Gender, acquired ?

Iwasfrozen

Hi all I've got a couple of questions for you that I've been pondering lately. So without further ado:
1.Do you think Sexual identity is such acquired at birth or can it be changed/modified later in life such as the case with Transgenders ?
2.Do you think people are born gay or is it acquired during life due to past/negitive experiences ?
3.And if homosexuality is already present in one at birth do you think a cure will be inevitabley be invented to make it obsolete in the future ?

spurious

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Hi all I've got a couple of questions for you that I've been pondering lately. So without further ado:
1.Do you think Sexual identity is such acquired at birth or can it be changed/modified later in life such as the case with Transgenders ?
2.Do you think people are born gay or is it acquired during life due to past/negitive experiences ?
3.And if homosexuality is already present in one at birth do you think a cure will be inevitabley be invented to make it obsolete in the future ?

1. Gender identity and sexuality are not the same.
2. I think people are born gay and their experiences in life/upbringing determine/shape what they do. This is not different to anything else in life - honesty, fitness, interest in music, art etc.
3. Cure?

Your questions do not hide your rather extreme opinions.

anoisaris

Gender is socially constructed, sex is biological.

I think people are born gay.

A cure???? lovely choice of words there!

Boston

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Hi all I've got a couple of questions for you that I've been pondering lately. So without further ado:
1.Do you think Sexual identity is such acquired at birth or can it be changed/modified later in life such as the case with Transgenders ?
2.Do you think people are born gay or is it acquired during life due to past/negitive experiences ?
3.And if homosexuality is already present in one at birth do you think a cure will be inevitabley be invented to make it obsolete in the future ?

1. I love the black or white, yea or ney, for or against it approach. How about neither. What anoisaris said tbh.

2. Every case of homosexuality is a direct result of not being loved enough as a child.

3. Obsolete? So you believe it serves some purpose now? Thats an awfully homosexual view point to have.

Iwasfrozen

1. I love the black or white, yea or ney, for or against it approach. How about neither. What anoisaris said tbh.

Not quite as simple as that, yes Gender is a social construct but society was constructed by humans. People act in a way that their biological make-up tells them to. i.e Woman are softer, caring and maternal while Men are stronger harsher and more protective. It isn't as simple as saying Gender is a social construct when society is infulenced by Biology.
So where does that leave Trangenders ? Can one really change you physical and emotional make-up with a simple hormone pill and a snip ?

2. I think people are born gay and their experiences in life/upbringing determine/shape what they do. This is not different to anything else in life - honesty, fitness, interest in music, art etc.

I'm not quite certain of where you stand here ? Are you saying that some are born gay and that outside influences will cause them to act on these imbuilt urges ?

3. Cure?

Perhaps the word cure was abit harsh, but my point still stands. If people are born Homosexual [which we are not even quite certain of] then it must be due to some genetic variation. Do you think that in the future scientists will be able to isolate this gene strand, and with parents consent fix the genetic make up of the unborn child ? Of course this brings up all sorts of moral questions on wether it is right to alter the childs Homosexual tendencies.
Also can we keep it civil people, these are controversial topics and I don't want this turing into a flame-fest.

Boston

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Not quite as simple as that, yes Gender is a social construct but society was constructed by humans. People act in a way that their biological make-up tells them to. i.e Woman are softer, caring and maternal while Men are stronger harsher and more protective. It isn't as simple as saying Gender is a social construct when society is infulenced by Biology.
So where does that leave Trangenders ? Can one really change you physical and emotional make-up with a simple hormone pill and a snip ?

You're talking about Sex as opposed to gender. And yes someone can talk pills and have operations to alter their physical and emotional make up. It happens all the time.

Perhaps the word cure was abit harsh, but my point still stands. If people are born Homosexual [which we are not even quite certain of] then it must be due to some genetic variation. Do you think that in the future scientists will be able to isolate this gene strand, and with parents consent fix the genetic make up of the unborn child ? Of course this brings up all sorts of moral questions on wether it is right to alter the childs Homosexual tendencies.
Also can we keep it civil people, these are controversial topics and I don't want this turing into a flame-fest.

Are you aware that currently parents are able to select the sex of their unborn child?

anoisaris

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

People act in a way that their biological make-up tells them to. i.e Woman are softer, caring and maternal while Men are stronger harsher and more protective. It isn't as simple as saying Gender is a social construct when society is infulenced by Biology.
quote]

Gender roles correspond with the biological sex of a person. People usually act in a way that society tells them. Woman are not softer, caring and maternal simply because they were born a girl they are taught that by the people around them and society in general these are things praised and nutured in girls, not so much in boys.

Men are not stronger, harsher and more protective because they were born a boy-they are shaped in that way "boys don't cry"/"look after your little sister"/encouraged to play rough and tumble games and sports and not show a side or emotions to be considered feminine.

I don't really get what you are asking about trans people to be honest. I assume the idea of the operation is to come in line with how they feel on the inside-to attain the body with the sex that matches their gender.

If homosexuality is a genetic variation then so too is hetrosexuality (are we sure people are born hetrosexual?). Your argument is moving into the realms of designer babies. Should any parent chose any aspect of their child's genetic make-up? If a parent can choose that their child be genetically hetro, then can another set of parents choose that their child be homosexual? Who would decide what a parent can or can't select in terms of their off-springs sexuality? You seem to base your questions on the assumption that a parent would want to "fix" a childs homosexuality.

