EPTGay StarCraft Players - Page 101
| Forum Index > TL Community |
Don't post in this thread to say "gay gamers are like everyone else, why do they have a special thread?" It is something that has been posted numerous times, and this isn't the place for that discussion. For regular posters, don't quote the trolls. | ||
|
Nerokas
Finland56 Posts
| ||
|
jarrydesque
584 Posts
I propose, we all stop discussing whether gay is right or wrong. We're here. Deal with it. Lets rather discuss hot guys and starcraft. Woooo! | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7918 Posts
On August 31 2011 05:37 Sovern wrote: Where are you getting this idea that everyone in Greece was bi? Even if they were all bi outsiders could of had sex with the women or vice versa and reproduced......We cant be sure of where gay comes from but my educated scientific opinion is that there's a good chance that its genetics. Why would your genes want you to have sex with the same gender knowing ahead of time that having sex with your own gender accomplishes nothing....... You cant prove to me that it isn't genetics and I cant prove to you that it is (at this moment in time), even though it being genetics seems the most logical to me so please don't post your opinions as being fact's such as "People would love it to be genetic, but it really isn't." when you have no proof to back up such claims. Read classic Greek literature. Any. You'll discover that love in ancient Greece was really something between men. Women were there to make children and that was more or less it. It's not a theory of mine, it's just factual. Pederasty (love with a much older man) was a part of a young man education and an institution. If you don't have time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_ancient_Greece http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Greece Now my point is that if sexual identity was not a product of culture, you wouldn't be able to explain why most men in our society are absolutely sure they would never in a million year have sex with another man (most of them would even tell you they find the idea disgusting), while in ancient Greece, it was considered as the absolutely mainstream form of love. So if you really want genetics to be responsible for homosexuality, you have to explain the fact that bisexuality was more or less universal in ancient Greece by the fact that they had a massive presence of this or that gene. Which I find ludicrous. /genetics | ||
|
Sovern
United States312 Posts
| ||
|
drshdwpuppet
United States332 Posts
On August 31 2011 05:37 Sovern wrote: Where are you getting this idea that everyone in Greece was bi? Even if they were all bi outsiders could of had sex with the women or vice versa and reproduced......We cant be sure of where gay comes from but my educated scientific opinion is that there's a good chance that its genetics. Why would your genes want you to have sex with the same gender knowing ahead of time that having sex with your own gender accomplishes nothing....... You cant prove to me that it isn't genetics and I cant prove to you that it is (at this moment in time), even though it being genetics seems the most logical to me so please don't post your opinions as being fact's such as "People would love it to be genetic, but it really isn't." when you have no proof to back up such claims. ugh. tl;dr is nope.avi If you can't prove it is and cant prove it isnt and provide no sources, cite no articles, show no studies, provide no evidence, then it isnt your educated scientific anything. It is your opinion. My own genes don't want me to do /anything/ and you are showing a distinctive lack in evolutionary biology education by suggesting that they "want" us to have sex with the opposite gender. Genes "want" to propagate sure, but they also want to ensure propagation happens, has the best chance of happening etc. So there are many traits that serve to assist in this function without directly requiring penis to enter vagina. You are right, I can't prove to you it isn't genetics and you can't prove to me that it is. That means nothing except that you aren't wrong because you aren't /even/ wrong. Come at me with articles that show homosexuality is genetic and then we will have a discussion, until then... Sources Cited: McGuire, Terry R. "Is homosexuality genetic? A critical review and some suggestions" "To date, all studies of the genetic basis of sexual orientation of men and women have failed to meet one of more of the above criteria [valid and precise measures, appropriate methods to determine bio relationships, randomized research subjects, appropriate sample sizes and appropriate genetic models]" Basically, ARTICLES THAT PURPORT A GENETIC BASIS OF HOMOSEXUALITY ARE SHITTY SCIENCE. Genetic and environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. Bailey, J. Michael; Dunne, Michael P.; Martin, Nicholas G. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 78(3), Mar 2000, 524-536. "Twin concordances for nonheterosexual orientation were lower than in prior studies." Homosexuality in monozygotic twins reared apart. E D Eckert, T J Bouchard, J Bohlen and L L Heston. The British Journal of Psychiatry (1986) 148: 421-425 (admittedly old and also not really scientific because it only surveyed 6 pairs) "One male pair was concordant for homosexuality, while the other was not clearly concordant or discordant; this suggests that male homosexuality may be associated with a complex interaction, in which genes play some part." "Monozygotic twins discordant for homosexuality: Report of a pair and significance of the phenomenon". M.D. Bernard Zuger Comprehensive Psychiatry Volume 17, Issue 5, September-October 1976, Pages 661-669 "This is a report on a pair of monozygotic twins who showed differences in gender role behavior from early childhood, one following an essentially feminine-type pattern and the other a masculine one, one later becoming homosexual and the other heterosexual. This type of development is present in other monozygotic twins discordant for homosexuality reported in the literature, where the pattern of the homosexual child resembles the syndrome of effeminate behavior described for single-born children." in other words, no study has been scientific enough to be useful /at all/. to be scientific, you a study needs to be blinded, use precise measurements of what constitutes genetic basis and have some explanation that fits within our currently accepted view of biology that shows how homosexuality could be affected genetically. Until we know what makes a homosexual male biochemically/biophysically/biologically different from a heterosexual male, any studies to show a genetic basis are kind of useless. My opinion? Its a little of column a and a little of column b, just like a lot of things in the natural world, displaying the presence of homosexuality as just a genetic factor is likely incorrect. Do I want it to be genetic, I am not sure, but as a gay man, I find the line of research to be interesting, if completely and entirely unimportant. | ||
|
drshdwpuppet
United States332 Posts
On August 31 2011 06:06 jarrydesque wrote: The arguments in this thread really do cycle every 10 pages or so. I propose, we all stop discussing whether gay is right or wrong. We're here. Deal with it. Lets rather discuss hot guys and starcraft. Woooo! I think EG wants a monopoly on hot sc2 players... huk, demuslim... COME ON GUYS!!!! | ||
|
Kinetik_Inferno
United States1431 Posts
Do you think sexual attraction often derives from the gender of the person in question? It seems to me that if half the population is male, and half the population is female, and we know that people aren't always attracted to people of the opposite gender, then is someone's sexuality unrelated to gender? Do we see more straight people because some of them are actually gay, or because they're repressing their gayness? God I hope that made sense. | ||
|
socommaster123
United States578 Posts
| ||
|
drshdwpuppet
United States332 Posts
On August 31 2011 06:57 Kinetik_Inferno wrote: This question is kind of directed at everybody, but I've been wondering... Do you think sexual attraction often derives from the gender of the person in question? It seems to me that if half the population is male, and half the population is female, and we know that people aren't always attracted to people of the opposite gender, then is someone's sexuality unrelated to gender? Do we see more straight people because some of them are actually gay, or because they're repressing their gayness? God I hope that made sense. I hope I understood, if not, sorry ^^ sexuality is unrelated to biological gender is unrelated to gender identity. To illustrate, think of a hermaphroditic female lesbian who has no idea she is a hermaphrodite. Many hermaphroditic individuals will present physically (externally) as biological females, and will seem that way until puberty when odd stuff can happen because she will have internalized (non sperm producing) testicles. These testicles may induce hormone chaos because the body will be trying to go through female and male puberty simultaneously (a common result of this will be strong androgyny, lack of breasts and possible growth of facial hair). But before that, she is assumed female so she identifies as female (though may feel different or ostracized from her peers, hermaphroditic individuals have been shown to have a greater occurrence of depression and low self esteem). She happens to like females more than males sexually, so also identifies as a lesbian. So we have someone who's gender identity is distinct from their biological gender (very few people openly identify with themselves as hermaphrodites) and is a lesbian. All this is plausible and has almost assuredly happened with a decent enough of frequency. I hope that explained it well enough. tldr is that at the very least, your sexuality exists independently of your sex. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7918 Posts
