Is Gay For Pay Still Gay?

[you go boy]

reminds me of dustin from the real world

 

[DPancakes]

Please OP, do not have sex with men.

 

[emeyesix]

Again, those studies have been proven to be inconclusive, as they have not yet FOUND a gay gene. It's really that simple, as they have not found a STRAIGHT gene either.

Let me add this, this is not coming from a position of homophobia, nor one of a religious perspective. If they've actually found the gay gene, there'd be no NATURE versus NURTURE debate.

 

[jordanhead718212]

It's gay, end of

 

[futuremd]

Are prisoners gay?

There is such a thing as situational homosexuality: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situational_homosexuality

Interesting nuance to this argument.

Nah nah nah. I've discussed this thoroughly in sociology, psychology and criminology classes, them dudes gay, it just took a desperate situation to bring it out of them.

I'd sooner become a Muslim extremist, Buddhist monk, and Jewish priest after joining the Aryan nation before I commit a homosexual act in prison. I'll be in the solitary everyday if somebody tries me, just attack the guards and then go to my hole and be alone.

you also have to remember how they do in a lot of strict muslim country.

Homosexuality is RAMPANT there, even though its illegal.

They'd rather you have sex with another man on the d/l than to have sex with women. 

You'll note that in really stressful situations, people will do some really INTERESTING things to get their rocks off.

Yes, some homosexual activity is voluntary. No debate there. It doesn't take anything to do the physical act. It is what it is. 

HOWEVER, in stressful situations people start looking at each other differently and sexual desires are often powerful emotions.

You see a lot of this stuff in places where the average citizen is poor and doesn't have tons of access to a wide range of women as the resources are hoarded at the top. 

 

[futuremd]

Again, those studies have been proven to be inconclusive, as they have not yet FOUND a gay gene. It's really that simple, as they have not found a STRAIGHT gene either.

Let me add this, this is not coming from a position of homophobia, nor one of a religious perspective. If they've actually found the gay gene, there'd be no NATURE versus NURTURE debate.

GENES ARE NOT THE ONLY THING AT PLAY.

STOP BEING FOCUSED ON "GENES"

THEM FINDING A "GENE" ISN'T GOING TO SAVE YOUR ARGUMENT.

SEXUALITY IS A GRAY SCALE. ITS NOT ABSOLUTE. 

 

[emeyesix]

Oh...so you're pretty much not going to address any of my questions.

Your questions were answered in my retort.

 

[futuremd]

the fact that people who were sexually abused "choose" to pursue homosexuality doesn't change the fact that there are plenty of people that acknowledge that they've been attracted to the same sex ever since they can recall attraction to others.

As stated earlier, it is the nature versus nurture debate. However, all of the evidence that points to nature, has been proven to be inconclusive.

If you were born that way, genetically, there'd be something to prove it, pro or con.

THIS IS NOT TRUE.

Read this post before you say this crap again.

http://niketalk.com/t/508359/is-gay-for-pay-still-gay/60#post_16344539

 

[emeyesix]

GENES ARE NOT THE ONLY THING AT PLAY.

STOP BEING FOCUSED ON "GENES"

THEM FINDING A "GENE" ISN'T GOING TO SAVE YOUR ARGUMENT NOR WOULD IT SAVE YOU. 

SEXUALITY IS A GRAY SCALE. ITS NOT ABSOLUTE. 

They haven't found anything, nothing conclusive that shows why people are straight, or even gay.

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

the fact that people who were sexually abused "choose" to pursue homosexuality doesn't change the fact that there are plenty of people that acknowledge that they've been attracted to the same sex ever since they can recall attraction to others.

As stated earlier, it is the nature versus nurture debate. However, all of the evidence that points to nature, has been proven to be inconclusive.

