Liberal arguments on faggotry proved to be bullshit

Remember how the excuse for faggots was that they couldn't help being gay because they were born that way? Now that the left has won this issue the science comes out saying that was bullshit.

>At the moment, they write, when you look at the (somewhat limited) twin research that has been conducted — studies on twins being the best large-scale way to tease out nature-nurture questions — it looks like about a third of the variation in sexual orientation in human beings comes from genes; 43 percent comes from environmental influences a given set of twins don’t share (random factors that cause their brains and bodies to develop differently, such as different experiences); and 25 percent from environmental influences they do share (their general upbringing, developing in the same uterine environment, and so on). Putting things a bit more straightforwardly: Identical twins share the same genes and the same womb, and yet when one is gay, the other is usually straight. That means things likely aren’t set at birth. Those environmental factors — mostly nonsocial ones, the researchers think — do matter.

nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/09/born-this-way-might-not-fully-capture-sexual-orientation.html

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=JAHhCSIPxU0&ebc=ANyPxKpLJn44ipqyNd_7qeCk2_XIVkNPeN3lPG6m6FJZvr89gjqMWcn5V564O2e2B0I0nMQvfcdIsHLMUs-lu8oTtxr3i0hxGA
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#Twin_studies
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Wow user ur right! Looks like being gay is a choice! Guess Clinton will just gas them all!

Did I become bisexual because I was forced to wear girl's clothes as a child?

The whole article is gold.

>there seems to be a consistent, robust way in which sexual orientation and gender roles play off of each other and that starts early in childhood for many people. Bailey and his colleagues point out that “Childhood gender nonconformity … is a strong correlate of adult sexual orientation that has been consistently and repeatedly replicated.” For boys, this means that if a child enjoys cross-dressing, playing with dolls, growing their hair long, preferring girls as playmates, and so on, then — true to stereotype — there’s a significantly increased chance that he will grow up to be gay (in cases where all this is accompanied by gender dysphoria, or discomfort with their natal sex, there’s a chance he could also end up identifying as transgender).

>Broadly speaking, these sorts of differences between (pre-)gay and (pre-)straight people persist into adulthood. Among adults, “Research indicates that heterosexual men have greater interest in occupations and hobbies focusing on things and less interest in those focusing on people, compared with heterosexual women.” For gay men and women, the pattern flips: Gay men are more into people-things than their straight brothers and dad, while gay women are more into object-things than their straight sisters and moms. This blending of stereotypically gendered behavior seems to extend to “gestures and walking,” “speech,” “physical presentation,” and “even facial appearance.”

>Because of this striking consistency in the (again, average) differences between how straight and gay people present themselves around the world, the researchers suspect that whatever’s going on here can’t be explained solely by suggesting gay people are simply fulfilling — or being socially coerced into — culturally expected roles.

Short version, people who act like fags are generally fags. Their shitty behavior is innate to being a faggot.

I used to be a raging homo at 13/ some of 14 but I prayed the gay away, literally. It worked. Permafaggotry is a myth.

>Looks like being gay is a choice!
Not what the article says faggot.

But user, it doesn't follow that one twin being straight means the other cannot be gay at birth.

And your own source says

>Bailey’s current view is that male sexual orientation is probably more or less set by birth, but for females, who in general exhibit a bit more fluidity with regard to sexual orientation, postnatal factors could be important.

So apparently men are "born that way" and women just like to fuck everything.

You clearly are desperate to prove its a choice.

Wew lad. Listen to some pastor manning.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=JAHhCSIPxU0&ebc=ANyPxKpLJn44ipqyNd_7qeCk2_XIVkNPeN3lPG6m6FJZvr89gjqMWcn5V564O2e2B0I0nMQvfcdIsHLMUs-lu8oTtxr3i0hxGA

No, I want to prove that (with more investigation into exactly what those environmental influences are) we can reduce the number of kids who grow up to be faggots.

If its set at birth you can probably shame/scare some into hiding it but you won't change biology. If people are attracted to other men they simply are. Why not encourage them to marry and be monogamous and develop a more pleasurable condom to use, more info about safer sex, harm reduction for drug use. There's so much you could do to actually help!

Awe man. I played with doll houses as a kid because they lived in awesome mansions, and I dressed up like a girl because I thought it was what spies did.

