User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 61

  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Interesting; certainly puts on weight for 'nature' in the great "nature vs nurture" debate.

    indeed; what defines someone as gay is questionable. Was it love/ affection? sexual needs? attraction? Both? Preference? How far? And then, there's denial, repression and such. Indeed, there might be lots of people in the middle of the scale.

    Maybe instead of saying "gay men have similar brains with women", which implicate -all- gay men, we can say "a man whose brain is similar to a woman's will develop same-sex attraction"?

  2. #12
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    And what of gay women then? Are their minds similar to heterosexual men?

  3. #13
    Senior Member avolkiteshvara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    YaYa
    Posts
    895

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trefle View Post
    indeed; what defines someone as gay is questionable. Was it love/ affection? sexual needs? attraction? Both? Preference? How far?
    True. Gay or homosexuality might be a modern concept.

    No doubt guys have been fucking guys for thousands of year. But we put a label on it now and have relatively strict definitions.

    Were the ancient Greeks gay? Well they fucked each other but they also had wives and families.

    Right before Hitler's rise, there was a movement in Germany to explore sexuality and homosexuality. I don't think they thought it was "gay" though.

    In centuries past, I think it might've been treated more like wrestling with your buddy or something.

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    Males tend to have a much stronger definition as far as sexual attraction goes, or at the very least, as far as arousal goes. Women tend to have more of a gradient of attraction/arousal. As far as that goes, the study is likely as strong as is needs to be - I'd say that despite that, it's probably true. Self-identification with homo/hetero that correlates strongly to a measured biological state is going to be strong on its own (assuming the study is solid, naturally).
    I'm fairly certain the ancient Greeks would disagree. The continuum is just as pronounced for males as it is females. Males in contemporary Western culture just lie to themselves and others about the reality of their sexuality.



    Why would that be? You are assuming a causation effect in here (I presume having to do with the development cycle of males vs females), and marginalizing the study by calling their sample effeminate. If you can show that is the case, that's one thing, but I doubt it is. If you read the article, the correlation runs both ways in males and females.
    I'm not marginalizing or assuming anything. You would be wise to avoid presumption on the matter. The original studies that were done involved men who openly identified themselves, in a variety of different ways, as effeminate. Please don't saddle the language with unnecessary baggage by making leaps where none ought to be made. I happen to be quite familiar with the first work done in this area. The topic is huge in the field of biocultural anthropology, a field I just finished a degree in.

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by avolkiteshvara View Post
    True. Gay or homosexuality might be a modern concept.

    No doubt guys have been fucking guys for thousands of year. But we put a label on it now and have relatively strict definitions.

    Were the ancient Greeks gay? Well they fucked each other but they also had wives and families.

    Right before Hitler's rise, there was a movement in Germany to explore sexuality and homosexuality. I don't think they thought it was "gay" though.

    In centuries past, I think it might've been treated more like wrestling with your buddy or something.
    yeah, because the label of "gay" is yet full of ambiguity. Not for the openly identifying as gays, but for the yet still in the closet. Especially the "curious" and the bisexuals.

    about the Greeks or the others, it's more of a cultural, regional value rather than absolute. Which I think is yet another problem complicating this.

    I think there are certain countries (Ancient Japan? Ancient Roman?) where homosexuality is even portrayed as more..pure or chivalrous or proud. I'm not sure in this, though.

    oooh, sexuality.

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    And what of gay women then? Are their minds similar to heterosexual men?
    What it really comes down to is articles like these misrepresent the actual findings. There is no real consensus on this issue. The very first studies on this issue were done on the cadavers of men who were known to be gay. There's no way to know exactly why their brains ended up structurally similar to female brains, or whether there's any real connection at all between physiological traits and "gay" behavior.

  7. #17
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    And what of gay women then? Are their minds similar to heterosexual men?
    From the article;

    The results showed that gay men had symmetrical brains like those of straight women, and homosexual women had slightly asymmetrical brains like those of heterosexual men



    Quote Originally Posted by juggernaut View Post
    I'm fairly certain the ancient Greeks would disagree. The continuum is just as pronounced for males as it is females. Males in contemporary Western culture just lie to themselves and others about the reality of their sexuality.
    Your belief does not make it so. Research has shown repeatedly that males identify stronger, are aroused outside of their control (mm, ff, mf) and are less experimental (notably outside of their arousal prefereces), while women do not identify as strongly, are aroused by almost every variation rather than a subset of them and are more experimental (as a subset of arousal, presumably).

    I'm not marginalizing or assuming anything.
    Yes, you are. You want to invalidate a study that you do not agree with by calling the sample biased without any knowledge if it is a valid criticism. More than that, the article mentions that the overall correlation goes both ways, showing more than just a casual link.

    Edit: Copy/paste error.

  8. #18
    Senior Member zago's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    1,171

    Default

    I'm not surprised. Perhaps a certain area of your brain lights up when you see a cock and like it.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,009

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    From the article;

    The results showed that gay men had symmetrical brains like those of straight women, and homosexual women had slightly asymmetrical brains like those of heterosexual men





    Your belief does not make it so. Research has shown repeatedly that males identify stronger, are aroused outside of their control (mm, ff, mf) and are less experimental (notably outside of their arousal prefereces), while women do not identify as strongly, are aroused by almost every variation rather than a subset of them and are more experimental (as a subset of arousal, presumably).



    Yes, you are. You want to invalidate a study that you do not agree with by calling the sample biased without any knowledge if it is a valid criticism. More than that, the article mentions that the overall correlation goes both ways, showing more than just a casual link.

    Edit: Copy/paste error.
    You're right, my beliefs don't make things correct, the facts make my beliefs correct. It's called "justified true belief" (perhaps you should read up on it). Apparently, you haven't done much research on any of this or you'd already know that. You, honestly, don't have a clue on this one.

    The article is garbage. Apparently you aren't aware, but the L.A. Times is not a scientific journal. This snippet of crap was not peer-reviewed. The extent of the work that's been done on this issue over the past decade is far greater than you realize, and the findings of those countless other studies are what invalidate the so-called findings of this bit of tripe. I realize you are completely clueless about this as you wouldn't be saying the asinine things you are if you did actually know what you were talking about, so like so many other times, I will leave you to ramble on. Hopefully, others will take it upon themselves to properly research the topic before buying into this drivel.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zago View Post
    I'm not surprised. Perhaps a certain area of your brain lights up when you see a cock and like it.
    Kinda like:
    :chicken:

    then, it's like:


    (note the pink & pigtails!)

Similar Threads

  1. Gay Men's Sexism and Women's Bodies
    By EJCC in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 11-29-2012, 08:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO