Do you think you are born gay or it is a lifestyle?

[Inseriousity.]

I think it's a mixture of both nature and nurture. I am bisexual and knew from 5-6 that I liked both males and females. I didn't really understand relationships at the time so wouldn't have known the terms for it but it was definitely at an early age. I think the opinions lie around the following questions:

Am I hanging around with women, gay men etc because I'm gay?
Am I gay because I'm hanging around with women, gay men etc?

I should point out that, in my experience, I used to hang around with girls all the time during primary school. Not entirely sure why tbh, it just worked out that way. Not trying to say there's a stereotype of gay men in the above questions however I think this is the point. There is no 'one size fits all' solution to this. People can live in the most homophobic of families and communities and still say 'I'm gay' (or if they choose not to say it, know inside that they are). This suggests to me that there must be some nature involved as well.

edit: words are not 'hijacked', words evolve. There's a difference

[-:Undertaker:-]

The dictionary would like a word with you.

If you think you can get away with classing opposing views to homosexuality as homophobia then you are wrong, even when you use hijacked words. It also does your 'cause' no good either because as know the homosexual lobby has a reputation for flashing the homophobia card whenever they are met with criticism.

A key example being this thread.

edit: words are not 'hijacked', words evolve. There's a difference

Would you like it if I started describing you as a 'denier' whenever we disagreed with one another? you know, to implicate you as a holocaust denier? I doubt you would, so i'd ask others to stop using words which class opponents as mentally backward simply for opposing homosexuality.

People can live in the most homophobic of families and communities and still say 'I'm gay' (or if they choose not to say it, know inside that they are). This suggests to me that there must be some nature involved as well.

I agree, this being the key factor against the enviroment/nuture argument. It could be, as I think, that genetics actually influence personality traits which is what I think the case is.

[Judas]

If you think you can get away with classing opposing views to homosexuality as homophobia then you are wrong, even when you use hijacked words. It also does your 'cause' no good either because as know the homosexual lobby has a reputation for flashing the homophobia card whenever they are met with criticism.

A key example being this thread.

You're making things way bigger than they are, and it is so pointless. You say people are trying to shut down the debate when you're the one completely derailing it with your unnecessary rambling about your disagreement with the ******* dictionary definition of a word.

I haven't called anyone a homophobe in this thread, and no one is saying that someone with opposing views is homophobic. Those with a dislike or prejudice towards homosexuals are.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I haven't called anyone a homophobe in this thread, and no one is saying that someone with opposing views is homophobic. Those with a dislike or prejudice towards homosexuals are.

Often when you oppose something it naturally means you dislike it. :rolleyes:

In other words, anybody with an objection or dislike with homosexuality is a homophobe then.

[Judas]

Often when you oppose something it naturally means you dislike it. :rolleyes:

In other words, anybody with an objection or dislike with homosexuality is a homophobe then.

ho·mo·pho·bi·a
noun /ˌhōməˈfōbēə/
prejudice against (fear or dislike of) homosexual people and homosexuality

Looks like you're getting the hang of things!

[Inseriousity.]

If you think you can get away with classing opposing views to homosexuality as homophobia then you are wrong, even when you use hijacked words. It also does your 'cause' no good either because as know the homosexual lobby has a reputation for flashing the homophobia card whenever they are met with criticism.

A key example being this thread.

Would you like it if I started describing you as a 'denier' whenever we disagreed with one another? you know, to implicate you as a holocaust denier? I doubt you would, so i'd ask others to stop using words which class opponents as mentally backward simply for opposing homosexuality.

Well this actually proves my point. According to this, the word 'denier' originated in the 14th Century and means:
a unit of weight indicating the fineness of fiber filaments and yarns, both silk and synthetic, and equal to a yarn weighing one gram per each 9000 meters: used especially in indicating the fineness of women's hosiery.

The holocaust occured during the 2nd World War so a long time since the 14th Century and so if the word denier now had connotations of holocaust denier, it would show how words and language can evolve into different meanings and contexts, the same way that homophobia does not just mean 'fear of homosexuals' but has evolved to also mean a prejudice against them.

Does it stop the debate? No because debates don't stop over petty name-calling.

PS feel free to call me a denier all you want. I couldn't care less.
PSS. Not sure why someone with a fear would be 'mentally backwards' anyway. Everyone has fears, makes people human.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I can be childish also if you wish Judas, you hetrosexual denier (thats right, remember the holocaust).

But as I said before, you homosexuals who act like yourself do yourselves no favours at all with your attitudes to criticism.

PS feel free to call me a denier all you want. I couldn't care less.
PSS. Not sure why someone with a fear would be 'mentally backwards' anyway. Everyone has fears, makes people human.

But I don't, because its disrespectful and slurs you as something you are not.

I feel I can argue points without slurring opponents as deniers, or classing them as being mentally backward.

I agree, this being the key factor against the enviroment/nuture argument. It could be, as I think, that genetics actually influence personality traits which is what I think the case is.

Indeed, enviroment argument makes no sense when some have father figures who push them to like football/girls etc.

[FlyingJesus]

From my Collins thesaurus:

Phobia
aversion, detestation, dislike, distaste, dread, fear, hatred, horror, loathing, obsession, repulsion, revulsion, terror

[dbgtz]

I'd say you're born it, but it develops as you age. Someone on the first page was saying how an infant knows if they are gay are not (or something along those lines) is a bit of a ridiculous arguement considering that the chances of you being sexually attracted to someone so young is pretty unlikely and if I am right, there is another word which says how someone is attracted to someone in the same sex by their personality rather then sexuality so if you were to see a boy be "friendly" with a boy at a young age it would likely be that. To be honest, I don't think most people think sexually until puberty.

[Inseriousity.]

I can be childish also if you wish Judas, you hetrosexual denier (thats right, remember the holocaust).

But as I said before, you homosexuals who act like yourself do yourselves no favours at all with your attitudes to criticism.



But I don't, because its disrespectful and slurs you as something you are not.

I feel I can argue points without slurring opponents as deniers, or classing them as being mentally backward.

Clearly not and the 'he started it' excuse would also be childish