Was that enough to make me bi?

No man. Shit just happens imo.

Going after faggots to fix their behavior isn't really feasible as it stands. Too many leftists in positions of power.

I hope that if we avoid the conditions that contribute to kids becoming fags, we can have more guys making white children rather than voting for leftists who import murderous minorities. First step is recognizing that this could be possible.

If the conditions are genetic + in the womb exposure to hormones, your options are a) worry about your own shit, b) try to outlaw their behavior.

>the left being wrong
THAT HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE

>tfw single mom/sister household led to me doing all that girly, faggy shit when I was younger
>tfw had no sexual interest in anyone for the first few years of puberty
>tfw managed to break free, wind up straight, and begin reclaiming my masculinity from the tatters that a single-mother household left it in
It's a hard road lads, but anyone can do it. Remember to fight tooth and nail to be there for your kids - a good dad is literally the most important gift a child, especially a son, can have.

The solution is easy and isn't politically incorrect at all as long as you don't point out your motive.
If your son is seems girly or even just distant from you, you gotta hug him alot to sate that need for male affection before he develops sexuality. If the need lingers it will incorporate with the sexuality and then he's fucked.
Thats how you prevent same sex feelings. if you think it sounds faggy to hug your son then whatever. Enjoy your gay kid.

So if gay's aren't really even "born that way" this should really destroy any hope of trannies being a thing, right?

If he's attracted to men in the same way that women are you behavior won't change it. You can shame him into hiding it, force him to hide it until he moves out, or hurt/kill him but that just makes you a shitty parent.

>But user, it doesn't follow that one twin being straight means the other cannot be gay at birth.

No one followed that retard. The study disputes the "feelings" based narrative of libfags that faggots are born to be faggots. Simplified its contradicted by twins who are born the same yet one of them turned into a faggot like you but the other most times is normal. If faggots become faggots because they are born that way most twins would be either both faggot or both normal.

>So apparently men are "born that way"

No faggot it means men are born normal read straight by nature but some degenerate to faggots because of bad outside influences or circumstances and adpoted behavior. For example the guy decided to act like a faggot and slippery slope down he became a real one.

>If he's attracted to men in the same way that women are you behavior won't change it.

I agree that once a male develops their sexuality, change is at least highly improbable if not impossible in most cases. I'm talking about what a father can do before puberty.

Not really, they can make the argument that it is still biologically determined. I.e. some environmental factor triggers a recessive gene which has an irrevocable effect on the carrier.

I was attracted to men well before puberty. Nobody abused or molested me or told me to be gay.

Maybe what you view as prepubescent physical attraction to men is a normal stage of development for boys, without a countervailing attraction to women? i.e. a deficit of something leads you to believe you have unique experiences which others do not when in fact those experiences were mundane.

I thought of it that way. That everyone had attractions to males, and they just grew out of it. But I never grew out of it. My brain is just wired differently that I am attracted to men in the same way heterosexual women are. Its not something I control or something that has ever changed in my life and most men I know are the same way. Trans really ruin the narrative, but most gay guys I know are simply attracted to men and a lot of the degeneracy is provoked by social stigma and exclusion.

...

>That everyone had attractions to males, and they just grew out of it. But I never grew out of it. My brain is just wired differently that I am attracted to men in the same way heterosexual women are
These seem like contradictions to me.

What is? I'm saying my attitude towards my own sexuality changed from "this is a phase everyone has" to "this is who I am" vis a vis being more attracted to males than other guys.

>a lot of the degeneracy is provoked by social stigma and exclusion.
I somewhat doubt that this is entirely true, given that this article states that faggots share atypical interests, gestures, speech, physical presentation and facial appearance across cultures. Presuming that this is true, it wouldn't be a stretch to suggest that their degenerate behavior is also simply inevitable, that faggots are simply more prone to degenerate behavior regardless of culture.

Oh I wasn't saying its a phase as in something you personally can get over anymore, i'm saying that you might have never achieved another developmental phase which would have contextualized filial bonding.

In lieu of a heterosexual developmental period you associate your sexual urges with same-sex bonding.

My point is only that intervention prior to puberty might have allowed you to avoid developing that pattern; I doubt it would be possible to undue those associations today.

