-->
@FLRW
Encouraging and praising their mental illnesses causes them to commit suicide.
School systems should include LBTQ+ topics in their history and sex education
Posts
Total:
279
-->
@Best.Korea
yep. The casualties of Munchausen are the lives of little children.
-->
@Best.Korea
Transwomen (born male) and transmen (born female) have been a part of society in every culture at every time. Their frequency and visibility is a function of societal mores, and in most societies they have suffered discrimination or worse.
This discrimination stems from a persistent attitude that transgender identification is an aberration of normal sexual development, perhaps exacerbated by events such as trauma or illness.
However, over the last decades, growing recognition emerged that transgender feelings start very early and are very consistent – pointing to a biological basis.
This led to many searches for biological signatures of transsexualism, including reports of differences in sex hormones and claims of brain differences.
This discrimination stems from a persistent attitude that transgender identification is an aberration of normal sexual development, perhaps exacerbated by events such as trauma or illness.
However, over the last decades, growing recognition emerged that transgender feelings start very early and are very consistent – pointing to a biological basis.
This led to many searches for biological signatures of transsexualism, including reports of differences in sex hormones and claims of brain differences.
-->
@Greyparrot
Mismatch between biological sex and gender identity, culminating in its severest form as gender dysphoria, has been ascribed to mental disease, family dysfunction and childhood trauma.
But accumulating evidence now implies biological factors in establishing gender identity, and a role for particular genes.
Variants – subtly different versions – of genes linked with gender identity might simply be part of a spectrum of gender and sexuality maintained throughout human history.
But accumulating evidence now implies biological factors in establishing gender identity, and a role for particular genes.
Variants – subtly different versions – of genes linked with gender identity might simply be part of a spectrum of gender and sexuality maintained throughout human history.
-->
@FLRW
However, over the last decades, growing recognition emerged that transgender feelings start very early and are very consistent – pointing to a biological basis.This led to many searches for biological signatures of transsexualism, including reports of differences in sex hormones and claims of brain differences.
You are confusing "start very early and are very consistent" with "not mental illness".
The countries with highest amount of LGBT suicides are countries that tolerate and accept LGBT.
USA has more suicides today than it did in 1950.
Was USA more tolerant in 1950??????
-->
@FLRW
implies... might...
What is your fascination with prophets? May and might are not scientific.
-->
@Best.Korea
USA has more suicides today than it did in 1950.
See, this is scientific. there is no "USA MAY have more suicides or have a higher suicide rate..."
It's a statement of scientific fact. Not a prediction.
-->
@Best.Korea
The countries with highest amount of LGBT suicides are countries that tolerate and accept LGBT.
That's not nearly as big of a factor as countries that PROMOTE such identification as a protected class and an entire month devoted to them.
With so many incentives, troubled youths will see no downsides by complying with peer pressure and mis-identifying until it's too late.
-->
@Greyparrot
I guess their idea was to lower birth rates by castrating children and therefore murdering the offspring those children would have.
They just needed a good cover up story.
-->
@FLRW
Did you ever have a gay friend that committed suicide? I did.
That is a really dirty attempt at emotional manipulation. It is insane to suggest that someone is "driven" to suicide because unrelated children aren't being indoctrinated, and if that isn't the suggesting it's a red herring.
Variants – subtly different versions – of genes linked with gender identity might simply be part of a spectrum of gender and sexuality maintained throughout human history.
@oromagi also similarly claims homosexuality can be genetically profiled. I found it fairly impossible to verify this claim due to paywalls; but IF that was true it would mean a genetic mapping could allow us to see who's faking and who is genuine no? Long before puberty in fact it could be predicted.
Would you accept that premise? No "gender affirming" care for anyone who doesn't have the genes? Any "genetic heterosexual" who claims to be bi gets removed from the environment because clearly he or she is being caught up in a social contagion?
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Across cultures, 2% to 10% of people report having same-sex relations. In the U.S., 1% to 2.2% of women and men, respectively, identify as gay. Despite these numbers, many people still consider homosexual behavior to be an anomalous choice. However, biologists have documented homosexual behavior in more than 450 species, arguing that same-sex behavior is not an unnatural choice, and may in fact play a vital role within populations.