On August 31 2011 06:49 drshdwpuppet wrote: ugh. tl;dr is nope.avi If you can't prove it is and cant prove it isnt and provide no sources, cite no articles, show no studies, provide no evidence, then it isnt your educated scientific anything. It is your opinion. My own genes don't want me to do /anything/ and you are showing a distinctive lack in evolutionary biology education by suggesting that they "want" us to have sex with the opposite gender. Genes "want" to propagate sure, but they also want to ensure propagation happens, has the best chance of happening etc. So there are many traits that serve to assist in this function without directly requiring penis to enter vagina. You are right, I can't prove to you it isn't genetics and you can't prove to me that it is. That means nothing except that you aren't wrong because you aren't /even/ wrong. Come at me with articles that show homosexuality is genetic and then we will have a discussion, until then... Sources Cited: McGuire, Terry R. "Is homosexuality genetic? A critical review and some suggestions" "To date, all studies of the genetic basis of sexual orientation of men and women have failed to meet one of more of the above criteria [valid and precise measures, appropriate methods to determine bio relationships, randomized research subjects, appropriate sample sizes and appropriate genetic models]" Basically, ARTICLES THAT PURPORT A GENETIC BASIS OF HOMOSEXUALITY ARE SHITTY SCIENCE. Genetic and environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. Bailey, J. Michael; Dunne, Michael P.; Martin, Nicholas G. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 78(3), Mar 2000, 524-536. "Twin concordances for nonheterosexual orientation were lower than in prior studies." Homosexuality in monozygotic twins reared apart. E D Eckert, T J Bouchard, J Bohlen and L L Heston. The British Journal of Psychiatry (1986) 148: 421-425 (admittedly old and also not really scientific because it only surveyed 6 pairs) "One male pair was concordant for homosexuality, while the other was not clearly concordant or discordant; this suggests that male homosexuality may be associated with a complex interaction, in which genes play some part." "Monozygotic twins discordant for homosexuality: Report of a pair and significance of the phenomenon". M.D. Bernard Zuger Comprehensive Psychiatry Volume 17, Issue 5, September-October 1976, Pages 661-669 "This is a report on a pair of monozygotic twins who showed differences in gender role behavior from early childhood, one following an essentially feminine-type pattern and the other a masculine one, one later becoming homosexual and the other heterosexual. This type of development is present in other monozygotic twins discordant for homosexuality reported in the literature, where the pattern of the homosexual child resembles the syndrome of effeminate behavior described for single-born children." in other words, no study has been scientific enough to be useful /at all/. to be scientific, you a study needs to be blinded, use precise measurements of what constitutes genetic basis and have some explanation that fits within our currently accepted view of biology that shows how homosexuality could be affected genetically. Until we know what makes a homosexual male biochemically/biophysically/biologically different from a heterosexual male, any studies to show a genetic basis are kind of useless. My opinion? Its a little of column a and a little of column b, just like a lot of things in the natural world, displaying the presence of homosexuality as just a genetic factor is likely incorrect. Do I want it to be genetic, I am not sure, but as a gay man, I find the line of research to be interesting, if completely and entirely unimportant. God, that's one solid post. Thanks :-) | ||
|
infinitum
United States83 Posts
Also, is it just me, or is Tasteless almost certainly gay, but nobody talks about it? I think he would do our community a great service if he came out. | ||
|
jarrydesque
584 Posts
On August 31 2011 06:50 drshdwpuppet wrote: I think EG wants a monopoly on hot sc2 players... huk, demuslim... COME ON GUYS!!!! Huk looks 100x better with his hair cut and styled. That mushroom cut vibe was not doing him any justice. Demu is attractive but I think even more so just because he's a good guy and has a nice way about him. It' helps that he is a baller terran as well. | ||
|
drshdwpuppet
United States332 Posts
| ||
|
Velocirapture
United States983 Posts
tl/dr: Since the origin of homosexuality is such a polarizing topic everybody has a bias and bias is toxic to the scientific process. As uncomfortable as uncertainty is, it is better than risking delusion. Also demusilm is super hot, in fact the only professional gamer I am attracted to at all (that I have seen). | ||
|
Soluhwin
United States1287 Posts
On August 31 2011 07:59 Velocirapture wrote: The science behind homosexuality is a very confused area of study because of so many conflicting agendas. The data is out there but it is surrounded by misleading abstracts and optimistic conclusions. Basically, even somebody like me who has done professional genetic lab work could spend a lifetime sifting through the mountain of "evidence" and find very little. tl/dr: Since the origin of homosexuality is such a polarizing topic everybody has a bias and bias is toxic to the scientific process. As uncomfortable as uncertainty is, it is better than risking delusion. Also demusilm is super hot, in fact the only professional gamer I am attracted to at all (that I have seen). This seems like one of those fields that absolutely no one would benifit from, so why research it? I say leave it, as we're probably better off not knowing anyway. Who knows what would happen if I, as well as others in this thread, were considered genetically different and segregation, even more sever than what already exists, happens. I've been playing too much Deus Ex... | ||
|
Nibbler89
884 Posts
On August 31 2011 08:08 Soluhwin wrote: This seems like one of those fields that absolutely no one would benifit from, so why research it? I say leave it, as we're probably better off not knowing anyway. Who knows what would happen if I, as well as others in this thread, were considered genetically different and segregation, even more sever than what already exists, happens. I've been playing too much Deus Ex... lol what, why does it matter if it's a gene. Segregating people based on their genes is already supposed to be considered taboo. You realize genes include skin color... height..race. etc right? Yeah you have been playing too much video games  Also I'm pretty sure the fact that homosexuality occurs widespread among many/all species is a pretty good indicator it's partially genetic. Also I don't think sexuality is as simple as you're straight or you're gay. Some "straight" guys would probably be ok with a guy if they were cute enough. Example: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://gaygamer.net/kayo-satoh-kayo-police-010.jpg) Someone will probably retort that since he looks like a girl it's "tricking" them but if you know that down there he still has a penis yet you still feel attraction otherwise... is it even the lower bits that really matter when it comes to sexual attraction? | ||
|
Velocirapture
United States983 Posts
On August 31 2011 08:08 Soluhwin wrote: This seems like one of those fields that absolutely no one would benifit from, so why research it? I say leave it, as we're probably better off not knowing anyway. Who knows what would happen if I, as well as others in this thread, were considered genetically different and segregation, even more sever than what already exists, happens. I've been playing too much Deus Ex... It all comes down to the value of "knowing". Some people believe ignorance is ok sometimes, and on a person to person level I think this is fine. But when it comes to the far reaches of human knowledge, its hard for me to accept that we should stop looking just because humans have a weakness for prejudice. Are we better off knowing the science behind nuclear weaponry? Should science have kept this knowledge at arms length because humans are too weak willed to stop themselves from abusing and proliferating the technology? These are hard questions. | ||
|
drshdwpuppet
United States332 Posts
| ||
|
AutobotDan
42 Posts
On August 31 2011 07:44 infinitum wrote: I just want to express my support for gaymers, and encourage you to come out! (I'm straight) Also, is it just me, or is Tasteless almost certainly gay, but nobody talks about it? I think he would do our community a great service if he came out. I have really good gaydar, and i'm 100% sure that tasteless isn't gay (not that there's anything wrong with that! ;p). He's just a really funny guy with a hammy personality. It's often mistaken for gayness in guys who tend to be more outgoing, energetic, and hammy. | ||
|
Velocirapture
United States983 Posts
On August 31 2011 08:33 drshdwpuppet wrote: Nuclear power is a little different because that is such a bipolar technology. Yeah, it has leveled entire cities. But the numbers might work out that nuclear medicine has saved more lives than nuclear weapons have killed. With homosexuality genetics, I don't see a real application of that knowledge other than in vitro gene therapy to ensure there are no more gay people. If there is a gene, it will be discovered eventually, such is science. We have to hope that it comes after there can be a popular and powerful movement to treat it as a disorder and have it removed from the pool. The fact that we do not see an immediate application isnt the point. And i am a little disturbed that eliminating gayness is the only "positive" outcome you see (i see this as overwhelmingly negative and is the irresponsible use of the information I was alluding to). The fact is that understanding is an end unto itself. When we look into the naturally occurring organic compounds in rainforest plants we have no idea what we may find but the understanding has led to new medicines. Who knows what a comprehensive understanding of human genetics and behavioral development could lead to. In the future we may be making MORE people gay for all we know. Anyways, I still stand by my earlier statement. While we should respect human limitations, we cant let it completely stop progress. Its getting the balance right that makes the difference between nuclear power and nuclear bombs (or I guess in this case cure for genetic disease or eugenics?). | ||
| ||
