Think of it like this: you didn't deside to be strait, you just are. There is no difference. And nobody give me any of that "o, but it is natural to be strait," mumbo-jumbo. It is just as natural for them to be gay as you to be strait.
O of where dost thou hail, Celephanil, Celephanil? Why dost thou wander in Tengelwar great, why on the sea do you sail?
I think that some people are born gay, and others are made during experiences. I have read that, in a matriarchal home, males are more likely to be homosexual. It has something to do with a scued gender role. But gays to not wake up one day and decide they are going to be gay, that is peposterous, and some bias people want you to believe that.
O of where dost thou hail, Celephanil, Celephanil? Why dost thou wander in Tengelwar great, why on the sea do you sail?
I once saw this debate on homosexual rights on UCTV, and there was this fanatical Christian guy who claimed he was gay, but he was "fixed". But, by the way he talked and such, and knowing many gays in my life myself, I can say he's still gay.
"Regardless, I have always, and will always, succeed."
Anyway, yeah, VoA, stop spreading your senseless hate, as well as silly lies, and "proof" that you aren't born gay and you can be "cured". There are always people that experiment and fool around, so what? Doesn't mean that's what everyone does.
Come back when you have some more decent information.
What are you trying to prove VoA? All that study is telling me is that "the study consisted of an extremely small sample group and LeVay failed to identify a control group."
There's your major flaw right there.
quote: Please, educate me with some of your proof.
I'd love to.
quote:What Causes a Person To Have a Particular Sexual Orientation?
There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality. In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many reasons for a person's sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people.
quote:Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?
No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.
quote:Is Homosexuality a Mental Illness or Emotional Problem?
No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals agree that homosexuality is not an illness, mental disorder or an emotional problem. Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific research has shown that homosexuality, in and itself,is not associated with mental disorders or emotional or social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to be a mental illness because mental health professionals and society had biased information. In the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined data about these people who were not in therapy, the idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was quickly found to be untrue.
In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed the importance of the new, better designed research and removed homosexuality from the official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years later, the American Psychological Association passed a resolution supporting the removal. For more than 25 years, both associations have urged all mental health professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental illness that some people still associate with homosexual orientation.
quote: Today, a large body of published empirical research clearly refutes the notion that homosexuality per se is indicative of or correlated with psychopathology. One of the first and most famous published studies in this area was conducted by psychologist Evelyn Hooker.
Hooker's (1957) study was innovative in several important respects. First, rather than simply accepting the predominant view of homosexuality as pathology, she posed the question of whether homosexuals and heterosexuals differed in their psychological adjustment. Second, rather than studying psychiatric patients, she recruited a sample of homosexual men who were functioning normally in society. Third, she employed a procedure that asked experts to rate the adjustment of men without prior knowledge of their sexual orientation. This method addressed an important source of bias that had vitiated so many previous studies of homosexuality.
Hooker administered three projective tests (the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception Test [TAT], and Make-A-Picture-Story [MAPS] Test) to 30 homosexual males and 30 heterosexual males recruited through community organizations. The two groups were matched for age, IQ, and education. None of the men were in therapy at the time of the study. Unaware of each subject's sexual orientation, two independent Rorschach experts evaluated the men's overall adjustment using a 5-point scale. They classified two-thirds of the heterosexuals and two-thirds of the homosexuals in the three highest categories of adjustment. When asked to identify which Rorschach protocols were obtained from homosexuals, the experts could not distinguish respondents' sexual orientation at a level better than chance.
A third expert used the TAT and MAPS protocols to evaluate the psychological adjustment of the men. As with the Rorschach responses, the adjustment ratings of the homosexual and heterosexuals did not differ significantly.
Hooker concluded from her data that homosexuality as a clinical entity does not exist and that homosexuality is not inherently associated with psychopathology.
Hooker's findings have since been replicated by many other investigators using a variety of research methods. Freedman (1971), for example, used Hooker's basic design to study lesbian and heterosexual women. Instead of projective tests, he administered objectively-scored personality tests to the women. His conclusions were similar to those of Hooker.
