Yet more evidence it's not a choice...

[Ravenstorm]

Yes, humans are more complex than fruit flies. No question. Nature operates under consistent, logical laws however. Or, if you wish, under the laws your deity of choice decreed. There is no doubt that as the months and years go by, it will eventually be proven that there is a genetic component to sexuality in humans.

And that means that either 1) there is a reason for it to exist in Nature even if it's not apparent and/or 2) God wants it that way.

Article from the NY Times follows:


For Fruit Flies, Gene Shift Tilts Sex Orientation

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL,
International Herald Tribune
Published: June 3, 2005

When the genetically altered fruit fly was released into the observation chamber, it did what these breeders par excellence tend to do. It pursued a waiting virgin female. It gently tapped the girl with its leg, played her a song (using wings as instruments) and, only then, dared to lick her - all part of standard fruit fly seduction.

Oliver Meckes/Nicole Ottawa/ Photo Researchers, Inc.
One gene, apparently by itself, creates patterns of sexual behavior in fruit flies.
The observing scientist looked with disbelief at the show, for the suitor in this case was not a male, but a female that researchers had artificially endowed with a single male-type gene.

That one gene, the researchers are announcing today in the journal Cell, is apparently by itself enough to create patterns of sexual behavior - a kind of master sexual gene that normally exists in two distinct male and female variants.

In a series of experiments, the researchers found that females given the male variant of the gene acted exactly like males in courtship, madly pursuing other females. Males that were artificially given the female version of the gene became more passive and turned their sexual attention to other males.

"We have shown that a single gene in the fruit fly is sufficient to determine all aspects of the flies' sexual orientation and behavior," said the paper's lead author, Dr. Barry Dickson, senior scientist at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology at the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna. "It's very surprising.

"What it tells us is that instinctive behaviors can be specified by genetic programs, just like the morphologic development of an organ or a nose."

The results are certain to prove influential in debates about whether genes or environment determine who we are, how we act and, especially, our sexual orientation, although it is not clear now if there is a similar master sexual gene for humans.

Still, experts said they were both awed and shocked by the findings. "The results are so clean and compelling, the whole field of the genetic roots of behavior is moved forward tremendously by this work," said Dr. Michael Weiss, chairman of the department of biochemistry at Case Western Reserve University. "Hopefully this will take the discussion about sexual preferences out of the realm of morality and put it in the realm of science."

He added: "I never chose to be heterosexual; it just happened. But humans are complicated. With the flies we can see in a simple and elegant way how a gene can influence and determine behavior."

The finding supports scientific evidence accumulating over the past decade that sexual orientation may be innately programmed into the brains of men and women. Equally intriguing, the researchers say, is the possibility that a number of behaviors - hitting back when feeling threatened, fleeing when scared or laughing when amused - may also be programmed into human brains, a product of genetic heritage.

"This is a first - a superb demonstration that a single gene can serve as a switch for complex behaviors," said Dr. Gero Miesenboeck, a professor of cell biology at Yale.

Dr. Dickson, the lead author, said he ran into the laboratory when an assistant called him on a Sunday night with the results. "This really makes you think about how much of our behavior, perhaps especially sexual behaviors, has a strong genetic component," he said.

All the researchers cautioned that any of these wired behaviors set by master genes will probably be modified by experience. Though male fruit flies are programmed to pursue females, Dr. Dickson said, those that are frequently rejected over time become less aggressive in their mating behavior.

When a normal male fruit fly is introduced to a virgin female, they almost immediately begin foreplay and then copulate for 20 minutes. In fact, Dr. Dickson and his co-author, Dr. Ebru Demir of the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology, specifically chose to look for the genetic basis of fly sexual behavior precisely because it seemed so strong and instinctive and, therefore, predictable.

Scientists have known for several years that the master sexual gene, known as fru, was central to mating, coordinating a network of neurons that were involved in the male fly's courtship ritual. Last year, Dr. Bruce Baker of Stanford University discovered that the mating circuit controlled by the gene involved 60 nerve cells and that if any of these were damaged or destroyed by the scientists, the animal could not mate properly. Both male and female flies have the same genetic material as well as the neural circuitry required for the mating ritual, but different parts of the genes are turned on in the two sexes. But no one dreamed that simply activating the normally dormant male portion of the gene in a female fly could cause a genetic female to display the whole elaborate panoply of male fruit fly foreplay.

Raven

[Fallen]

So this study is showing that homosexuality is a genetic anomaly?

[ElanthianSiren]

I believe that genetic components to sexuality were already found in the hypothalamus of the brain; the danger of that is what if you get some psychopath (like Hitler) who wants to eliminate all homosexuals? While I personally find sexuality research fascinating and believe as you do, (It's not really a choice), I could see that as a reason that conclusive studies that support this point may not be publicized.

-Melissa

[Nakiro]

Looks like it to me.

Yeah, I read a little bit about it in the Times today. I didn't see anything about drosophila melanogaster causing the downfall of mankind after it was endowed with the extra gene, so I guess we're safe for now.

Edited for grammar.

[Edited on 6-3-2005 by Stanley Burrell]

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by ElanthianSiren
I believe that genetic components to sexuality were already found in the hypothalamus of the brain; the danger of that is what if you get some psychopath (like Hitler) who wants to eliminate all homosexuals?

Personally, I'd say that's highly unlikely. I used the term 'genetic component' because I don't think it's purely genetic. From the research I've read, I'm guessing that there are several genes that can - not will - determine if someone ends up gay. But those genes also need to be activated by something else that's undetermined.

When an identical twin is gay, there's almost a sixty percent chance that his twin will be gay but if they're fraternal twins, the chance drops to less than twenty five percent. Obviously, genes play a factor but not alone. Another study showed that the odds of a male being gay are greater the more older brothers he has. There's an obvious implication that something in the mother's physiology changes the more sons she gives birth to and that it then affects the developing fetuses.

A single gene might be enough for a fruit fly but not for a human.

Raven

[HarmNone]

I really have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that there are still people who believe it IS a choice. :?:

[Fallen]

A choice to be homosexual? No. A choice of how one portrays themselves AS a homosexual? I believe there is some choice in that.

[ElanthianSiren]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm

Originally posted by ElanthianSiren
I believe that genetic components to sexuality were already found in the hypothalamus of the brain; the danger of that is what if you get some psychopath (like Hitler) who wants to eliminate all homosexuals?

Personally, I'd say that's highly unlikely. I used the term 'genetic component' because I don't think it's purely genetic. From the research I've read, I'm guessing that there are several genes that can - not will - determine if someone ends up gay. But those genes also need to be activated by something else that's undetermined.

When an identical twin is gay, there's almost a sixty percent chance that his twin will be gay but if they're fraternal twins, the chance drops to less than twenty five percent. Obviously, genes play a factor but not alone. Another study showed that the odds of a male being gay are greater the more older brothers he has. There's an obvious implication that something in the mother's physiology changes the more sons she gives birth to and that it then affects the developing fetuses.

A single gene might be enough for a fruit fly but not for a human.

Raven

Damn ferret walked on the keyboard :) she's so curious.

Anyway, as I was saying, I think you're right. There are several components, several of which are nurture.

Curiously, are you quoting Kinsley's research? -I think I've read that he was guilty of very-extensive number tampering. If not, I'd really love to read your source on the human twins. :) I know, I'm a nerd.

Also, what HN said.

-Melissa

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Fallen
A choice to be homosexual? No. A choice of how one portrays themselves AS a homosexual? I believe there is some choice in that.

That's generally how I feel about it too.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Fallen
A choice to be homosexual? No. A choice of how one portrays themselves AS a homosexual? I believe there is some choice in that.

There's a choice in how one portrays themselves as any gender, whether the one they appear to be, or otherwise.

[Wezas]

In my experience (no research done, just observing) most twins that are 1 male & 1 female end up with a masculine female and effeminate male.

(Google spell check rocks. No way I could spell effeminate the first try)

[Shalla]

Originally posted by Fallen
A choice to be homosexual? No. A choice of how one portrays themselves AS a homosexual? I believe there is some choice in that.

It should also apply to heterosexuals, that if one is sure about their sexuality, they shouldn't fear homosexuals. One should not potray themselves a gay bashing homophobic just to prove the world they are straight.

tired, but good read and very enlightening. Thanks.

Edit: Er not implying that fallen is homophobic, just a general statement.

[Edited on 6-3-2005 by Lady Shalla]

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by HarmNone
I really have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that there are still people who believe it IS a choice. :?:

They have to believe it's a choice. If it's not, it makes them bigots who are no better than the KKK. And that would be a bad thing.



Originally posted by Fallen
A choice of how one portrays themselves AS a homosexual? I believe there is some choice in that.

Certainly. What actual lifestyle you live is a choice. You can party all night and do drugs or you can dress in leather and ride motorcycles or you can buy a house with a white picket fence and raise a family.

These are all options that are open to both gays and straights and are partaken of by both gays and straights. And if people were to just condemn particular choices that are behavioral - such as choosing to wallow in drug induced euphoria - there'd be no problem.

Raven

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Lady Shalla

Originally posted by Fallen
A choice to be homosexual? No. A choice of how one portrays themselves AS a homosexual? I believe there is some choice in that.

It should also apply to heterosexuals

OMG Arkans she's talking about your Prada!

[Liberi Fatali]

This experiment sounds almost identical to one that was already done.

They found a Drosophila gene called 'fruitless', which is expressed in the central nervous system, and affects behavior.

As the article stated, typically a male does his mating behavior, which includes orienting and following a female, tapping her with his forelegs, singing a species-specific courtship song (extending, and vibrating one wing), licking the genitalia of the female, and curling the abdomen to attempt copulation.

The fruitless mutants show aberrant mating behavior. The male flies court indiscriminately (court both females and other males). They always fail to copulate, however.

In the absence of females, the males form mating chains.

The point of the research, according to my entomology professor, was to pose the question, "Do Drosophila have a gay gene?" The answer, though, is not really. Fruitless Drosophilia lose non-preference for males -- however, they do attempt to mate with other males. This proves that genes are associated with atypical sexual behavior.

My professor stated the following on the implications for humans aspect (this is taken directly from a slide she gave to us, some of which does not make sense to me due to her shitty use of typing):

* Genes in fruit flies can affect sexual orientation.

* Human relationships more complex.

* Genetic components to social behavior

* Humans are social. Drosophilia are solitary.

* More than just mating

* Defense, care of offspring, gathering and resources.

Tabor.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by ElanthianSiren
Curiously, are you quoting Kinsley's research? -I think I've read that he was guilty of very-extensive number tampering. If not, I'd really love to read your source on the human twins. :) I know, I'm a nerd

(delayed reply to research the exact info requested)

No, I'm not sure how much stock I put in Kinsey. I prefer to go by more recent research that can be scientifically proven and exposed to peer review.

The twin study took place in 1991 by a Michael Bailey, a PHD in psychology from Northwestern University. The percentage of identical twins who were gay was 52% while the fraternal twins were only 22% and adopted twins 11%. Now, one problem with the study was a small sampling size but that's not terribly unusual for the time. Nowadays, a lot more people are willing to admit to being gay so it's actually possible to get a decent sampling.

Critics of the study say 'Oh, look. If it was genetic, then 100% of the identical twins would be gay. Obviously, it's not.' Of course, if there were no genetic component at all then there would be no difference in the numbers between identical and fraternal twins. What's obvious is that it seems it is not /just/ genetics.

The study about the older brothers is much more recent and done by Italians so I'm having some trouble finding it now.

Another very recent study was done by Brian Mustanski who posits from his research that three different chromosones play a heavy factor in homosexuality. To quote him:


"There is no one 'gay' gene," said Mustanski, a psychologist in the UIC department of psychiatry and lead author of the study. "Sexual orientation is a complex trait, so it's not surprising that we found several DNA regions involved in its expression."

"Our best guess is that multiple genes, potentially interacting with environmental influences, explain differences in sexual orientation."

