Riddle Me This:

If people are born gay, then why aren't pairs of identical twins gay? They share the same genes, no?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=MxpJvrclIfM
sciencemag.org/news/2015/10/homosexuality-may-be-caused-chemical-modifications-dna
unsafeschools.org/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Twins still develop different mutations as the cells divide.

>If people are born straight, then why aren't pairs of identical twins straight? They share the same genes, no?

Because being a faggot is learned behavior

>I'll take "Epigenetic Expression" for 1000, Alex.

>muh genetic holocaust trauma

Combination of genetic, environmental, and psychological factors

Most identical twins DO share sexual preferences...

youtube.com/watch?v=MxpJvrclIfM

>missing the point entirely
>being this dumb

People are gay because they were sexually abused as children.

They are, thats the point OP is making you dunce

To re-emphasize, not one homosexual has ever answered yes to the following question:

If the gene(s) responsible for homosexual tendencies were discovered in their mutated state, and reversible, would you undergo procedures to alter their function to reverse your sexual preference to heterosexual?

The answer, unequivocally, every fucking time, is a resounding no.

Even the ones that take a moment to pause and actually reflect on the possibility from a real standpoint of "how would this make my life different?" still, eventually, say no.

Convincing yourself it's not a choice (falling prey to your lack of self-control not matter how logically conflicting it causes you to be as a person) is more important than acknowledgement and correction of a problem.

explain mr. smarty pants school man

Identical twins have like a 50% chance of sharing the same sexuality.

The only identical twins I know are both gay.

If being gay isn't a choice why do they all put on the exact same faggy accent? Women don't even talk like that

If they do it's because happened to both of them at the same time.
An identity created out of reliving past trauma to try and 'make it ok' by eroticizing it.

>50%
>there's only 2 choices
Brilliant deduction. Doesnt answer the question though

It's been proven gay lads had an experience and took a direction. Being one I know.
Nobody is born gay.

>post your face when you realized homos touch kids and plant the homo gene like zombies

Because faggots are defective.

Look at manufacturing. Hundreds of thousands of products can be made on an assembly line. But occasionally one will get fucked up or something. Thats why you have quality assurance to catch fuck ups and destroy them.

Social shaming and decency is what was the QA for humans. But the western kikes have all but dismantled it, and so you see the rampant faggotry and degeneracy go unchecked

are you retarded
do you think every single person in the world has a 50% chance of being gay

So you're saying that half of all twin pairings have one homosexual?
That's an incidence rate over 10 times the nation average, and completely implausible.

Not what was meant.

If 1 twin is gay, the odds of the other twin being gay is very high, like 50/50.

Regular siblings pretty much always have a less than 3% chance of being gay regardless of whether or not their brother or sister is.

It's a combination of pre-natal and environmental factors. Some combination of hormone balances in the womb play a big role. Would be interesting to clone gay people and see if their clones were as likely to be gay in different wombs.

Everyone has a crush, weird time. When you share that with someone else at the same time boom, neat. Gay as Christmas. It isn't natural. But it is.

sciencemag.org/news/2015/10/homosexuality-may-be-caused-chemical-modifications-dna

There are genes that are absolutely HARD CODED.

There are many many many more genes that are "adaptable"; meaning they change based on external influences.

Scientists aren't quite sure, yet, how this works to an exactness that provides the level of confidence needed to say "this is the science and how it works". However, they're getting closer each day.

Take identical twins - same genes and all.
One's gay
One's not

I shit you not, from personal experience, I know a set just like this. They were raised in the same house, and have mostly similar experiences. One of them, by chance, just so happened to have an off hand experience with another female that led to a momentary period of experimentation, which led to some regular "play time".

These types of things could be something so simple as seeing two girls kiss in the playground at age 3, and boom, there ya have it.

What I would like to know is the incident of homosexuals who are blind/deaf/tactile sensitive/etc. and how that compares to the populace of otherwise "average" people.

It's because the likelihood of them getting molested simultaneously is higher

I watched this show called degrassi and yes I do

literally 16 times more likely than if they were non-twin siblings? i doubt it
what is so scary about the idea people are gay from birth and not as a result of abuse? why is the genesis of homosexuality political for you

I know a pair of gay twins as well.

