|
These are your children. Why Society Is Dumb. R.I.P. Duanna Johnson Why Gay Marriage Should Be Banned Do you want to laugh for at least 30 minutes? BAN DIVORCE! Ha Ha. HEHHH? Obama is NOT a Terrorist. Is This a McCain/Palin Rally Or A KKK Meeting? April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 November 08 December 08 
RSS 2.0    |
|
|
My Wrong Research. =P
Here, on Wikipedia I found this information while I was looking up some more biological factors in the cause or proper false cause of Sexual Orientation. The link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... This is the paragraph in question. There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation. A number of biological factors have been considered by scientists, such as genetics, prenatal hormones, chromosomes, polygenetic effects, and brain structure effects. No simple biological source of sexual orientation in humans has conclusively been found, however, the most recent studies do suggest that birth order and a mother's genetic makeup may play roles. Although much popular focus is on simplistic formulae like "the gay gene," no simple biological answer has conclusively emerged despite decades of research. Maternal linkage, birth order, and female fertility Blanchard and Klassen (1997) reported that each older brother increases the odds of being gay by 33%.[16][17] This is now "one of the most reliable epidemiological variables ever identified in the study of sexual orientation."[18] To explain this finding, it has been proposed that male fetuses provoke a maternal immune reaction that becomes stronger with each successive male fetus. Male fetuses produce HY antigens which are "almost certainly involved in the sexual differentiation of vertebrates." It is this antigen which maternal H-Y antibodies are proposed to both react to and 'remember'. Successive male fetuses are then attacked by H-Y antibodies which somehow decrease the ability of H-Y antigens to perform their usual function in brain masculinisation.[16] Bocklandt, Horvath, Vilain and Hamer (2006) reported that some mothers of gay babies have extreme skewing of X chromosome inactivation. Using a sample of 97 mothers of homosexual men and 103 mothers of heterosexual men, the pattern of X inactivation was ascertained from blood assays. 4% of the mothers of straight men showed extreme skewing compared to 13% of the mothers of gay men. Mothers of two or more gay babies had extreme skewing of X inactivation of 23%. This extreme skewing may influence male sexual orientation through the fraternal birth order effect.[8] An alternate theory was proposed by Italian researchers in 2004 supported by a study of about 4,600 people who were the relatives of 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men. Female relatives of the homosexual men tended to have more offspring than those of the heterosexual men. Female relatives of the homosexual men on their mother's side tended to have more offspring than those on the father's side. The researchers concluded that there was genetic material being passed down on the X chromosome which both promotes fertility in the mother and homosexuality in her male offspring. The connections discovered, however, would explain only 20% of the cases studied, indicating that this might not be the sole genetic factor determining sexual orientation.[19] Homosexuals of either sex are more likely than the general population to be non-right-handed.[20] (See also Handedness and sexual orientation.) [This is the opinion part, just so you know!] So, there is technically no "gay-gene" but, nobody can figure out why gay people are gay, it wasn't nurture for me, I was in fact born this way, but I have known of gay men who claim they were nurtured into the Gay orientation after most times being molested at a very young age by another male figure, like an Uncle for example. For women, they are saying it's more complex, as we have seen on T.V. many times women don't know that they are lesbian until their 30's in special cases. I myself have a rather minuscule opinion about this, I really can't say I know for sure it's true or it's not, what I can do is trust that they aren't lying because they wouldn't be compelled to say so on national television and lead lesbian lives unless it were in fact the truth. Also, I want to point out that Gay is in fact "trendy" but NOT in the way you may think, in high school, Do you know HOW MANY teenage girls said they were Bisexual? A LOT! This in my opinion has to stop unless they know for sure that they are. A lot of young girls (in hopes of reeling in that cute boy in 5th period) say they are bisexual just so the young men will seem more interested. I have been witness to this, as well as my younger sister (who is heterosexual and doesn't claim anything else). I can't believe it but I apparently HAVE TO SAY THIS; but This Message Isn't Directed Towards Anyone In Particular, It's purely education and a little bit of opinion and some personal experience for the new GLBT supporters in our area. 11 comments from 5 users
1
posted by
latindaddy07
on Jun 23, 2008 at 02:17 PM