Raven

[xtc]

Interesting article. I don't pretend to have a science background. If they do identify a gene for creating patterns of sexual behaviour in humans, would it be unethical or wrong to change a same sex preference to opposite sex preference? (assuming that is possible)

[Edited on 6-3-2005 by xtc]

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by xtc
If they do identify a gene for creating patterns of sexual behaviour in humans, would it be unethical or wrong to change a same sex preference to opposite sex preference? (assuming that is possible

This question came up once before in this thread (http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=5952). I reread what I wrote then and I still can't answer it any better than I did then.

Raven

[Jorddyn]

Originally posted by HarmNone
I really have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that there are still people who believe it IS a choice. :?:

You'd find a conversation with my father on the topic quite... um... "enlightening" then.

Jorddyn

[Edited on 6-3-2005 by HarmNone]

[HarmNone]

Heh. Probably not, Jorddyn. I've had such conversations before and come away no more enlightened than I was before. :lol:

[Delirium]

The differences in twins identical and fraternal, i have a question. If the identical twins have the same genes then couldnt it be the nurture instead of nature, the way their parents raise them and what not. Their exact genes might be why they are more likely to react the same to it where as it isnt as likely in fraternal. Id be curious about other behaviors and how likely they are in identical and fraternal. Also with the lots of older brothers being more likely. Couldnt that be nurture as well? That somehow the human reaction is more likely to be gay when surrounded by that many brothers or that there is more likely to be an action, like abuse, that could make it more likely? I swear im not arguing that there isnt a genetic component here, just curious. I do believe that it isnt a choice.

[Ravenstorm]

Possible? Sure, I suppose so. That's one reason why it's not a conclusive study by itself. It's when you look at them all that it becomes pretty self evident.

Oh, and to go back to the mention of the hypothalamus for a moment, the same differences have been found in gay sheep so that confirms Lavey's findings. Though that speaks more to there being a biological difference thana genetic one. Of course, genes also determine how organs develops so who's to say.

Raven

[Latrinsorm]

I don't get why merely thinking that homosexuality is a choice is grounds for derision.

Good experiment. :)

[Jorddyn]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
I don't get why merely thinking that homosexuality is a choice is grounds for derision.


Perhaps more disbelief than derision.

Jorddyn

[Latrinsorm]

Disbelief I get. This (http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=15093#pid372851) struck me as more derisive though.

[HarmNone]

Not derision, at all, Latrinsorm. Simple truth. I have had such conversations, on numerous occasions, and have come away just as disbelieving as I was when the conversation started. I still have no clue why someone would believe that being gay is a choice.

[Jorddyn]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
Disbelief I get. This (http://forum.gsplayers.com/viewthread.php?tid=15093#pid372851) struck me as more derisive though.

If you're referring to my comment, I have had more than one conversation on the topic with my father. His comment is always along the lines of "they're just out to get sex with anyone they can". When I point out that he had the exact same motive when he originally met my mom, his only response is "it's different!" His belief that it is a choice, therefore, appears to me to be little more than an ingrained prejudice, and I hardly find it worthy of anything but disdain.

If you weren't referring to my statement, I obviously can't speak to the mindstate of others, but I've not felt anything in this thread to be belittling.

Jorddyn

[HarmNone]

Nor have I found any derision in this thread, Jorddyn. So far, it's maintained a pretty open and fair presentation, in my opinion.

[Back]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
Yes, humans are more complex than fruit flies. No question. Nature operates under consistent, logical laws however. Or, if you wish, under the laws your deity of choice decreed. There is no doubt that as the months and years go by, it will eventually be proven that there is a genetic component to sexuality in humans.

OK, you’re gay. Its ok. You don’t need to rationalize it.

Originally posted by Backlash

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
Yes, humans are more complex than fruit flies. No question. Nature operates under consistent, logical laws however. Or, if you wish, under the laws your deity of choice decreed. There is no doubt that as the months and years go by, it will eventually be proven that there is a genetic component to sexuality in humans.

OK, you’re gay. Its ok. You don’t need to rationalize it.

harmnone is going to get you

[Back]

When she does, look for a “Banned” title under my handle.

Until then? In the infamous words of Beatrix Kiddo, I’m gonna kill Bill.

[HarmNone]

Well, I'll amend what I said earlier. Up until now, I saw no derision in this thread. Thanks, Backlash. :rolleyes:

well I tried too harmnone :nudges: my post got yanked

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by HarmNone
Not derision, at all, Latrinsorm.I misconstrued the smiley I guess.
Originally posted by Jorddyn
If you're referring to my comment,I was referring to the one I linked to. :)

[xtc]

Originally posted by HarmNone
I really have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that there are still people who believe it IS a choice. :?:


I think considering there has been no decisive proof one way or the other it is important to keep one's mind open to all possibilities. To truly find the cause of anything one must be open to everything, the evidence must determine the conclusion; the conclusion must not determine the evidence. Here is an alternate view; I am not posting this to start anti-gay posts only an intelligent discussion.

http://salmon.psy.plym.ac.uk/year3/tahir.html

[AnticorRifling]

More people need to be like me. Bugger whatever you want just let me watch football.

[HarmNone]

I'd freaking love to see an intelligent discussion on these boards. it would be such a lovely surprise, xtc! However, to think people could discuss something this complex without resorting to throwing stones at those different than themselves, or imagining some dreadful conspiracy, is too much to ask, I suppose.

Back to my efforts at an intelligent discussion:

I agree that one should keep an open mind. I think most thinking people try to do so. However, for any of us, there are some concepts around which our minds will not reach. I've never been able, as I've said, to grasp how it could be possible that being gay is simply a matter of choice. I've tried to understand, but I simply cannot.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by AnticorRifling
More people need to be like me. Bugger whatever you want just let me watch football.

I think I'm about to reach that point, Anticor. Just hand me a beer and a ragged wife-beater and I'll hang out on the porch amongst the empty beer cans and old refrigerators. :(

[AnticorRifling]

Originally posted by HarmNone
I'd freaking love to see an intelligent discussion on these boards. it would be such a lovely surprise, xtc! However, to think people could discuss something this complex without resorting to throwing stones at those different than themselves, or imagining some dreadful conspiracy, is too much to ask, I suppose.

Back to my efforts at an intelligent discussion:

I agree that one should keep an open mind. I think most thinking people try to do so. However, for any of us, there are some concepts around which our minds will not reach. I've never been able, as I've said, to grasp how it could be possible that being gay is simply a matter of choice. I've tried to understand, but I simply cannot.

