Is Gay For Pay Still Gay?

[cashbanks]

Why is this even a question you have sex with a guy you're gay the end

 

[shoeking2101]

As a sociology major studying the sociology of Women, Men, and Society, over the last few weeks we have went in depth and thorough into this discussion.

And we have come to the conclusion that there is no CONCRETE evidence suggesting that one is "born" gay.

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

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.

societal pressures can have an influence, but it's not the determining factor as there are plenty of people that pursue their attraction to what society may shun or condemn. in any case, not everyone consciously chooses to follow societal pressures.

 

[emeyesix]

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"

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

Second of all, all of "science" will never completely agree on everything.

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. 

You've been providing some incredible information, even while typing in caps

. However, much of what you've shown, suggests that it MIGHT be possible that someone can be born gay. It's not definitive, if it were, it would be quite newsworthy, wouldn't it?

Don't you think that it would extend itself toward Gay rights, especially something like Gay marriage, then being recognized by something like the church, as being indisputable even in the eyes of some god?

Hmmm?

 

[futuremd]

"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?

Out of the data I have painstakingly presented for your benefit, what of that does not corroborate with your subjective bias?

Mind you, "science," as you so affably refer to it, doesn't tell you whats "true" or "false." It backs up claims with evidence.

There is an OVERWHELMING amount of evidence that you can be born gay.

Just like there is an OVERWHELMING amount of evidence for the theory of gravity or relativity. 

The theory, as stated, is supported by all of the data i've presented to you.

All you an ever judge is the data...and for you to take some route of just "well can't happen" is incredibly irresponsible on your behalf. 

 

[emeyesix]

As a sociology major studying the sociology of Women, Men, and Society, over the last few weeks we have went in depth and thorough into this discussion.
And we have come to the conclusion that there is no CONCRETE evidence suggesting that one is "born" gay.

Say it again so they can read it thoroughly.

societal pressures can have an influence, but it's not the determining factor as there are plenty of people that pursue their attraction to what society may shun or condemn. in any case, not everyone consciously chooses to follow societal pressures.

Oh yes many do. Try talking to some Black Gay Christians, and closeted gay republicans, then get back to me.

 

[futuremd]

As a sociology major studying the sociology of Women, Men, and Society, over the last few weeks we have went in depth and thorough into this discussion.

And we have come to the conclusion that there is no CONCRETE evidence suggesting that one is "born" gay.

No offense, but sociology doesn't incorporate the arguments that neurology and biochemistry have presented to the contrary. 

Read the data in this post: http://niketalk.com/t/508359/is-gay-for-pay-still-gay/60#post_16344539

---

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"

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

Second of all, all of "science" will never completely agree on everything.

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. 

You've been providing some incredible information, even while typing in caps

. However, much of what you've shown, suggests that it MIGHT be possible that someone can be born gay. It's not definitive, if it were, it would be quite newsworthy, wouldn't it?

Don't you think that it would extend itself toward Gay rights, especially something like Gay marriage, then being recognized by something like the church, as being indisputable even in the eyes of some god?

Hmmm?

I love the backtracking you've done in this thread.

I hope i'm not the only one that has noticed it.

First you said there was no evidence.

Then you said you just reject the evidence.

Now you're saying it MIGHT be possible. 

So which is it? 

Plus, they've ALREADY been trying to push this. There have been thousands of studies on the matter. Now we're just fleshing out details.

Kids can be born gay.

 

[Coupé It]

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.

I'm pointing out that you may have some conflicting questions about your sexuality.

As science has shown, Gay men can be more feminin and those shows you've mentioned have a more abundant female viewership. You also made this thread which from my perspective is very odd, the fact you're so skeptical about dudes banging guys for money could be a sign. Of course it's gay, at the very least bi-sexual.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong...

Ps - Niptuck is a joke of a show, go watch Mad Men or the Sopranos ASAP.

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

Oh yes many do. Try talking to some Black Gay Christians, and closeted gay republicans, then get back to me.

i didn't dispute that. i said that not everyone consciously chooses to conform to societal pressures.

 

[emeyesix]

Out of the data I have painstakingly presented for your benefit, what of that does not corroborate with your subjective bias?