If you were born that way, genetically, there'd be something to prove it, pro or con.

my point is that there's obviously something that drives our attraction for others and it's false to say that we choose what we're attracted to. no one states that another person is attractive because they consciously chose to be attracted to that person.

you said previously that there is also not a straight gene, so i'm confused why you're referring to attraction as a choice. perhaps i'm lost in what you're trying to say?

 

[Comparison Ford]

They haven't found anything, nothing conclusive that shows why people are straight, or even gay.

You realize your entire argument amounts to an argument from ignorance logical fallacy, right?

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

 

[Coupé It]

Went in the Netflix recommendations thread and OP was suggesting we watch "Niptuck" and "Vampire Diaries". Now this thread appears.

 

[futuremd]

GENES ARE NOT THE ONLY THING AT PLAY.

STOP BEING FOCUSED ON "GENES"

THEM FINDING A "GENE" ISN'T GOING TO SAVE YOUR ARGUMENT NOR WOULD IT SAVE YOU. 

SEXUALITY IS A GRAY SCALE. ITS NOT ABSOLUTE. 

They haven't found anything, nothing conclusive that shows why people are straight, or even gay.

Yo.

Now you're just being dense. 

Hormones ALONE in the womb of the mother explains a great deal of homosexuality in males at least and partially in females as much as we know.

I don't know what your credentials are, but as someone with a degree in neuro you're not going to sit here and just sprout off what you want to be true. 

I've posted countless articles, videos, and comments for your to pour over.

You are wrong. 

They HAVE found conclusive evidence that shows how homosexuality can occur. 

 

[futuremd]

emeyesix, there is NOTHING more I can't stand than someone who refuses to at least pay attention to evidence when presented to them...especially on an objective claim. I'm trying to put forth well reasoned and well researched points here for you to look over and all you can reply is that "well the studies aren't true"

Do you even know what the current studies are? If you did, you wouldn't say that foolishness.

This isn't a matter of opinion. Its fact. We've got tons of data points backing up the notion that you can in fact be born gay. Sexuality is a very complex thing and you don't get to just sweep your ignorance under the rug by saying "well its not true."

Sorry. We're all wrong about something in our lives.

You're wrong about homosexuality.

This is how we learn. I don't know whats so hard for you to understand. 

Stop looking to confirm what you want to be true and understand that your opinion carries no weight on a matter of evidence and objective study. 

 

[smangalang]

you "science" guys sound an awful lot like those Christian zealots you despise. You don't have "solid" proof and yet you spout of your "beliefs" in the name of ALMIGHTY SCIENCE!

 

[futuremd]

you "science" guys sound an awful lot like those Christian zealots you despise. You don't have "solid" proof and yet you spout of your "beliefs" in the name of ALMIGHTY SCIENCE!

Are you frigging kidding me?

So now we're ridiculing hard data points and groundbreaking studies as just opinions?

Get ALL the way out of here with that crap. 

We have TONS of solid proof, in fact I listed most of the modern understanding of homosexuality in this post: http://niketalk.com/t/508359/is-gay-for-pay-still-gay/60#post_16344539

Now you can talk about where the research should start heading but you don't get to just ignore **** because it conveniently supports your own bias.

The evidence isn't on your side. If you'd like to make an argument to the contrary PLEASE show us your data. 

You all know literally NOTHING about what sexuality or orientation actually means nor many of you aware of the modern understanding of these concepts.

I blame the people around you for constantly reinforcing this cult of superstition and hardline thinking that sexuality is just a black and white concept. 

Sexuality is a very complex thing. Sexual orientation, even more so.

We are learning even more about these things as it becomes less taboo.

Now we can talk about facts, or we can just talk about speculation because if its going to be the latter then i'm refusing to participate.

Unless anyone wants to start showing some data or some studies in here, lets do each other a favor and learn to respect the validity of evidence over the cult of wild assertions and rampant miscalculations. 

Do better. 

 

[ohmygosher]

Went in the Netflix recommendations thread and OP was suggesting we watch "Niptuck" and "Vampire Diaries". Now this thread appears.

Both are good shows.