>OP BTFO

I asked that question to a gay friend

His answer was no

Annoying American
We're all open books for years, strange things happen.
I was not born gay. No one I know was, no one I know pretends to be. You develop attraction and that's fixed for the rest of your life.

It's not scary, the reality that is indeed spread by adult-child and peer to peer sexual contact among prebubescent children who then grow up to fetishize and identify with the resulting trauma or confusion is.

Educate yourself Australia unsafeschools.org/

What are the actual statistics about gays being molested as kids?

I'm gay and was never molested, and of all the dozens of gay guys I know I have never once had a conversation that lead me to believe that they were molested either. I don't doubt it happens sometimes but literally the only people I know for sure who were sexually abused as children are straight.

Different atom deactivation times influence it.

there are times when I would have said yes. but you realise that ones sexuality is fundamental to your experience as a person, and once you've developed it becomes part of your identity. if heterosexuality was considered immoral, but you didn't consider it so, and you were in love with a woman, would you say you would like to stop being heterosexual?

Epigenetics usually begin approximately the same in identical twins though due to growing in the same environment.
Epigenetic expression in this sense would be caused by factors after they were born, like if they were adopted to different parents and had different diets, or if there was some other rift in what they exposed themselves to as kids.
Also if you want to get technical, epigenetic factors are not beyond your control, they are by definition things that are possible to change given the right circumstances, which would mean that gayness caused by them is curable with the right approach.

Faggotry is a developmental disorder. There is no such thing as a gay gene

Did you have any remotely sexual experiences before age 13 with adults or peers or online?
It's mostly anecdotal but I am seeing a pattern.

why would they answer yes?

If that is the reality of homosexuality, as a whole, then where are the proofs? I'm a gayfag who wasn't sexually abused, nor did I have any contact with homosexuals.

It is probable that some people can have homosexual inclinations after being abused by someone of the same gender, same for pedophilic or violent sexual urges - paraphilias in general. But I would not consider this the normal origin of homosexuality.

SHUT UP YOU FUCKING BIGOT

You imprint everyone does. Normies shrug it off when they see vaginas.

Sure buddy. How convenient. We believe you.

I still think this is one of the closest answers to homosexuality.

There may be a variation - whether biological or "societally induced" (mind bug), that causes trans-whatever the fuck.

It may be both - toxoplasma + jewish mind bug propagation = trans-XYZ-otherkin-apachefolk-whateverthefuck = profits for healthcare, big pharma, doctors, news/journaling, and other rich kike-owned domains.

My brothers and cousin and some of my neighbours wrestled but that was pretty much it.

One time when I was young a neighbourhood girl a couple years older dared my brother and I to show her our privates and we did. My brother is straight.

One time when I was 3 or 4 I got muddy in my aunt's backyard and she put me in one of my cousin's dresses while my clothes were being washed. I have no memory of this but apparently it happened.

One time my uncle pantsed me as a prank in front of some other people but he did the same thing to his son and my brothers and they're all straight.

I don't know, none of it really seems influential or traumatizing enough to have an effect.

Identical twins only share half of their DNA. One egg splits and is fertilized by two different sperm.

I get to play with those tits. I say, 'I'm admiring things of beauty.' She'll let me because I fuck men. You can do what you like as a faggot.
I might still fuck her. She'd notch me up as a turned straight man. I'd be the same, and have fucked her.

This is the kind of perverse, sex obsessed, psychopathic behavior that makes people have a problem with you

If people are born gay, what about the people who are bi-sexual? Are they just born to fuck everyone? Really makes me think

>not one
>has ever

Milo said he would multiple times in various interviews, I believe.

Did you say that incorrect thing on purpose?

I've also seen countless people on this site say yes to changing if they could

The strange thing is, we get to do things you're thinking about. Trying to be normal.
I don't really care if I get knocked back by a woman, just banter. Sometimes I'll go for it because green light and shes super hot. I'm much more afraid of hot guys.

>Scientists aren't quite sure, yet, how this works
We have a word for this, it's called psuedoscience

Milo has also contradicted that by stating that homosexuals are more "advanced". He literally stated that the mutation causing homosexuality was a side effect of being a "superior" person (implied intellectually). This was in one of his interviews with Dave Rubin.

