Homosexuality

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by Joro, Mar 29, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    If an individual is homosexual, have they necessarily committed aggression against your person or property? [The answer is obviously 'no,' and I trust you know why.] That is the only question we need ask when we consider whether an act is right or wrong, moral or immoral, good or evil. The root cause of homosexuality is irrelevant to the question of whether ir is moral or immoral. If no aggression has been committed against the person or property of another individual, that act is moral. If aggression has been committed against the person or property of another individual, that act is immoral.
    test
  2. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    test
  3. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    i agree w. your larger thinking on this

    but

    the argument will surface that

    "aggression" is committed to humanity/society becayse homosexuality is counter to the nature of the species and therefore inherently destructive

    this of course can be deconstructed using some fairly simple reasoning

    however

    you would need (YOU MUST) have to go back (alll the way back) to the roots of humanity/society to show just specifically how this argument is flawed

    and that would be the only way to firmly prove right/wrong

    and as always I leave you good sir with this

    [youtube]Je9fncDgI-s[/youtube]
    test
  4. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    You are right to bring this up at this moment. I think this

    is the biggest monkey wrench

    because it shows how amorphous human sexuality (along w/ other sexual variations/perversions) really can be. the picture is often painted in these discussion of only homosexuality vs heterosexuality; as though these are the only two types of human sexuality. this is clearly false. for example i was reading about this japanese man who took sexual pleasure from eating healthy/fleshy women.

    thus is there a gene that specifically causes sexual pleasure from killing and then eating women who are in good physical shape?

    due to the extremely bizarre nature of this sexual preference this seems unlikely. whats more we can bring up all the other preferences of human sexuality - perhaps more absurd, perhaps less so. ARE there specific genetic causes that trigger these things to specifically happen from birth within humans also? it doesnt follow that there would be specific genetic causes to only some types of sexuality and yet not to others. things get messy when we bring all of these other sexual preferences into thinking. to explain only some but not all leaves only a half shaded picture - and thus not the whole picture. how to explain them all together?

    I offer this

    (very simple explanation that can be expanded)

    the child is shaped by its genes

    from development through the womb and off into the external world the child will be shaped initially from just its genes into later a thinking, decision-making agent from existing in the external world. therefore a human develops the capacity to be shaped not just by genes but also by these things

    so largely, because genes come before thoughts, it follows that genes would play a bigger role in determining personality/sexuality because the genes set the initial basis for what types of thoughts will come up once exposure to the external world begins to happen

    however because exposure to the external world is so turbulent the genetic foundation can be warped into many different shapes.

    nature has as yet not found a way to make the external world less turbulent and thus the reason why there are many different types of personality/sexuality.

    in sum, genes determine everything to the personality/sexuality first but later are warped by thoughts which are influenced by exposure to the external world which is for all purposes unpredictable and turbulent. genes are the guiding ship moving down an ever-changing river: its path, its own.

    this would explain not just homosexuals/heterosexuals but also other types of human sexuality
    test
  5. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    The basic template for humans is female. We all begin as females in the womb, and it takes a certain amount of testosterone and other hormones to make us male. Now, all fetuses get a certain level of testosterone in the womb, but it takes roughly 8 times the normal testosterone level to make a female fetus into a male fetus.

    The current leading theory of homosexuality goes something like this:

    If a female fetus receives enough testosterone to develop into a male fetus, but below the proper threshold, odd things start to happen. Let's suppose that a normal female fetus typically receives 20 testosterone in the womb as a normal part of the developmental process. For a male fetus to properly form, the female fetus would have to receive 160 testosterone at just the right time during pregnancy. But suppose the female fetus receives only 140 testosterone, it might be physically male, but since the brain is the last organ to be affected by the testosterone, the fetus might still have a "female brain." If a female receives more than the baseline 20 testosterone at a particular time during pregnancy, she might remain physically female but develop a "male brain."
    test
  6. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    whats more interesting about that to me is that it implies that there is an inherent 'male nature' and 'female nature' among humans
    test
  7. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Humanity and society are concepts that do not have material existence in the real world. They are abstractions to describe a group of people of no particular size. Society does not think, feel, decide, or act. There is no society, there are only individuals. You cannot commit aggression against society, you can only commit aggression against individuals. You cannot commit aggression against an abstract concept.