Kidding aside I think about homosexuality like I think about hetrosexuality. People are different it's what makes us so cool as a species. If we were all the same it would be boring as hell. I don't care one way or the other nor do I tend to dwell on it being a choice or it being "hard wired" Personally I think it's a bit of both but I don't think it matters.

My whole ethos is respect everyone but the stupid. You can love men, women, triple thick malts from the soda shop, whatever you want to love. As long as you're not pushing me to convert to your ways and I'm not doing the same to you then we should have no problems.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by HarmNone
I think I'm about to reach that point, Anticor. Just hand me a beer and a ragged wife-beater and I'll hang out on the porch amongst the empty beer cans and old refrigerators. :(

That's hot.

[Edited on 6-4-2005 by Hulkein]

[AnticorRifling]

Originally posted by HarmNone

Originally posted by AnticorRifling
More people need to be like me. Bugger whatever you want just let me watch football.

I think I'm about to reach that point, Anticor. Just hand me a beer and a ragged wife-beater and I'll hang out on the porch amongst the empty beer cans and old refrigerators. :(

I don't drink beer, I don't wear wife beaters, I don't have a refrigerator on my porch or empties. I don make some mean nachos though.


I'm so dao that sponges scare me. :cool:

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by AnticorRifling

Originally posted by HarmNone
I'd freaking love to see an intelligent discussion on these boards. it would be such a lovely surprise, xtc! However, to think people could discuss something this complex without resorting to throwing stones at those different than themselves, or imagining some dreadful conspiracy, is too much to ask, I suppose.

Back to my efforts at an intelligent discussion:

I agree that one should keep an open mind. I think most thinking people try to do so. However, for any of us, there are some concepts around which our minds will not reach. I've never been able, as I've said, to grasp how it could be possible that being gay is simply a matter of choice. I've tried to understand, but I simply cannot.

Kidding aside I think about homosexuality like I think about hetrosexuality. People are different it's what makes us so cool as a species. If we were all the same it would be boring as hell. I don't care one way or the other nor do I tend to dwell on it being a choice or it being "hard wired" Personally I think it's a bit of both but I don't think it matters.

My whole ethos is respect everyone but the stupid. You can love men, women, triple thick malts from the soda shop, whatever you want to love. As long as you're not pushing me to convert to your ways and I'm not doing the same to you then we should have no problems.

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Anticor. You just made my night! Gods, I needed to hear that! :)

[AnticorRifling]

Originally posted by HarmNone

Originally posted by AnticorRifling

Originally posted by HarmNone
I'd freaking love to see an intelligent discussion on these boards. it would be such a lovely surprise, xtc! However, to think people could discuss something this complex without resorting to throwing stones at those different than themselves, or imagining some dreadful conspiracy, is too much to ask, I suppose.

Back to my efforts at an intelligent discussion:

I agree that one should keep an open mind. I think most thinking people try to do so. However, for any of us, there are some concepts around which our minds will not reach. I've never been able, as I've said, to grasp how it could be possible that being gay is simply a matter of choice. I've tried to understand, but I simply cannot.

Kidding aside I think about homosexuality like I think about hetrosexuality. People are different it's what makes us so cool as a species. If we were all the same it would be boring as hell. I don't care one way or the other nor do I tend to dwell on it being a choice or it being "hard wired" Personally I think it's a bit of both but I don't think it matters.

My whole ethos is respect everyone but the stupid. You can love men, women, triple thick malts from the soda shop, whatever you want to love. As long as you're not pushing me to convert to your ways and I'm not doing the same to you then we should have no problems.

Thank you, thank you, thank you, Anticor. You just made my night! Gods, I needed to hear that! :)

So naked time is a go?!

[HarmNone]

Anticor, darling, I think I'd let you dance naked with me in my Grove! I love you. I truly do! :kiss:

[xtc]

Originally posted by HarmNone
I'd freaking love to see an intelligent discussion on these boards. it would be such a lovely surprise, xtc! However, to think people could discuss something this complex without resorting to throwing stones at those different than themselves, or imagining some dreadful conspiracy, is too much to ask, I suppose.

Back to my efforts at an intelligent discussion:

I agree that one should keep an open mind. I think most thinking people try to do so. However, for any of us, there are some concepts around which our minds will not reach. I've never been able, as I've said, to grasp how it could be possible that being gay is simply a matter of choice. I've tried to understand, but I simply cannot.

I haven't reached any conclusions on the matter and find all new information interesting. Perhaps choice is a poor word, it is the old nature/nuture argument. If it is strictly a matter of genetics than all identical twins should be either both straight or both gay. I think whatever the answer is, it won't be simple.

[HarmNone]

That was my point, xtc. As I said, I've never been able to grasp how people could believe that being gay is a simple matter of choice.

[AnticorRifling]

Identical twins could be different at the most basic level so one could have the switch on and the other the switch is off. So I don't think identical twins is an end all be all example.

I still think your sexuality is going to be a combo of genetics + personal choice + outside influnce.

I don't know how each would be weighted or if that's all the variables but I do think it's going to be a more complex formula than just one thing being the deciding factor.

I think genetics makes you more prone, MAYBE.. I think a TON of it is outside influence though.

- Arkans

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Fallen
So this study is showing that homosexuality is a genetic anomaly?

No.


Originally posted by Nakiro
Looks like it to me.

You would be incorrect.


Originally posted by Fallen
A choice to be homosexual? No. A choice of how one portrays themselves AS a homosexual? I believe there is some choice in that.

Just as one has a choice in how they conduct themselves as a heterosexual.

All irrelevant to the article.


Originally posted by xtc
Interesting article. I don't pretend to have a science background. If they do identify a gene for creating patterns of sexual behaviour in humans, would it be unethical or wrong to change a same sex preference to opposite sex preference? (assuming that is possible)


It would be possible the day we are able to engineer our offspring.

Ethics depends completely on the parents and the geneticists performing the genetic alterations. Personally, I don't think such a thing should ever be attempted unless the child will have some sort of mental retardation or physical handicap.


Originally posted by Latrinsorm
I don't get why merely thinking that homosexuality is a choice is grounds for derision.


