| What has/does TWTD make 09:51 - Oct 23 with 21413 views | chicoazul |
…of Morsy not wearing the rainbow armband on Friday? |  |
| |  |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:30 - Oct 24 with 2105 views | Bluearmy71 |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:08 - Oct 24 by The_Flashing_Smile |
So are you in your 80s then?
Also, have you got some evidence to back up this assertion that some people choose their sexuality? |
My age really is no concern of yours but is easily spotted when I post.
Google is your friend, history is there for you to look through!
But......the thing i...............most of you who are rather perturbed by my point of view are so blinded by what I have said is wrong that you haven't even given yourselves a minute to stop and think that I know from experience because I made that choice!! |  | | |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:34 - Oct 24 with 2076 views | StokieBlue |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:09 - Oct 24 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I think there is plenty of evidence that sexuality is a combination of innate and upbringing - a combination of genetic and environmental factors.
Everyone has a freedom to express their sexuality or not (although for many there are serious consequences to expressing it). I would like to think that we are all agreed that where governments and others persecute people for expressing their sexuality it is wrong. This has clearly happened in the past and still does now.
What often gets overlooked in this debate is the idea that sexual attraction does not have to determine behaviour. Plenty of people have chosen celibacy, abstinence or monogamy over satisfying their base desires for a variety of reasons. |
I believe that first paragraph is incorrect and that in fact the vast weight of evidence and studies suggest that upbringing isn't a major factor in sexism orientation.
Could you point to some published studies showing your assertion? Happy to be corrected but that was my impression.
SB [Post edited 24 Oct 2022 19:59]
|  | | |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:35 - Oct 24 with 2088 views | jeera |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:30 - Oct 24 by Bluearmy71 |
My age really is no concern of yours but is easily spotted when I post.
Google is your friend, history is there for you to look through!
But......the thing i...............most of you who are rather perturbed by my point of view are so blinded by what I have said is wrong that you haven't even given yourselves a minute to stop and think that I know from experience because I made that choice!! |
What a rambling load of nonsense.
You don't even seem to know what you're going to post next yourself.
As for your age being no one else's concern, it's probably then best not to introduce it as a form of argument:
"Well I hope when you are in your 80's you will have seen enough of life to see just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it never happened!!"
I'm embarrassed for you and genuinely hope you don't express your rabid sh1t in public. |  |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:39 - Oct 24 with 2076 views | Bluearmy71 |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:23 - Oct 24 by jeera |
Dan doesn't have more than one account. Never has to my knowledge.
And he is one of the most decent posters ever to have frequented the board.
You should apologise for your false accusation there.
And for your ignorance on pretty much every level you've displayed so far to be honest. |
I'm glad your knowledge of Dan is superior to mine
Did I say he wasn't a decent poster, no!!
Since when have questions been false accusations?? Am I asking you a question or falsely accusing you of something with that question/false accusation thing??
I accept the fact that you don't like my opinion however you wish to express your dislike!! | | | |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:41 - Oct 24 with 2066 views | Bluearmy71 |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:35 - Oct 24 by jeera |
What a rambling load of nonsense.
You don't even seem to know what you're going to post next yourself.
As for your age being no one else's concern, it's probably then best not to introduce it as a form of argument:
"Well I hope when you are in your 80's you will have seen enough of life to see just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it never happened!!"
I'm embarrassed for you and genuinely hope you don't express your rabid sh1t in public. |
Don't be and if I ever feel the need I will!! | | | |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:54 - Oct 24 with 2028 views | J2BLUE |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:30 - Oct 24 by Bluearmy71 |
My age really is no concern of yours but is easily spotted when I post.
Google is your friend, history is there for you to look through!
But......the thing i...............most of you who are rather perturbed by my point of view are so blinded by what I have said is wrong that you haven't even given yourselves a minute to stop and think that I know from experience because I made that choice!! |
Sorry, you chose to be gay? Or chose not to be? |  |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 12:50 - Oct 25 with 1754 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| What has/does TWTD make on 19:30 - Oct 24 by Bluearmy71 |
My age really is no concern of yours but is easily spotted when I post.
Google is your friend, history is there for you to look through!