Although some investigations published since Hooker's study have claimed to support the view of homosexuality as pathological, they have been methodologically weak. Many used only clinical or incarcerated samples, for example, from which generalizations to the population at large are not possible. Others failed to safeguard the data collection procedures from possible biases by the investigators – for example, a man's psychological functioning would be evaluated by his own psychoanalyst, who was simultaneously treating him for his homosexuality.
Some studies found differences between homosexual and heterosexual respondents, and then assumed that those differences indicated pathology in the homosexuals. For example, heterosexual and homosexual respondents might report different kinds of childhood experiences or family relationships. It would then be assumed that the patterns reported by the homosexuals indicated pathology, even though there were no differences in psychological functioning between the two groups.
The weight of evidence In a review of published studies comparing homosexual and heterosexual samples on psychological tests, Gonsiorek (1982) found that, although some differences have been observed in test results between homosexuals and heterosexuals, both groups consistently score within the normal range. Gonsiorek concluded that "Homosexuality in and of itself is unrelated to psychological disturbance or maladjustment. Homosexuals as a group are not more psychologically disturbed on account of their homosexuality" (Gonsiorek, 1982, p. 74; see also reviews by Gonsiorek, 1991; Hart, Roback, Tittler, Weitz, Walston & McKee, 1978; Reiss, 1980). Confronted with overwhelming empirical evidence and changing cultural views of homosexuality, psychiatrists and psychologists have radically altered their views during the last two decades.
Removal from the DSM In 1973, the weight of empirical data, coupled by changing social norms and the development of a politically active gay community in the United States, led the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Their decision was supported in 1974 by a vote of the membership. Subsequently, a new diagnosis, ego-dystonic homosexuality, was created for the DSM's third edition in 1980. Ego dystonic homosexuality was indicated by: (1) a persistent lack of heterosexual arousal, which the patient experienced as interfering with initiation or maintenance of wanted heterosexual relationships, and (2) persistent distress from a sustained pattern of unwanted homosexual arousal.
The new diagnostic category, however, was criticized professionally on numerous grounds. It was viewed by many as a political compromise to appease those psychiatrists – mainly psychoanalysts – who still considered homosexuality a pathology. Others questioned the appropriateness of having a separate diagnosis that described the content of an individual's dysphoria. They argued that the psychological problems related to ego-dystonic homosexuality could be treated as well by other general diagnostic categories, and that the existence of the diagnosis perpetuated antigay stigma.
Moreover, widespread prejudice against homosexuality in the United States meant that "almost all people who are homosexual first go through a phase in which their homosexuality is ego dystonic," according to the American Psychiatric Association.
In 1986, the diagnosis was removed entirely from the DSM. The only vestige of ego dystonic homosexuality in the revised DSM-III occurred under Sexual Disorders Not Otherwise Specified, which included persistent and marked distress about one's sexual orientation (American Psychiatric Association, 1987; see Bayer, 1987, for an account of the events leading up to the 1973 and 1986 decisions).
The American Psychological Association (APA) promptly endorsed the psychiatrists' actions, and has since worked intensively to eradicate the stigma historically associated with a homosexual orientation (APA, 1975; 1987).2 Although some psychologists and psychiatrists may personally hold negative attitudes toward homosexuality, empirical evidence and professional norms do not support any linkage of sexual orientation with psychopathology.
My best friend is gay but that does not make him mentally ill. He functions like a normal human being. He just loves differently. And that is a beautiful thing.
It, as most things, states that there is no proof that you can be born gay. Where, scientifically, is the proof that you CHOOSE to be gay? WHere is the proof that you AREN'T born gay? I am sorry, but I do not believe a site such as that. Give me a good, reputable, not-assocated-with-religion site, where things do not run the risk of being quoted out of context that tells me SCIENTIFICALLY that you CHOOSE to be gay, and I may be obliged to believe it.