Mind you, "science," as you so affably refer to it, doesn't tell you whats "true" or "false." It backs up claims with evidence.

There is an OVERWHELMING amount of evidence that you can be born gay.

Just like there is an OVERWHELMING amount of evidence for the theory of gravity or relativity. 

The theory, as stated, is supported by all of the data i've presented to you.

All you an ever judge is the data...and for you to take some route of just "well can't happen" is incredibly irresponsible on your behalf. 

I disagree, and I do not mind looking irresponsible by requiring concrete proof on the matter of homosexuality, and then being born gay.

On this issue in particular, I'll be waiting for the on going party that will most definitely happen, when the announcement is made.

So far, there is only Gay Pride day. 

 

[futuremd]

Out of the data I have painstakingly presented for your benefit, what of that does not corroborate with your subjective bias?

Mind you, "science," as you so affably refer to it, doesn't tell you whats "true" or "false." It backs up claims with evidence.

There is an OVERWHELMING amount of evidence that you can be born gay.

Just like there is an OVERWHELMING amount of evidence for the theory of gravity or relativity. 

The theory, as stated, is supported by all of the data i've presented to you.

All you an ever judge is the data...and for you to take some route of just "well can't happen" is incredibly irresponsible on your behalf. 

I disagree, and I do not mind looking irresponsible by requiring concrete proof on the matter of homosexuality, and then being born gay.

On this issue in particular, I'll be waiting for the on going party that will most definitely happen, when the announcement is made.

So far, there is only Gay Pride day. 

Now you're just being a damn lair. The data says YOU CAN BE BORN GAY. 

Now you're just ignoring it just so you can keep perpetuating this meme of ignorance.

I've provided concrete evidence on the matter.

What else do you need? I've shown you the biology, chemistry, neurology, psychology, and behavioral studies. Hell, even a few anthropological ones.

Homosexuality can happen naturally. 

Sexual orientation is subject to SEVERAL factors working off of each other. 

 

[emeyesix]

No offense, but sociology doesn't incorporate the arguments that neurology and biochemistry have presented to the contrary. 

Read the data in this post: http://niketalk.com/t/508359/is-gay-for-pay-still-gay/60#post_16344539

---

I love the backtracking you've done in this thread.

I hope i'm not the only one that has noticed it.

First you said there was no evidence.

Then you said you just reject the evidence.

Now you're saying it MIGHT be possible. 

So which is it? 

Plus, they've ALREADY been trying to push this. There have been thousands of studies on the matter. Now we're just fleshing out details.

Kids can be born gay.

No, no, no, no.

Don't play that game.

I've said that what you've presented suggests that there MIGHT be evidence, but there isn't anything concrete as of yet.

I am not backing off of this one, as I've done plenty research as well, and I don't have to post anything but the fact that there hasn't been anything proven as of yet.

We all know this.

If it is, I'm cool with it. In fact, I'm cool with people doing their thing right now.

Who knows what anyone will be attracted to as they continue to get older and evolve, hmmm?

 

[futuremd]

Why is this even a question you have sex with a guy you're gay the end

Whats the difference between having sex with a man OR being attracted to a man? 

 

[emeyesix]

Now you're just being a damn lair. The data says YOU CAN BE BORN GAY. 

Now you're just ignoring it just so you can keep perpetuating this meme of ignorance.

I've provided concrete evidence on the matter.

What else do you need? I've shown you the biology, chemistry, neurology, psychology, and behavioral studies. Hell, even a few anthropological ones.

Homosexuality can happen naturally. 

Sexual orientation is subject to SEVERAL factors working off of each other. 

Like I said, I am waiting for the party. If it's proven, that party will happen. 

The party hasn't happened.

 

[Coupé It]

I disagree, and I do not mind looking irresponsible by requiring concrete proof on the matter of homosexuality, and then being born gay.

On this issue in particular, I'll be waiting for the on going party that will most definitely happen, when the announcement is made.

So far, there is only Gay Pride day. 

Why are you being purposely ignorant?

Lame

 

[futuremd]

No offense, but sociology doesn't incorporate the arguments that neurology and biochemistry have presented to the contrary. 