In a 2019 issue of Science magazine, geneticist Andrea Ganna at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, and colleagues, described the largest survey to date for genes associated with same-sex behavior. By analyzing the DNA of nearly half a million people from the U.S. and the U.K., they concluded that genes account for between 8% and 25% of same-sex behavior.
In a 2019 issue of Science magazine, geneticist Andrea Ganna at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, and colleagues, described the largest survey to date for genes associated with same-sex behavior. By analyzing the DNA of nearly half a million people from the U.S. and the U.K., they concluded that genes account for between 8% and 25% of same-sex behavior.
-->
@FLRW
Homo sapiens are not “other” species. It’s a false equivalency to compare human beings to other species that operate solely on innate self-serving actions that do nothing to propagate the species. The damn thing doesn’t even know what it’s doing, it just does it. Even monkeyed masturbate once they realize doing it provides the same pleasure as sticking it another butthole or vagina of its fellow primate does. human beings know what they are doing as they make a conscious choice to do so.
-->
@FLRW
Across cultures, 2% to 10% of people report having same-sex relations. In the U.S., 1% to 2.2% of women and men, respectively, identify as gay. Despite these numbers, many people still consider homosexual behavior to be an anomalous choice.
"The Global Divide on Homosexuality" was not "an anomalous choice" it was "should society accept homosexuality".
And the prevalence of a behavior is in no way sufficient evidence that it should or should not be socially accepted. There are other sexual orientations that could easily be 1% of the population.
However, biologists have documented homosexual behavior in more than 450 species, arguing that same-sex behavior is not an unnatural choice, and may in fact play a vital role within populations.
It's like you're a chat bot copy pasting standard trivia. This has nothing to do with the subject, unless you're claiming that anything that happens in nature should be something young children are exposed to.
By analyzing the DNA of nearly half a million people from the U.S. and the U.K., they concluded that genes account for between 8% and 25% of same-sex behavior.
1.) No such coherent biological concept "accounts for X of behavior". Does that mean 25% of the reason someone has homosexual attractions is genetic? Non-sense, without a divisible quantity you can't have "25%" of something. For example if they identified a hormone that made you attracted to the same sex and said gene expression produced 25% of the observed levels that would qualify. Clearly that is not the case here.
Does that mean 25% of homosexuals are homosexual because of genes and the rest aren't? Well then either the rest aren't really homosexual or homosexuality is not genetic.
2.) Almost certainty referring to statistical correlation, and this is a psuedoscientific way to report correlation.
3.) 8-25%? Those are some serious error bars.
-->
@FLRW
What the hell? I have quite a high IQ, unlike your dumbass. Besides, even if I was from there, why would that make me have a low IQ?
-->
@TWS1405_2
The damn thing doesn’t even know what it’s doing, it just does it. Even monkeyed masturbate once they realize doing it provides the same pleasure as sticking it another butthole or vagina of its fellow primate does. human beings know what they are doing as they make a conscious choice to do so.
A crab doesn't know what it's doing. A monkey does. There isn't the slightest objective reason to accept the poorly defined claim that the consciousness of homo sapiens sapien is so qualitatively different that you feel entitled to say non-humans don't know anything.
That attitude was a brief aberration from the 19th century departing from the straight forward consensus of previous human history and an objective and rational review of the evidence. Namely that if you can explain an animal's behavior by putting yourself in their shoes, you're probably right.
-->
@Rieka
Well, someone from Slovenia did marry a "downright moron".
-->
@FLRW
And how is that at all related to this?
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
A crab doesn't know what it's doing. A monkey does.
Neither “knows” what it’s doing.
And comparing a crab to a mammal is a really stupid false equivalency fallacy. 🤦♂️🤦♂️
-->
@TWS1405_2
A crab doesn't know what it's doing. A monkey does.Neither “knows” what it’s doing.
You don't know what you're doing. See, it's easy enough to completely abandon a theory of mind. Just happens to be irrational.
-->
@Rieka
IQ is as IQ does.
A high IQ is no guarantee of common sense.
Just means you're good at data management.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
So is that.....The Crab doesn't know what the Monkey is doing.....Or the Monkey doesn't know what the Crab is doing.... And neither of them know what something else is doing?