I think he explained that very well.

Look at it this way. A person who hates black people is obviously racist. A person can't decide what color they are born and hating someone due to skin color is pretty ignorant to begin with. Now, a person who hates the mentally handicapped is obviously a scum bag. He/she hates people that have no control over how they were born.

It is far more acceptable to dislike or hate criminals. They make a choice. It's ok to hate racists .... they make a choice. It's ok to loath people of opposing political views ... they chose views differing from your own. It's ok to hate gay people because .... they obviously choose to be gay.

Get it yet?

[Ravenstorm]

I'm kind of curious about something...

Whether it's genetics, biology, physiology, some combination of the above, I don't know. Possibly all. But speaking from my own experience, I'm saying point blank that it was never a choice.

So what I'm curious about is for anyone who thinks that a choice was involved. On what are you basing your opinion? Mind you, I'm not talking about actions. Whether to engage in homosexual behavior or not is certainly a choice just as it's one to engage in heterosexual behavior. I'm talking solely on sexual preference.

Did you, at some point, say 'No, I'm not going to be gay'?

Raven

[Drew2]

I need this gene plz.

I have someone I need to give it to.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Tayre
I need this gene plz.

I have someone I need to give it to.

It's very likely that the person you want to give to already has it. It's just not expressed.

[HarmNone]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
I'm kind of curious about something...

Whether it's genetics, biology, physiology, some combination of the above, I don't know. Possibly all. But speaking from my own experience, I'm saying point blank that it was never a choice.

So what I'm curious about is for anyone who thinks that a choice was involved. On what are you basing your opinion? Mind you, I'm not talking about actions. Whether to engage in homosexual behavior or not is certainly a choice just as it's one to engage in heterosexual behavior. I'm talking solely on sexual preference.

Did you, at some point, say 'No, I'm not going to be gay'?

Raven

Absolutely not, Raven. My sexuality is as it is just because...well, because it is. I never made a conscious decision to be straight. I just am. I have to assume it's the same for gay people. To assume otherwise is beyond my comprehension.

[AnticorRifling]

Maybe not a consious choice but on the subconsious level. Paging mister Freud!

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by AnticorRifling
Maybe not a consious choice but on the subconsious level. Paging mister Freud!

All right. What leads you to believe that?

Raven

[Parkbandit]

I've always liked girls... so I never had to have that conversation in my head.

[Delirium]

I dont see how it can be a choice of who you're attracted to. Ive been attracted to some pretty crazy arse women. If there was a choice involved id make myself be disgusted by their appearance. The choice of not persuing them is definately there but not being attracted in the first place? Not for me anyway.

It is a choice to poke them though. You don't have to do it.

[Delirium]

Of course not. Having sex, gay or straight will always be a choice. I am talking about the kind of people we are attracted to and if it is a choice.

[Apotheosis]

yeah <-- habitually addicted to crazy chicks, about to relapse soon

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by AnticorRifling
You can love ... triple thick malts from the soda shopOnly after you buy them, please.
Originally posted by Tsa`ah
It is far more acceptable to dislike or hate criminals. They make a choice. It's ok to hate racists .... they make a choice. It's ok to loath people of opposing political views ... they chose views differing from your own. It's ok to hate gay people because .... they obviously choose to be gay.I don't think it's acceptable to hate anyone. However, I don't see how that applies to my question. If you'll notice, neither Harmnone nor I made any reference to hating.

[Tsa`ah]

I don't think it's acceptable to hate anyone. However, I don't see how that applies to my question. If you'll notice, neither Harmnone nor I made any reference to hating.

Hate, fear, loath ... view as wrong, evil, or an aberration.

Take your pick guy. Saying it is a choice, believing it is a choice is the only justification people have for any negative view on homosexuality.

Now if it is proven that one does not have a choice, well that just makes a very large group of people look like a collection of "hoods and sheets" fans.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Saying it is a choice, believing it is a choice is the only justification people have for any negative view on homosexuality.And having a knife is the only way to kill someone with a knife. That doesn't mean having a knife is an inherently bad thing (like killing someone with a knife). If Harmnone had said "People who hate gay people sure are dumb :lol:" I would have been right there with her. (And yes, I realize that that isn't the sort of thing Harmnone generally says. That's not the point.)

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
And having a knife is the only way to kill someone with a knife.

Which is relevant how?


That doesn't mean having a knife is an inherently bad thing (like killing someone with a knife).

So you're implying that it's ok to be gay ... just not to have gay sex?

[Delirium]

I think he is saying its ok to think being gay is a choice but it isnt ok to hate them because of it.

[Edited on 6-4-2005 by Delirium]

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Delirium
I think he is saying its ok to think being gay is a choice but it isnt ok to hate them because of it.Correct.

To clarify the metaphor:

Having a knife: thinking that being gay is a choice.
Stabbing someone with a knife: hating gay people because being gay is a choice.

Can't have the second without the first, but that doesn't make the first bad.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
To clarify the metaphor:

Having a knife: thinking that being gay is a choice.
Stabbing someone with a knife: hating gay people because being gay is a choice.

To elaborate on the metaphor:

Thinking that being gay is a choice: thinking someone has a knife.

It might not make a difference but it can also be used as an excuse to shoot the person. And it's an excuse being used all over the world.

Raven

[Back]

To weigh in on this a little more soberly... I don’t see how it could be choice. I mean, when I see a chick with a hot bod, stacked and backed, the procreation instinct kicks in. I’ve always been this way since I was little. Its not like one day I work up and decided it.

Also, how could attraction be a choice? Do people just wake up one day and say, hey, from now on I’m going to be attracted to women with an ass like a police horse?

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
It might not make a difference but it can also be used as an excuse to shoot the person. And it's an excuse being used all over the world.While that's something that should be condemned, it would be extremely bad precedent to condemn people who have only been identified with the first.

[AnticorRifling]

What I hate is if I get in a fight with someone regardless of the reason and they are gay or a race other than me it's a hate crime and the real reason for the scuffle/action is overlooked.

I think being gay and or being of a different race is being used way to often to overshadow other issues involved in crimes. All crimes are hate crimes. You don't shoot someone you love.