It would be very interesting if it was announced that homosexuality is genetic since the CoI previously annonuced that if homosexuality was found to be genetic then they would have to consider gay marriages within their churches.

Iwasfrozen

Gender roles correspond with the biological sex of a person. People usually act in a way that society tells them. Woman are not softer, caring and maternal simply because they were born a girl they are taught that by the people around them and society in general these are things praised and nutured in girls, not so much in boys.

Men are not stronger, harsher and more protective because they were born a boy-they are shaped in that way "boys don't cry"/"look after your little sister"/encouraged to play rough and tumble games and sports and not show a side or emotions to be considered feminine.

That is exactly my argument it is well established that Men and Women are not equal at birth, there are many differences already present in the child due to the evelutionary role played by his/her ancestors: see herefor more info.
Here are some samples from the article to support my argument:
Genes:

wikipedia wrote:

Chromosomes were likened to books (above), also like books they have been studied at more detailed levels. They contain "sentences" called genes. In fact, many of these sentences are common to multiple species. Sometimes they are organized in the same order, other times they have been "edited" — deleted, copied, changed, moved, even relocated to another "book", as species evolve. Genes are a particularly important part of understanding biological processes because they are directly associated with observable objects, outside chromosomes, called proteins, whose influence on cell chemistry can be measured. In some cases genes can also be directly associated with differences clear to the naked eye, like eye-color itself. Some of these differences are sex specific, like hairy ears. The "hairy ear" gene is on the Y chromosome which is why only men have it. However, sex-limited genes on any chromosome can "say" for example, "if you are in a male body do X, otherwise do not." The same principle explains why chimpanzees and humans are distinct, despite sharing nearly all their genes.
The study of genetics is particularly inter-disciplinary. It is relevant to almost every biological science. It is investigated in detail by molecular level sciences, and itself contributes details to high level abstractions like evolutionary theory.

The Brain:

wikipedia wrote:

"It is well established that men have a larger cerebrum than women by about 8–10% (Filipek et al., 1994; Nopoulos et al., 2000; Passe et al., 1997a,b; Rabinowicz et al., 1999; Witelson et al., 1995)." However, what is functionally relevant are differences in composition and "wiring", some of these differences are very pronounced. Richard J. Haier and colleagues at the universities of New Mexico and California (Irvine) found, using brain mapping, that men have more than six times the amount of grey matter related to general intelligence than women, and women have nearly ten times the amount of white matter related to intelligence than men.
Gray matter is used for information processing, while white matter consists of the connections between processing centers. Other differences are measurable but less pronounced. Most of these differences are known to be produced by the activity of hormones, hence ultimately derived from the Y chromosome and sexual differentiation. However, differences arising from the activity of genes directly have also been observed.

And finally, Behavior

wikipedia wrote:

Some behaviors are so simple that biological explanation may be sufficient. Blinking, yawning and stretching are more reflexes than behaviors. However, etiquette and protocol are complicated behaviors, presumably influenced by many environmental factors, including social ones. A large area of research in behavioral psychology collates evidence in an effort to discover correlations between behavior and various possible antecedents such as genetics, culture, gender, physical or social development, or physical or social environments.
A core research area within sociology is the way human behavior operates on itself, in other words, how the behavior of one group or individual influences the behavior of other groups or individuals. Starting in the late 20th century, the feminist movement has contributed extensive study of gender and theories about it, notably within sociology but not restricted to it.

Based on the above information, it is clear that most[but not all] of societies gender roles stem from our genetic make up. As for my question on Transgenderism that is simple, is it always possible to undo 10k years of evolution in ones biological make up, i.e Men as the hunters, Women as the home makers and fruit gathers with drugs and an operation ? Or will there always be a deep seated confusion in the subject that renders him/her/it from fully adapting to their new found gender role ?

If homosexuality is a genetic variation then so too is hetrosexuality (are we sure people are born hetrosexual?). Your argument is moving into the realms of designer babies. Should any parent chose any aspect of their child's genetic make-up? If a parent can choose that their child be genetically hetro, then can another set of parents choose that their child be homosexual? Who would decide what a parent can or can't select in terms of their off-springs sexuality? You seem to base your questions on the assumption that a parent would want to "fix" a childs homosexuality.

Not so, Hetrosexuality is the normal dominant sexual behaviour in any sexualy reproducing species. If it wasn't then you and I would never have evolved in the first place. It seems pretty obvious to me why a parent would want to protect their children from years of discrimination and harship at the hands of their peers if they had the ability to do so. Not to administer the treatment or even turn their children homosexual would be a very selfish thing for a parent who wants to look "cool" or "PC" .

It would be very interesting if it was announced that homosexuality is genetic since the CoI previously annonuced that if homosexuality was found to be genetic then they would have to consider gay marriages within their churches.

lol, quite possibly, but I think if such an announcment did take place the Church would quickly ignore that promise.

anoisaris

You are quoting chunks of wikipedia that bear little if any relevance to your argument let alone support it.

I would avoid using wikipedia as a factual reference point when in fact I could post on wikipedia for people to quote "as fact" that male and females brains are composed of 77.43% lime jelly and 58.32 % raspberry jelly respectively until someone copped and removed my citations (...and there several false facts by the way in what you have quoted as expert opinon from wikipedia most notably in regard to make up of brain matter).

You still seem to think that man as hunter gatherer and woman as home maker is biological or genetic, it's not it's a socially determined gender role in our society, these are roles which may very well be reversed in other societies. It's most certainly not years of biological evolution but simply a social one.

