Human Anatomy, Physiology, and Medicine. Anything human!
Absolutely agree! More over i would say any human behaviour that doesn't start with the intention of producing offspring is derived psychologically. For example, playing chess or painting or creating music.
And I am absolutely not against homosexuals. Nevertheless I think there's some difference between desire to create chess combination and enjoy its beauty and desire to put one's dick into other man's rectum. The same would be about heterosexual behavior if it didn't have reproductive function.
Of course, what I think is fully subjective.
It does It demonstrates that human has free will ( well, not all humans do).
Btw, what do you mean by understanding our world?
That's right. But Down syndrome child cannot escape his fate ( by his own means, at least; hopefully sometime gene therapy will solve the problem)
F*cking man's ass desire can be easily subdued:
"When asked how to avoid the temptation to lust of the flesh, Diogenes began masturbating. When rebuked for doing so, he replied, `If only I could soothe my hunger by rubbing my belly.`"
i think you are blurring the line between reproductive functionality and reproductive intention. just because a man and a woman can have a child by having sex doesn't mean its normal behaviour to be having sexual encounters when ever they please. hetero-sex without reproducing serves to appease the desires, it serves no biological function. of course we can say if sex helps people cope psychologically then it does serve a biological function, since less stressed individuals are more likely to live better lives. but then this would apply to all forms of sexual relief of stress. but as a species we have tried to control our sexual desires because we collectively know that relinquishing ourselves to them is bad and destructive to our innocence and innocence around us.
humans are a product of Earth. everything about us must have some perfectly understandable biological process that occurred which resulted in us. including our psychological state. its our capacity to reflect these processes in our mind, understand cause and effect that sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom. imo. 'free will' is a term thrown around but isn't really made understandable. does it mean we can do whatever we please? i dont think we can. behaviour is something shaped and moulded from the instant our mothers hold us after being born. concious awareness of self occurs at around the age of 8/9. by then your behaviour has been determined. sure we have the capacity to change our behaviour. but this is not a concious factor in our development. only when we start understanding the reasons for our behaviour can we start to conciously change it.
its not so easy escaping a psychological state. first theres denial that you actually have a problem. then theres the problem of actually finding the process that led to our human condition, how it occured. how to implement changes in your own life to change and so on.
at this point in time alot of people are just denying there is a problem to begin with. homosexuals are firm in the belief that they are 'normal'. because what they measure themselves against is heterosexual behaviour. so when its seen from that perspective, where any heterosexual behaviour (short of rape and child molestation) is percieved as 'normal', homosexual behaviour where two people of concenting age condone the behaviour can also be percieved as normal. promiscuity by heterosexuals is concidered normal but it could be that this behaviour infact leads to more abstract sexual behaviours like homosexuality. there are a lot of factors that contribute to a person becoming sexually promiscuous.
It's biological to a point.
People simply ignore social norms. If they choose to ignore social norms, be controlled by their biological aspects, then they will choose to be homosexual.
It's biological. However, it's primitive in my opinion. My belief is that human beings are suppose to evolve beyond biological cravings, drives, and passions; and they are suppose to use logic, rationality, and intellect to choose how they go about life.
However, I do not believe that is the case in homosexuals. I have spoken to many, and they simply said biological drives made them homosexual. Biological drives make people want to kill retards, the disabled, etc. in a darwinistic effort; but most don't kill people.
Apparently this is a choice. It's a choice driven by biology. And homosexual, in my opinion, are weak minded. They are weak minded because they are driven by biology.
And, funny enough, they'll probably die out. Sadly, however, bisexuals are the problem. They are bisexual, typically conform to a heterosexual norm, and give birth to children who may become homosexual or bisexual, thus perpetuating the problem of individuals basing choices on biological drive, rather than logic or rationality.