[DeV]

Originally posted by Parkbandit
I've always liked girls... so I never had to have that conversation in my head. Same...

[Drew]

Originally posted by HarmNone
I really have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea that there are still people who believe it IS a choice. :?:


What do you say about people who were homosexual for 20 years and then changed?

[Ravenstorm]

That they didn't. Even some of the so-called 'ex-gay' groups admit that they only repress and ignore their feelings. You could refuse to have sex with women and force yourself to do only guys. That doesn't make you gay.

Raven

[Drew]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
That they didn't. Even some of the so-called 'ex-gay' groups admit that they only repress and ignore their feelings. You could refuse to have sex with women and force yourself to do only guys. That doesn't make you gay.

Raven


Kind of sounds like you don't want to believe what a significant number of people are saying because it doesn't mesh with your views. Not that both sides aren't guilty of that, but when I think about it, it just reminds me of a bunch of people with their hands over their ears yelling 'LA LA LA LA!"

[Ravenstorm]

Go read the official statements from the APA on reversion therapy for yourself and how it works. Go read the mission statements of these groups. Go read the 'testimonials' and how they often mention talk about having to supress their feelings when they reemerge but 'with the power of God' they know they won't give in to temptation! And lets not forget how the founder of, I think it's Exodus, was found recently in a gay bar.

That's not being 'cured'. But you too can believe what you want.

Raven

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Drew
What do you say about people who were homosexual for 20 years and then changed?

Maybe ....

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Drew
Kind of sounds like you don't want to believe what a significant number of people are saying because it doesn't mesh with your views.

A significant number of people claim that the holocaust didn't happen.

A significant number of people believe Elvis is still alive.

A significant number of people believe that the trip to the moon was a staged event that really didn't happen.

A significant number of people believe that because they are white, they are superior to any other ethnicity.

A significant number of people believing anything does not make it so.


Not that both sides aren't guilty of that, but when I think about it, it just reminds me of a bunch of people with their hands over their ears yelling 'LA LA LA LA!"

Ironic.

However there is a big difference here. One group only has a book of fiction to go on, the other is exploring scientific reasoning. Guess which one is performing the “la la las”?

[Drew]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

A significant number of people claim that the holocaust didn't happen.

A significant number of people believe Elvis is still alive.

A significant number of people believe that the trip to the moon was a staged event that really didn't happen.

A significant number of people believe that because they are white, they are superior to any other ethnicity.


Wait, these aren't true? Now I have to rethink everything.

[Back]

Look at how many pedophiles are in the clergy. So much for that “cure.”

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
A significant number of people claim that the holocaust didn't happen.

A significant number of people believe Elvis is still alive.

A significant number of people believe that the trip to the moon was a staged event that really didn't happen.

A significant number of people believe that because they are white, they are superior to any other ethnicity.

A significant number of people believing anything does not make it so.The flaw in your analogy is each of those examples is a belief about something outside, whereas Drew is talking about something internal. To tell a group of people that they are incorrect about their own sexual orientation is pretty condescending and rather
Ironic.considering I've heard the same tactic used by the opposing side you seem to have so much disgust for.

Raven's post, on the other hand, was an effective rebuttal. I know you don't read every post in a thread before responding to it, but it's the one directly before that pic you posted.

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Latrinsorm
The flaw in your analogy is each of those examples is a belief about something outside, whereas Drew is talking about something internal. To tell a group of people that they are incorrect about their own sexual orientation is pretty condescending and rather
Ironic.

Yet daily gays are told that they are "wrong".

The analogy is only flawed to you. What you propose is no different than telling a group of Elvis freaks that he is indeed dead, and has been for some time.

Nice to see you missed the point entirely though.

I'm willing to bet an a large chunk of cash that almost every case of a gay person being "cured" is due to pressure, guilt, and exhaustion, not because they woke up one day and decided being gay was wrong.

[Edited on 6-5-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[xtc]

This thread is going downhill in a hurry. The "causes" of homosexuality are still to be determined, maybe genetics, maybe environment, maybe both. Arguing at this point is useless because we lack information.

If someone "chooses" to live a homosexual lifestyle so be it. If someone "chooses" to go to exodus or some such similiar program so be it.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah
Yet daily gays are told that they are "wrong".That is in fact what I was referring to when I said: "considering I've heard the same tactic used by the opposing side you seem to have so much disgust for."
What you propose is no different than telling a group of Elvis freaks that he is indeed dead, and has been for some time. It's entirely different, and I don't see how you're missing this. To make the analogy work, you would be telling said Elvis freaks that they did not believe Elvis was alive. The proposition that you know what I (for example) believe or find attractive better than I do is what is condescending (at best).

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by xtc
This thread is going downhill in a hurry. The "causes" of homosexuality are still to be determined, maybe genetics, maybe environment, maybe both. Arguing at this point is useless because we lack information.

If someone "chooses" to live a homosexual lifestyle so be it. If someone "chooses" to go to exodus or some such similiar program so be it.

I completely agree.

I still don't understand why the argument has to be made of whether it's a choice or not. They're living the life, why does it need to be justified? It doesn't matter. Just let it go already.

[Snapp]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
I completely agree.

I still don't understand why the argument has to be made of whether it's a choice or not. They're living the life, why does it need to be justified? It doesn't matter. Just let it go already.
I think it's mostly frustration that makes people want to prove it's not a choice... mostly because many of us know it's not. I understand you're point though, and frankly, I don't really care what other people think if it doesn't effect me.

[DeV]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
I completely agree.

I still don't understand why the argument has to be made of whether it's a choice or not. They're living the life, why does it need to be justified? It doesn't matter. Just let it go already. :clap: I've reached a point where I don't feel a need to justify anything about my sexuality any longer. I'm confortable with labeling myself a femme dyke; it's who I am. I feel slightly disgusted that I ever felt that way in the past, but I think it's something most of us if not all go through at some point. Not everyone reaches this point sadly.

Maybe I'd feel differently if my family didn't accept it because... they have no choice. Though, given the choice, I'd much rather be the way I am than any other way anyway.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
I still don't understand why the argument has to be made of whether it's a choice or not. They're living the life, why does it need to be justified? It doesn't matter. Just let it go already.