I can't see how after transition someone would feel a confusion in regard to a gender role when in fact they always felt they were in the wrong body. If anything would they not have felt pressured to confrom to the gender role typical of the sex they were born, for example some MTF would have had ultra macho jobs, married and had kids, played tough sports in order to hide their true selves.Other people may have a hard time adjusting to the person's change in physical appearance, more open minded would not.

Your choice of words such as cure and administer treatment in regard to homosexuality really show your true colours.

If hetrosexuality is dominant behaviour it does not mean it is genetic so why look for a gay gene if not look for a hetrosexual one? Your notion of finding the gene is based on your idea it should be removed or fixed. If you think you have the right to choose a hetrosexual child why can a gay/lesbian/straight parent not choose to parent a gay child? No-one should have the right to choose-simple!

You seem to have an idea that all gays are suffering. I suffer no discrimination in my life personally other than the fact I cannot legally marry my partner in this country yet (and the legal protections that would provide) or adopt/be legal parents of a child as a couple. And I have most certainly not ever suffered "hardship at the hands of peers". My life has been no tougher than any of my straight friends and I'm am more than happy with my life as it is. Alot of peoples struggles are more than likely internal rather than at the hands of peers. Fair enough there are some muppets that will try to make comments etc at random gay people, families or friends that have trouble re; acceptance or those thugs that beat up gay people on the street . In general life in this day and age for a gay person is not that hard.

Are you basing your eradication of the gay gene on your assumption you are saving a child from some woeful life?

Iwasfrozen

You are quoting chunks of wikipedia that bear little if any relevance to your argument let alone support it.

I would avoid using wikipedia as a factual reference point when in fact I could post on wikipedia for people to quote "as fact" that male and females brains are composed of 77.43% lime jelly and 58.32 % raspberry jelly respectively until someone copped and removed my citations (...and there several false facts by the way in what you have quoted as expert opinon from wikipedia most notably in regard to make up of brain matter).

I don't but into the argument that wikipedia is not reliable. Any false information on wikipedia is quickly removed, as I had found out to my displeasure some time ago.

You still seem to think that man as hunter gatherer and woman as home maker is biological or genetic, it's not it's a socially determined gender role in our society, these are roles which may very well be reversed in other societies. It's most certainly not years of biological evolution but simply a social one.

Are you trying to tell me that Men and Women are inherintly the exact same when they are born ? That they are blank canvasses onto which parents register their gender related sterotypes such as pink for girls, blue for boys ? To be honest that is pure trife when I was a child I played with Action Man, loved Oscar the Groutch from Seseme street and enjoyed exploring the fields to the back of my house with my pet dog, in fact I even went as far as the local shop once at the age of 2, about 1.5 kilometers. All this was without any prompting form my parents that I should be an explorer or play with Action Man because it's "masculine", I simply played with those toys because they appealed to the male in me, the same male who thought that toy dolls where crap without being able to explain why.
Truth is we evolved our sexual traits for a reason. Why do you think that women are physically attracted to buff men: Case A powerful men: Case B or even rich men: Case C truth is these men where atractive to women not for their looks [lets face it none of them are angelic] but for their power, there is an inbuilt gene in every woman that asses a mans ability to look after her and her child. [again this dates back to our hunter-gatherer days.]
If men and women are born equal only to be shaped by their society then why has every society in history [save the amazonians] sent their men to war ?
Gender roles are not simply social constructs, they are built into our genes and have been since the last 10k years, we may be a socialy progressive society now but alas biology is a lot slower then society.

I can't see how after transition someone would feel a confusion in regard to a gender role when in fact they always felt they were in the wrong body. If anything would they not have felt pressured to confrom to the gender role typical of the sex they were born, for example some MTF would have had ultra macho jobs, married and had kids, played tough sports in order to hide their true selves.Other people may have a hard time adjusting to the person's change in physical appearance, more open minded would not.

But that is my question, can someone who contains 10k years of genetic evolution really fully adopt to a role that they are not biologically suited to ?

Your choice of words such as cure and administer treatment in regard to homosexuality really show your true colours.

If homosexuality is due to a genetic variance then [as most homosexuals claim] then why is it not acceptable to use words such as cure and administer treatment ?

If hetrosexuality is dominant behaviour it does not mean it is genetic so why look for a gay gene if not look for a hetrosexual one? Your notion of finding the gene is based on your idea it should be removed or fixed. If you think you have the right to choose a hetrosexual child why can a gay/lesbian/straight parent not choose to parent a gay child? No-one should have the right to choose-simple!

If hetrosexuality is the dominant behaviour ? I think we can both agree that hetrosexuality is by far the dominant behaviour in every sexualy reproducing organism. As Hetrosexuality is the dominant trait there is no need to find the hetrosexual gene, tbh I assume that the gay gene is simply a mutation of the hetrosexual gene. As you will see in my last post the primary desire of changing a child from being gay to straight is no social torture or having to "come out of the closet" and how hard that can be for a young person. Why would a parent want to make their child gay ?

You seem to have an idea that all gays are suffering. I suffer no discrimination in my life personally other than the fact I cannot legally marry my partner in this country yet (and the legal protections that would provide) or adopt/be legal parents of a child as a couple. And I have most certainly not ever suffered "hardship at the hands of peers". My life has been no tougher than any of my straight friends and I'm am more than happy with my life as it is. Alot of peoples struggles are more than likely internal rather than at the hands of peers. Fair enough there are some muppets that will try to make comments etc at random gay people, families or friends that have trouble re; acceptance or those thugs that beat up gay people on the street . In general life in this day and age for a gay person is not that hard.

