I figured out today what causes homosexuality and all other gender abnormality. When children are very young they IMPRINT on the dominant figure [and/or figures] in their lives, naturally this has always been the father. For boys and girls this imprinting process has different effects, but it results in normal heterosexual behaviour for both genders. When boys and girls fail to imprint on their father [or in the absence of the father a substitute male figure] and INSTEAD IMPRINT ON A DOMINANT FEMALE they become homosexual/transgender/etc.
Nice schizo logic. Did you remember to take your Abilify?
>>5483543
do you have anything better than ad hominem?
>>5483547
Do you have anything better than baseless armchair psychology?
go present your findings to someone who isn't randoms on the internet
>>5483531
This is a variant of the long ago discredited theory of homosexuality popularized by Freud who said male homosexuality stems from an absentee father and domineering mother.
My dad used to take me hunting, fishing , and all the rest and raised me to be a normal masculine boy. And my mother was traditional housewife. I still turned out gay.
>>5483570
was your dad submissive to your mom though? did she boss him around? who did you perceive as the dominant figure? who called the shots?
There are plenty of beta men who live stereotypical lives.
>>5483531
So your so called theory is what people thought in the fucking FIFTIES? This is why I hate the internet sometimes. This shit has been disproven during the nineties son. Go back to dank memes and leave the thinking to the big boys.
>>5483570
>This is a variant of the long ago discredited theory of homosexuality popularized by Freud who said male homosexuality stems from an absentee father and domineering mother.
Which was itself an excuse Freud was making for why his brother was gay and spent all of his time slutting it up with other gays, and why Freud created the theory that all humans are bisexual and then choose whether or not they'll be gay or straight based on personal weakness. The second theory meant to be an excuse for why his brother was gay and he himself was not. Also it was all a convenient excuse for him to bitch about his mother and father, since bitching about them was forbidden in that day and age no matter what, unless you couched it in retarded tea leaf reading.
>>5483579
They we're about equal when it came to sharing decisions about the family and so forth . Dad was better at some stuff, mom at others.
Quit trying to fit a complex world into your simplistic all or nothing thinking.
>>5483585
I am thinking that while homsexual acts can be fetishised to provide sexual pleasure, seeking out a traditional monogamous homosexual relationships derives from imprinting on the wrong gender, that and transgenderism.
>>5483589
if you asked a man 50 years ago or earlier that same question he would have told you some outright sexist shit, so your 'equality' line of thinking is evidence that you've diverged mentally from a traditional heterosexual mindset.
You guys are all flaming me but I'm not trying to be insulting.
>>5483531
>mother died before I ever knew her
>dad raised me as a single father
>hes manly as hell
>his son turns out to be a tranny bislut
your theory seems accurate anon, why don't you make that your doctoral dissertation?
>>5483598
I'm not interested in what you think you dog shit.
>>5483607
So heterosexual males are implicitly sexist?
What about the ones who support feminism and respect women ?
Are they secretly gay for not having a "heterosexual mindset"?
Nobody is flaming you, we're just calling out your sloppy reasoning.
>>5483631
Yeah I think that there is always a dominant and a submissive gender, this can be seen in nature, in some spiders or mantises the female is the dominant gender. We're undergoing a cultural change where we want genders to be equal yet biologically our sexual attraction is based on a dominant and submissive gender. If you don't perceive male as the dominant gender then you perceive female as the dominant gender, it's instinctual to have to identify the dominant gender kid aren't born PC.
>>5483631
or ants, in ants the female is the dominant gender.
>>5483662
Not for nothing but you are discounting many other variables, fetal hormones, brain development, differnt kinds of chemical exposure in the womb, etc.
>>5483683
No being gay isn't biological, it can't be, or natural selection would wipe out those genes and gays would no longer exist.
>>5483623
You use the word 'manly' but we are talking about dominant. Are you afraid of your father? is he an Alpha?
>>5483706
Please attend your classes this semester.
>>5483761
You took the time to respond but the best you could do was ad hominem. Just gives more weight to my argument.
>>5483712
>Are you afraid of your father? is he an Alpha?
uh, yeah I guess. He worked in a lumber-mill my whole life, and he was defiantly in charge. I still haven't come out to him because I don't think he'd react well.
he thinks I'm in college, but I'm actually living as a housewife with my husband
>>5483531
Why is it normal to imprint on the father? After all, it's the mother who gives birth, for virtually all of human history it's been the mother who does the most to take care of young children. The father doesn't seem to become the more important parent until around adolescence, by which point the imprinting period has long passed.
And it seems to be, that imprinting would cause them to become like whoever they're imprinting on - which means girls imprinting on the father would become more masculine, i.e. lesbian/ftm. The only way around this issue is that the father's behavior is somehow "more hetero" than the mother's, or if there's some sort of built-in brain subroutine that is triggered by imprinting on a masculine male and results in the development in hetero characteristics.
I could kind of see this theory making sense if you instead said that it was specifically role-reversed relationships (masculine/dominant woman, feminine/submissive man), as that could at least theoretically cause children to not learn a "proper" gender role. However, that would only work if orientation and gender identity were conditioned rather than innate, which would mean you'd have to accept that being cishet is no more "natural" than being gay or trans.
>>5483607
>if you asked a man 50 years ago or earlier that same question he would have told you some outright sexist shit, so your 'equality' line of thinking is evidence that you've diverged mentally from a traditional heterosexual mindset.
By that reasoning, most of society has diverged mentally from a traditional heterosexual mindset. If gender roles are conditioned (which they'd have to be under your theory, since imprinting is a form of conditioning), then it's completely possible that overall changes in society have changed gender roles, regardless of imprinting. I mean, attitudes towards politics, technology, race etc have changed over the years, and that doesn't seem to all be explained by imprinting.
>>5483706
There are plenty of genetic disorders that prevent one from reproducing. Some even result in near certainty of childhood death, even with modern medical treatment. Yet they continue. Why? Because certain genetic traits are recessive - it's possible to be a "carrier" for these traits without expressing them. Which means, while the people who actually have the condition don't reproduce, the carriers do. And this is very basic genetics, not even getting into more complex stuff like kin selection and epigenetics.
>>5483712
Manly and dominant have a clear connection, in most human cultures men are expected to be dominant, those who aren't are considered failures. Why are you assuming this has anything to do with fear, or even bringing up the concept of "alpha" (which is itself a pretty armchair psychological concept).
>>5483785
If you don't understand high school genetics, I don't think you really have the background knowledge necessary to meaningfully speculate about the causes of homosexuality/transgenderism. You're just going to end up reinventing the wheel when you have what you think is a profound idea but was already discovered by some guy back in 1830.
>>5483607
50 years ago WHERE?
The family structure is a thing that varies a lot. If you were in Southern France or parts of Central Italy 50 years ago chances their family was a lot more egalitarian even in conservative areas than in nuclear-family-land.
There's nothing traditional about the nuclear family where the patriarch is sole king in the west, it's entirely a creature of the early modern era, justified on the basis of a purported return to ancient Rome.
>>5483531
>implying its caused after birth
>>5483817
>living as a housewife with my husband
That's my dream. Tell us about that, anon.
