nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Gay People are Living The Way They Want To

[Deleted User]

on the limerick post right now reading about gay marriage :mad:

how long will it take before people realize , people are born gay its not like we can choose

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Ilik Urgee

So what you having for dinner tonight,sausage or fish?

FatherLen

4 years?

Dravokivich

Ilik Urgee wrote: »

So what you having for dinner tonight,sausage or fish?

Why not have both?

krudler

A link would help:

http://www.limerickpost.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5660:limerick-councillors-divided-over-gay-marriage&catid=37:local-news&Itemid=60

IT IS currently unclear whether Limerick City Council will follow nearby Kerry County Council in backing same-sex marriage in Ireland as City Councillors offered differing opinions on the issue.

As Kerry became the 14th local authority in the country to support such a motion this week, Limerick City Mayor Gerry McLoughlin said he was not planning to table a similar motion in the immediate future.

He told Limerick Post: “It’s possible but it hasn’t come up yet. Obviously it’s a big issue and there are a lot of things involved. It would depend on how the individual Councillors feel about it. I don’t see why we couldn’t have a debate about it but there’s no reason why it should come up at the moment.

1ZRed

Deleted User wrote: »

on the limerick post right now reading about gay marriage :mad:

how long will it take before people realize , people are born gay its not like we can choose

When did they ever say it was a choice?

[Deleted User]

1ZRed wrote: »

When did they ever say it was a choice?

Every time they say "lifestyle choice"

krudler

don't get why they say theres no need to bring it up at the moment, Limerick has a pretty big gay community and the city has a Pride Week every year that it openly advertises, you'd imagine councillors would be looking to support a group that the city by and large already does.

Nodin

Dravokivich wrote: »

Why not have both?

Lord Varys doesn't care for fish pie.

1ZRed

bluewolf wrote: »

Every time they say "lifestyle choice"

"Lifestyle choice" isn't mentioned even once in that link.

But I read it and it always strikes me as odd that people get to vote for me on what I'm allowed to have when it has no effect, positive or negative, on them.

TeddyTedson

I have no idea whether it's a nature or nurture thing. I'd lean towards nature but who can really say. It will be interesting to know all the answers some day. I have no doubts however that people have no choice over their sexual orientation so can the world just get over it already. It's getting tedious (tactical use of language there).
I can't understand the mind set of a straight person despising gay people so much. The straight person doesn't come into the equation unless they put themselves in it.
I'm sure a lot of extremely homophobic people are gay themselves I suppose there is logic behind that in a peculiar way, but the ones who are heterosexual, that's even more bizarre to me. I guess it's just ignorance in its purest form.

hatrickpatrick

Have to say while I believe it's not a choice, I think that argument is toxic and avoids the real issue.
So WHAT if it's a choice or not? What difference does that make? The only relevant issue over sexual orientation is that it's a personal thing and is nobody else's business but the person concerned.

Let's suppose if it was a choice. What difference does that make? It doesn't harm or affect anyone who doesn't freely consent to involvement, ergo it's ok. It's that simple in my view.

If there's no victim, there's no wrong. Period. Choice or not, it hurts nobody and is therefore ok.

orestes

1ZRed wrote: »

But I read it and it always strikes me as odd that people get to vote for me on what I'm allowed to have when it has no effect, positive or negative, on them.

Whaddya mean has no effect on us? What if I have kids one day and they see two of the gays getting married? Next thing I know little Billy doesn't want to play football anymore and I'm forking out money every week for ballet lessons! I'll probably end up having to lock him under the stairs so the rest of the kid at school don't catch the gay from him! Twenty years down the line I have some tutu wearing Norman Bates serial killer on my hands who keeps trying to have sex with the male cops that come to arrest him!

Bloody gays, socially irrresponsible is what ye are! :mad:

Death and Taxes

orestes wrote: »

Whaddya mean has no effect on us? What if I have kids one day and they see two of the gays getting married? Next thing I know little Billy doesn't want to play football anymore and I'm forking out money every week for ballet lessons! I'll probably end up having to lock him under the stairs so the rest of the kid at school don't catch the gay from him! Twenty years down the line I have some tutu wearing Norman Bates serial killer on my hands who keeps trying to have sex with the male cops that come to arrest him!

Bloody gays, socially irrresponsible is what ye are! :mad:

That was a joke, yeah?

Tom_Cruise

Its obviously to much female hormones inside the bodies of gays that make them gay.

Have you ever noticed how gay men talk like women? With a squeaky voice?

That the female hormones inside their bodies.

They are born with a hormone imbalance and cant do anything about it.

Banned for trolling

orestes

WileyCoyote wrote: »

That was a joke, yeah?

I find it pretty scary that you even have to ask if something that utterly absurd is serious.

Tom_Cruise wrote: »

Its obviously to much female hormones inside the bodies of gays that make them gay.

Have you ever noticed how gay men talk like women? With a squeaky voice?

That the female hormones inside their bodies.

They are born with a hormone imbalance and cant do anything about it.

But I find it even scarier that something this absurd actually might be.

1ZRed

TeddyTedson wrote: »

I have no idea whether it's a nature or nurture thing. I'd lean towards nature but who can really say. It will be interesting to know all the answers some day. I have no doubts however that people have no choice over their sexual orientation so can the world just get over it already. It's getting tedious (tactical use of language there).
I can't understand the mind set of a straight person despising gay people so much. The straight person doesn't come into the equation unless they put themselves in it.
I'm sure a lot of extremely homophobic people are gay themselves I suppose there is logic behind that in a peculiar way, but the ones who are heterosexual, that's even more bizarre to me. I guess it's just ignorance in its purest form.

Environment always has a small role on gene expression, but it's always slight and you need something to build on in the first place for someone to turn out gay. That's why it is nearly completely hardwired from birth, same as any other sexuality.

This is a new angle scientists are looking at to determine the cause of it.

Study finds epigenetics underline homosexuality

Epigenetics – how gene expression is regulated by temporary switches, called epi-marks – appears to be a critical and overlooked factor contributing to the long-standing puzzle of why homosexuality occurs.

According to the study, published online today in The Quarterly Review of Biology, sex-specific epi-marks, which normally do not pass between generations and are thus "erased," can lead to homosexuality when they escape erasure and are transmitted from father to daughter or mother to son.

From an evolutionary standpoint, homosexuality is a trait that would not be expected to develop and persist in the face of Darwinian natural selection. Homosexuality is nevertheless common for men and women in most cultures. Previous studies have shown that homosexuality runs in families, leading most researchers to presume a genetic underpinning of sexual preference. However, no major gene for homosexuality has been found despite numerous studies searching for a genetic connection.

In the current study, researchers from the Working Group on Intragenomic Conflict at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) integrated evolutionary theory with recent advances in the molecular regulation of gene expression and androgen-dependent sexual development to produce a biological and mathematical model that delineates the role of epigenetics in homosexuality.

Epi-marks constitute an extra layer of information attached to our genes' backbones that regulates their expression. While genes hold the instructions, epi-marks direct how those instructions are carried out – when, where and how much a gene is expressed during development. Epi-marks are usually produced anew each generation, but recent evidence demonstrates that they sometimes carryover between generations and thus can contribute to similarity among relatives, resembling the effect of shared genes.

Sex-specific epi-marks produced in early fetal development protect each sex from the substantial natural variation in testosterone that occurs during later fetal development. Sex-specific epi-marks stop girl fetuses from being masculinized when they experience atypically high testosterone, and vice versa for boy fetuses. Different epi-marks protect different sex-specific traits from being masculinized or feminized – some affect the genitals, others sexual identity, and yet others affect sexual partner preference. However, when these epi-marks are transmitted across generations from fathers to daughters or mothers to sons, they may cause reversed effects, such as the feminization of some traits in sons, such as sexual preference, and similarly a partial masculinization of daughters.

The study solves the evolutionary riddle of homosexuality, finding that "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks, which normally protect parents from natural variation in sex hormone levels during fetal development, sometimes carryover across generations and cause homosexuality in opposite-sex offspring. The mathematical modeling demonstrates that genes coding for these epi-marks can easily spread in the population because they always increase the fitness of the parent but only rarely escape erasure and reduce fitness in offspring.