Well then let me say you are extremely lucky to have such understanding parents/peers to guide you and help make such a difficult decision more easy for you. Alas others are not quite as lucky.

Are you basing your eradication of the gay gene on your assumption you are saving a child from some woeful life?

Based on my own life experiences, yes.
P.S sorry about the typo's it's late.

jady88

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

2.Do you think people are born gay or is it acquired during life due to past/negitive experiences ?
3.And if homosexuality is already present in one at birth do you think a cure will be inevitabley be invented to make it obsolete in the future ?

and....

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Do you think that in the future scientists will be able to isolate this gene strand, and with parents consent fix the genetic make up of the unborn child ? Of course this brings up all sorts of moral questions on wether it is right to alter the childs Homosexual tendencies.
Also can we keep it civil people, these are controversial topics and I don't want this turing into a flame-fest.

Emphasis added. When asking to keep it civil it would be more than advisable to think about the wording chosen to present your questions. Cure denotes disease, or illness which homosexuality isn't. Fix presumes problem, again homosexuality is not a problem.

Iwasfrozen

Emphasis added. When asking to keep it civil it would be more than advisable to think about the wording chosen to present your questions. Cure denotes disease, or illness which homosexuality isn't. Fix presumes problem, again homosexuality is not a problem.

Sorry for any offence caused in the wording, yes Homosexuality is not a desease but it is a variation of the normal human genes. What i ment to say was would it be possible to fix the variation in the child DNA to make him "normal".
Here you go.

Do you think that in the future scientists will be able to isolate this gene strand, and with parents consent correct the genetic make up of the unborn child ? Of course this brings up all sorts of moral questions on wether it is right to alter the childs Homosexual tendencies.
Also can we keep it civil people, these are controversial topics and I don't want this turing into a flame-fest.

TBH, I don't see whats wrong with the word Tendencies.
Oh and before anyone jumps down my throat, I said correct the childs genes, not the child.

anoisaris

Based on your personal life experience???? -of how you personally view/treat gay people or how you have been viewed/treated as a gay person?

Your view of life for a gay person seems fairly grim. It really is nowhere near as bad for most people as you think it is. I by no means have some extraordinary liberal and accepting family they are just a normal family. I don't have fantastically supportive friends, they are just friends, the same people that were my friends before I told them I was gay-they are just friends that accept me as I am, as I accept them and all that they are. If you are referring to coming out as the tough decision well it was not that awful either. Granted it may be built up to be a big deal in your head when you are younger-but so would telling your parents you will not be studying medicine if they had it built up in their heads since your birth that you were going to be a doctor!I'm sure it's a shock to parents as they would have had a little life for you planned out in their minds and it takes time to process.

Some gay people do have problems with people accepting them, especially those with religious families or families more concerned with what others around them think than their own child's happiness. That says much more about the person that has problems accepting than the gay person themselves. But you are very mistaken if you think all gay people are suffering some "social torture". Very few of my gay friends have suffered negative experiences in regard to their sexualities-they are happy, well rounded people with a good social life, relationships, careers etc with no more or no less difficulties in their lives than my straight friends.

As for your question why would a parent choose that their child be gay? They shouldn't (same as a parent should not choose that their child be straight) but especially not on the assumption that you would be saving them from a tortured existence!

Iwasfrozen

Based on your personal life experience???? -of how you personally view/treat gay people or how you have been viewed/treated as a gay person?

Lol no I'm not gay, but my friend is and had a pretty tough time of it with parents, class mates etc.
I started thinking wouldn't it be good to have a way to reverse genetic variation that causes Homosexuality, or would it be morally right to do so.
Thats why I started this thread.

anoisaris

Really so you base all your assumptions and theories on the back of one friend?

KeyLimePie

Stupid thread.

1.Do you think Sexual identity is such acquired at birth or can it be
changed/modified later in life such as the case with Transgenders ?

There was a set of twins in america, both circumsised though one was botched. As an experiment they castrated him, make a fake vajayjay and set about seeing if gender was socially conditioned or you were born into it. Turns out it's that you're born into it, a body of a woman didn't stop him thinking he was a boy and out of place, it wasn't until he was 14 when he found out and he was immediatly relieved.

2.Do you think people are born gay or is it acquired during life due to past/negitive experiences ?

Not one bit. What defining moment in you're life made you straight ? If it's physchological the statistics wouldn't be at 10%, and i bet you that you can find a good few hundred people with overbearing mothers who bat for the straight team.

3.And if homosexuality is already present in one at birth do you think a cure will be inevitabley be invented to make it obsolete in the future ?

That's so offensive You make it sound like there's something wrong ! It's things like this that segregates gay people more and more !!

Iwasfrozen

There was a set of twins in america, both circumsised though one was botched. As an experiment they castrated him, make a fake vajayjay and set about seeing if gender was socially conditioned or you were born into it. Turns out it's that you're born into it, a body of a woman didn't stop him thinking he was a boy and out of place, it wasn't until he was 14 when he found out and he was immediatly relieved

Do you have any sources on this ? I find it hard to believe that a child would be castrated for an experiment.

Not one bit. What defining moment in you're life made you straight ? If it's physchological the statistics wouldn't be at 10%, and i bet you that you can find a good few hundred people with overbearing mothers who bat for the straight team.

You wantme to name my defining stright moment ? Ok, Carrie Fisher in that wonderful space bra, you know the one.