Read the data in this post: http://niketalk.com/t/508359/is-gay-for-pay-still-gay/60#post_16344539

---

I love the backtracking you've done in this thread.

I hope i'm not the only one that has noticed it.

First you said there was no evidence.

Then you said you just reject the evidence.

Now you're saying it MIGHT be possible. 

So which is it? 

Plus, they've ALREADY been trying to push this. There have been thousands of studies on the matter. Now we're just fleshing out details.

Kids can be born gay.

No, no, no, no.

Don't play that game.

I've said that what you've presented suggests that there MIGHT be evidence, but there isn't anything concrete as of yet.

I am not backing off of this one, as I've done plenty research as well, and I don't have to post anything but the fact that there hasn't been anything proven as of yet.

We all know this.

If it is, I'm cool with it. In fact, I'm cool with people doing their thing right now.

Who knows what anyone will be attracted to as they continue to get older and evolve, hmmm?

Prove it.

I've dropped tons of data, studies, and videos for you to catch up on.

You don't get to skirt off with the "I do research too" line. You're too old for that.You haven't shown a SINGLE source challenging anything i've said from someone in the field.

Back it up. Show me where the data supports your assertions are.

Furthermore...i'm convinced you don't know how these studies work or what their results mean. When you say "its not proven" what the hell are you waiting for? All the evidence backs up the claim that you can be born gay.

All of it.

Now, you just keep saying "well I don't believe it, i need more evidence..." Why? So you can reject that too? 

Frankly, I'm convinced you haven't really done much research at all. If you look at your first posts in this thread, you were making some of the most ignorant comments out of the bunch, basically equating all homosexuals to people who engage in the "gay lifestyle" or making it sound like a goddamn hobby.

I'm onto you so don't think you can just skirt responsibility for your claims...AND I've already peeped you making the backtrack over how much evidence it was going to require for you to start changing your tune. You went from "theres no evidence" to "theres little evidence" to "I need more evidence" 

 

[emeyesix]

i didn't dispute that. i said that not everyone consciously chooses to conform to societal pressures.

[h3]Have you been to the Middle East lately? How do you feel about what Ahmadinejad recently[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]  said about the region and homosexuality?[/font][/h3]

 

[sn00pee]

By definition, yes.
As a heterosexual man, partaking in sex with another man is... Gay. Whatever rationale the person uses to dignify their acts is, for the most part, irrelevant because the act itself is what constitutes the homosexuality. I mean, a person can harbor thoughts of another member of the same sex, but if they never act out on it, their claim at being heterosexual is more substantial than that of a person who partakes in homosexual acts.
I remember that episode of true life and thought the guy was gay, regardless of what he claimed.

Does that mean an actor and actress who kiss on screen are in love with each other? They are doing what essentially lovers do....
Yes, They are doing homosexual acts, but that doesn't mean they're gay. Doesn't mean they have any feelings for their on-screen partners, etc.

 

[emeyesix]

Prove it.

I've dropped tons of data, studies, and videos for you to catch up on.

You don't get to skirt off with the "I do research too" line. You're too old for that.You haven't shown a SINGLE source challenging anything i've said from someone in the field.

Back it up. Show me where the data supports your assertions are.

Furthermore...i'm convinced you don't know how these studies work or what their results mean. When you say "its not proven" what the hell are you waiting for? All the evidence backs up the claim that you can be born gay.

All of it.

Now, you just keep saying "well I don't believe it, i need more evidence..." Why? So you can reject that too? 

Frankly, I'm convinced you haven't really done much research at all. If you look at your first posts in this thread, you were making some of the most ignorant comments out of the bunch, basically equating all homosexuals to people who engage in the "gay lifestyle" or making it sound like a goddamn hobby.

I'm onto you so don't think you can just skirt responsibility for your claims...AND I've already peeped you making the backtrack over how much evidence it was going to require for you to start changing your tune. You went from "theres no evidence" to "theres little evidence" to "I need more evidence" 

I'll respond to your questions with an even larger question.

If science has indeed proven that you can be born gay, and there is concrete evidence that supports this claim, then why wasn't it front page news?

