>homosexuality is genetic. Were born that way
>they try to convert straight people
So which one is it, fags? Because your actions tell me its a sexual perversion.
desu I'm almost certain it's mostly environmental, or how you were raised or something. Like if it's genetic then how has this phenomenon survived for thousands of years?
>>5738713
If you think that is bad just look at how trans people try to convert us gays.
Given that it's not a choice, and that sexuality is on a spectrum, I'd say polygenic (influenced by many genes) and/or heavy environmental influence. Of course, polygenic variation can skip many a generation before (significant) expression (as may monogenic, although it is more likely to be bred out or expressed more frequently), and environmental influence includes hormonal balance in utero (it is not necessarily determined by upbringing).
Also, >>5738717 hasn't taken into account mutations. These occur fairly frequently (however, many go unnoticed because they occur on introns or are silent).
Only fetish-fags and desperate sluts try to convert heteros. You need to find some more respectable legbutts, OP.
>tl;dr science, not a choice, bleh.
ITT lazy teenagers who haven't even bothered to do the most cursory reading of the available literature pretend to understand genetics.
Fuck off kids, you're fooling no one.
>>5738758
>tfw the reading isn't even that deep and people still don't read it
I'm not even a biologist.
>>5738713
No one tries to convert straight people. At most we convince ourselves that they are gay in denial and need someone to help them figure things out. And since it's a fantasy of course we are that someone
It's really painful to watch /lgbt/ trying to do science.
You don't understand genetics or psychiatry.
Please stop.
>Straight people have forced LGBT people since the dawn of mankind to be straight through use of death, force, intimidation, social isolation
Straight people are victims i tell you!! victims!!!
>>5738713
>try to convert straight people
I don't want straight people stealing my men
Fuck off back to your women
>>5738894
>we don't try to convert people
>jk we try to convert people
>>5738910
lmao
>>5738910
>implying this has anything to do with victims
>implying that, of all of the people in the gay community, there aren't individuals who hypocritically seek out and attempt to convert straight people
Calm down with those generalizations
>>5739076
can you read? they're not straight for us.
>>5738758
>>5738902
>Implying that the science behind this is remotely difficult.
>Implying that this topic requires extra reading and that it's impossible to hypothesise the causes.
>Implying that anything previous anons said was scientifically invalid in any way.
>>Implying that your ideas are more valid without even trying to validate them.
>Implying that you have any scientific knowledge/qualifications whatsoever.
Your American high-school education is showing a bit.
>>5738713
>Heteros say they are never turned on by thoughts of sex with the same sex
>try to convert gay people
Which one is it, hets? Either you believe sexuality is a choice and therefore you've had thoughts about having gay sex, or you never got to choose your sexuality and should fuck off
Also, the reason people try to convert straights is wishful thinking. something like 80% of dudes have never and will never have sex with another man. Divide the dating pool even further to take out the uggo and honestly out of the entire American population living in the entire US, there's maybe 10000 men I would realistically want to and be able to bang. On top of that, you have to realize that shitloads of gays have major mental issues and problems with denial due to their sexuality being rejected by them and others and are usually not on the market.
Meanwhile, a straight boy is right there. Often comfortable with his sexuality. Good personality. Very attractive, and is more likely to work out and build some sexy muscle than the average gay. That + serious sexual repression and lack of options means that straight boys get targeted for "conversion" by gays who are desperate for an attractive mate.
>inb4 don't feed the trolls
It's not like this is the first time I've thought about this
>>5739456
>>Implying that the science behind this is remotely difficult.
I agree, it's simple. Yet, /lgbt/ can't do it right.
>>Implying that this topic requires extra reading and that it's impossible to hypothesise the causes.
I did not imply that. You can perfectly well write a lot about this topic without reading complex and hyper-specialized scientific papers if you use logic. Yet, /lgbt/ still doesn't.
>>Implying that anything previous anons said was scientifically invalid in any way.
A lot of what was said before is either plain wrong or ridden with logical fallacies.
>>>Implying that your ideas are more valid without even trying to validate them.
My ideas are way more valid than anything written in this thread because they are actually based on logic and recent experiments. However, I'm not here to explain what my ideas are, a quick google search will give you an idea of the stance of modern science on this issue of homosexuality.
>>Implying that you have any scientific knowledge/qualifications whatsoever
I do, and I'm painfully aware of it everytime I read or hear bullshit. But on the internet, you can't prove anything about degrees and qualifications, so what's the point of attacking people on that except trying to hide an ad hominem argument to avoid having to actually think about how science works ?
>>Your American high-school education is showing a bit.
Not even American.
If it isn't genetic, it's probably just a form of variation present in utero. I seriously doubt there are any environmental factors to it.
There is no way to know, if someone says they were straight but turned gay people will say he was gay all along, so there's no way to prove it.
>>5738713
Most gay people "try" to be heterosexual.
I live in western europe, and a very liberal city in a very liberal region, and still, I've meet people still coming out in ther 20s (I don't mean their families, I mean as in coming out to even themselves)
That and also the bisexuals or people who are >1 in the kinesy scale. There are more of those than full homos, and usually have a harder time coming out, and just live as heterosexuals.
We try to "convert" as trying to find people in the closet, and believe me, if we try it's because it works. A lot.
Homosexuality is not very heritable at all. Most of the variation in sexuality is environmental. Doesn't mean it's a choice. I certainly didn't choose to love the cock.
>>5739640
>A lot of what was said before is either plain wrong or ridden with logical fallacies.
You haven't said anything yet yourself.
Saying "read a study" or "google it" is not an argument, in fact it's the calling card of idiots everywhere.
>>5739157
Just like how you fags aren't people to us.
"Oh he's a fag because I'm a fag and say so teeheehee".
>>5739845
>That and also the bisexuals or people who are >1 in the kinesy scale.
lol thats me. After 23 years it took a big dick twink to lure me out of the closet.
>>5739076
And we fail, most of the time
I'll fuck anything that moves, I'll try to convert a fence post if I think it'll give me attention, is it nature or nurture or am I a rampaging pervert? Probably all of the above. Do I represent the billions of other individuals who overlap venn diagrams with me in any way whatsoever? Not at all. Why do you care.
How does 'converting' even work? I figured gay guys would be too pussy to make a move on a straight.
>>5739918
Totally not what I said man. You neef to step up your shitposting skills, otherwise it's not funny.
t. Gay guy with 8 succesful conversions so far
>>5739973
>conversion
>somehow making a faggot realize he's a faggot is a conversion
Whatever you say, butt pirate.
>>5739982
I see you finally got my first post. Your daddy is proud.
>>5740000
Unlike yours.
>>5739886
>Saying "read a study" or "google it" is not an argument, in fact it's the calling card of idiots everywhere.
I didn't present it as an argument. I just know that there are people far more intelligent than me who have posted a lot of articles about this topic on google and they're much more able than me to explain why /lgbt/ is retarded. People who are sincerely interested in those issues will look it up on Google. People who are just interesting in Internet cockfights are the ones screaming "SOURRRRCCE OR YOUR WRONG" all day long. Nobody wants to spend ages searching for a source when it's obvious other posters are not waiting to be convinced but to be entertained.
>>5740142
Post pics
>>5739973
Do you think you'd be able to convert me?
>>5740148
Yes.
>>5740155
But I thought you had to be "born that way"? :3
>>5738713
gays are mentally ill deviants
>>5738713
Homosexuality is genetic, if you try to convert straight people, you're a cunt. Being gay/bi doesn't validate you more to any extent.
>>5738713
>homosexuality is genetic. Were born that way
I don't believe sexual orientation is entirely genetic (thought genes are involved). I think it's probably innate though.
>they try to convert straight people
I can't speak for all gay people or all green-eyed people or any other group I belong to, because I'm just one person. But I have never done this myself, so I guess it doesn't apply to me. I did once accidentally make a pass at a straight guy in a gay bar.
But I'm fairly confident (though you may not be) that most gay people don't try to convert, nor do they believe that such a conversion is possible. But some gay guys do hit on straight guys. Why? I think the reasons are that 1) they find them attractive, and 2) their objective is probably something like sucking their dick, rather than 'converting' them to being gay. Another way of thinking about it: A world where 95% of women are lesbians. In that world, eventually some lesbians are going to be hit on by men (and, indeed, some already are).
I should mention that I think hitting on straight guys is a bad idea and you shouldn't do it. For this reason I have a policy of never hitting on anyone unless I'm in a gay bar or I have some solid ground for believing that they're into men that way.
I hope that this response was helpful.
>>5740167
you can't turn straight but you can turn gay
Fuck if I remember but there is a study showing its in fact not genetic, but a choice.
>>5741114
there are studies for everything, really.
>>5741106
Why in the world would that be true?
>>5741189
Maybe because you can discover a hidden attraction to men but you cant undiscover it.
>>5741114
Studies have shown that homosexuality is only somewhat heritable--something like 40% of variance in sexual orientation is heritable. This doesn't mean it's a choice. Left-handedness has a smaller heritable component than homosexuality, but it's inborn and is not a choice. Most researchers in the field agree that homosexuality is probably in-born, and there's quite a bit of evidence for biological factors involved in sexual orientation, including differences between homo- and hetero-sexuals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_and_sexual_orientation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation
I find it very strange when people say that sexual orientation is a 'choice'. Just on a sort of common-sense level, who believes that they can choose what they're turned on by? I also have questions like: why do people pay money to be cured of their homosexuality, if they could just 'choose' to be straight? And, on top of that, why have these attempts to cure homosexuality been a total failure? Or all those kids who were effeminate from day 1 who are gay later in life? There's also evidence of subconscious pupil dilation when people are shown images of the sex they're sexually attracted to. How can people be like "Yeah, being gay is a choice. That makes sense to me."? Do those words mean the same thing to them as they do to me? It just seems strange to me.
http://www.livescience.com/22120-eyes-reveal-sexual-orientation.html
>>5741189
because if you're gay you don't like vaginas and can't developt an attraction to them because you don't know how they feel.
If you're straight you're not attracted to penises but since you have one you know how they work and feel so you can develop an attraction to it.
>>5741231
There's no reasoning with these people they will straight up ignore the blatant truth in front of them because they want to feel good about hating us
>>5741240
haha wtf
dude homosexuality is more than just liking dick. I like feeling a dude's muscles, his beard, feeling his weight on me, the baritone of his voice, thick fingers etc.
>>5741276
developing an attraction for dick will lead to developing an attraction to the rest of the male body
>>5741286
I honestly have no idea how to even deal with this fucked logic. Are you saying a human's default state is homosexuality? That is what you're saying?
>>5741296
no
if it was the default you wouldn't have to develop anything if you are initially straight. I don't know where you got that from.
>>5741305
well children don't really develop sexual feelings until puberty, so you necessarily have to develop sexual feelings.
How do you explain my absolutely zero attraction to women though, if I'm "initially straight"? I tried to find women attractive in high school, but nothing happened downstairs
>>5741276
>beard
Not necessarily true, but that guy you were replying to makes some sense. You can be born with a disgust for axe wounds but not for a penis because you're attached to one.
I also think that once a guy starts to get fit he'll invariably begin to notice how the male physique looks good.
>>5741327
you weren't initially straight, you were initially gay
>>5741524
okay that makes more sense
>>5741376
so am I gay if I don't like baras?
>>5741586
Unless you ONLY like vagoos, boobs and feminine features you are NOT straight. There are gay guys who don't like bara.
>>5741586
Also not every bara drawing or masculine guy has body hair.
>>5741604
I don't like vag or boobs, but I do like feminine facial features with a chiseled twink bod.
I like down with more masc stuff but twinks gets me going crazy like nothing else.
>>5741633
then you're gay there's no way around it buddy
>>5741376
I've seen that webm before but I can't find it now. Source?
>>5741759
It's not an webm it's a picture, I posted on /y/ nonhuman thread here >>>/y/2251961
Based on Mardi Gras and the Rio carnival I think it's very obvious that heterosexuality is a debilitating paraphilia
>>5738735
>Given that it's not a choice, and that sexuality is on a spectrum
There really isn't good evidence for this. It all started with Kinsey (He's from Indiana University my alma mater), but his methodology was pretty shitty. Plus he had kind of a motive for expanding the number of people who would be called "sexual deviants" because he was a closeted homo at a time when being that way was really not accpeted.
Then it just kind of became this unchallenged assumption that keeps propagating itself. Another example of an idea like this is often stated "fact" that fire fighters and police officers die much younger than everyone else which is why they need to retire earlier with more benefits when they retire. If you examine the actual lifespan of people who reach retirement in either profession they live the same average length as anyone else.
>>5742466
Oh I realized I was kind of ambiguous. I wasn't saying there isn't good evidence that sexuality is not a choice. I think there is good evidence for that.
Just the idea that sexuality exits on a spectrum.
>>5742466
Except current research and general polling has the share of the population that is some degree of bi well over his estimated 10%.
Also people went much, much further than Kinsey and have largely removed a lot of his assumptions. They haven't been unchallenged except in the feverish minds of a few dumb christfags (and that one jewish woman who thinks Hirschfeld was somehow complicit in the shoah)
>>5742466
Sorry if my info is a bit out of date on sexuality; I haven't done any research on it for a few years (did some back when I was trying to prove that gay=OK to myself). Kinsey's stuff was the only thing I ever really looked at before I got hooked on virology. Still, we can all be sure of two things:
>It's not a choice.
>No matter how much evidence for this one may present, it will never change homophobes' minds.
On a side note: I know I was a little vague and jargon heavy with my previous comment, but that doesn't mean I don't understand the topic; it means I wrote a comment in 5 minutes without explaining terms to keep from making it too long winded. It always makes me laugh when people on the internet insist that I don't understand a subject (that I just so happen to study) and call my points invalid, despite having no knowledge on the topic themselves, and never actually correcting what was wrong.
>Also, reading over that comment, I do see an issue with my phrasing on polygenic variation. Can't think of how to explain what I meant without taking up a whole comment.
>I've never been a fan of the "gay gene" hypothesis, though. Prenatal hormones always seemed the most likely, in my opinion.
>>5742466
>but his methodology was pretty shitty
why?