Many posters (including myself) have put Nip/Tuck in their top shows of all time list.

Not really sure what you're trying to get at.

 

[Comparison Ford]

you "science" guys sound an awful lot like those Christian zealots you despise. You don't have "solid" proof and yet you spout of your "beliefs" in the name of ALMIGHTY SCIENCE!

Considering that FutureMD is backing up all of the points he's making with evidence, your argument is not valid. Critique his tactfulness all you want, but he actually addresses each statement someone writes point-by-point and provides supplemental evidence. The same can't be said for emeyesix.

 

[emeyesix]

my point is that there's obviously something that drives our attraction for others and it's false to say that we choose what we're attracted to. no one states that another person is attractive because they consciously chose to be attracted to that person.
you said previously that there is also not a straight gene, so i'm confused why you're referring to attraction as a choice. perhaps i'm lost in what you're trying to say?

It's not false, because you are not thinking about societal pressures being the determining factor of what you may choose as a lifestyle, gay or straight.

You realize your entire argument amounts to an argument from ignorance logical fallacy, right?

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

I actually realize that you are making an attempt to sound smart, when this debate is still being had all throughout the halls of science.

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

 

[futuremd]

my point is that there's obviously something that drives our attraction for others and it's false to say that we choose what we're attracted to. no one states that another person is attractive because they consciously chose to be attracted to that person.
you said previously that there is also not a straight gene, so i'm confused why you're referring to attraction as a choice. perhaps i'm lost in what you're trying to say?

It's not false, because you are not thinking about societal pressures being the determining factor of what you may choose as a lifestyle, gay or straight.

You realize your entire argument amounts to an argument from ignorance logical fallacy, right?

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

I actually realize that you are making an attempt to sound smart, when this debate is still being had all throughout the halls of science.

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

"Halls of science?" Yeah, who is reaching for credibility now? 

I've presented to you both biological differences in gay individuals including by changes in brain organization, hormonal exposure in the womb, studies showing that gay people respond differently to sex pheromones, AND that there is sexual dimorphism between gay individuals.

Additionally I have presented to you an argument that does not only rely on the impact of the socialization of individuals and their adherence to dominant gender identities.

Homosexuality is prevalent in all societies so nuture can not be the only cause of this behavior. 

Stop making this seem like its merely just some kids who got molested or who gave into peer pressure. You can be born gay.

 

[Comparison Ford]

Science is a building?

 

[emeyesix]

emeyesix, there is NOTHING more I can't stand than someone who refuses to at least pay attention to evidence when presented to them...especially on an objective claim. I'm trying to put forth well reasoned and well researched points here for you to look over and all you can reply is that "well the studies aren't true"

Do you even know what the current studies are? If you did, you wouldn't say that foolishness.

This isn't a matter of opinion. Its fact. We've got tons of data points backing up the notion that you can in fact be born gay. Sexuality is a very complex thing and you don't get to just sweep your ignorance under the rug by saying "well its not true."

Sorry. We're all wrong about something in our lives.

You're wrong about homosexuality.

This is how we learn. I don't know whats so hard for you to understand. 

Stop looking to confirm what you want to be true and understand that your opinion carries no weight on a matter of evidence and objective study. 

You do realize that not all of science agrees with what you've posted, correct?

I didn't ignore it, I've seen it all already. I've seen the flip side of the argument as well, and I don't have a definitive opinion that YOU ARE BORN GAY, just like I don't have an opinion that there really IS A GOD.

I do not believe that you are born GAY, and I do not believe that you are born STRAIGHT either. Neither has been completely proven through science.

 

[Master Zik]

Oh wait now we're gonna bring in the science ppl are like religious ppl again? You troll about to get reported, purposely derailing the thread.

As far as how far ppl will go to get their rocks off, yes there is that breaking point. That's how we have acts of bestiality, necrophiliacs and all other deviant sexual behavior but the prison situation isn't that dire. Whether it's a choice or they're born that way them dudes in prison aint just looking for a warm hole. They know what they doing.