I am truly sorry what you were put through with your father, I too have had many experiences with someone in the family with an addiction problem. You are right, it is our choice as to whether or not we become addicted to substances such as alcohol, marijuana or any other illegal drug. Hell, in some cases it's just plain FOOD that people are addicted to, utilizing these things to somehow fill the void in their lives. But addiction or alcoholism has nothing to do with Homosexuality. I know what you are trying to say, but these figures are not legitmate enough to prove that Homosexuality is a choice. As I have stated many times, and as my peers do well know that Sexual Preference is not chosen, it is merely something we cannot control. Can anyone sway you from loving a woman? Was it ever your choice to love a woman? Did you make the conscious decision as a growing teen going through puberty when all men begin to notice who they are attracted to that you wanted to like women? It's simply not a choice, just as I did not choose, YOU did not choose; Unless you did? Then that would mean you hold bisexual tendencies or have attraction to both male and female genders. This has to be the most debated issue involving sexuality and sexual preference, and I still don't see how you as well as other people like you cannot know that being gay or bisexual or straight is not a choice. Genetics are not only a suggestion, they are the ground work my friend. They are the foundation. The genetic make up of a person who lives with or around people who have been or are alcoholics are simply not the reason as to why they themselves are at higher risk for being alcoholic. When you are around alcohol, or drugs as a child that is simply influence and nuture, versus nature and genetics. I have brown eyes and black hair, according to my genetics; Things I cannot change Biologically. I am also Homosexual according to SOMETHING. I don't know exactly why I feel the way I do, I have stated my opinions on God, Genetics, as well as other denominators to all be legitimate examples of why people are born gay. It's up to you to decide for yourself whether or not you will vote for our equality as human beings. But as for your belief that it is a choice, go ahead. It's your right to believe that and I respect it. posted by
Crobar
on Jun 23, 2008 at 04:34 PM
I know some research has been done utilizing brain scans as well and might be helpful in your research. One study was done recently, however, I am not sure if the material has been published yet:http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/... Also, a pubmed search will bring up the latest published research on the subject as well: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... UPDATE: Found the article: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/con... posted by
SugarMagnolia
on Jun 23, 2008 at 08:03 PM
Latin Daddy - thanks for posting some of this research. In previous blogs, you have stated your interpretation of this information as right-handed males, in order of birth, being something like 1st - 2%, 2nd - 33%, 3rd - 66%, and 4th - 99%. Or around those figures, anyway. Now I see how your miscalculation occurred. The actual study states that, Blanchard and Klassen (1997) reported that each older brother increases the odds of being gay by 33%, so this means that you don't ADD 33 to each son born, but that the initial 2% chance of being born gay becomes 2% TIMES 33%, which amounts to 2.66% (approximately) for the second son, 3.54% for the third son, and 4.70% for the fourth son. Now do you understand? You have misinterpreted these statistics in a BIG way. I'm not picking on you, LatinDaddy, at all, nor am I taking sides in this debate. Just want to make sure that the statistics are understood in the way that they are presented. You have made quite a mathematical error. Unless a person understands statistics and the calculations presented therin, data can be greatly misconstrued and misrepresented, just as you have done. I think it would reflect well on you to present a correction, for some may have been mislead by your interpretation of these numbers. It would still serve to back up your point, which is that each successive generation of right-handed males have an increasing chance of being homosexual, according to this research. It is just the numbers that turn out being vastly different. Thank you for letting me help you understand this, LatinDaddy. posted by
bighorn
on Jun 23, 2008 at 08:20 PM
Thanks so much for being gay and feeling the need to proclaim your pride in being so. Your own need to explain/defend/not apoligize for your gayness over and over and over and over and over again speaks volume of your own personality. posted by
latindaddy07
on Jun 23, 2008 at 09:46 PM
Sugar Magnolia, I want to thank you for your input, and your correction, but unfortunately it was not I who made the mistake of miscalculating, if you had watched that youtube video link I posted, the lady on CBS news actually said the 33, 66, and 99 percentages. they later changed that as a miscalculation im hoping because you are right, and in fact the 4th boy has nearly a 6 percent chance of being gay, almost double the first son's chance.