Well yes, but its hard to pinpoint exactly where we are on the spectrum. Gays are not a monolith, and we are somewhere in between straight males and straight females in our behavior and interests. Not a lot of good research can come of it since the people most interested have an agenda: either they hate gays because they are Christians or they are SJW's who cannot say anything mean. I've read very little objective research. I think the focus should be on social integration for gays, harm reduction techniques re: alcohol and drug use, and inquiry into genetic causes and hormonal womb influences.

No I had females attracted to me when I was a teenager, I just wasn't interested. What sort of intervention? We gay guys aren't like unhappy to be gay any more than women are degenerate for craving cock. Nobody pushed me to be gay, since nobody I knew was gay.

Got the relevant webm

I mean if the periods of development where homosexual imprinting are most likely to occur can be identified, it might be possible to reduce the rate of homosexuality.

Tbf m8 I think the twin studies demonstrate that environmental factors are primarily responsible for triggering homosexuality at some point in early development, with a heightened predisposition being the primary genetic factor.

>they couldn't help being gay because they were born that way

Of course it was bullshit.

It's a great use of the naturalistic fallacy though. And it's a wonderful manipulation of people's general sense of liberty for all.

If you can't help being born retarded, you shouldn't be punished for being a retard. Almost everyone agrees with this. Almost everyone wants to help the poor retard, who dindunuffin, he just drew a poor lot in life.

So they used it as an argument like the sleazy gay jews they are. The trouble is you can make the same argument for why people want to fuck horses or children. In fact the left demolished the majority of reasons why we should oppose "alternative" sexualities at all.

They just haven't realized what was in the box they opened yet. Tranny acceptance is already ticking some of the gay rights supporters off, because it's mimicking gay rights arguments and they don't agree with trannies being women, but they can't say shit about the bullshit arguments, because then their gay rights support comes tumbling down.

What a bed they made.

I assume it happens in the womb. You could abort all gay kids but that's as best you can do. Is that what you want?

>I assume it happens in the womb

Then you would be wrong.

There is enough variation in the sexuality of identical twins to indicate that whatever environmental factors influence sexuality later in life, they are mostly NOT prenatal.

According to what? We don't know for sure. We have disputed genetic markers like Xq28.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#Twin_studies

You can read all about it there, but the TL;DR is that the frequency of concordant homosexuality among twins is far, far less than 100%, indicating a genetic predisposition towards homosexuality but NOT a predetermination.

Why would it have to be 100%? IQ isn't 100% but its still heritable. Genetic predisposition + activation in the womb via hormones.

If it was activated in the womb then 100% of identical twins would have the same sexuality. That is not the case. The highest rate of dual-homosexuality in monozygotic twins was found to be 50%.

I.e. 50% of identical twins studied had one sibling that was gay and one that was not.

If it really was a result of hormonal exposure in the womb + genetic predisposition then you would expect all identical twins to have identical sexualities. That isn't the case.

Twins don't always have the same womb environment.

How so?

Different membranes for fraternal twins.
What is your goal? Eradicate homosexuals? Social conservatives baffle me.

>fraternal

lol dis goy. I have limited myself to discussing identical twins purposefully.

Why can't you have a conversation without feeling personally attacked? I'm not advocating any particular agenda. I'm just pointing out that the evidence today indicates that incidence of homosexuality even within groups that have a genetic predisposition can be reduced by at least 50% by manipulating environmental factors.

That's just what the data suggests.

Which environmental factors could be manipulated and how? Because your starting premise is that homosexuality is a dysgenic mutation.

>Because your starting premise is that homosexuality is a dysgenic mutation.

lol no it isn't. Just because something can be manipulated does not mean there is an evolutionary imperative to do so.

What factors specifically has to be studied, there isn't clear evidence one way or another what they are as of yet. Conditions in the womb likely play some part. If I had to guess neonatal diet would also be an important factor.

Further study is required.

Supposing a prenatal treatment existed which might discourage the development of homosexuality later in life, would you have been buttmad to know your parents used it on you?

Would you really even care?

What no. I wouldn't be mad if I were straight because I wouldn't know what being gay was like. But a lot of this is research dollars thrown at silly causes. Gay people who are ALIVE need money for mental healthcare, drug abuse treatment, social stigma reduction and community awareness.