Well, I'll tell you...

Justification doesn't come into it, at least not with me. It doesn't and won't make a difference to me personally no matter what. That doesn't mean I don't want to see it proven though.

For one thing, I want to see the religious right eat their words. They have so much invested in saying it's a choice. You're asking why does it need to be justified? Ask rather, why do they need to justify it to themselves by calling it a choice. Granted, the most fanatical will put their hands over their ears and go 'LALALALA' even once it's proved conclusively but the majority of people are a bit more reasonable. They know discrimination based on how someone is born/made makes them a bigot.

Second, it makes a difference politically. In at least half the states in this country (and I don't remember the exact numbers) it's perfectly legal to fire someone because they're gay. Nothing else, just because they're gay. Republicans are constantly voting against anti-discrimination laws. After all, it's not like people are discriminating against blacks or some /real/ minority where they don't have a choice about it...

So yes, it makes a difference. In an ideal world it wouldn't. This is far from an ideal world.

Raven

[CrystalTears]

Not that I really want to get into a fight over it, but I've known people who "turn gay" because it was popular at the time. Or perhaps it was something new to try, or to be rebellious. Or maybe they liked it but later on decided it wasn't for them. It may not be a choice for the majority, but there ARE some who DID choose to be gay and that's not something that can be proven anyway.

Either way, I don't see why it should matter. I think the problem lies in how someone lives their life sexually shouldn't really have anything to do with anything politically. No one can prove with certainty why someone is sexually attracted to someone else regardless of sex. What IS the issue is how politics decide the norm should be in society today. It can't be the same as it was back in the 50's, but it can't be as radical as to allow everything just because we want them to be. It's going to take some time, unfortunately.

Holy hard hornballs:

That fruit fly really started ruthlessly anally raping the masses after being endowed with the extra gene!

We should be talking about how people with extra Y chromosomes murder at a higher % and whether to execute them or not.

[DeV]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
Either way, I don't see why it should matter.
We can come to a point where personally we don't feel a need to any longer. That's where I'm at. But as far as politics and religion, the demand to justify is still very much active and necessary for others to know, for reasons real to them.

The justification, on a grand scale, can only end when the demand for it does.

[Warriorbird]

"but I've known people who "turn gay" because it was popular at the time."

I think those folks probably had some bisexual tendencies to begin with.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
Not that I really want to get into a fight over it, but I've known people who "turn gay" because it was popular at the time. Or perhaps it was something new to try, or to be rebellious.

Two notes: one, behavior doesn't determine sexuality. The idea of having sex with a woman doesn't make me vomit. I can, and have, done so. There was not the slightest attraction or pleasure involved. Trying something new or to be rebellious or just normal experimentation doesn't make someone 'gay'.

And two, maybe they are just bi. You know, I have no idea how bisexuals fit into the equation. They're attracted to both sexes. I never was. I assume Anticor never was. It's no more likely for him to start lusting over men than it is for me to lust over women.

Most likely we'll find out someday what determines sexuality. I'm thinking there is no 'default state' as a fetus develops. Meaning sexuality actually has to be set somehow and that for some reason some people aren't 'set' with one preference or the other. They get the best of both worlds. Beats me.

Raven

[Edited on 6-6-2005 by Ravenstorm]

[CrystalTears]

If they were bi and then decided on either males or females, wouldn't that be considered a choice?

It's still not something that can proven anyway, and shouldn't matter.


Trying something new or to be rebellious or just normal experimentation doesn't make someone 'gay'.

Okay so what are the rules for someone to be gay? Apparently someone living the life of a homosexual isn't labeled as a gay person because... why?

[Edited on 6/6/2005 by CrystalTears]

[Warriorbird]

You can have a sexuality yet no necessarily express it. Like the school principal's wife in my town who ran off with a woman after having been married for thirty years. I'd bet she experimented in college and I'm pretty sure she was attracted to women during her marriage. I think those are the type of people who "turn" gay. Sexuality has gradations, anyways.

Alternately there's folk who do a behavior but don't really feel attracted. Like men raped in prison or women pressured by a man into going down on a girl in a threesome.

[Edited on 6-6-2005 by Warriorbird]

[CrystalTears]

Yeah my cousin left her husband of 25 years to be with a woman. It just seemed sudden, not because she had never expressed feelings on it as I doubt she would have anyway, but because they were initially breaking up because she was having an affair with a male coworker of hers.

We'll never know what caused her to make that decision, if it was because of a simple change of heart, or if this woman made her suddenly feel something that she felt was missing in her marriage. Who knows. It doesn't matter. She's happy now in her new marriage and that should be enough for everyone, but unfortunately it's not.

[Warriorbird]

Which is sad. I guess those "conversion" programs just bother me. I reverse them in my head. If I suddenly had to only think about men in a sexual fashion I'd probably shoot myself upon completion of a program like that.

[Edited on 6-6-2005 by Warriorbird]

[xtc]

Originally posted by Warriorbird
Which is sad. I guess those "conversion" programs just bother me. I reverse them in my head. If I suddenly had to only think about men in a sexual fashion I'd probably shoot myself upon completion of a program like that.

[Edited on 6-6-2005 by Warriorbird]

Hey, as long as the programs are voluntary.

Warriorbird and his new friend after graduation.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by xtc
Hey, as long as the programs are voluntary.

I wouldn't really call 'Do this or you're going to burn in Hell because God hates you' exactly voluntary though.

Raven

[Warriorbird]

I dig those bald guys.

:snickers:

Parkbandit better watch out.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm

Originally posted by xtc
Hey, as long as the programs are voluntary.

I wouldn't really call 'Do this or you're going to burn in Hell because God hates you' exactly voluntary though.

Raven

There are people who believe this, however the decision to attend Exodus or some other program is voluntary to my understanding.

[Warriorbird]

When it's an adversarial family/church backed step, I'm not quite sure it is either.

[Delirium]

The idea of having sex with a woman doesn't make me vomit. I can, and have, done so. There was not the slightest attraction or pleasure involved.