and bighorn, I don't know what you were trying to say but I'll take it as a compliment, I love when straight people say why they are straight over and over and over again too! :) posted by
SugarMagnolia
on Jun 23, 2008 at 10:30 PM
LatinDaddy, I apologize that I thought you were the one making the miscalculation. I cannot get YouTube on this computer; once could but no longer. D'OH! So was unable to see that and any other videos referenced of late. Just shows the danger of taking things (and people) at face value, and that what is said is the truth. Always do your own research and calculations! As I said, the numbers differ but the thrust of the research is still the same. I hope that heartens you, and that others appreciate the heart of the study that you have been trying to get across. As I said, I won't take sides or judge here. Peace and be well, LatinDaddy. posted by
bighorn
on Jun 23, 2008 at 10:45 PM
For the record, such research is bogus pseudo science. If we are to believe your position that being GAY is natural and occurs naturally, your and your sources are practicing witchcraft to justify the outcome. In scientific terms, facts are only those things than be replicated under the exact same conditions, again, again, and again using the exact same conditions. Such is not the case with your behavior/life/beliefs. Given your cited references, each roll of a pair of dice is controled by the previous roll of those same dice. Such is not the case. Each individual roll has the same odds of producing the same results with EACH roll of those dice. To use birth order as you have, you are actually bring environment into play. And to call in a the GAY lifestyle as product of that environment. Or what some would call learned behavior, or perhaps "choice". No critcism of your life, but your need to seek out "junk" science answers on the net to justify some things is leading towards logic that works against your case. "Studies" do not prove how we got there, only where we are. Personally, I believe history tells us that about 10 percent of the population is gay, queer, ***, or whatever. I believe, but can not prove (and seek none) that this was true 2,000 years ago, 200 years ago, 60 years, and today. Since "homosexuals" don't reproduce, I am lead to believe 100 years from now about 10 percent of the humans will be gay. If I were "at peace with myself", I wouldn't find it necessary to defend who, what, or where I am. Constantly. Repeatly. Loudly. Explore the turmoil within yourself and may God grant you wisdom to bring that peace into your life.
posted by
latindaddy07
on Jun 24, 2008 at 12:20 AM
bighorn I thank you for your kind words of inspration, but I'll be D***** to let someone use the word F@G and get away with it. How dare you use slandering names to describe your fellow human beings. you aught to be ashamed for that kind of language. I don't quite get your logic, simply because it's based under too much religiousness. is that a word? anyway, I just don't feel like bringing up religion into this, we have all established that believing what you want is tolerable. I don't even care anymore that you don't approve, or don't agree with the LEGITIMATE scientific studies or just plain being gay. as long as you vote EQUALITY for all, I don't care. Simple as that. Peace be still. I'm happy! Goodness, why do so many people think that because you are gay it means you are incomplete? and when did a valid human sexuality have to be defined as a sexuality that procreates? It is natural because anything that is natural comes from nature, I don't want to say that we base our moral standards of sexuality on what animals do, but the last time I checked it was 10 percent of animals who are also gay. I respect your opinions, because truly, that is all that they are. I do hope you respect mine, and hey, why don't you pray for me too. that would be nice. blessed be.
posted by
bighorn
on Jun 24, 2008 at 09:25 AM
Didn't mean to offend, only used desciptive terms that the group uses on theirselves. Quite honestly, I could care less what term anyone uses on themselves in this society anymore. Obviously I did a poor job of explaining objectively the failed logic/arguments/defenses you have put up. Or I misjudged the education level of the audience. I really could care less who/whom/what you sleep/live/love as long as no inocent party is harmed. While you have the right to live as you chose, I also have the right to disaprove/criticize/laugh at the same behavior. Great country, isn't it! posted by
latindaddy07
on Jun 24, 2008 at 01:21 PM
yeah, you do have a point there. I laugh at things that aren't supposed to be funny too. :) I guess as time goes by we will see how much will have changed. until then, I don't see anything wrong with just being happy, and living life to the fullest.
posted by
BIGJ
on Jun 27, 2008 at 01:16 AM
Here is the question, Latin. What took you so long? I Have been telling you and telling for days that your research is bogus.
1
|