 

[emeyesix]

"Halls of science?" Yeah, who is reaching for credibility now? 

I've presented to you both biological differences in gay individuals including by changes in brain organization, hormonal exposure in the womb, studies showing that gay people respond differently to sex pheromones, AND that there is sexual dimorphism between gay individuals.

Additionally I have presented to you an argument that does not only rely on the impact of the socialization of individuals and their adherence to dominant gender identities.

Homosexuality is prevalent in all societies so nuture can not be the only cause of this behavior. 

Stop making this seem like its merely just some kids who got molested or who gave into peer pressure. You can be born gay.

I didn't do that at all. Didn't come close to suggesting it either.

I simply stated that it has not been proven that you are born gay, and it hasn't. There is science that suggests that IT MIGHT BE TRUE, but nothing definitive. So again, you do realize that all of science does not agree with what you've posted, right?

 

[futuremd]

emeyesix, there is NOTHING more I can't stand than someone who refuses to at least pay attention to evidence when presented to them...especially on an objective claim. I'm trying to put forth well reasoned and well researched points here for you to look over and all you can reply is that "well the studies aren't true"

Do you even know what the current studies are? If you did, you wouldn't say that foolishness.

This isn't a matter of opinion. Its fact. We've got tons of data points backing up the notion that you can in fact be born gay. Sexuality is a very complex thing and you don't get to just sweep your ignorance under the rug by saying "well its not true."

Sorry. We're all wrong about something in our lives.

You're wrong about homosexuality.

This is how we learn. I don't know whats so hard for you to understand. 

Stop looking to confirm what you want to be true and understand that your opinion carries no weight on a matter of evidence and objective study. 

You do realize that not all of science agrees with what you've posted, correct?

I didn't ignore it, I've seen it all already. I've seen the flip side of the argument as well, and I don't have a definitive opinion that YOU ARE BORN GAY, just like I don't have an opinion that there really IS A GOD.

I do not believe that you are born GAY, and I do not believe that you are born STRAIGHT either. Neither has been completely proven through science.

NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU "THINK" OR "BELIEVE"

FACTS DO NOT CONSIDER YOUR EMOTIONS OR YOUR OPINIONS. GET OVER YOURSELF AND YOUR SOLIPSISM. 

I DON'T CARE IF YOU WANT TO HEAR IT OR NOT, BUT THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT YOU CAN BE BORN GAY. 

This is what you're not getting.

The EVIDENCE shows that THERE ARE PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND EMOTIONAL DIFFERENCES IN GAY INDIVIDUALS.

Are you even familiar with other genetic factors that come into play when deciding the sex of the fetus? Like chromosome inactivation? Looking one gender but genetically being the opposite? 

I don't believe you have the AUDACITY to them come at me with this ridiculous argument: "Not all of science agrees with you"...are you that desperate? The LEAST you could do is post some sources....something that has evaded you this entire thread.

First of all "science" isn't a thing. 

Second of all, all of "science" will never completely agree on everything. Evidence is what builds claims. Not speculation and wild guesses.

There are still physicists who think Einstein is wrong and keep trying to find holes in his theories.

But you know what? Until you find evidence or facts then NO ONE CARES. "Science," as you call it, is a meritocracy. If you have something to say, back it up. Otherwise, keep your baseless and elementary speculation to yourself. No one benefits from your inability to process data as presented to you...even if you choose not to agree (rather unlikely that you could manage to do that), that doesn't excuse you from being versed in the modern understanding of the very arguments you're trying to debate. 

I've been very forthright with you in providing detailed information and stuff for you to read up on. Are you aware that just about every neurobiology student gets exposed to that stuff as just the basics? 

You're behind and you deserve to know it. I don't care how you take it at this point. Stop thinking that your opinion means more than it really does.

If you would like to show some evidence to the contrary, PLEASE do so. I'm waiting.