    So, if a homosexual is necessarily committing aggression against each individual in "society" merely by being homosexual, then let his "victims" come forward and plead their case. When a "victim" (we'll call him person A) who doesn't know the supposed aggressor (we'll call him B) and has never even been within 10,000 miles of him, can legitimately prove that he's been aggressed against by B, merely by virtue of B's pronounced homosexual effect on ALL OF HUMANITY (gay radio waves? homo fallout? queer pollution?) including A, then we'll discuss how homosexuality is aggression against society. It's bullshit, and anyone with half a brain can recognize it as bullshit.
    test
  8. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    In varying degrees, yes. I mean, going with the thresholds in my previous post, suppose a female fetus gets 23 testosterone in the womb. You might get a female bisexual, whereas if she got 21, you just might have a slightly less emotional female. On the other hand, if a fetus got 159 instead of 160, you might have a slightly more emotional male, whereas 157 might get you a male bisexual. I'm just making numbers up, but you get the idea.
    test
  9. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    so Volaticus what testosterone value causes sexual attraction to animals
    test
  10. SIZZLA

    SIZZLA New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 1999
    Messages:
    7,907
    why dont you? What, you never do some because some deep indiode of you tells you that its jus the right thing to do? Well, where did it come from? Well, das what um talkin about.
    test
  11. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    I suspect that interspecies sexual attraction has more to do with psychological trauma after birth than a hormonal imbalance during gestation. Homosexuality is part of normal human sexual variation.
    test
  12. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    for most forms of sexuality i think you're generally right, that our sexual preferences (including any variations within heterosexuality) are generally shaped by early sexual experience and stimuli. you don't necessarily have to have sex to experience these feelings.

    however volaticus has a point that there are specific gender roles within sexuality, and altering those roles has the obvious effect of homosexuality or bisexuality (which is a little more complex, and i can't seem to explain so i won't even try.) because while obviously a foot fetish is something you develop, the general urge to have sex is something that's present in all humans. obviously this sexuality is gender specific, and so logic dictates that we (heterosexuals) are born with an inherent attraction to the opposite sex.

    in short, i can't say for sure whether the testosterone flush theory is the correct one. but it is a possibility because there is a fundamental difference between a specific sexual fantasy or fetish and the inherent attraction of all humans to members of the opposite sex. the only thing missing from the equation is a something that is reversing the gender roles in homosexual development, and that is what has been proposed with the testosterone flush.

    i disagree. if some virus were to begin to kill of all of humanity, it would be a fair claim to say that the virus posed a threat to 'humanity,' even though you claim it's just a concept that has no material existence.

    the fact is that our invention of said 'concepts' are scientifically sound and help to address things in a broader sense. rather than just saying the virus poses a threat to 6 billion separate individuals (and remember, 6 billion is also a concept that doesn't exist, meaning i could be saying 6 or 600 or 6,000, for all you know), we say that it is a threat to 'humanity' because the 'concept' of a species is something that transfers into nature as scientific fact. if all humans were to die, or unable to reproduce, then there would never be another human to exist after that. in that way we are connected, both by concept and by scientific fact, because the continuing of our species is and will always be a group effort.

    that is where the inherent fear/disgust towards homosexuality comes into the picture. they display anti-social behavior in the sense that they reverse the gender roles that are essential to a human family's survival, and they mate with each other even though there is zero possibility of reproduction. any and all religious taboos concerning sexual deviance are not a religious invention, i can assure you. they draw from basic human instinct to maintain the family unit and through it, the human species.

    edit: however, i'd like to add that with the current world population at 6 billion and growing, population control is severely needed and so there is at the moment no logical reasoning behind the continued homophobia. if anything, we need more faggots in countries like china and india.



    i think what you're referring to is your conscience. that would come from your brain.
    test
  13. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    Why then is there not the same inherent fear/disgust towards priests who choose to be celibate, or other individuals who choose not to reproduce? (It is not necessary to discuss incidence of homosexuality among this population, as it is irrelevant to the discussion.) Also, it should be pointed out that homosexuals are not as a group sterile, and generally are capable of reproducing. Some homosexuals DO reproduce.

    Can it be said that any human who does not reproduce is committing aggression against 5,999,999,999 other individuals? What exactly is the injury that this "aggression" causes? What have those other "6 billion minus one" individuals actually been deprived of?

