See guy's it's a maternal reaction to prevent over population.
I'm pretty sure sex orientation is driven by hormones, call me stupid, but you're born with those mechanisms in your brain that make you attracted to certain people. Otherwise you could probably explain what it is about women (or men if you're gay, cause I'm sure some of you are) you like so much.
Hormone regulation would be genetic. If it was really a choice you really think people want to be ridiculed and outcasts in society for some dick?
God, I remember highschool, I'm suprised I didn't rape a bunch of girls. I had serious libido issues, also read something else interesting lately related to it. Apparently it's linked to migraines, which I had a lot of those too. They say it's the same hormone that triggers the migraine from it being hyperactive. Well anyway, thank god I don't have those head aches anymore and also not controlled by my dick (as much).
Ah man, you seriously crack me up dude. You should post more. I know what you mean though, that's how I was made to understand that it's not a matter of choice. I don't know why anyone would go for a life of persecution, so it makes sense.
Ideas like homosexuality don't exist in the animal kingdom, where homosexuality is the most prevalent. Ideas don't exist, and society doesn't exist. You can't claim that society is fostering a homosexual culture when neither cultures nor societies exist in a great many of the animals which exhibit.
As there are no ideological traits in animals, I shall call you a poopy-head for your silly notions.
Ideas may be bullet-proof, but they're quite vulnerable to language barriers. Or the barrier presented by lack of a language.
Of course, I can be totally wrong, but I beleive homosexuallity to be the result of an imbalance in hormones. However, if you study history a bit you realise that the Ancients (greek, romans, egyptians...) were mostly bisexual. so it could be that humans are naturally hetero, but most of us have homo tendencies, only because of the inhibitions of todays society we dont express them. Weras homos, who have a larger imbalance in hormones, are basically gay, some of them have ethero tendencies, that are today similary repressed by their self image and the perception others have of them. Rarely, some persons are open-minded enough to express that bisexuality.
Now thats just the conclusion that sprung to mind after a long evening of listening to old Metallica album and warding off sleep, so I dont guarranty its even coherent.
Albator wrote:For those being interested, here is the article in question (hope you don't need a subscription) http://www.pnas.org and go check the latest (june 28 ) on-line edition.
I am not really interested in it, but I must say that PNAS is a good journal for this type of studies, which generally end-up in behavorial or specialized reviews. PNAS is widely known and read within the scientific community. And this article has not been pushed in, as it sometines happend in PNAS (you know, editors friends...).
My point being, it seems serious.
Be aware that PNAS (say that one aloud) isn't peer reviewed.
angi wrote:
Be aware that PNAS (say that one aloud) isn't peer reviewed.
Missed that one, it's good that EvilDmitri felt the need to necro this with a worthless post.
What you said is partially true (or false). Some PNAS articles effectively bypass the peer review because they are "sponsored" by internal connections (board members, etc). I had to submit my own PNAS articles without being "sponsored", and it is published.
Edit: shit I reread my original post and I said it all already. "This article has not been pushed". You even quoted it, so what was your point?
angi wrote:
Be aware that PNAS (say that one aloud) isn't peer reviewed.
Missed that one, it's good that EvilDmitri felt the need to necro this with a worthless post.
What you said is partially true (or false). Some PNAS articles effectively bypass the peer review because they are "sponsored" by internal connections (board members, etc). I had to submit my own PNAS articles without being "sponsored", and it is published.
Edit: shit I reread my original post and I said it all already. "This article has not been pushed". You even quoted it, so what was your point?
Worthless posts are fuel.. for the soul.
They bestow their blessings of randomness and futility upon us all, so that we may laugh, and cry, and die a little more inside.
I really have to question the methodology of this thing. I mean, really, is there any reasonable expection of correlation? How big was the group they tested again? In what geographical location?
Forgive me father, for I have sinned, and find me guilty for true guilt comes from within.