"Transmission of sexually antagonistic epi-marks between generations is the most plausible evolutionary mechanism of the phenomenon of human homosexuality," said the study's co-author Sergey Gavrilets, NIMBioS' associate director for scientific activities and a professor at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville.

###
The paper's other authors are William Rice, a professor at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and Urban Friberg, a professor at Uppsala University in Sweden.

The National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS) brings together researchers from around the world to collaborate across disciplinary boundaries to investigate solutions to basic and applied problems in the life sciences. NIMBioS is sponsored by the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture with additional support from The University of Tennessee, Knoxville.

Citation: Rice WR, Friberg U, Gavrilets S. Homosexuality as a consequence of epigenetically canalized sexual development. The Quarterly Review of Biology. Published online 11 December 2012.

davet82

We're here, we're queer, get use to it!!

(always wanted to type that)

(returns to closet)

Beruthiel

Tom_Cruise wrote: »

Its obviously to much female hormones inside the bodies of gays that make them gay.

Have you ever noticed how gay men talk like women? With a squeaky voice?

That the female hormones inside their bodies.

They are born with a hormone imbalance and cant do anything about it.

You're trolling, right?

[Deleted User]

krudler wrote: »

A link would help:

im was reading it in the newspaper

davet82

Tom_Cruise wrote: »

Its obviously to much female hormones inside the bodies of gays that make them gay.

Have you ever noticed how gay men talk like women? With a squeaky voice?

That the female hormones inside their bodies.

They are born with a hormone imbalance and cant do anything about it.

Banned for trolling

sad thing is i dont think he was trolling

Boombastic

What anyone else does in bed has no effect on my life

davet82

Boombastic wrote: »

What anyone else does in bed has no effect on my life

what if i tea-bagged you when you were asleep? :cool:

Boombastic

davet82 wrote: »

what if i tea-bagged you when you were asleep? :cool:

Lyons or barrys?

CreepingDeath

According to the study, published online today in The Quarterly Review of Biology, sex-specific epi-marks, which normally do not pass between generations and are thus "erased," can lead to homosexuality when they escape erasure and are transmitted from father to daughter or mother to son.

I would've thought that listening to "Erasure" would increase the chances...

dan1895

I'll just leave this here

davet82

CreepingDeath wrote: »

I would've thought that listening to "Erasure" would increase the chances...

you obviously haven't listen to much Erasure lately

1ZRed

Tom_Cruise wrote: »

Its obviously to much female hormones inside the bodies of gays that make them gay.

Have you ever noticed how gay men talk like women? With a squeaky voice?

That the female hormones inside their bodies.

They are born with a hormone imbalance and cant do anything about it.

Well that's all just based on assumption. If that was all true then all gay men and gay some would all have very much the same degree of campness and butchness, respectfully. That wouldn't answer why some straight men can be camp either.

It's a very complex thing to understand and if it was so simplistic as that scientists would've understood it well by now.

I've had my bloods done and they've come back showing high levels of testosterone as well as quite abnormally high levels of DHT - a far more powerful and potent form of testosterone. Bare that in mind that usually I'm more masculine than many straight men I meet and it kind of lays to rest the idea of me having more female hormones in my body to an average male when clearly I've a higher amount.

It's all to do with the hormones that shaped my brain during gestation.

There are even some theories now that have three pillars of sexual expression. Appearance, mindset and partner preference. Just being gay doesn't mean you've a more feminine sway in all those three things.
Many gay men could only possess one, or have all three. I believe I only have the latter meaning my parter preference is for other males.

But all this goes to show that they're are many genetic factors going on to influence different expressions, yet give the homosexual result.
That's why just saying that we've more female hormones doesn't suffice because it's not that clear cut.

Nodin

Tom_Cruise wrote: »

Its obviously to much female hormones inside the bodies of gays that make them gay.

Have you ever noticed how gay men talk like women? With a squeaky voice?

That the female hormones inside their bodies.

They are born with a hormone imbalance and cant do anything about it.

This and similar bits of "informed opinion" always remind me of this....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V6Ebey458Q

ejmaztec

Why is this anything to do with the business of councils or corporations?

davet82

ejmaztec wrote: »

Why is this anything to do with the business of councils or corporations?

because they've filled in all the pot holes?