I shit you not, Milo is great at speaking. He only tops that by bringing bantz like that.

If one of the twins is gay, the odds of the other being gay are 70%. So genetics isn't the single causative effect, but its by far the dominant one.

Sometimes it's called "I don't want to publish my findings because I'll be run out on a rail in the scientific community".

This is, more often than not, the case. Look at all the scientists that didn't buy into the "consensus" that Glowball Wormening isn't an actual thing.

you can't change genes

Why is everything within our power to change except sexuality? Who even has the authority to make that claim?

except our sexual orientation is molded by our surrounding, social norms and upbringing

That's my point. As far as we know, everything for humans, personality wise, is up for grabs by the environment. We know of no personality traits that are purely genetic.

This is some textbook post-modernism right there.

Heterosexuality is not considered immoral, and turning the tables to induce a sense of cross-experiential logic is in defiance of homosexuality being an abnormality; which it would seem you do think that way by how you started out.

I'm sympathetic to the need to emotionally justify because things like alcoholism, similarly homosexuality, can become easier to build justifications around and "live with" instead of abstaining from.

The fact that you, at one point in time, would have said "yes" means you acknowledge this fact.

When you state "experience as a person" in an effort to count towards some version of a logical argument for the "choice" to live that way, you are subversively admitting that you are adopting a way of thinking that provides justification to reject the fact of the matter; that homosexuality is an abnormality that does happen, and currently doesn't have a "fix".

I would never shun someone for being homosexual. I've had acquaintances over the years, and they've all been great to work with and be around. I just wish more of them could reason a little better with the decision they've made to accept what they are, instead of being in emotional denial that it flies in the face of a more natural order of things.

do identical twins share the same finger prints? i think they don't but i don't quite recall

Hypothetical transhumanist utopia you fucking nigger.

if people were born gay, would the "gay gene" die out since gays dont reproduce?

>If the gene(s) responsible for white skin were discovered in their mutated state, and reversible, would you undergo procedures to alter their function to revert your skin colour to its natural darker tone?

>The answer, unequivocally, every fucking time, is a resounding no.

This is how dumb your argument is

Randy Taylor.

quick google tells that they're very similar but not quite

>comparing becoming straight to having a nigger's skin

You do realize that having white skin is a genetic mutation right? Same with blue eyes. Everything we have as humans comes from mutations and natural selection, thats how evolution works and its why we are different from everyone else.

Just because something is a mutation doesnt mean its automatically bad. Even a child in grade 7 science could tell you this.

Why would homosexuals want to revert this mutation unless its negatively impacting their lives? Its really as dumb as wanting to go back to darker skin.

Read:
I would add to this that "purely genetic" should be read as "purely one gene"; which we clearly know is not the case. The issue we're still working on is the "which ones in combination".

If we ever get to that point, and learn how to modify, we're looking at Gattica just around the corner. Then we're all truly fucked irrespective of which hole we like to poke it in.

Except for agression and energy/motivation for example, it is highly tied to testosterone

>murder rate is mostly us males
>war is fought by us males
>everything invented by us males

Here's an exercise. Think of all the gay people you've ever known. How many of their parents are divorced? It's about 90% for me. I'd like to see data on this

>Just because something is a mutation doesnt mean its automatically bad

name a good one because science hasn't found one yet

...

>name a good one because science hasn't found one yet
Are you unironically retarded? Everything on your body comes from a mutation. YOUR SKIN COLOR AND EYE COLOR ARE MUTATIONS.

Your oposable thumbs, your kidney, your spleen, your ears, etc etc etc. Like really pls tell me you are joking

My genetics are the reason I'm a fucking degenerate flamboyant cocksucker with hundreds of pozzed sexual partners and a destroyed ass cavity and anal warts. If it wasn't for my genetics I would be a straight family man

When I say "purely genetic" I mean a paychological phenotype that cannot be changed by environment, aside from undergoing extreme distress.

No one is born gay or straight and simply has to deal with it.

No one is born with a brain thst is the wrong gender. Studies have proven this time and time again, but it gets thrown under because science is a white man's domain.

But humans have will. You can choose not to act out on agression.

