Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
What causes people to be Gay?
- Thread starter GinNJuice
- Start date
Its very interesting when one talks to a gay person---98% will say they are like that because they were born like this. Johnny O as far as the study done, For every study like that there are 100 others that have society to blame. Whose right? It doesn't really matter and there will always be arguments on either side. Listen to Strongchix statments---she said that she was playing doctor with little girls at a young age yet she states she was born with it. Basicly saying that the reason she like playing with little girls was because she was already gay. Role playing when very young has a major effect on ones mind. Certainly when a doctor has a person take off the clothes and check diff---areas of the body. At a young age one can not determine what is "right" or "wrong" Yell if I'm a 8 year old boy that has not been taught anything, if another 8 year old boy touched my thing. And I didn't know any better then it would probably feel good. And that could easily be brought to my adult years esp---if I was not having very good relations with woman.
Do you know how many men that take gear from time to time and don't use any post natural test builders have there test levels drop so low that they could be in female levels.. If Johnny O theory was right then all of these guys would have homosexual thoughts. But most don't because of society and what they were taught. Woman that dress "butch" don't dress like that because of the way they were born--but because they are making a statment. The way one dresses is not a trait one is born with but how they grew up and who they grew up with-----Its all influence------People are born with the alcoholic trait but some are not alcoholics--------people have depression in there build up but are not depressed. People can have an agressive trait in there system but find ways to control it-----Everything can be controlled in ones mind. It just takes more out of some people then others.
Do you know how many men that take gear from time to time and don't use any post natural test builders have there test levels drop so low that they could be in female levels.. If Johnny O theory was right then all of these guys would have homosexual thoughts. But most don't because of society and what they were taught. Woman that dress "butch" don't dress like that because of the way they were born--but because they are making a statment. The way one dresses is not a trait one is born with but how they grew up and who they grew up with-----Its all influence------People are born with the alcoholic trait but some are not alcoholics--------people have depression in there build up but are not depressed. People can have an agressive trait in there system but find ways to control it-----Everything can be controlled in ones mind. It just takes more out of some people then others.
By the way there are tests done with rats on cancer also---
pump at rat with 10times his bodyweight with saccharin and he will get cancer(something like that) So our government forces anyone who uses saccharin as an ingredient to say it is known to cause cancer.(or they used to anyways) But does it really in humans?
pump at rat with 10times his bodyweight with saccharin and he will get cancer(something like that) So our government forces anyone who uses saccharin as an ingredient to say it is known to cause cancer.(or they used to anyways) But does it really in humans?
JohnnyO
New member
The low levels of test that would cause homosexually in males are only done during a particular stage of pre-natal development. After birth the brain is essentially "finished" as terms of being a masculine brain or a feminine brain.
Low levels of test after the brain has completed development wouldn't have any significant changes -- as the brain is already set in it's masculine or fem mode.
That would also explain that even in gay people, why we have such a WIDE variety of behavors ..from flaming queens who dress as girls, to harley riding super bitch hairy guys, and everything in between -- the differing levels of test.
At any rate -- more reseach needs to be done in this area.
Low levels of test after the brain has completed development wouldn't have any significant changes -- as the brain is already set in it's masculine or fem mode.
That would also explain that even in gay people, why we have such a WIDE variety of behavors ..from flaming queens who dress as girls, to harley riding super bitch hairy guys, and everything in between -- the differing levels of test.
At any rate -- more reseach needs to be done in this area.
P
prince of a guy
Guest
What causes a guy to be gay? The following:
1) The drugs
2) The music
3) The fabulous Oscar parties
4) The witty reparte
5) The never ending supply of sexual partners
1) The drugs
2) The music
3) The fabulous Oscar parties
4) The witty reparte
5) The never ending supply of sexual partners
musclebrains
New member
Although I find this thread entertaining, the quote FROM ME that precipitates it has been misconstrued by Mr. Gin. I certainly do not think sexual orientation is PERSONALLY elected in any significant way. I was referring, in the quote, to the act of choosing to reveal your orientation and thereby inviting an avalanche of stigmas.
That said, I do not subscribe to the idea that a particular sexuality is wholly given with biology. The term "gay" refers to an identity based on homosexuality. That idea -- that the object of one's desire somehow constellates your identity -- is recent in human history.
You can go all over the world and find men having sex with men and not identifying as "gay" or "homosexual." This is especially true in the Mediterranean world, including the Arab world (and we saw how that is getting played out in western terms in the Egyptian court cases this week). This was also true in the ancient world. A system of educational pederasty -- utterly bizarre to our minds -- allowed adult men to penetrate teenaged boys without stigma. But to be penetrated as an adult was taboo. There was nothing called "homosexuality." Sex between men did not constitute an identity and was not incompatible with marriage to women -- who, of course, were just another object of penetration in that time. Sexual stigmas were based on penetration, not on gender relations and women were beneath boys in their sexual status. (Plato rhapsodized boy love.)