I've jumped in at the end here, so it all seems very irrational relative to School Systems and LBGTQ.
I'm not sure how Crustacea view sexuality.
Nor Monkeys.
Did you know that a Monkey named Albert was the first to reach space. Though he might have died before he got there.
And then Albert 11, but he died on impact.
Whereas Ham the Chimp actually flew the thing.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
You don't know what you're doing. See, it's easy enough to completely abandon a theory of mind. Just happens to be irrational.
Well that was a childishly ignorant retort. Every time I read your nonsense and formulate a response, I know exactly what I’m doing and why I’m doing it.
Only irrational 💩 here is running from your mouth to your fingertips.
-->
@Best.Korea
Ah yes, the 1950s where famously our technology matched todays standards
First of all, our population has more than doubled since the 1950s.
Second of all, the idea of suicide has been blasted recently therefore it is not a surprise that we find more suicides - we're looking for more.
Third of all, correlation is not causation- there is also much better medical technology now than in the 1950s- does the fact that we have more suicides somehow mean that our ability to prevent people or save them from an attempt has lowered?
Your argument is not very convincing
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
You have some strange rebuttals....
The biological complexes in charge of attraction- because its not a single chromosome or gene or anything like that- aren't necessarily quantifiable by ease because we don't exactly know. We have ideas, but we don't have an exact estimation. Doesn't mean we have no estimation.
Further....its just so-obtuse the way you argue, its very interesting. Honestly not gonna engage too much, you don't seem particularly invested in hearing people out.
I'll be plain- the idea that gay people "choose" to be gay is both correct and incorrect. You do indeed, "choose" to engage in consensual sexual acts- that part is a choice sure. Being attracted to someone though- thats another thing entirely. While i believe being in love with someone eventually comes down to a decision to put effort into a relationship- that initial attraction is not a choice. It'd be like saying "why can't you just not like root beer, i can't believe you like root beer". Frankly its ridiculous that this concept has to be explained to someone who has such clear diction.
The concept should be clear enough if you're done with middle school. Which you clearly are- so?
-->
@zedvictor4
So is that.....The Crab doesn't know what the Monkey is doing.....Or the Monkey doesn't know what the Crab is doing.... And neither of them know what something else is doing?
...
TWS used the phrase "Don't know what they're doing" to imply a purely mechanic behavior with no abstract intelligence.
This does not fit the evidence. Monkeys learn, crabs don't (or don't to anywhere near the same degree).
A monkey doesn't just "have sex" whenever they smell the right pheromone (even if pheromones will put them in the mood no different from humans).
They form relationships and for monkeys probably have a basic theory of mind for others. i.e. they can put themselves in another's point of view.
They do not "miss" the fact that some monkeys are male and some are female. They are not "tricked" by some obscure but simple stimuli. If they bang each other they "know what they're doing".
A crab (or any arthropod) barely has a brain to speak of and it shows. Time and again we see that things like a single pheromone, sound, image, or color can reliable produce the same behavior; even if it leads to harm.
Crabs don't know what crabs are doing in the sense TWS used. Monkeys do know what monkeys are doing.
I've jumped in at the end here, so it all seems very irrational relative to School Systems and LBGTQ.
Blame FLRW, randomly inserting "the animals are gay too" as if it was relevant.
-->
@Theweakeredge
First of all, our population has more than doubled since the 1950s.
Irrelevant, since the rate of suicides has nothing to do with population size. I really wish they started teaching statistics in schools.
Second of all, the idea of suicide has been blasted recently therefore it is not a surprise that we find more suicides - we're looking for more.
You look for more suicides? Well, thats obviously false. You cannot prove such an absurd claim. Unless you claim that all countries who hate gays are covering up suicides. You have to think of better lies than that to refute my arguments.
Third of all, correlation is not causation
Thats what you say, however, causation is correlation.
there is also much better medical technology now than in the 1950s- does the fact that we have more suicides somehow mean that our ability to prevent people or save them from an attempt has lowered?
Yes, your ability to prevent suicides has lowered because you encourage mental illnesses like homosexuality.
Your argument is not very convincing
There is no argument that can convince idiots, so all arguments are not convincing.
Dont worry, I dont expect that you will understand anything I said. So no pressure and no need to try hard.