>putting a skin mutation in the same level as sexual attraction to the same sex

>degeneracy being supported
>all of the things your points imply falling in line with OPs claim and still thinking it's not a choice at all

>not to mention pic related, a fucking leaf saying there's nothing wrong with being gay on Sup Forums

First, I would highly encourage you to stop hating the fact that you are white.

Second:
>When you state "experience as a person" in an effort to count towards some version of a logical argument for the "choice" to live that way, you are subversively admitting that you are adopting a way of thinking that provides justification to reject the fact of the matter; that homosexuality is an abnormality that does happen, and currently doesn't have a "fix".

Having white skin is an adaptation. Just like producing vitamin D without the need for sun exposure and Lactose tolerance. All of these allowed northern Europeans to survive a more harsh climate. Other affects include increased problem solving skills, and long term planning and overall work ethic. Not trying to have a race war here, but c'mon; you have to admit you are making an argument that defies a logical comparison.

These adaptations are not a deficiency or abnormality that causes successive generations of progeny to dwindle into extinction.

Homosexuality, though, is.

nigga have you even taken high school biology?

>>putting a skin mutation in the same level as sexual attraction to the same sex

>i have literally no idea how biology or evolution works

Pls come back when you graduate highschool and atleast have a basic science education. Unless you are some kind of christcuck who refuses to learn because it triggers you

We have a will but genetics highly influence us, like with male murder rates, especially black male murder rates

>american education

>First, I would highly encourage you to stop hating the fact that you are white.
I dont, i love being white. I was making a point that you are retarded for thinking genetic mutations are always bad when us being white is literally a mutation. Sometimes mutations are good.

>Having white skin is an adaptation
Thats not how it works hun. It starts out as a genetic mutation which is then passed on because the people who had it had a higher chance of producing offspring because it helped them. Every single adaptation comes from a mutation. This is literally grade 7 science.

If a mutation doesnt help someone pass on their genes then it just dies out and is considered bad, it it helps them then it spreads and eventually affects whole populations

It's not post-modernism, I'm just trying to get you to understand the position of the homosexual, and why he would not want to change. Your comparison to alcoholism would be apt if homosexuality was inherently damaging, and while I don't deny that promiscuity, sexual disease and drug use are associated with homosexual behaviour, there is nothing - as far as I can tell - that is damaging about merely the homosexual inclination and its behaviour. In other words, if you strip the obviously degenerate lifestyle associated with homosexuality, and look only at the homosexuals who do not engage in acts that are considered harmful, then what is the affliction? Do the negatives outweigh the positives?

Im not saying that genetics don't influence us. No one says that.

I'm saying that we as humans have will. We consciously decided to do things. It's God's gift to us.

Zero arguments Canada

>I'm saying that we as humans have will. We consciously decided to do things. I
Your will is 100% affected by your brain. Your brain is affected by your genetics as well as your experiences. God has nothing to do with it.

...

Now you understand the need for eugenics.

Iv understood that for a long time family. Poor and retarded people shouldnt be allowed to have children

White people never utter the phrase "who would choose to be white?"

But always remember that they chose that, as we all chose paths for our lives.

How can someone know how evolution works?

gay is a myth, most people are born bisexual to some extent whether they act upon or not. we all have masculine and feminine traits, homosexuality for men is an expression of the femininity we all possess

Its just we live in a world of highly dualistic thinking where we think of everything in terms of absolutes. We very rarley teach children that there is a middle ground. Homosexuality has a big stigma attached to it, nobody wants to be seen as gay or even bisexual because of the negative image connected with homosexuality. Many of us are indoctrinated with the idea that it is wrong or unnatural to the point we repress any homoerotic feelings we might experience from a very young age and then when we grow up that repression manifests itself as an incoherent rant on a Polynesian basket weaving forum against those evil gays who are somehow bringing about the downfall of western civilization despite being the least criminal, most educated and economically productive subsection of society for expressing a type of sexuality that makes us feel a uncomfortable.

>I just wish more of them could reason a little better with the decision they've made to accept what they are

Which is?

I read your post and it certainly gave me a fresh perspective of things, but the main issue I have with it is that you based it all around the inability/disinterest to breed.

...

the ability to enjoy making babbies