That's so offensive You make it sound like there's something wrong ! It's things like this that segregates gay people more and more !!

There is nothing wrong with homosexuality but if a cure was invented I assume most parents would use it making homosexuality very rare.

hot2def

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with homosexuality but if a cure was invented I assume most parents would use it making homosexuality very rare.

I imagine most people would choose to "cure" any tendency to be overweight, depressed, introverted, buck teeth, iffy eyesight, gullible enough to believe in god, soft teeth, color blind, tone deaf, short, tall, inclned to arthritis, asthma, red head, bad at sports etc.

Its worth remembering that most of the world can't afford clean water, let alone elective treatments to create designer babies. So homosexuality wouldn't bcome rare - just rare amongst vain affluent westerners.

Butterfly baby

Tag....my turn

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Do you have any sources on this ? I find it hard to believe that a child would be castrated for an experiment.

First of all it wasn't an experiment, as KeyLimePie said it was a caused by a ****ed up circumcision, his name was David Reimer and here's your source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

He killed himself because he was forced to live as a gender that he didn't fit. HE WAS NOT Trassexual, a ****ed up circumcision made his parents decide that it'd be better to raise him as a girl but, you see, no matter how hard they tried the truth is he was and always would be psychologically male so what they did was wrong. In the end he would probably have been better off with a mutilated penis and spent his life as a man (and would have been less likely to kill himself too) because it was a forced gender he had to live. And that is the exact same thing that happens to Transsexual people. We are born in a body that doesn't fit our mind.

And in general we don't don't give a toss about sex either.

You are mixing us up with tranvestites and crossdressers but they are a MALE kink, MEN who dress as women for sexual pleasure and what no one ever seems to realise is that they are MEN! MEN who have the TV/CD (Transvestite/Cross dresser) urge for a cheap toss off, MEN who masturbate when wearing a pair of knickers but none the less MEN because in normal life they still identify as MEN. The stereotype MEN create we have to live with. See it's not us that **** while wearing a schoolgirl/french maid etc outfit, it's MEN who in real life identify as MEN.

You see Transsexuals dress as women because we are women, we may not have the parts yet but deep down it's who we are and eventually we have no choice but to transition or, like David Reimer, we'll die too because we will also be getting forced into a gender role that we don't fit...so we change it.

TV's and CD's (MEN) can always walk away after they have that **** and go back to their normal life but, until gender reassignment, we never have that freedom. We can never walk away so our lives are never normal or hidden like TV's and CD's are, For us ignorant people like you make our life hell all based on your "Holier than thou" morals.


Life is short so why the fcuk should we live it by your rules?, in 100 years time you'll be just as dead as me and no one will give a fcuk what I wore...

KeyLimePie

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Do you have any sources on this ? I find it hard to believe that a child would be castrated for an experiment.
.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You wantme to name my defining stright moment ? Ok, Carrie Fisher in that wonderful space bra, you know the one.

Oh and I've never seen a wonder bra ad have i ?! Or when i was 10 I didn't look through a playboy, or a pack of playing cards with naked women on them !
You do realise that by ASSUMING gay people choose to be this way, or they're this way because of social conditioning you're first of all creating a society where young people coming to terms with their sexuality will think that there's something wrong with themselves and then go to some crackpot who does mass in a basement to get fixed and also if society believes that being gay is a choice or brought on by social conditioning it completely ruins any argument for civil rights !

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with homosexuality but if a cure was invented I assume most parents would use it making homosexuality very rare.

That's a generalisation. A complete and utter generalisation. In our society now Gays are accepted, and I do believe that such a treatment would have
to be constented to by the person receiving it.


And may I just say that this forum is meant for people of a Gay and Lesbian persusasion, not like the George or anything where it's a club and anyone can walk in but it should be treated with respect as there are people who do post here who do have genuine problems and they don't need to be hearing the half baked opinions of any old random person ! Bring that stuff to After Hours or Debate.

jady88

KeyLimePie wrote: »

And may I just say that this forum is meant for people of a Gay and Lesbian persusasion, not like the George or anything where it's a club and anyone can walk in but it should be treated with respect as there are people who do post here who do have genuine problems and they don't need to be hearing the half baked opinions of any old random person ! Bring that stuff to After Hours or Debate.

That is actually shameful, anyone should be allowed to post an opinion so long as it is in the spirit of discussion I actually can't believe how discriminative that part of your comment was.

oisindoyle

jady88 wrote: »

That is actually shameful, anyone should be allowed to post an opinion so long as it is in the spirit of discussion I actually can't believe how discriminative that part of your comment was.

But the OP comments are shameful..All this nonsense and it is nonsense....Is gender acquired ???,,,are you born gay ??? ect ect ,,Those type of comments are insulting and shameful

Nevyn

I think certain gender behaviours are aquired or forced on us, while they may be natural for some they are not for all.

anoisaris

oisindoyle wrote: »

But the OP comments are shameful..All this nonsense and it is nonsense....Is gender acquired ???,,,are you born gay ??? ect ect ,,Those type of comments are insulting and shameful

I'm sorry but while the OP has used some offensive words and mixed up terminology that doesn't take from his right to discuss. It isn't all nonsense re: the question is gender acquired by the way it's hugely discussed within sociology and psychology etc.

anoisaris

Butterfly baby wrote: »

Tag....my turn



First of all it wasn't an experiment, as KeyLimePie said it was a caused by a ****ed up circumcision, his name was David Reimer and here's your source

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

He killed himself because he was forced to live as a gender that he didn't fit. HE WAS NOT Trassexual, a ****ed up circumcision made his parents decide that it'd be better to raise him as a girl but, you see, no matter how hard they tried the truth is he was and always would be psychologically male so what they did was wrong. In the end he would probably have been better off with a mutilated penis and spent his life as a man (and would have been less likely to kill himself too) because it was a forced gender he had to live. And that is the exact same thing that happens to Transsexual people. We are born in a body that doesn't fit our mind.

