X and Y chromosomes!
 

Can somebody please clear up with Arista about the X and Y chromosomes. As in what they actually are..
he (or she) seems to think it determines a baby's sexuality rather than sex.

It determins sex, however you can produce enough of the Y chromsome to have a boy but not enough to make them manly. [Obviously not manly but its the best word I could think of]

Technically your both right.

I am a He,
and you can get Cross Cells.

This may help
https://www.caremark.com/Imagebank/A...ophilia_02.gif

Thank you. That is all correct. For diseases etc.
Homosexuality is not genetic

Wth diseases not homosexuality. Homosexuality isn't a physical illness or disease. It's just who you choose to have sexual relations with.

I am not on about any diseases.

I know that. But the point you are trying to make about the X and Y has got nothing to do with homosexuality.
They can determine your sex, whether you carry a disease or not but do not determine your sexuality.

You can argue your point till your blue in the face but do not say i lack education because you spoke in the other thread about it being 'proven, when it isn't.
(and your comment about bisexuality, very mature)

Being Gay or BiSexual
is Not a Lifestyle choice.


Fom was correct on that.

But that is a matter of opinion, or whatever you choose to believe.
You must admit you are wrong about the X and Y chromosomes though and understand my argument in that sense.



(BTW, what is your obsession with Fom. You seem to be taking every chance you can to try and please him or call him clever)

Homophobia (from Greek homós: one and the same; phóbos: fear, phobia) is an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals.[1][2][3] Some definitions lack the "irrational" component.[4][5] Homophobic is the adjective form of this term used to describe the qualities of these characteristics, while homophobe is the noun form given as a title to individuals labeled with homophobic characteristics. Homophobia was first used with its modern meaning in 1972, although it was coined in the mid-1950s. It has been criticized as a pejorative against those with differing value positions, with several researchers proposing alternative words to describe prejudice and discrimination against gays and lesbians. The term "internalized homophobia" is used to describe a prejudice against one's own homosexuality.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality


Do you understand what you are talking about?

No Obsession with Any Poster


Fom makes Clever Statements
nothing to do with a Obsession.

Fom makes clever statements?
'You are born gay, it's not a choice'

(well, woooo, give him a medal)

Being Gay or Bisexual is Natural

Being Straight is Natural.


You are Alone in your Bible Talk.

Why would Fom want a Medal?


Marsh I am not Fighting with you.

remember, you were the one who keeps mentioning churches and bibles!
I am not homophobic and i was trying to prove a point with the X and Y. (You said it was PROVEN. No it isn't)

We both have differing opinions. Now let's leave it at that.

(It was nice debating with you)

OK Marsh.
no problem.

It's down to opinion, obviously.

I personally take middle ground in that I believe some people are PREDISPOSED to be homosexual, and triggers from environment or upbringing bring this out.

Edit: Oh I see, Marsh is right in that it isn't proven. It's subjective.

The X and Y chromosones just determine gender

The combinations are usually XX or XY

YY only occurs rarely and is considered an abnormality

As for homosexuality there was some talk about the "Gay" gene, however if I recall correctly the accademic who proposed that was discredited.

To make an assertion that X or Y chromosones or any of the others causes this behaviour trait needs to be backed up with evidence, so it would be helpful Arista if you could cite your sources on this one and not just resort to statements like "It's natural", that in the trade is known as handwaving and is not legitimate as a debating technique.

You are born Gay
BiSexual
or Straight.


Sure Lauren
there is cases
of the wrong way of bringing a child up
that creates a change.

whatever is proven or not proven (nothing has been proved outright, that goes for pretty much everything), a persons sexuality is not something that is chosen! Or why would they try to deny those feelings? (especially those who were born into a society that said it was wrong- legally and morally)

Most evidence points to biological differences and my experience of gay people tells me that is so, nevermind any research.

Those feelings are NATURAL to them!

All this talk being gay is way off topic but hey what the heck.

I agree with everything arista sais you are born either gay bi or straight. nothing you do in life will change that outcome. But i suppose me being gay is going to make me say that.

although trying to see it from a straight persons view i can see why the might believe it be a lifestyle choice because they just cant understand why some men like men. Just how me, a gay guy, cant understand why men like women. To me its just completly mental.

Thank you. Someone with a brain who can understand what i'm trying to say. :dance2:

Finally, someone with some sense who doesn't just throw this homophobia nonsense at me. :hug:

The 'nature versus choice' debate is another thing.

This discussion is about whether it's possible to be born gay due to the X and Y chromosomes.
Some people slag off my 'lack' of education when they clearly need to backtrack themselves.

"PREDISPOSED to be homosexual, and triggers from environment or upbringing bring this out."
nah ... there's nothing to back that up....and it just sounds wrong. "predisposed" ....sounds like you think being gay is like some kind of psychosis or mental health issue.

Well I don't?

Just like I feel people are predisposed to being confident... that's not a psychosis or mental health issue either.

Plus I never said there is anything to back it up, I clearly stated that it was my feelings on the subject.

?
I'm not even sure what to say here? By your own admission your opinion is based on no facts nor data but instead on a feelling or something? lol...how can anyone argue against you then?... that's so tibb hehe

Ange7 it's not like you not to read posts :whistle:

If you saw my first post, I started with "it's subjective". This whole debate is. The only thing factual is about the chromosomes, and then the debate allowed for personal opinion. There are no FACTS about homosexuality and genetics - does this mean we should just not discuss the matter?

Theres no proof for much in this world. Evidence shows that there are differences in brain structure/chemistry of gay people. That is fact

:whistle: this smug emoticon is even more "tibb"ness.....kidding

ps yeah I read it ... I don't think it's subjective. Either there IS a genetic link or there isn't. There's nothing subjective about good science. Subjectiveness comes in when people try to interpret hard data and put their own spin into it.

Show me undisputed fact that homosexuality either IS or ISN'T genetic then? You'll find science arguing either way.

"you'll find" ( I can be condescending too)
that just because scientist argue doesn't mean one of them isn't right. Using their discord as a reason not to look at the data yourself is a cope out...."you'll find"

So how do you decide which one is right? "You'll find" you have to use your OWN interpretation.

no..."interpretation has spin in it.... by definition how you interpret stuff is defined by things cultural, religious ( even if you not religions), political etc. Fact are cold and honest.... 1 + 1 = 2. Once you want to make that data usable...ie turning it into information, then you need to interpret that data and start making assumption ..... but based on the data..... not on a "feelings" (.. ouch!! I think you'll find)

ps tom posed a link that netto was referring to in this thread about brain sizes.....http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm ... or are you after something from a science journal.

That article doesn't prove anything though. It shows a likelihood of something, or a suggestion of something. You agreed there are science articles showing otherwise, or showing that the findings don't suggest that homosexuality is genetic. So which one is correct, and why?

Edit: The APA are withstanding on their belief that it cannot be determined as of yet whether it is genetic or not. The whole debate is subjective. There are no objective findings surrounding the causal link.

Lauren
you must know some are born
the way they are.

Twin studies- twins raised apart- support biological factors also. No theres no hard proof as such but there is a growing body of evidence in support of differences in biological make-up of gay people. There are no common experiential factors in the upbringing/life of gay people.

And intuition and experience tells me that those feelings/preferences are entirely natural, its biology/chemistry n all that JazZ

...and aswell as the Swedish study (Tom mentioned), Le Vay 1993, http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2...ists-link.html

And I think this might be what Arista is thinking about, something along those lines maybe...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...explained.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4215427.stm

Exactly, which brings me back to my original point that it's a predisposition, but I obviously can't back this up with HARD PROOF, cos there exists none.