Thats intresting to me. Maybe im misreading it. The idea doesnt give you any pleasure or the act of having sex with a woman doesnt give any pleasure? Maybe im a tad weird but any tight warm hole for me would give pleasure. I might be repulsed at what that tight warm hole is but if i got past that part the pleasure part would be there. If there was no attraction or pleasure at all how did you maintain an erection?

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Delirium
If there was no attraction or pleasure at all how did you maintain an erection?

Neither the idea nor the act was particularly pleasurable. As to how, they say the brain is the best sexual organ and I have a very good imagination. And a very good friend at the time (male) was quite attractive. While that was enough to finish things, it wasn't what I'd call a successful experiment and I'm positive it was just as lacking for her.

Raven

[Ravenstorm]

Coincidentally, here's an excellent example of why it matters:

Driver's licence is refused due to being gay. (http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyID=2005-06-06T164024Z_01_DIT660001_RTRIDST_0_OUKOE-LIFE-ITALY-GAY.XML)

Raven

[CrystalTears]

Oh you can't use DMV as an example. They're stupid on general principle. :P

At least it was denied and he could drive again. However the attempt was tremendously ridiculous. Were they worried that he won't know which side of the road to drive on because of his sexual orientation and will drive down the middle? People with authority make me sick sometimes.

[Delirium]

Thats nuts,,can ya imagine if that happened in the USA? There'd be uproar. Probably gonna give me sixteen thousand examples of it happening here too but oh well. I always thought Europe was uhh more liberal than here thus way more into the whole tolerance/acceptance thing?

[Ravenstorm]

No, I can't cite any instances here in the US that are quite that assinine. Less assinine? Sure. And while some European countries are more liberal, Italy is generally not considered one of them.

Raven

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
If they were bi and then decided on either males or females, wouldn't that be considered a choice?

We're not really discussing choice. There are gay people who have never had sexual relations with people of the same gender. They're just going through the motions of a heterosexual for what ever reason.

Homosexual acts occur in prisons with great frequency, that doesn't make the participants gay.

"Gay" is defined by attraction, or lack of it, to one gender or another.


It's still not something that can proven anyway, and shouldn't matter.

The research in the posted link is leaning more to toward the "provable" side of things.


Okay so what are the rules for someone to be gay? Apparently someone living the life of a homosexual isn't labeled as a gay person because... why?

Again, it boils down to attraction. Sex is one identifier, but lacking attraction, isn't the only necessary identifier.

[Edited on 6-6-2005 by Tsa`ah]

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Tsa`ah

Originally posted by CrystalTears
If they were bi and then decided on either males or females, wouldn't that be considered a choice?

We're not really discussing choice.

Holy hell, I thought that was the point of this thread. :P


There are gay people who have never had sexual relations with people of the same gender. They're just going through the motions of a heterosexual for what ever reason.

Homosexual acts occur in prisons with great frequency, that doesn't make the participants gay.

"Gay" is defined by attraction, or lack of it, to one gender or another.

Right, so if you have attraction for both males and females and then decide to live your life with the same sex, is that not a choice?

[Warriorbird]

It's a choice, but I don't believe it doesn't make you bi.

[Tsa`ah]

Attraction is not a choice. Someone who finds one gender as attractive as the next is not hetero or homo ... they're bi. They can choose to have sex with one and not the other, but they are still bi.

To argue that sexual acts are choice, I ask you (well not you CT), would you choose to not have sex with the gender you're attracted to in favor of the gender you're not attracted to?

How many women, who have no attraction to women, would chose to have sex with a woman? How many men would have sex with another man ... out side of a prison setting?

So yes, we choose who we have sex with, we do not chose the gender we are attracted to. In fact, I would go as far as to say we do not really chose what we find attractive in our chosen mate. We just do.

[CrystalTears]

For all intents and purposes, I'm considered straight because I live and love a male. Had I chosen to be with women, I'd be considered gay. I've heard gay people say that stating you're bi is a cop out because you can't commit. :rolleyes: So does that make me a bi still or what?

And in addition, I'm not really one to believe it's a choice. I was just throwing that what-if out there to cover it. ;)

[Edited on 6/6/2005 by CrystalTears]

[StrayRogue]

So you think you had the "choice" to be attracted to women, but chose men instead? Damn I'm sure a lot of gay, straight and bi people would love to be able to just choose who they were attracted to.

[Bobmuhthol]

.. you're definitely considered bi.

[Tsa`ah]

Since I already know your reply to any question I could throw your way ... yes ... you're bi.

I believe it's only a cop out for those confused about sexuality or intent to settle. Being attracted to either sex, regardless of choice, is bi-sexuality.

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
I've heard gay people say that stating you're bi is a cop out because you can't commit. :rolleyes: So does that make me a bi still or what?

Yes, you're bi. An online friend of mine is quite happily married and very monogamous. She's married to a man. She is also bisexual. And she is also outraged at how much discrimination there is against bisexuals, especially by homosexuals.

It's sad but true that there are lots of gay people who resent bisexuals for being able to 'pass'.

Raven

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by StrayRogue
So you think you had the "choice" to be attracted to women, but chose men instead? Damn I'm sure a lot of gay, straight and bi people would love to be able to just choose who they were attracted to.

No, I'm not saying that I chose who to be attracted to. I'm attracted to both. I believe I'm trying to state that the decision to LIVE as a straight person is the choice, not the attraction. But if that's not what's in debate, then I stand corrected.

Thanks Raven. I'm glad I'm not the only one getting grief for being bi. Good grief.

[Edited on 6/6/2005 by CrystalTears]

[StrayRogue]

Ah right, I gotcha. I guess that "choice" is one someone would have to make for themselves, regardless of genes, DNA, word of God or whatever.

[Bobmuhthol]

You don't live as a straight person, though. You just have a partner of the opposite sex. Choosing not to live with a woman doesn't make you less bisexual.

[Tsa`ah]

Well as Raven just put it, you have a pass. You live an apparent hetero lifestyle. Had you decided to live the rest of your life with a woman, you wouldn't have that pass ... but you would still be bi.

[CrystalTears]

I do live as a straight person, though. Le sigh. I have no woman. Course if Angelina Jolie walks through my door today, I can tell you right now things would change with the quickness.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<I do live as a straight person, though.>>

So does a homosexual person without a partner live as nothing?