And in general we don't don't give a toss about sex either.

You are mixing us up with tranvestites and crossdressers but they are a MALE kink, MEN who dress as women for sexual pleasure and what no one ever seems to realise is that they are MEN! MEN who have the TV/CD (Transvestite/Cross dresser) urge for a cheap toss off, MEN who masturbate when wearing a pair of knickers but none the less MEN because in normal life they still identify as MEN. The stereotype MEN create we have to live with. See it's not us that **** while wearing a schoolgirl/french maid etc outfit, it's MEN who in real life identify as MEN.

You see Transsexuals dress as women because we are women, we may not have the parts yet but deep down it's who we are and eventually we have no choice but to transition or, like David Reimer, we'll die too because we will also be getting forced into a gender role that we don't fit...so we change it.

TV's and CD's (MEN) can always walk away after they have that **** and go back to their normal life but, until gender reassignment, we never have that freedom. We can never walk away so our lives are never normal or hidden like TV's and CD's are, For us ignorant people like you make our life hell all based on your "Holier than thou" morals.


Life is short so why the fcuk should we live it by your rules?, in 100 years time you'll be just as dead as me and no one will give a fcuk what I wore...

He was living as a man (with a wife and step kids) at the time he killed himself and had been living as a man since he was a teenager. He committed suicide after he and his wife split and following the death of this brother from an overdose etc I'm sure the difficulties of his upbringing contributed to his mental state but he wasn't living as a woman in his adult life.

Butterfly baby

KeyLimePie wrote: »

And may I just say that this forum is meant for people of a Gay and Lesbian persusasion, not like the George or anything where it's a club and anyone can walk in but it should be treated with respect as there are people who do post here who do have genuine problems and they don't need to be hearing the half baked opinions of any old random person ! Bring that stuff to After Hours or Debate.

Lets ignore the fact that you basically posted the link I had previously posted and lets focus on your own ignorance. This forum isn't only for people of a "Gay and Lesbian persusasion", it may not say it in the link but Transsexual and Bisexuals are free to post here too as are straight people. There's no harm in asking a question and that's all the OP did, my reply was an answer to his question whereas yours get increasingly agressive. If all we did was see every question as an attack then I could easily ask how come you just said Gay and Lesbian? I mean there are more sexualities than those two but why just name them? My point is that that's just another phobia, you argue for Gay and Lesbian rights but 1. talk about it like it's a desease, 2. talk about it like it's something that should be pitied and 3. Talk like it's black and white and you either are or aren't gay...life doesn't work like that. Look at yourself before you critize others. He asked his question to learn but you asked your question to argue. Right now you're trying to think of a moralistic reply to make yourself sound like you empathise but, and trust me on this, you don't.

You're next post will have included the words "I'm not gay but I have 7 gay friends" well bravo, well done for you.

Butterfly baby

anoisaris wrote: »

He was living as a man (with a wife and step kids) at the time he killed himself and had been living as a man since he was a teenager. He committed suicide after he and his wife split and following the death of this brother from an overdose etc I'm sure the difficulties of his upbringing contributed to his mental state but he wasn't living as a woman in his adult life.

I'm well aware of how he lived, to be honest I'm too much aware of how many Gender dysphoric people have lived and died and why they died, I don't need you to point that out because in any given year I'll go to at least 20 funerals of my friends that chose death rather than this hell.

anoisaris

Butterfly baby wrote: »

I'm well aware of how he lived, to be honest I'm too much aware of how many Gender dysphoric people have lived and died and why they died, I don't need you to point that out because in any given year I'll go to at least 20 funerals of my friends that chose death rather than this hell.

Then why say he would have been better of living as a man with a mutilated penis, when that is how he did live, edit: oh sorry you mean living as a man all his life I suppose sorry I picked it up differently?

That is awful about your friends btw.

Butterfly baby

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with homosexuality but if a cure was invented I assume most parents would use it making homosexuality very rare.

You do realise that's a contradiction? lets assume there was a "cure" now that means there'd have to be a desease so let's call that desease "Homosexuality" or for short "Gay". Now imagine I have a son and he's, let's say, 8 years old and just very emotional, do I assume he's gay and "cure" him?

How do you "cure" a natural progression? it's like saying you can cure a burst appendix. To "cure" homosexuality you'd have to first admit that your child is born gay and when you admit that then all you will be "curing" will be who they are. The person you loved will be gone, who you are left with will be a shadow of who you loved, the "Cure" may take away more than you think.

Butterfly baby

anoisaris wrote: »

Then why say he would have been better of living as a man with a mutilated penis, when that is how he did live, edit: oh sorry you mean living as a man all his life I suppose sorry I picked it up differently?

That is awful about your friends btw.

I meant he would have been better off in his real gender than the gender that was forced on him. He was male...he should never have been forced to be female, no person can live that way and no man should be forced to be a girl, I just think that as a man he'd have prefered to live as a man (wrecked penis or not) rather than what they did to him.

anoisaris

Butterfly baby wrote: »

I meant he would have been better off in his real gender than the gender that was forced on him. He was male...he should never have been forced to be female, no person can live that way and no man should be forced to be a girl, I just think that as a man he'd have prefered to live as a man (wrecked penis or not) rather than what they did to him.