I think half of those quotes on that site are irrelevant to proving that you choose to be gay.
quote:Keep in mind that the study consisted of an extremely small sample group and LeVay failed to identify a control group.
That statement practically voids the whole experiment.
If you want a decent experiment, you have to have a much larger group of people involved (let's say 1000+ instead of just 35) and you have to have a control group (aka, males that say they are heterosexual, instead of assuming that they might be).
Also, I'm not seeing the connection between the hypothalumus and sexual orientation. I'm pretty sure that if there was a real one, my Advanced Biology teacher would have covered it.
"If voting could really change things, it would be illegal." & "A conservative is a person who lives in a past that never existed. "
"Another highly publicized 1991 study was done by former Salk Institute researcher and homosexual Simon LeVay, who studied a cluster of neurons as INAH3 (the third interstitial hypothalamus) in the brains of 35 male cadavers. Contrasting 19 known homosexuals with 16 unknown or presumed heterosexual men, LaVay found that the homosexuals generally had smaller clusters. Keep in mind that the study consisted of an extremely small sample group and LeVay failed to identify a control group. Also, he did not actually know the orientation of the "heterosexual" cadavers; he assumed they were all heterosexual, even though 6 had died of AIDS. LeVay said this about his control group: "Two of these subjects (both AIDS patients) had denied homosexual activity. The records of the remaining 14 patients contained no information about their sexual orientation; they are assume to have been mostly or all heterosexual." (Hard science does not assume anything!) Source: Simon LeVay, "A difference in Hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men," Science 258 (1991): pp. 1034-1037."
I won't be long because I think everyone else pretty much covered it. Psychoanalyze*. Parents can only do so much to influence the life of a child. Some of the effects may be great, some negligible. However once a child reaches the stages of adolescnece they begin to form their own social theories and ideas. And I didn't read a study I heard it on one of those medial shows on educational TV about transexuality and the hypothalmus.
In my lifetime I have been to bed with men, women, and odd pieces of furniture....Oh and my avatar says "The only abnormality is the inability to LOVE!"
quote: did you grow up with one parrent, or did you feel that one of the was absent. that can sometimes cause homosexuality.
Wrong.
quote: In additon to an absent father, an overbearing mother can produce the same results. Also sexual molestation can trigger that as well.
Wrong and wrong again.
quote: all of the gay men had a medical conditon (AIDS) that could have affected the size of thier hypolthamus. But I might be wrong.
Yes, you are wrong yet again.
VoA, you lack in the following subjects:
Pyschology, Biology, Sociology, Human Anatomy, Pathology and Anthropology. Study them. You obviously know nothing about them. Your terrible conclusions are from a religious point of view that are completely unscientific and completely wrong, as most religious "answers" are. You've given no proof. Your refutations are pathetic and unconvincing.
sleeprocker.... i agree... loving someone isnt a disorder and thres nothing wrong with anyone who is gay... i know many gay/lesbian people who have had a great life and feel free to be them.... and i know people that have had a horrible life and have found the strength to love.... love is hard enough lets not call it a disorder or anything else... lets just call it love FREE LOVE FOR ALL AMBER
Homosexuality isn't a psychological disorder. Unless you consider loving someone and/or being attracted to them a disorder.
It can't be cured, it can't be caused; it just IS. Much in the way that you might believe there is a god and all that other stuff, that's the way it is. There are gays, there are straights, they're just the way they are. Get over it.
And, for the record, AIDS doesn't affect the size of things in the brain. It attacks the immune system. The hypothalmus is the pleasure-sensing area in the brain, so it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE IMMUNE SYSTEM. Plus, there's no way that a "study" of homosexual men brought in all HIV-positive guys, unless they were looking for specifically positive guys.
quote:Originally posted by gayquestionnare: OMG. I am from a divorced family. Almost as soon as my parents were divorced my mom was remarried so I have never been without a father figure.And same on my dad's side of the family so when I lived with him there was no absence of parenting.
Maybe your step father couldn't fill the void in your life that you biological f
Topics 