    The answer is nothing, because there was no aggression, was no crime, was no injury, was no deprivation. Homosexuals as a rule do not injure any other single individual in society merely by being homosexual, and so they cannot be said to have injured the whole of society or humanity in the same fashion.
    test
  14. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    reggie/volatics:

    the thing is

    even though there is a shown correlation to testosterone levels and sexuality, human sexual desire is such an amorphous thing that even this cannot fully explain all sexuality. If developmental experiences cause a say, heterosexually testosterone-charged person to sexually prefer...plants and trees instead of women

    then why couldnt/wouldnt they also cause say, a homosexually testosterone-deprived person to sexually desire something like... women instead of men?

    is the latter more absurd than the former?

    I say no

    and so

    we must take a step back from this neat, well-dressed science and math and consider that gender identity doesnt automatically = sexuality

    I would arghue rather that gender identity and sexuality are two completely different things. Gender identity shapes in general the personality of the person however the general personality of a person is not complete until exposure to external world experiences. thus sexuality development ultimately starts in the womb but doesnt finalize until later on in life

    hence

    gender identity is only a sub component that builds up to the greater personality of a human which ultimately (as a whole) goes on to shape sexualioty

    the personality is the sum of womb based gender and external world experience

    and because these two forces cannot cleanly add together like (1+1=2) no final conclusions about testosterone levels in relation to sexuality can be drawn as these two variables can literally join together to create any sum (X+Z=N)
    test
  15. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    LOL @ volaticus not believing in concepts
    test
  16. Volaticus

    Volaticus Anarcho-Capitalist

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    3,408
    It should be noted that I'm not suggesting that human sexuality is cut and dry. Any explanation of theories I've given has been a gross oversimplification.
    test
  17. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    [youtube]Je9fncDgI-s[/youtube]
    test
  18. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    nah Volaticus seriously I respect your perspectives on matters you bring strong arguments wherever you go

    I just had to do that though LOL
    test
  19. reggie_jax

    reggie_jax rapper noyd

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,437
    well, priests and the like are a cultural variation on normal behavior, and common sense dictates that not everyone can be a priest. only 1 man can be the priest, while the rest of the church are his followers. so since these are people who are seen as 'sacrificing' their sexuality and earthly desires in a gesture towards god, the religious view this as a trait worth admiring, all the while being secure in the fact that priests are an always will be a nobel minority of people.

    meanwhile, there is no such assurance when it comes to homosexuals. here are a group of people who's behavior suggests that they are not sacrificing a thing; that they're doing exactly what they want to be doing, and what they're doing goes against the laws of nature and the basic family structure of human beings. this is, seemingly, a trait that could spread like a disease.

    so therein lies the fundamental difference. it's all a jedi mind trick, but it's an effective jedi mind trick. that's why the church spends more effort on protesting gay marriage then they do on combating the problem of child molestation within the church by priests.

    i never argued that gays pose a threat. in fact i specified otherwise. all i did was point out the basic survival element to the whole conflict. in most species, they can't afford to have a permanent homosexual population. humans have populated the earth to a point where such a thing no longer matters. in fact, the less kids people in a lot of these 3rd world countries start having, the better.


    you have to remember though, that while human sexuality seemingly has an endless amount of variations, there is an apparent difference between these sex fetishes and basic gender preference.

    the majority of the population prefers to be with the opposite sex. we can assume this is because all species are naturally inclined to reproduce. but within this heterosexual population, exist different variations on heterosexual sex. different people have different sexual fixations. some guys like to hit it from behind. some guys like feet. some guys like to hold her head in place and skullfuck her.

    the thing is, these preferences exist independent from gender preference. there are heterosexual males who have specific types of sex he likes with women, and homosexual men who have specific types of sex he likes with men. there are people who like to fuck children and animals and doormats as well, but the numbers point to the fact that gender preference is the basic nature of your sexuality and all the other 'extras' are built on from there.

    the reason i say this is because with all things equal, there would most likely be (roughly) an equal amount of homosexuals to heterosexuals. the fact that heterosexuals are the sexual 'norm' and homosexuals are still much more prevalent than say... horse fuckers, leads to the conclusion that the attraction to the opposite sex is a basic element of our biology, and the reversal of this attraction is merely a common defect among humans.

    now that 'amorphous' nature of human sexuality is still shaped by experience, it's just more along the lines of specific sexual fixations rather than gender preference. this is of course just a guess on my part, i don't think anybody really knows where homosexuality comes from yet. i'm just basically trying to summarize the basic premise of a scenario where homosexuality is something that is determines by either genetics or a common birth defect.
    test
  20. Radium

    Radium f k

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,535
    I think homosexuality is ultimately from a boy thinking/acting like a girl

    this is a stripped down way of saying so many things. but at the end of the day i hang my hat on this as far as what homosexuals are
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)