Exactly, completely agree. (yeah copped what you were saying there eventually )

Butterfly baby

anoisaris wrote: »

Exactly, completely agree. (yeah copped what you were saying there eventually )

I may be Transsexual but I don't think any guy should be forced to live as a girl, what they did to him was wrong on so many levels and no one should have been allowed let that happen to him. As Transsexuals, in general, we make the choice about what gender to live as but he was never given that choice. His gender was forced and even I can't imagine how hard that must have been, we lose a lot of family ties after we transition (and he probably did too when he went back to being male) but that in it's self is a choice we make but he was always a "He", choice was never an option for him. For lack of a better word they mutilated him and totally demasculinized him, his death was inevitable because you can't live without some form of gender identity, at the core it's who we are. I was born male but my Identity is female so I'm comfortable with that, you were born male and your identity is male so you're comfortable too but it must be hell to be male and have parts mutilated and then be forced into a different gender role, I could never relate to that and only imagine how hard that must have been, we (as Tanssexuals) see our gender in a flux, what we are isn't what we always have to be but we have choice...he didn't

KeyLimePie

Butterfly baby wrote: »

Lets ignore the fact that you basically posted the link I had previously posted and lets focus on your own ignorance. This forum isn't only for people of a "Gay and Lesbian persusasion", it may not say it in the link but Transsexual and Bisexuals are free to post here too as are straight people. There's no harm in asking a question and that's all the OP did, my reply was an answer to his question whereas yours get increasingly agressive. If all we did was see every question as an attack then I could easily ask how come you just said Gay and Lesbian? I mean there are more sexualities than those two but why just name them? My point is that that's just another phobia, you argue for Gay and Lesbian rights but 1. talk about it like it's a desease, 2. talk about it like it's something that should be pitied and 3. Talk like it's black and white and you either are or aren't gay...life doesn't work like that. Look at yourself before you critize others. He asked his question to learn but you asked your question to argue. Right now you're trying to think of a moralistic reply to make yourself sound like you empathise but, and trust me on this, you don't.

You're next post will have included the words "I'm not gay but I have 7 gay friends" well bravo, well done for you.

I'm gay. .

anoisaris

Butterfly baby wrote: »

I may be Transsexual but I don't think any guy should be forced to live as a girl, what they did to him was wrong on so many levels and no one should have been allowed let that happen to him. As Transsexuals, in general, we make the choice about what gender to live as but he was never given that choice. His gender was forced and even I can't imagine how hard that must have been, we lose a lot of family ties after we transition (and he probably did too when he went back to being male) but that in it's self is a choice we make but he was always a "He", choice was never an option for him. For lack of a better word they mutilated him and totally demasculinized him, his death was inevitable because you can't live without some form of gender identity, at the core it's who we are. I was born male but my Identity is female so I'm comfortable with that, you were born male and your identity is male so you're comfortable too but it must be hell to be male and have parts mutilated and then be forced into a different gender role, I could never relate to that and only imagine how hard that must have been, we (as Tanssexuals) see our gender in a flux, what we are isn't what we always have to be but we have choice...he didn't

Why have you assumed I was born male or that my identity is male?

Tricity Bendix

Butterfly baby wrote: »

You do realise that's a contradiction? lets assume there was a "cure" now that means there'd have to be a desease so let's call that desease "Homosexuality" or for short "Gay". Now imagine I have a son and he's, let's say, 8 years old and just very emotional, do I assume he's gay and "cure" him?

How do you "cure" a natural progression? it's like saying you can cure a burst appendix. To "cure" homosexuality you'd have to first admit that your child is born gay and when you admit that then all you will be "curing" will be who they are. The person you loved will be gone, who you are left with will be a shadow of who you loved, the "Cure" may take away more than you think.

Given that the OP was talking about genetically engineering a straight child, your example doesnt really apply.

Frankly, most replies to the OP have latched onto his clumsy language without actually dealing with any of his actual points.

Butterfly baby

anoisaris wrote: »

Why have you assumed I was born male or that my identity is male?

Because you are male, it's not an assumption because it's obvious. Prove me wrong and say you are female but I doubt you ever will...

anoisaris

Butterfly baby wrote: »

Because you are male, it's not an assumption because it's obvious. Prove me wrong and say you are female but I doubt you ever will...

What makes it obvious that I am male?

Butterfly baby

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

Given that the OP was talking about genetically engineering a straight child, your example doesnt really apply.

Frankly, most replies to the OP have latched onto his clumsy language without actually dealing with any of his actual points.

Genetically engineerig a straight child? like really? how can you genetically
engineer a straight child not to be gay? I mean seriously their orientation is straight already so you're plan would be to **** with their genetics more just to be sure? While you are ****ing around with their genetics would you dispose of that stupidity gene too? because it sounds like it's inherent..

Butterfly baby

anoisaris wrote: »

What makes it obvious that I am male?

It's how you talk. So I was right then and as such my assumptions were based on fact and not actually assumptions at all?

anoisaris

Butterfly baby wrote: »

It's how you talk. So I was right then and as such my assumptions were based on fact and not actually assumptions at all?

No, you were wrong and your assumptions were based on just that-assumptions!

I am intrigued please do go on and tell me more about me!? I find this very ironic considering the nature of the topic that you have fairly adamantly and incorrectly assumed my sex.