The advent of gay "identity" -- as a set of characteristics describing men who only have sex with other men -- is extremely recent. (There is a great book, "Gay New York," Geo. Chauncey, that demonstrates how the Mediterranean ethic regarding sex between men prevailed throughout much of that city early in the last century -- and how "straight" and "gay" cultures blended quite comfortably.) The popular description of "gay" as a fixed and pathological identity began with the American academy's perversion of Freud's theories. (Freud actually had no trouble with queerness.) A diagnosis, of course, becomes an identity. Concomitant with that, a host of legal prohibitions were established, so homosexuality, the identity, also became a crime.
A movement in the late 40s, led by the Mattachine Society, began to resist the legal prohibitions. The movement was dominated by people in the american communist movement, interestingly, and they wanted to conceptualize homosexuality as a social movement opposing the dominant culture. They were booted out by people who wanted to assimilate and, pathetically, actually supported the pathologizing of sex between men but pled for compassion in the legal system.
Then, in the '70s, with the so-called Stonewall Rebellion, a more radical, separatist group prevailed. It was then that homosexuality congealed fully into an identity. One had to come out, to declare oneself. Borrowing the feminist maxim, sexuality became political. This is the still present bind of identity based on sexuality, of course: If you don't purchase the identity you can't have membership in the group...and you need the group for political leverage to gain civil rights. But what happens if you don't like the group mindset?
So, my LOOOOOOOOOOOONG answer to the question is that sexuality is somewhat given, undoubtedly inflected by culture. (Sexuality can be constructed by the culture, apart from biological inevitabilty, and be quite nonelective.) However, the assumption of an IDENTITY based on the gender of your love object is elective in large part.
I straight-identified when I was in my 20s, got married, got divorced and then gave expression to my same-sex impulses. I found queer culture -- an outlaw culture -- very attractive at the time, so I assumed a gay identity. HOwever, I have utterly no doubt that were I given the choice TODAY, I'd not assume that identity because I don't respect what gay culture has become by and large. But the abdication of the identity label doesn't mean one stops the sexual behavior.
That said, I do not subscribe to the idea that a particular sexuality is wholly given with biology. The term "gay" refers to an identity based on homosexuality. That idea -- that the object of one's desire somehow constellates your identity -- is recent in human history.
You can go all over the world and find men having sex with men and not identifying as "gay" or "homosexual." This is especially true in the Mediterranean world, including the Arab world (and we saw how that is getting played out in western terms in the Egyptian court cases this week). This was also true in the ancient world. A system of educational pederasty -- utterly bizarre to our minds -- allowed adult men to penetrate teenaged boys without stigma. But to be penetrated as an adult was taboo. There was nothing called "homosexuality." Sex between men did not constitute an identity and was not incompatible with marriage to women -- who, of course, were just another object of penetration in that time. Sexual stigmas were based on penetration, not on gender relations and women were beneath boys in their sexual status. (Plato rhapsodized boy love.)
The advent of gay "identity" -- as a set of characteristics describing men who only have sex with other men -- is extremely recent. (There is a great book, "Gay New York," Geo. Chauncey, that demonstrates how the Mediterranean ethic regarding sex between men prevailed throughout much of that city early in the last century -- and how "straight" and "gay" cultures blended quite comfortably.) The popular description of "gay" as a fixed and pathological identity began with the American academy's perversion of Freud's theories. (Freud actually had no trouble with queerness.) A diagnosis, of course, becomes an identity. Concomitant with that, a host of legal prohibitions were established, so homosexuality, the identity, also became a crime.
A movement in the late 40s, led by the Mattachine Society, began to resist the legal prohibitions. The movement was dominated by people in the american communist movement, interestingly, and they wanted to conceptualize homosexuality as a social movement opposing the dominant culture. They were booted out by people who wanted to assimilate and, pathetically, actually supported the pathologizing of sex between men but pled for compassion in the legal system.
Then, in the '70s, with the so-called Stonewall Rebellion, a more radical, separatist group prevailed. It was then that homosexuality congealed fully into an identity. One had to come out, to declare oneself. Borrowing the feminist maxim, sexuality became political. This is the still present bind of identity based on sexuality, of course: If you don't purchase the identity you can't have membership in the group...and you need the group for political leverage to gain civil rights. But what happens if you don't like the group mindset?
So, my LOOOOOOOOOOOONG answer to the question is that sexuality is somewhat given, undoubtedly inflected by culture. (Sexuality can be constructed by the culture, apart from biological inevitabilty, and be quite nonelective.) However, the assumption of an IDENTITY based on the gender of your love object is elective in large part.
I straight-identified when I was in my 20s, got married, got divorced and then gave expression to my same-sex impulses. I found queer culture -- an outlaw culture -- very attractive at the time, so I assumed a gay identity. HOwever, I have utterly no doubt that were I given the choice TODAY, I'd not assume that identity because I don't respect what gay culture has become by and large. But the abdication of the identity label doesn't mean one stops the sexual behavior.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
