Are humans pre-dispositioned to be attracted to the OPPOSITE sex???

by gumby 36 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Nosferatu

  There is research that is ongoing that may suggest you are wrong on this

  Hello Stillajwexelder, this was not my opinion, it's just something that I read and thought it would be an interesting opinion to add to this thread.

  As far as this topic goes, I don't really bother to think about it. I'm one who has no problem with people doing as they do - unless it's a downright violation of another person's life.

  Does this mean that Adam or Eve were completely heterosexual? No. This simply means that there were no others of the same species from whom to choose for sex relation.

  Very good point SFJ!
• 

  Azalo1

  I read somewhere that because the Y chromosome is gradually becoming more and more "defective" eventually the male species is going to die off and by that point genetic engineering will be advanced enough that women will be able to reproduce by taking the nucleus from one womans cell and inserting it in another woman's egg. women have two x chromosomes so when there is a defect on one it is highly unlikely that the other one will have the same defect so it will cancel it out. Men dont have this advantage so they continuously pass on the defects in their y chromosome.

  i'm sure someone can explain this better but you get my point... i hope
• 

  gumby

  Did you notice how mant times the word "programmed" was in connection with DNA? I see the evolutionary idea of this a baloney! Programmed to me is just what it says.

  Hillary Step,

  Gumby,

  Something else that I puzzles me is that in the few cases that have been researched where children were raised by animals ( Caspar Hauser for example ) the children copied the traits of the animals in their vicinty.

  I think enviroment has much to do with this, but by no means is the sole factor. As another one just said......"I was attracted to girls even when I was a little boy"......says alot in itself. It also says alot if a male says...."I was always attracted to other males.....even as a little boy". Both are true feeling's and neither can be condemed........it's HOW THEY NATURALLY FEEL. There are also others who can learn to like being gay by experience. Hollywood is a good example as straights learn that both ways is nice, whearas they may have not considered it before, had they not been introduced to it.

  As for dogs learning from this.....you should see my boxer! She when she sneaks on the bed she pulls the covers off the pillow and lays her head on it just like a person.......kinda spooky!

  Many enjoy and are prone to drugs, whereas others have no desire for them and remain straight as an arrow. Is one morally bad and selfish whereas the straight one is a better person? No. Neither is wrong either, as both have real natural feelings for these things that are real......individually.

  So far I have seen a little of truth in many of the comments so far. Thanks Nos.

  Gumby
• 

  Stacy Smith

  always one will be the male and the other will be the female,

  That's a pretty dumb statement for anyone to write and dumb for anyone to believe. I'm am feminine and have never been attracted to a masculine female. When I wanted masculine I wanted a penis with the package. Not toys, the real deal.

  You have to wonder about some people. They are so far off it's amazing.

  Oh and two butch women together isn't uncommon either.
• 

  peacefulpete

  Gumby....Why ask complicated questions about genetics and human behavior if you have no interest in the answer? Are you looking for a simple answer to your question? Then take your pick, plenty have been offered here.
• 

  gumby

  if you have no interest in the answer?

  What makes you think I do not want an answer......because I didn't comment on your post?

  People arrive at "answers" from information they recieve. If I listen to all the posters here, then I form an opinion....or "answer" then how do you reason I'm not looking for an answer?

  Gumby
• 

  stillajwexelder

  I am feminine

  You sure are Stacy - oops sorry I said I was not going to electronically hit on you now you are engaged
• 

  Gretchen956

  No matter the homosexual, one or both of them at any given time will nevertheless "act out" the role of their opposite gender. You will never see a pair of lesbians or homosexuals both adapting the role of one particular gender - always one will be the male and the other will be the female, leading some of us to wonder what then is the point,

  This is probably the most ridiculous statement. I can also assure the author of this that neither my partner nor myself assume a male role in our relationship. Neither one of us look or act even remotely male. In fact if you didn't know us you would never guess that we are lesbian. We are not the exception to the rule either. I know many couples where both partners are just like us. Very very female and very very gay.

  As has already been stated, this person is using stereotypes and not valid fact. My partner and I are more on the feminine side, neither of us is attracted to real butch women. But having said that, this is also ridiculous when used with males too. My brother is what you call a "bear." Thats a gay male term for a man that is masculine and not "buffed out." Most of the bears I know have a bear partner. For that matter, you cannot tell by looking that a lot of these more masculine gays are gay in the same way as the stereotypical queens.

  What does this have to do with dna? Maybe nothing. What does it have to do with trying to fit everyone into a prefit category or label? Everything.

  Gretchen
• 

  Big Tex

  Not being terribly intelligent, I would think yes. It is necessary in order to perpetuate the species. If genetics determined same-sex attraction as being primary, the species (I would think) would die off rather quickly.

  Now the question becomes is same-sex attraction the result of mutations in the DNA strand over several hundred generations or is it a secondary perhaps even latent tendency?

  The key phrase in this quote is "not being terribly intelligent".

  In responding to Gumby's question, I was thinking more in terms of the beginnings of the race, whether through creation or evolution, but naturally I expressed myself poorly. A fatal flaw I possess is the inability to express clear and cogent thoughts.

  In no way was I attempting to pass moral judgment on homosexuality. It is not my place to pass judgment on anyone, I have enough to answer for in my life to my God. I know what it feels like to have others sit in judgment on me, and it would be the height of hypocrisy of I did the same to others. If this post came off that way to anyone, please accept my humblest apologies. I have stepped in it quite a bit lately, so I need to be more careful and considerate.

  I'll exit now, go play in the sandbox and let the grown-ups have their say.
• 

  Aztec

  BT, will you please stop with all the "not being terribly intelligent" bull?

  What you say has as much merit as anyone else. It grieves me to see you talk about yourself this way!

  I think that evolution has spoken for us. I think it was Gretchen who pointed out the fact that in overpopulated areas homosexuality is a necessity. It is a normal occurance and it should be treated as such.

  ~Aztec