But......the thing i...............most of you who are rather perturbed by my point of view are so blinded by what I have said is wrong that you haven't even given yourselves a minute to stop and think that I know from experience because I made that choice!! |
It's not up to me to google something when it's you making the assertion. Now please share with us some evidence that some people chose to change their sexual orientation. To make such a bold claim, which goes against what everyone else thinks, you must have something to back it up? |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| What has/does TWTD make on 12:57 - Oct 25 with 1737 views | FrimleyBlue |
| What has/does TWTD make on 12:50 - Oct 25 by The_Flashing_Smile |
It's not up to me to google something when it's you making the assertion. Now please share with us some evidence that some people chose to change their sexual orientation. To make such a bold claim, which goes against what everyone else thinks, you must have something to back it up? |
My cousin in law is bi. She had bfs. But decided to settle down with her partner (female) as she felt females were more sensitive etc.
You could say that's making a choice?
Just read the thread backwards. This post obviously falls within that discussion already. Apologies. [Post edited 25 Oct 2022 13:00]
|  |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 14:59 - Oct 25 with 1692 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| What has/does TWTD make on 12:57 - Oct 25 by FrimleyBlue |
My cousin in law is bi. She had bfs. But decided to settle down with her partner (female) as she felt females were more sensitive etc.
You could say that's making a choice?
Just read the thread backwards. This post obviously falls within that discussion already. Apologies. [Post edited 25 Oct 2022 13:00]
|
No. She's bi. Settling down with one or the other doesn't mean she's stopped fancying the other and has therefore changed her sexuality. This isn't difficult! | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 15:38 - Oct 25 with 1673 views | J2BLUE |
| What has/does TWTD make on 14:59 - Oct 25 by The_Flashing_Smile |
No. She's bi. Settling down with one or the other doesn't mean she's stopped fancying the other and has therefore changed her sexuality. This isn't difficult! |
All this thread has proved is some people don't know what gay means. | |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 15:48 - Oct 25 with 1654 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| What has/does TWTD make on 15:38 - Oct 25 by J2BLUE |
All this thread has proved is some people don't know what gay means. |
And that Chico is cool with sexism but massively triggered by armbands (or lack of). |  | | |
| What has/does TWTD make on 16:04 - Oct 25 with 1635 views | J2BLUE |
| What has/does TWTD make on 15:48 - Oct 25 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
And that Chico is cool with sexism but massively triggered by armbands (or lack of). |
Yea, it's almost like he's completely disingenuous | |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:24 - Oct 25 with 1581 views | jeera |
| What has/does TWTD make on 12:50 - Oct 25 by The_Flashing_Smile |
It's not up to me to google something when it's you making the assertion. Now please share with us some evidence that some people chose to change their sexual orientation. To make such a bold claim, which goes against what everyone else thinks, you must have something to back it up? |
Does he think straight blokes decide which women they fancy that they see in the street? And visa versa. No, of course he doesn't.
If I am somewhere and I spot a lass I like it's not a conscious thing, I've noticed her before I've even realised it. So to speak. It's instinct.
I don't choose to fancy her, I just do.
To claim someone is attracted to another person through choice is stupid so to single that out as unique to people who are gay is by design, homophobic. | |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:30 - Oct 25 with 1571 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:24 - Oct 25 by jeera |
Does he think straight blokes decide which women they fancy that they see in the street? And visa versa. No, of course he doesn't.
If I am somewhere and I spot a lass I like it's not a conscious thing, I've noticed her before I've even realised it. So to speak. It's instinct.
I don't choose to fancy her, I just do.
To claim someone is attracted to another person through choice is stupid so to single that out as unique to people who are gay is by design, homophobic. |
Quite. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:31 - Oct 25 with 1575 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:24 - Oct 25 by jeera |
Does he think straight blokes decide which women they fancy that they see in the street? And visa versa. No, of course he doesn't.
If I am somewhere and I spot a lass I like it's not a conscious thing, I've noticed her before I've even realised it. So to speak. It's instinct.
I don't choose to fancy her, I just do.
To claim someone is attracted to another person through choice is stupid so to single that out as unique to people who are gay is by design, homophobic. |
Indeed. Attraction is an instinct and by nature (whether entirely genetic or partly environmental as studies suggest). What you choose to do with that attraction is the conscious action. There is a choice about the lifestyle and actions we lead. Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel. |  |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:49 - Oct 25 with 1547 views | jeera |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:31 - Oct 25 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Indeed. Attraction is an instinct and by nature (whether entirely genetic or partly environmental as studies suggest). What you choose to do with that attraction is the conscious action. There is a choice about the lifestyle and actions we lead. Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel. |
"Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel."
I am getting a Family Guy type scenario in my head where Griffin strongly disagrees with you.
That aside, I'm not sure it's anyone's place to say what people should or not act on when it comes to something personal like their sexuality. That reads like gay people should maybe choose to abstain because it's wrong.
I'm guessing that's not your intention there but does sound odd given the context. | |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 09:05 - Oct 26 with 1463 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:31 - Oct 25 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Indeed. Attraction is an instinct and by nature (whether entirely genetic or partly environmental as studies suggest). What you choose to do with that attraction is the conscious action. There is a choice about the lifestyle and actions we lead. Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel. |
Choosing not to act on your desires is very different from choosing not to be gay (or straight or bi) as Bluearmy71 was attesting. Your desires don't change just because you choose to do nothing with them.
You seem to be clutching at straws on his behalf, I'm not sure why. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 21:36 - Oct 26 with 1417 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:49 - Oct 25 by jeera |
"Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel."
I am getting a Family Guy type scenario in my head where Griffin strongly disagrees with you.
That aside, I'm not sure it's anyone's place to say what people should or not act on when it comes to something personal like their sexuality. That reads like gay people should maybe choose to abstain because it's wrong.
I'm guessing that's not your intention there but does sound odd given the context. |
The point I was making is that many people choose a monogamous relationship that they do not ditch just because they find someone else attractive. That many find someone attractive who is not available to them for whatever reason. That some choose to be single for a huge variety of reasons. And there are people who would desperately want a relationship with someone, but they do not have their feelings reciprocated.
None of that was meant to be applied specifically to either a single-sex or an opposite-sex attraction. In fact, virtually every one of the specific cases I had in mind would have involved opposite-sex attraction. | |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:00 - Oct 26 with 1397 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| What has/does TWTD make on 21:36 - Oct 26 by Nthsuffolkblue |
The point I was making is that many people choose a monogamous relationship that they do not ditch just because they find someone else attractive. That many find someone attractive who is not available to them for whatever reason. That some choose to be single for a huge variety of reasons. And there are people who would desperately want a relationship with someone, but they do not have their feelings reciprocated.
None of that was meant to be applied specifically to either a single-sex or an opposite-sex attraction. In fact, virtually every one of the specific cases I had in mind would have involved opposite-sex attraction. |
But everyone gets that. That's not the point of the discussion, so you either don't get the point or are building a straw man. The assertion is that you can just change your sexuality through choice, which is patently nonsense. What on earth has that got to do with the reciprocality of love?! | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:13 - Oct 26 with 1374 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:00 - Oct 26 by The_Flashing_Smile |
But everyone gets that. That's not the point of the discussion, so you either don't get the point or are building a straw man. The assertion is that you can just change your sexuality through choice, which is patently nonsense. What on earth has that got to do with the reciprocality of love?! |
No response, just a downarrow. QED. I hope that makes you think about what you posted. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:29 - Oct 26 with 1356 views | StokieBlue |
| What has/does TWTD make on 17:31 - Oct 25 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Indeed. Attraction is an instinct and by nature (whether entirely genetic or partly environmental as studies suggest). What you choose to do with that attraction is the conscious action. There is a choice about the lifestyle and actions we lead. Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel. |
This is veering dangerously close to the sentiments of 100 years ago in that homosexual inclinations are wrong and they shouldn't be acted upon.
I think you need to clarify that if it's not what you meant as in the context of this discussion it looks horrible.
SB | | | |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:44 - Oct 26 with 1316 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| What has/does TWTD make on 21:36 - Oct 26 by Nthsuffolkblue |
The point I was making is that many people choose a monogamous relationship that they do not ditch just because they find someone else attractive. That many find someone attractive who is not available to them for whatever reason. That some choose to be single for a huge variety of reasons. And there are people who would desperately want a relationship with someone, but they do not have their feelings reciprocated.
None of that was meant to be applied specifically to either a single-sex or an opposite-sex attraction. In fact, virtually every one of the specific cases I had in mind would have involved opposite-sex attraction. |
Skimming through the thread but to me it is obvious what you meant. Perhaps Brixton and Stokie are keen on the idea of being constantly surrounded by a homo/bi/heterosexual animal instinct driven orgy at all times.
But especially in Qatar!! [Post edited 26 Oct 2022 22:45]
|  |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:50 - Oct 26 with 1310 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:13 - Oct 26 by The_Flashing_Smile |
No response, just a downarrow. QED. I hope that makes you think about what you posted. |
I thought about replying but then thought you are simply trying to push a particular line here that is going down a rabbit hole (you already decided in your reply it was not relevant). I was clarifying a question from Jeera. You are then saying it is irrelevant to the overall context. Stokie is now picking up on it and trying to project it as a comment on homosexual practice specifically. I have clarified. I don't think it gains anything from getting drawn into further argument. But to make it absolutely clear here it is:
Stokie questioned whether sexual orientation is partly affected by environmental factors, and I gave the scientific evidence published for that.
My comments that you (and Stokie) are now trying to decide what they mean beyond what they say are from the following trail of question and response:
Me: "I think there is plenty of evidence that sexuality is a combination of innate and upbringing - a combination of genetic and environmental factors.
Everyone has a freedom to express their sexuality or not (although for many there are serious consequences to expressing it). I would like to think that we are all agreed that where governments and others persecute people for expressing their sexuality it is wrong. This has clearly happened in the past and still does now.
What often gets overlooked in this debate is the idea that sexual attraction does not have to determine behaviour. Plenty of people have chosen celibacy, abstinence or monogamy over satisfying their base desires for a variety of reasons."
Jeera: "To claim someone is attracted to another person through choice is stupid so to single that out as unique to people who are gay is by design, homophobic."
Me: "Indeed. Attraction is an instinct and by nature (whether entirely genetic or partly environmental as studies suggest). What you choose to do with that attraction is the conscious action. There is a choice about the lifestyle and actions we lead. Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel." That is not meant to suggest anything other than what I have already clearly stated. To then decide it is saying something else is simply disingenuous or a careless lack of reading. I am not sure what is unclear from what I have put here.
If it isn't already clear, I am in no way attempting to defend anything the OP has written. I was simply trying to clarify something that didn't seem clear and may have been impacting on the way I saw a potential misunderstanding in the debate. | |
| |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:57 - Oct 26 with 1300 views | StokieBlue |
| What has/does TWTD make on 22:50 - Oct 26 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I thought about replying but then thought you are simply trying to push a particular line here that is going down a rabbit hole (you already decided in your reply it was not relevant). I was clarifying a question from Jeera. You are then saying it is irrelevant to the overall context. Stokie is now picking up on it and trying to project it as a comment on homosexual practice specifically. I have clarified. I don't think it gains anything from getting drawn into further argument. But to make it absolutely clear here it is:
Stokie questioned whether sexual orientation is partly affected by environmental factors, and I gave the scientific evidence published for that.
My comments that you (and Stokie) are now trying to decide what they mean beyond what they say are from the following trail of question and response:
Me: "I think there is plenty of evidence that sexuality is a combination of innate and upbringing - a combination of genetic and environmental factors.
Everyone has a freedom to express their sexuality or not (although for many there are serious consequences to expressing it). I would like to think that we are all agreed that where governments and others persecute people for expressing their sexuality it is wrong. This has clearly happened in the past and still does now.
What often gets overlooked in this debate is the idea that sexual attraction does not have to determine behaviour. Plenty of people have chosen celibacy, abstinence or monogamy over satisfying their base desires for a variety of reasons."
Jeera: "To claim someone is attracted to another person through choice is stupid so to single that out as unique to people who are gay is by design, homophobic."
Me: "Indeed. Attraction is an instinct and by nature (whether entirely genetic or partly environmental as studies suggest). What you choose to do with that attraction is the conscious action. There is a choice about the lifestyle and actions we lead. Most people would say it is not right to act on every desire we feel." That is not meant to suggest anything other than what I have already clearly stated. To then decide it is saying something else is simply disingenuous or a careless lack of reading. I am not sure what is unclear from what I have put here.
If it isn't already clear, I am in no way attempting to defend anything the OP has written. I was simply trying to clarify something that didn't seem clear and may have been impacting on the way I saw a potential misunderstanding in the debate. |
Apologies for not replying the other day, it's been busy.
On the articles you posted, I read them and they were internally contradictory, I could post a paragraph from them which said that environmental factors were not a proven factor in sexual orientation.
I've looked at a few more papers and it seems the jury is very much out on this subject. As far as I can see there are no conclusions that it's either fully genetic or genetic and environmental. I certainly believe it could be in part environmental but that is different from your initial post which said it was the accepted view at the moment.
SB | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