 

[ohmygosher]

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.

I'm pointing out that you may have some conflicting questions about your sexuality.

As science has shown, Gay men can be more feminin and those shows you've mentioned have a more abundant female viewership. You also made this thread which from my perspective is very odd, the fact you're so skeptical about dudes banging guys for money could be a sign. Of course it's gay, at the very least bi-sexual.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong...

Ps - Niptuck is a joke of a show, go watch Mad Men or the Sopranos ASAP.

Oh.

 

[futuremd]

Prove it.

I've dropped tons of data, studies, and videos for you to catch up on.

You don't get to skirt off with the "I do research too" line. You're too old for that.You haven't shown a SINGLE source challenging anything i've said from someone in the field.

Back it up. Show me where the data supports your assertions are.

Furthermore...i'm convinced you don't know how these studies work or what their results mean. When you say "its not proven" what the hell are you waiting for? All the evidence backs up the claim that you can be born gay.

All of it.

Now, you just keep saying "well I don't believe it, i need more evidence..." Why? So you can reject that too? 

Frankly, I'm convinced you haven't really done much research at all. If you look at your first posts in this thread, you were making some of the most ignorant comments out of the bunch, basically equating all homosexuals to people who engage in the "gay lifestyle" or making it sound like a goddamn hobby.

I'm onto you so don't think you can just skirt responsibility for your claims...AND I've already peeped you making the backtrack over how much evidence it was going to require for you to start changing your tune. You went from "theres no evidence" to "theres little evidence" to "I need more evidence" 

I'll respond to your questions with an even larger question.

If science has indeed proven that you can be born gay, and there is concrete evidence that supports this claim, then why wasn't it front page news?

Are you serious? Thats a "larger question?"  

I don't know. I'm not a damn newspaper editor.

Why isn't there frontpage news over the new AIDS drugs? 

You don't get to trivialize data because it wasn't beat into your head.

Are you LOOKING for this data? 

The stuff I'm referring to has been known in the realm of neuroscience for many years...so why haven't you learned it? All neuroscience students get exposed to it.

Are you saying that they need to pull you aside too? 

So because the data wasn't given to you then it doesn't exist...right? 

Give me a goddamn break. 

Is THIS really what your argument boils down to? The fact you hadn't heard about it? 

Its no surprise you were unaware of this stuff. You're too busy making fun of gay parades and suggesting all homosexuals were molested or something. 

 

[so nyuh shi dae]

i didn't dispute that. i said that not everyone consciously chooses to conform to societal pressures.

[h3]Have you been to the Middle East lately? How do you feel about what Ahmadinejad recently said about the region and homosexuality?
[/h3]

this doesn't change the fact that my statement is true.

 

[emeyesix]

Are you serious? Thats a "larger question?"  

I don't know. I'm not a damn newspaper editor.

Why isn't there frontpage news over the new AIDS drugs? 

You don't get to trivialize data because it wasn't beat into your head.

Are you LOOKING for this data? 

The stuff I'm referring to has been known in the realm of neuroscience for many years...so why haven't you learned it? All neuroscience students get exposed to it.

Are you saying that they need to pull you aside too? 

So because the data wasn't given to you then it doesn't exist...right? 

Give me a goddamn break. 

Is THIS really what your argument boils down to? The fact you hadn't heard about it? 

Its no surprise you were unaware of this stuff. You're too busy making fun of gay parades and suggesting all homosexuals were molested or something. 

Wait, with the issue of Gay rights and Gay marriage being front page news, are you telling me that this so called concrete evidence that you've presented while here in Nike Talk, hasn't been shown to the general public in order support gay rights?

You don't think that this information would be advantageous to the gay community?

Imagine if all of those kids who are still in the closet, had this sort of info to show to their parents? Imagine if all of the adults who have been in denial all these years, actually had a reason to breathe a sigh of relief?

Come on man...concrete proof would be HUGE! 

 

[emeyesix]

this doesn't change the fact that my statement is true.

Only in america, perhaps.

 

[emeyesix]

Why are you being purposely ignorant?
Lame

Because I am siding with what science hasn't proven, I am being purposely ignorant?

I wonder how you feel about atheists.