Once Gay, always Gay?

the detachment from reality is complete with this one.

 

You have your opinion, but no absolute definition of all upon which you comment. Take that as reality or leave it.

 

The dispute is upon what you have already stated. No definitions required. Just your contradictory statements quoted side by side. And you will always have your detachment from that reality.

 

Let's experiment. How about you switch to being gay for a moment to see if it's possible.

 

You are dreaming, dixon. You've said so much that is ludicrous already, it's nearly insurmountable. Even so, I just want people who happen upon the URL's (related to this site) where you post your views, to know that YOUR view, is SKEWED from what actually exists in reality. At the very least, give them a different 'perspective' upon what YOU apparently view as reality.

 

What are you babbling on about now. Here is the reality

 

How about NOT misrepresenting the 'meaning' of what I said... you pull that stuff out of context, shows your own ineptness.

 

They are quotes. No misrepresentation involved.

 

I could use your own "quotes" to misrepresent you; but I do not do that.

 

The Human Genome Project finished mapping the human genome back in 2003. Research on the data set they created has been ongoing since then. After the mapping was complete, there were many requests for the data set, some coming from those seeking to find a "gay gene". That research has concluded and they never found anything even remotely resembling a "gay gene". Can you imagine the press coverage there would have been if they had?

The Human Genome Project keeps up with the results of all of the research resulting from the data set they created. The scientists within the project have clearly stated that, based on the data, sexual preference is less than 1% related to genetic cause.

Research on identical twins, who have the exact same genetics, has shown that most of the time, if one twin is homosexual, the other is not.

I'm not sure why this debate continues in some isolated pockets where people are unaware of the current state of the science. The American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association have been in a frenzy to update their documentation to reflect current findings.

Both APA's have been aware for quite some time that other research has shown that many people's sexuality changes over their lifetimes. The language that both APA's use now includes new terminology with words like "fluid" and "plasticity".

Now that the debate is over, many are beginning to review past mistakes in both policy and publications. The new frontier for understanding homosexuality has turned to the study of habituation.

So if I'm understanding many of the posts in this thread, some people still think there's a genetic cause? I'm not clear on this. Is that actually true?

There have been tens of millions of people who have left the gay lifestyle. There are many, many groups of people who have shared this life experience and created online support groups and research organizations. Based on exploding numbers, it's been suggested there will soon be more people who have left the gay lifestyle than those who remain in it.

Here in this thread I think I've entered the twilight zone of groupthink that comes from isolation.

 

That is untrue/unproven, and the research is NOT over, not by any means.

Stop making things up.

 

the twilight zone of groupthink that comes from isolation

 

I realize people disagree on the in's/out's of human sexuality... but there is a scientific consensus on the matter of homosexuality which is more solid/credible than the opinions typically shared within this forum.

 

Yes there is and it directly contradicts your theory that ones sexuality never changes or that people are born that way. .


The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers stated in 2006:

“ Currently, there is no scientific consensus about the specific factors that cause an individual to become heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual—including possible biological, psychological, or social effects of the parents' sexual orientation."

You just have a very tight grasp upon your delusion

 

Stop LYING. You need to prove that is my position; which it isn't. I agree with the APA and other REPUTABLE organizations on the matter of sexual orientation. If I've stated something different than that, then it certainly would not have been my intention.

And the following is what concerns major mental health organizations:

 

You are lying dixon. You need to link to where I made that claim. Do you think you should get away with claiming something which I did not?

If you keep doing it, I'll start a new campaign of reporting you. (It will be fun.)

 

You are lying dixon. You need to link to where I made that claim. Do you think you should get away with claiming something which I did not?

If you keep doing it, I'll start a new campaign of reporting you. (It will be fun.)

 

Sometimes you do and sometimes you dont

 

You need to learn to read, dixon. And yes, the scientific community DOES have various consensuses on homosexuality; yet you claim I said they had a 'single' consensus upon something they DO NOT.

You need to read my posts better than you do. Even so, you should not make up things about what I've said.

But better than that, you just need to say what YOU think it true/right concerning the topic, and we'll go from there.

As I implied before, if you have seen in the past where I claimed something that the APA does not, then either you or I were mistaken.

Now, what do YOU think of people changing their "sexual-orientation"; better yet, what do you really know about it?

 

I know, I should be more gentle because some (many?) people developed an emotional connection to the bad data (born gay hoax). When you go in with a "shock and awe" approach to these isolated pockets where some still cling to the born gay hoax, you risk creating freakshows like the Flat Earth Society.

 

No, you'd probably go into withdrawals, as people SWAT DOWN the BS you are so fast and furiously seeking to overwhelm others with. In fact, prepare to be met with intolerance commensurate with your arrogant approach to things. Few to none should/will put up with that crap you so approve of. You can't seek to shove your alternative to reality down anyone's throat, then expect to see anything positive or constructive come of the same.

One thing is certain... you aren't undoing the reasonable views and superior logic expressed by MANY other than yourself. You can swat at non-existent or microscopic pests all you wish; in effect, the only real freak-show will feature yourself as the main attraction.

Get real.

 

Just let it go man. It's in the past now so get over it.

What part of "over ninety-nine percent environmental causation" don't you understand? The party is over. I suggest that those on your side once again get creative and think up something new that takes us years to prove wrong while you get to "help" more children learn to become gay.

 

Ha-Ha! I'll bail from the conversation, when I see your words support actual truth. In the meantime, I'll sit back and enjoy the "show" that you see fit to put on (as part of whatever agenda you've justified for yourself).

What part of reality have you decided to disregard, in order to generate the amusing display of willful ignorance you are revealing here?

Well then... go home; the fun ran out a long time ago.

I suggest that YOU make more sense, before anyone who knows more than most learn by the 12th grade actually takes you seriously.

 

I've known a lot of people who did the opposite. Most recently, the partner of a friend of mine left after thirty years and married a person of the opposite sex. I think it's fairly common. Every incidence I have known personally involved women. If it possible men and women are different? Naaaahhhh, not possible.

Of course, the "he's not a real whatever" is a comment argument. "Oh, he's not a real Christian." "Oh, he's not a real Communist."

 

The new plastic sexuality.

No matter how much johnny wants to convince himself that sexuality is set in concrete.