Tricity Bendix

Butterfly baby wrote: »

Genetically engineerig a straight child? like really? how can you genetically
engineer a straight child not to be gay? I mean seriously their orientation is straight already so you're plan would be to **** with their genetics more just to be sure? While you are ****ing around with their genetics would you dispose of that stupidity gene too? because it sounds like it's inherent..

OK, I'll bite.

I'll do this nice and slow for you. The OP basically said that if people are born gay, it must be due to a genetic variation. As such, these genes could be identified and subsequently altered to remove the variation in a developing child in which it is found to exist. The result would be a genetically engineered straight child. It is not, as you assert, my plan, nor will I be ****ing around with anyone's genetics. And your last line doesn't even make sense.

Butterfly baby

anoisaris wrote: »

No, you were wrong and your assumptions were based on just that-assumptions!

I am intrigued please do go on and tell me more about me!? I find this very ironic considering the nature of the topic that you have fairly adamantly and incorrectly assumed my sex.

You are male, you live in Galway, you work as an engineer but software engineer and your intrests include Golf..want me to continue?

Boston

Butterfly baby wrote: »

You are male, you live in Galway, you work as an engineer but software engineer and your intrests include Golf..want me to continue?

You use google.

anoisaris wrote: »

No, you were wrong and your assumptions were based on just that-assumptions!

I am intrigued please do go on and tell me more about me!? I find this very ironic considering the nature of the topic that you have fairly adamantly and incorrectly assumed my sex.

You play online poker, and you're not very good.

Butterfly baby

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

OK, I'll bite.

I'll do this nice and slow for you. The OP basically said that if people are born gay, it must be due to a genetic variation. As such, these genes could be identified and subsequently altered to remove the variation in a developing child in which it is found to exist. The result would be a genetically engineered straight child. It is not, as you assert, my plan, nor will I be ****ing around with anyone's genetics. And your last line doesn't even make sense.

So what you are saying is, given the choice, you would freely accept the wipe out of any gene that variates from "Straight"? why even post here then? it's obvious from your reply that you see us all as a genetic abnormality so why post? If we sicken you that much that you view us as needing nothing more than a "cure" then why not avoid us? Personally I'd be under the impression that you post to get attention. You post what you think is "controversial" but to be honest you're just another fool that we learn to ignore

Now be under no illusions here love, you're going to reply to this with a big moralistic rant but the truth is I will always have won. because I pointed out that you're nothing but a Bigot and you just proved that yourself too.

Butterfly baby

Boston wrote: »

You play online poker, and you're not very good.

Actually he sucks at online poker, anoisaris if you're going to play online poker at least learn the rules. Ahoma high low is a little more difficult than throwing in a $20 bet and hoping for the best.

Butterfly baby

Boston wrote: »

You use google.

Well where else would I get my information from? he asked a question and I fullfilled the criteria of that question but what will really **** his head up is if I post his real name too.

Tricity Bendix

Butterfly baby wrote: »

So what you are saying is,

Bless your simple soul. I clearly pointed out that I was outlining what the OP was suggesting, seeing as how you misunderstood his posts. I'm beginning to think that you don't actually read anyones posts, but write responses to imaginary ones instead. I clearly said it was not my plan and that I had no intention of messing with anyone's genes.

given the choice, you would freely accept the wipe out of any gene that variates from "Straight"? why even post here then? it's obvious from your reply that you see us all as a genetic abnormality so why post? If we sicken you that much that you view us as needing nothing more than a "cure" then why not avoid us? Personally I'd be under the impression that you post to get attention. You post what you think is "controversial" but to be honest you're just another fool that we learn to ignore

Now be under no illusions here love, you're going to reply to this with a big moralistic rant but the truth is I will always have won. because I pointed out that you're nothing but a Bigot and you just proved that yourself too.

Nice try, sweet cheeks, but its to the back of the class with you. Learn to read, then maybe you could move on to writting.

Butterfly baby

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

Bless your simple soul. I clearly pointed out that I was outlining what the OP was suggesting, seeing as how you misunderstood his posts. I'm beginning to think that you don't actually read anyones posts, but write responses to imaginary posts. I clearly said it was not my plan and that I had no intention of messing with anyone's genes.

It seems to me you were very clear about your opinions...

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

Nice try, sweet cheeks, but its to the back of the class with you. Learn to read, then maybe you could move on to writting.

"writting"...really would I be the bestest like you is? it's spelt "writing" you fool, if you are going to correct someones grammar at least get your own right first because at least then you won't look like such a twat when I point it out.


As I said, moralistic reply, she can't accept she was beaten so calls me "sweet cheeks" as a form of condension

Tricity Bendix

Butterfly baby wrote: »

It seems to me you were very clear about your opinions...

Really? Perhaps you could point out which part of my post confused you?

"writting"...really would I be the bestest like you is? it's spelt "writing" you fool, if you are going to correct someones grammar at least get your own right first.

I never corrected your grammer, only your ignorance.

EDIT: Dont know how my reply was 'moralistic'. How is sweet cheeks more condesending than love? And it certainly isn't insulting like bigot or fool. Also I am a man. You're on some losing streak tonight.

jady88

Butterfly baby wrote: »

Well where else would I get my information from? he asked a question and I fullfilled the criteria of that question but what will really **** his head up is if I post his real name too.

Wouldn't you banned for doing that?

54kroc

jady88 wrote: »

Wouldn't you banned for doing that?

Well we can hope for it anyway