-->
@Theweakeredge
The biological complexes in charge of attraction- because its not a single chromosome or gene or anything like that- aren't necessarily quantifiable by ease because we don't exactly know. We have ideas, but we don't have an exact estimation. Doesn't mean we have no estimation.
It could be a hundred different genes on every chromosome and still, if it was genetically deterministic we could easily tell by patterns of inheritance (which is a form of statistical association so obvious little analysis is needed).
For instance, people in Africa have dark skin. Their children have dark skin. Their ancestors have dark skin.
Thus we can conclude that dark skin, or at least dark skin that is not triggered by solar radiation; is genetically determined.
If children of Africans were "at random" light skinned we wouldn't be so sure.
Children of heterosexuals are "at random" homosexual, or bisexual, or a bunch of other sexuality.
------------
There is another reason to doubt the claim of genetic predestination in this matter.
documented homosexual behavior in more than 450 species <- posted by FLRW
Needless to say 450 different species are only going to have ancient genes in common. The claim I've seen (such as from oromagi) is that homosexual genes somehow make for good uncles and aunts (and even this requires that the gene is not fully deterministic, a risk factor if you will).
Yet living in large family groups with shared child-rearing responsibility is NOT a universal or even common trait in the animal kingdom. We should see a clear pattern in those 450 involving a common ancestor with those traits (shared child-rearing) if the theory was true.
----------
A much simpler explanation is available: Sex feels good. Animals do what feels good. Human brains create sexual orientations because our psycho-sexuality is excessively complicated and complicated systems have diverse "failure" modes.
===============
It is easy for someone with a basic understanding evolutionary biology to form complex and engaging stories explaining any morphology or behavior. I can do it for males murdering other males for a female for example.
Just as a murderers (nazis) might use evolution and nature as excuses for their actions, a sexual deviant feeling persecuted and ostracized by society might use evolution and nature as a source of validation.
This is the appeal to nature fallacy.
Further....its just so-obtuse the way you argue, its very interesting. Honestly not gonna engage too much, you don't seem particularly invested in hearing people out.
I read everything I respond to. You engage whoever you like, I won't go chasing your opinion.
I'll be plain- the idea that gay people "choose" to be gay is both correct and incorrect.
Speaking of not hearing people out and saying obtuse things: I said nothing about choosing. In fact no one did. You should read more carefully.
Frankly its ridiculous that this concept has to be explained to someone who has such clear diction.
It's more ridiculous than you know given that I'm a sexual deviant in multiple ways.
The difference between me and say oromagi or the typical LGBT activist is that I am an objectivist. I did choose to be an objectivist, and I accept then the responsibility of rationality.
Though it may be tempting to presume I was "born this way" I cannot make such an assumption without evidence nor can I fall into fantasies about genetic determinism and how I'm "supposed to be this way".
There are more options than genetic predetermination and conscious choice. Far more; because the human organism is a living system that responds to stimuli both chemical and intellectual below the level of conscious will.
For instance my personal belief is that sexual orientation forms at some formative point before puberty but well after learning to speak. It forms as a response to external stimuli. The mechanism of formation is complicated, so complicated that the pattern is not (as of yet) discernible. Genetic factors may (probably do) influence the probabilities by biasing this formation process.
That is not genetic pre-determination, that does not mean there are "gay genes" or "trans genes". Certainly not at "25%" (correlation?).
-->
@zedvictor4
Still, how high my IQ is has nothing to do with this debate.
-->
@Best.Korea
So- actually, yes population IS linked to suicide? Like, this is such a basic extrapolation of data that its a test question for high school ap students?
Lets do some math!!!
If the suicide rate for a town with 1,300 people and a town with 13,000 people is 5%, how many more people in the latter town commit suicide?
585.
So! It seems that, given a similar rate of suicide, a difference in population results in quite a difference numerically.
Again, if you have a hard time parsing this argumentation then I do believe you oughta take some time to do some studying =D
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
And here ya are bein' a hypocrite, you oughta know that just because something isn't necessarily hereditary that doesn't mean there isn't genetic factors. We seem to actually share a fairly similar opinion about how sexualities form.
A combination of genetic predispositions and experience. Although you like to be obtuse about it all.