Can sexuality change over time?

No I didn't.

 

Well all of a sudden you seem to understand what the difference between "too young to have sex" and "old enough to have sex" is, without me having to explain it. Infact you seem to have very strong opinions about it.

 

I've always understood that. *shrugs* The point being that you don't know what causes any of these anomalies. Doctors have been studying these things for years now with equipment and medical tests, etc.,etc., and even they don't know.

 

There are several different theories though. Fyrthermore the very reason I started this thread is because there is no real answer to it which opens for great discussion.

 

What about people who were gay and became straight or vice versa? That happens too. I've heard that some people do a lot of "experimenting" in college. There are also some people who can be attracted to both men and women, depending upon a connection or whatever.

- - - Updated - - -

There even could be different reasons why different people are homosexual. And I know I have read stories of children who were sexually abused and were confused and "thought" they were gay but they came to realize when they were adults that they weren't really gay but just confused.

 

I only heard of homos who thought they were straight, but never the other way around. But this still does not change anything; the people who thought they were straight always were homosexual in the first place.

Feels like that is exagerrated pop cultural bs.

Yeah, it is called bisexuality.

That kind of proves environment does not play a role, yes?

 

I think it proves that environment certainly does play a role. Where do you get that it doesn't from my statement above? I also tend to think that some younger people want to be "different" and perhaps even "shocking," and some will go through a phase where they might experiment with homosexuality for those purposes. Attention seekers to put it bluntly.

 

You claimed the children in your example thought they were gay but later came to realise they were actually not. This proves that one is born gay and not taught to be so; although they grew up in an abusive environment the abuse could not change their biological, natural, heterosexual programming. :yes:

There are people with narcissistic personality disorders, no doubt. However, i do not really think anyone wiuöd fake their sexuality simply to taste the spotlight. And even these people (if they even exist) are heterosexual from birth, but just fake fagness to get attention, narcissism is the mental disorder, homosexuality isn't. Sooner or later these people too will realise tjey aren't really gay and return to their straight lifestyle, the one they were born into.

 

Do I think, in my OPINION that a 15 year old having a child is a good idea, no. Understand that having the child was the result of making a decision to have unprotected sex. So at that point, is the child put to death as punishment for the crime of being inconvenient? I was active at 15 but knew to have protection.

Families are there to support a 15 or 16 year old who gives birth. As family they MUST assist.

But, age does not reflect maturity as I've seen folks in their 30's with kids who probably should not have had them.

It's a cultural thing just like how we treat those who choose gay-sex; it's cultural

- - - Updated - - -

if that is the case then why not treat the imbalance just like we do with other maladies?

 

Your hypothesis is based on emotion, not rational thought

I'm not talking about political correctness.

That is a false cause sec

We don't, we punish poeple for their actions if said actions harm another person.

 

I'm not talking about sexual addiction. I'm talking about sexual orientation. If you want to make the claim that orientation is equivilant to addiction than you are going to have to prove your claim for your statements to carry any weight or validity.

What informs your opinion? The way you feel? The need to justify your aversion?

If so your opinion may be worth something to you, but it holds no value in debate.

 

he may not know this but there is a theory supported by data that suggests epigenetics in the womb play a role. It certainly isn't absolutely proven fact, but generally theories aren't. But gravity is theoretical, motion is theoretical. Lots of things we just accept are theoretical. Very few things are definitively proven.

biologically capable yes. Socially mature enough? Is say nobody is. Having a child forces you to mature socially, but not always, even among people in their 30s.

 

They do have theories. Theories aren't the same as wild ass guesses. When you say they don't know you mean they haven't proven it. They likely will never have proof. But theories based on data. Is a little more then having no idea. Could somebody come along and discover something that renders these theories obsolete of course. But until that happens all we really have is the theory.

 

How do you know they weren't gay, straight, or bisexual all along? The only case I've ever heard of someone becoming gay was a rugby player named Chris Birch. He claims he was straight prior to a stroke and when he woke up he was gay. But even this is anecdotal because he can't prove his claims. But that is just one case, and we don't even know if his sexual orientation changed.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...ke-gay-stroke-says-hes-happiest-hes-been.html

Experimenting isn't indicative of sexual orientation.

That is bisexuality.

I don't discount that, there could even be more than one contributing factor for an individual.

Yes people can be coinfused that doesn't mean their sexual orientation changed.


But I don't believe we'll ever know. As of yet there exists no test for homosexuality, so people are only homosexual heterosexual or bisexual because they claim to be. As of yet no technique exists to price that claim. We just take them on their word.

 

I know transexuality was dropped in here earlier and here is some cool reading regarding that; http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7689007.stm

Just like, I said, there is scientific research suggesting that transexuality too depends on the fetus' brain/hormonal/chemical development.

Never underestimate Mother Nature.

 

I would say, instead, 'No matter what your beliefs, you can find a study somewhere that will support it!'

 

Broadly generalised, maybe. However, posters who argue against me are yet to share studies suggesting their argument has scientifical value and is not solely based on emotional ranting.

 

This is true, but I think it's indicative of science not having answers.

 

Whereas, your arguments are? You have conclusive evidence for your emotional rantings, while others do not?

 

I do not base my arguments on pathos arguments. I have provided links to support my claims. My actual feelings about the matter are irrelevant as is anyone else's. "Boo hoo, I think it is bad because it is gross" is not a very valid argument at all.

 

Ah, now we have come full circle, to the 'evidence' presented, & the validity of the studies. Are they based on empirical evidence? or just 'pathos arguments', shrouded in technical jargon?

 

They are based on science obviously...