Do not care about homosexuals. They are not your problem. The bisexuals are the problem.
yes i agree. i think that everything is biological to some degree.
how do we define social norms? what are the bounderies? are they the same for you and a seventy year old lady? from a biological perspective i think that if we are to understand these behaviours we shouldn't be making facts out of cookie-cutter perspectives that place 'this' behaviour within the circle of acceptance actually denying it real scientific focus and scrutiny. we only find this happening to behaviour outside the circle, perceived as unacceptable. i think the perspective has to be widened. the question is, why do we even practice sex if not to procreate? that is the key question in regards to sexual behaviour, whether perceived as 'normal' or 'immoral'. to "keep the spices going", as someone has already said, is unintelligible.
by choose you mean suppress (in the process becoming superficial, fake and delusional). and by supress you mean the total opposite of understand. and by choosing to not understand ultimately forgo logic, rationality, and intellect. this is the road we are headed down because people absolutely refuse to widen their perspective.
it sounds like you are proposing that we all want to kill mentally/physically handicapped people due to a primitive biological drive to do so, yet we sustain from that action because we suppress it...? because we choose not to, over and above the fact of actually wanting to ..?? social darwinism is outdated and irrelevent for the moral and altruistic beings we are. yes im optimistic.
it doesn't make sense to base your opinion on that summation in the first sentence (that i highlighted and underlined^). does the "weak minded" opinion apply to heterosexuals that practice sex due to their biological drive? if not, my question is why?
so heterosexuals base their choices on logic and rationality yet all the other sexual behaviours are based on biological drives? also the fact that you previously state that rationality should be used by homo/bi-sexuals thus becoming straight and conforming to the 'norm'. yet when they do that they are still a problem. your biological-drive/choice opinion is antagonistic. it doesn't make sense.
i am infinately sadened to hear you say that. no im not gay/bi. it does sound like you have chosen to forgo your own logic/rationality/compassion.
maybe this topic has got a little off course. to reiterate. i dont think homosexuality is a genetic trait. my other posts explain why i think this. and i propose the real question that lurks behind this one, why do we even practice sex if not to procreate? whether it be hetero-sex or homo-sex.
I am interested in the psychology of homosexuality.
Again in my observations I noted that three males who were femine since early childhood, were sexualy molested when children by a man and later became gay.
Were they targets of the pervert because they were femine? and having been introduced to homosexuality it is what they became accustomed to?
This perv who molested them left other more macho kids alone.
Many cases involve molestation.
The same thing happens with some woman who are molested as children, why do they become promiscuous? Even become strippers or hookers?
now I cant figure out why these same three men have relatives who are also gay, almost like its genetic?
~ George washington Carver
one huge point of interest in all child psycholigical development investigations is the amount of good nurturing mothers are giving their children. alot of the abstract behaviours we are witnessing nowadays (and in sheer volume) is being blamed on the mother child bond, or lack there of (Read the article, The Social Necessity of Nurturance, by Betty McCollister, in the Humanist journal, if you cant find it ill save a copy from uni). Of course its unintelligible to simply blame parents who are wholey unconcious of what they are doing wrong. This begs the question how parents lost their ability to provide exceptional nurturing in the first place. so that is the point that has to be investigated so that we can rectify the situation. McCollister's article is very informative on child nurturing and the effects this has on the development of the child although a bit right wing.
Behaviours are also handed down to the next generation and are shared by family members especially when it comes to social/interactive/nurturing behaviours. So in the case of the boys you knew, the reason there are quite a few homosexuals in the family may come down to the type of nurturance that has developed through the history of that family (in generations). The reason they were targeted may be for many reasons. their family life might have made them submissive which can be picked up by a very aware peadophile. their feminine/innocent looks are also a targetting point. the word 'fukc' quite simply implies to destroy. and what is being destroyed is their innocence, and that is what excites peadophiles. of course to have a proper understanding of the situation we have to ask ourselves how a human being could have become like this. its strange to think that a peadophile was once an innocent child too... its a very sad situation humanity is in.
Oh, really? So you're saying that you choose to be straight? It's not like anyone woke up one morning and said "You know, I think I'll be gay today."
Why would anyone choose to have such rude and rather ignorant remarks directed at them? Why would anyone choose to put up with people like you if they didn't have to?
And quite frankly, on what evidence can you say that homosexuality is a choise? Are you gay? No? I didn't think so.
No one can choose who they're attracted to, everyone has a 'type.'
So let's be a little less ignorant to things like this, thank you.
In this sense, bigots like you probably aren't any help to our gene pool anyway.
On the other hand, if you have erection and can have sex with a guy, why not have sex with a woman instead? It is so simple, and having sex with a woman is so much more hygienic than with a man!
I just don't understand why how can guys **** guys.
Well, it is what YOU think, because you are staight (heterosexual). Those gays don't interested on women, which means they cannot errect and enjoy their time while with women. They will get aroused when they are with guys. Definetely, there is something inside their mind, to lead into this gayness, as I said, it could be physiological thing (hormone) or could be psychological things (environment, experience in the past).
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests