As usual, SeRoX is correct.

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #550 on: May 17, 2012, 04:52:57 PM »
Not sure what you're saying at all, but it sounds wrong.

Here's another example. Coffee tastes bad. Our genetic predisposition towards coffee is to reject it. But we "teach" ourselves to make it taste good.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline SeRoX

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2425
  • Gender: Male
  • The VoiceMaster
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #551 on: May 17, 2012, 04:59:23 PM »
Not sure what you're saying at all, but it sounds wrong.


What does it mean? Because you are not sure it doesn't mean it's wrong. Plus, they are not my thoughts, they are biological statements.

Your another example for that matter is completely invalid. Sorry but this time I am not sure what you are trying to say.
Quote from: Plasmastrike
SeRoX is right!
Quote from: Nihil-Morari
SeRoX is DTF's JLB!
As usual, SeRoX is correct.

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #552 on: May 17, 2012, 05:02:17 PM »
Okay. Individual organisms adapt over time through non-evolutionary processes. Sexuality is likely one trait that can undergo adaptation.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline SeRoX

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2425
  • Gender: Male
  • The VoiceMaster
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #553 on: May 17, 2012, 05:15:13 PM »
Genotype and phenotype are different matters in genetic and sexuality belongs to genotype traits. But again it's so deep subject. The genes which control our sexuality can change through the time but it literally takes so much time.

A human suddenly can't change his/her sexuality just because of nurtures (which you mentioned).We can't simply say "maybe the next generations can be effected". Because 100-200 or even thousand years do not even matter to have a gen mutation. You just can't explain "the sexuality" with genetic in your way.
Quote from: Plasmastrike
SeRoX is right!
Quote from: Nihil-Morari
SeRoX is DTF's JLB!
As usual, SeRoX is correct.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 4174
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #554 on: May 17, 2012, 05:21:01 PM »
Okay. Individual organisms adapt over time through non-evolutionary processes. Sexuality is likely one trait that can undergo adaptation.

Maybe over time a guy can change his preference from liking his men to have hairy bungholes, to them having a more clean and groomed bunghole.  But he hasnt stopped liking mens bungholes as a whole.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Ħ

  • Posts: 3247
  • Gender: Male
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #555 on: May 17, 2012, 05:22:13 PM »
Okay. Individual organisms adapt over time through non-evolutionary processes. Sexuality is likely one trait that can undergo adaptation.

Maybe over time a guy can change his preference from liking his men to have hairy bungholes, to them having a more clean and groomed bunghole.  But he hasnt stopped liking mens bungholes as a whole.
Your thinking isn't far off from my own.
"All great works are prepared in the desert, including the redemption of the world. The precursors, the followers, the Master Himself, all obeyed or have to obey one and the same law. Prophets, apostles, preachers, martyrs, pioneers of knowledge, inspired artists in every art, ordinary men and the Man-God, all pay tribute to loneliness, to the life of silence, to the night." - A. G. Sertillanges

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 4174
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #556 on: May 17, 2012, 05:23:37 PM »
Okay. Individual organisms adapt over time through non-evolutionary processes. Sexuality is likely one trait that can undergo adaptation.

Maybe over time a guy can change his preference from liking his men to have hairy bungholes, to them having a more clean and groomed bunghole.  But he hasnt stopped liking mens bungholes as a whole.
Your thinking isn't far off from my own.

You think about men's hairy bungholes too?

We are a match.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline SeRoX

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2425
  • Gender: Male
  • The VoiceMaster
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #557 on: May 17, 2012, 05:25:42 PM »
Okay. Individual organisms adapt over time through non-evolutionary processes. Sexuality is likely one trait that can undergo adaptation.

Maybe over time a guy can change his preference from liking his men to have hairy bungholes, to them having a more clean and groomed bunghole.  But he hasnt stopped liking mens bungholes as a whole.
Your thinking isn't far off from my own.

You think about men's hairy bungholes too?

We are a match.

We are all match! YES! :neverusethis:   :lol
Quote from: Plasmastrike
SeRoX is right!
Quote from: Nihil-Morari
SeRoX is DTF's JLB!
As usual, SeRoX is correct.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #558 on: May 17, 2012, 08:09:14 PM »
Actually, you've provided me a great example. My nature provides me with a neutral amount of melanin and pigmentation. Depending on my environment (nurture), my skin color can wind up between pale and fairly tan.

Ya, that's a very slight modification on the scale, which I mentioned. I could stay out all day, and I won't turn black. I'll turn red, and then maybe I'll turn very tan - but at no point will I ever be black, or really confusable for a black person.

You're trying to imply that I can tan myself into a black skin. That is simply not possible.

Offline Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 36093
Re: "I'm Not Anti-Gay, I'm Pro-Marriage"
« Reply #559 on: May 17, 2012, 08:27:30 PM »
H, I get what you're saying, however you're basing it off solely what you want to be true and not actual evidence. If you want try an experiment to prove your point....then train yourself to only be attracted to men and repulsed by women. Let us know how that goes.
fanticide.bandcamp.com