Is /lgbt/ in here trying to defend this?

>need money for mental healthcare, drug abuse treatment, social stigma reduction and community awareness.
Lol I hope you are trolling with this statement, but in any case its not a zero sum game. Medical research and money fo dem programz rarely overlap in the budget anyway.

Oh wow gee whiz looks like the Catholic Church was right AGAIN.

This is super old news op

I'm a Catholic intersex XXY male, and I made the decision to take female hormones and live as a female.

I have kf syndrome

43 percent of the variance is a large amount of variance though user

Do you even know what variance is?

I don't think you understand causation. Gays are more interested in girl things. They don't present evidence that being around women and their things more makes you gay.

Your calling in life was to be an asexual Monk and possibly a eunuch. But you chose to be an abomination instead. Way to fuckin blow it

> 43 percent comes from environmental influences a given set of twins don’t share

Why did you think this disproves OP's point?

Pastor Manning is the best

>click bait with little to no caveats
Into the trash it goes.

PET bottles liberate estrogens once they enter in contact with sunlight. Estrogen exposure makes boys into faggots. What's new here?

>le feelings meme
Pure ideology detected. There are still too many studies
>le straight is normal meme
>people become gay by deciding to act gay
It appears that not only do you not understand the results of this study, but you have no comprehensive understanding of human biology in general.

It may not be something the individual can decide, but it is something that society can influence or fix through intervention.

Attraction to the same sex has been around long before plastic bottles came about.

>environmental factors — mostly nonsocial ones
>nonsocial

like what exactly?
are they talking exposure to chemicals?

And what would justify involuntarily intervening in such a delicate area of a minor's life, seeing as there's nothing inherently wrong about being attracted to the same sex?

If it is something that can be done prenatally, assuming all the proper standards for vetting treatment of human beings has been followed, then it should be a parents choice.

The ethics of hormonal treatment post-birth are more complicated (not that many people who oppose this would agree).

How exactly could they intervene? What if the child said he/she wasn't gay? How would you determine which children are gay?

If a gene that predisposes one to homosexuality could be identified it could be screened for. If there is a certain hormonal environment which tends to trigger this gene, and that could be isolated, then management of the hormonal conditions in the womb could be used to make triggering of the gene less likely.

It wouldn't be catchall, but it might prevent homosexuality in the subset that meets these conditions.

Again, anything like this would first have to pass FDA regulations regarding medical treatment of human beings.

Will dwarves become extinct when it is possible to repair the DNA prior to insemination? What about bi-polar disorder? Should that be eliminated? Autism? Would we still have highly intelligent mathematicians if we eliminated autism?

What if everyone looked like Taylor Swift and Calvin Harris? Would that be an ideal world? When do we stop trying to eliminate differences and start trying to accept and understand them?

I highly doubt the FDA would approve eugenics treatments for healthy fetuses.

>this entire post
>'I'm depressed, give me more money and programs :'''('
If mentaI iIIness, drug abuse and diseases are much more prevaIent in homosexuaIs than heteros, why wouIdn't you want to find out what causes homosexuaIity so minimize the amount of peopIe who have to suffer these aiIments?

Oh wait, Imao thats right you're gay, and gays onIy care about themseIves.

I believe the suffering is mainly from gays being treated crappy by non-gays, not from intrinsic factors.

>I believe the suffering is mainly from gays being treated crappy by non-gays, not from intrinsic factors.
>Society 24/7 taIks about how much they Iove gay peopIe, bend over backwards to just accommodate their needs even when it's compIeteIy iIIogicaI and even dangerous to do so
>'Society just hates gay peopIe :'((((('
Mate are you even reading what you're saying?

Its almost like the jew propaganda doesn't correlate with the reality or something!

I suspect they mean hormones.

can people control their hormones?
if not, then it isn't a choice.

— studies on twins being the best large-scale way to tease out nature-nurture questions —
>nature-nurture
You must realize that nature versus nurture has not been scientifically relevant for some time. Systems are more complicated than this dichotomy is able to represent. Are you not aware of epigenetics?

You should be on guard for such simplistic explanations. Use a field in which you are an expert as a basis of comparison to demonstrate how simple explanations usually come from simple minds.

Why?
To force overpopulation?

You'd have to Iive in Russia to think gays are mistreated Imao