Tendo City

Isn't this surprising?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/05/09/phe...index.html

You truly are the master of ambiguous thread names, ABF.

I'm not even going to click on that link based on principle alone.

Is it SO hard to click a link?

Quote:Study: Gay men's brains react differently to scent

Monday, May 9, 2005 Posted: 8:37 PM EDT (0037 GMT)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A compound taken from male sweat stimulates the brains of gay men and straight women but not heterosexual men, raising the possibility that homosexual brains are different, researchers in Sweden reported on Monday.

It also strengthens the evidence that humans respond to pheromones -- compounds known to affect animal behavior, especially mating behavior, but whose role in human activity has been questioned.

The pheromone in question is a derivative of testosterone called 4,16-androstadien-3-one, or AND.

"AND is detected primarily in male sweat," the researchers write in this week's issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

In a previous study, Ivanka Savic of Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm and colleagues found that the hypothalamus region of the brain became activated when women smelled AND and when men smelled a corresponding compound in female urine called EST.

This time they compared the reactions of 12 women, 12 heterosexual men and 12 homosexual men.

They let them smell EST, AND, and ordinary odors such as lavender, and used positron emission tomography to watch their brain responses.

"In contrast to heterosexual men, and in congruence with heterosexual women, homosexual men displayed hypothalamic activation in response to AND," Savic's team wrote.

And a region of the brain called the anterior hypothalamus responded most strongly -- an area that in animals "is highly involved in sexual behavior".

But other smells were processed the same in all three groups.

"These findings show that our brain reacts differently to the two putative pheromones compared with common odors, and suggest a link between sexual orientation and hypothalamic neuronal processes," Savic's team wrote.

In most animals, pheromone signals go to the hypothalamus region of the brain via a pit-like structure in or near the nose called the vomeronasal organ.

People have a vomeronasal pit but there are no nerves connecting it to the brain, leading biologists to question whether humans respond to pheromones.

...


I smell sexy.

The last line basically sums it up.

Personally I think some scientists will grab onto any stupid little thing to make the 'born gay' idea sound even remotely plausable.

A Black Falcon Wrote:Don't get ripped off - find out the real truth about pheromone products and...
www.penis-enlargement-secrets.com

rofl

I didn't notice that

Forgot to delete the ads/sidebar... fixed.

Quote:The last line basically sums it up.

Personally I think some scientists will grab onto any stupid little thing to make the 'born gay' idea sound even remotely plausable.

And people like you will look for anything you can to try to disprove something that is almost certainly not disprovable. It doesn't matter how much humans are affected by them. Their existance shows a physical difference, and that certainly should prove that it's not just mental...

Okay.

I like my new sig.

Scientists don't have some sort of political agenda. Note their TOTAL lack of tact or any sort of sense of what they say actually doing something GOOD for them, for example interviews in which they make themselves look bad and just plain don't care. They just care about finding out stuff.

If you really want to make a claim about this study, find out everything you can about it. If it's legitimate, the scientists will be more than happy to give you, for free, all the info they have if you simply contact them asking for it. Then, you can simply sit down reading it and note the nature of the test to determine if there were any flaws. Do this, and you will have my ear.

Quote:Scientists don't have some sort of political agenda. Note their TOTAL lack of tact or any sort of sense of what they say actually doing something GOOD for them, for example interviews in which they make themselves look bad and just plain don't care. They just care about finding out stuff.

If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you. Scientists are human like everyone else and have their biases.

I think it's more accurate to state that in this case it's really not the scientists but the media who are looking to grab onto the slightest piece of anything that will help them push the pro-gay agenda. The more we make them seem like victims of cirumstance, the less people complain when we start teaching their kids and telling them how normal it is, while they're still in elementary school.

Studies like this one, and more that will surely come, will expose people like you to be the advocates of intolerance and hate that you are. It's not, never has been, and never could possibly be a choice. I know, it's not scientifically proven... but there's a lot more evidence pointing towards it not being something controllable, and virtually nothing saying that it's a choice.

But as I've said before, you won't recognize that because you refuse to recognize the difference between homosexuals and homosexual acts.

I can't recognize what doesn't exist.

Science will prove you wrong, and articles like this show that it's on the way to doing that.

Now you don't assume yet either ABF.

Perhaps I should be more clear Weltall. Scientists as a general rule don't let bias affect them. More accuratly, they design tests so that bias can't affect them at all, so the facts simply are without any bias in the way. Then, the only way for bias to have sway is if they simply ignore their own evidence. Some "scientists" are NOT scientific in their testing or in their analyzing of the results (which is to say, they ignore them or make up reasons why their tests didn't give the conclusions they wanted). The key is to simply examine the nature of these tests before making any conclusions yourself.

What I'm saying is this. Simply look into the matter. If these scientists refuse to give you any information, like some sort of runaround, then you can freely doubt the test's validity on the grounds that they are making the claim without backing it up. A good scientist is more than willing to provide the data to anyone who asks nicely. Do this, and you can find out exactly how the tests were performed. Look for double blinding, the standard of all good scientific tests.

....

You know what's so wrong about gayness? If there are two men who HAS the vagina?

Why do you interpret what Ryan says as "intolerance and hate"? Simply because he thinks (as do I) that there is no genetic precondition for homosexuality, doesn't make him a homophobe or hate monger.

What gets me about the whole gay gene thing is...if that is the case, how does the gene pass on to future generations? The entire idea of homosexuality rules out that it could be genetic. Gay people are attracted to and have sex with those of their own gender, and thus do not procreate. So...how do they pass on this gene to future generations when they DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN TO GIVE THE GENE TO? Darwin would probably have considered homosexuality to be an evolutionary flaw, because it would lead to extinction.

Let it be known, ABF, I don't hate gay people. I'm impartial. I don't agree with their lifestyle, but I don't shun them for it either.

Pfft, that's just logic. He won't let something silly like that bother him.

In fact, according to ABF, my viewpoint that it is not genetic makes me anti-gay. Therefore, ABF himself must be gay.

Frankly, I think my viewpoint is more flattering to them. I think they are people who pick an abnormal lifestyle. He paints them out to be genetic freaks. Granted, when one looks at an average gay-pride parade, with dancing penises and Timmy and Tommy, the Testicle Twins, I can't really disagree with that either .

Quote:What gets me about the whole gay gene thing is...if that is the case, how does the gene pass on to future generations? The entire idea of homosexuality rules out that it could be genetic. Gay people are attracted to and have sex with those of their own gender, and thus do not procreate. So...how do they pass on this gene to future generations when they DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN TO GIVE THE GENE TO? Darwin would probably have considered homosexuality to be an evolutionary flaw, because it would lead to extinction.

Bad, bad logic. If that were true, there would be no genetic diseases. They're unproductive to continuing human life, right?

Now, we don't know what creates homosexualism... a genetic flaw, or something which just can happen either way, or whatver. First, there are many kinds of genetic disorders. Evidence here seems to suggest that this probably isn't something inherited. So the 'they won't pass it on' thing probably does not apply. I don't think homosexuals raising children are any more common to have homosexual children as anyone else is... I haven't seen specific data on that, but what I do know certainly suggests that.

Also, just because people are homosexual doesn't mean that they don't want children... most do, I believe. Some have their own children, others adopt... but sexual preference and want for children are not as connected as you believe. And as I said, I don't think that it's an inhereted trait.

Well, there are a number of genes that can't be passed on due to their very nature as well. Think of progeria (nature's CRUELEST joke!). It's advanced aging disease that kills children by making them age to death by roughly 8 to 12 years old. They don't reproduce, but progeria shows up, and it's genetic. Why? Well, there's one key thing about genetics to keep in mind. Recessive traits. Then, combined recessive traits that can thus express themselves. Need I say more?

A Black Falcon Wrote:Bad, bad logic.

You sound like you're scolding a puppy that peed on the floor :D

Quote:Well, there are a number of genes that can't be passed on due to their very nature as well. Think of progeria (nature's CRUELEST joke!). It's advanced aging disease that kills children by making them age to death by roughly 8 to 12 years old. They don't reproduce, but progeria shows up, and it's genetic. Why? Well, there's one key thing about genetics to keep in mind. Recessive traits. Then, combined recessive traits that can thus express themselves. Need I say more?

Yes. As I said, there are plenty of genetic diseases that kill young... Cystic Fibrosis would be another example.

But homosexuality is far, far more common than any such disease.

Eh..

How about this one:

I believe that homosexuality is not a genetic condition.

I am not homophobic.

And I in no way disagree with 'their' lifestyle.

Every human being has been given the greatest gift of all, life, and intelligence and they can use these gifts as they see fit. I don't see someone who enjoys licking shaft as being so different from you and me.

Good point, progeria IS pretty frickin' rare. In fact annually whoever is able of ALL known worldwide cases get together for a picnic of sorts, and that amounts to roughly 20 families (I saw a special...).

I don't know what causes it. But the fact is, everything I have ever read says that it's just something people come to understand, exactly the same way straight people do... they just see the same gender as attractive instead of the other one. This can't be a concious choice.

I don't know what causes it, I'm not a scientist. But, I'll tell you what DOESN'T cause it...smokin'.

You know, in Croatian "smoking" as in "cigar smoking" is the same word for "sucking"... and it's slang for... for you know... so... so my point is that maybe smoking does make people...

never mind

yeah...

A Black Falcon Wrote:I don't know what causes it. But the fact is, everything I have ever read says that it's just something people come to understand, exactly the same way straight people do... they just see the same gender as attractive instead of the other one. This can't be a concious choice.

So because it's not a conscious choice, it's automatically genetic?

Quote:So because it's not a conscious choice, it's automatically genetic?

What else do you think could cause it? It could be something else... I just know it's not a choice.

Nothing causes it. It exists if a person makes the choices that lead to that lifestyle.

And honestly, if you ever want to convince anyone otherwise, "I just know it" is never going to be sufficient.

The whole concept of a man or women being born with a predisposition towards other males and females (respectively) is absurd. Nature has two genders, male and female, and they're meant to mate and create children, thus is the circle of life.

*The Lion King music plays*

Stop that!

Anyway, some things are instinct, simply hard wired into the brains of every animal. One of those things is the desire to mate and create offspring. You ever seen any animals ass fucking or grinding one another? Of course not, that's not how nature works. The idea that nature can somehow throw a wrench into the whole process that has continued for millennia is something that I just can't believe. Homosexuality is a choice made by that person, and their DNA has nothing to do with it.

Quote:Nothing causes it. It exists if a person makes the choices that lead to that lifestyle.

And honestly, if you ever want to convince anyone otherwise, "I just know it" is never going to be sufficient.

You're the one with a complete lack of facts behind what you say, not me...

Quote:Anyway, some things are instinct, simply hard wired into the brains of every animal. One of those things is the desire to mate and create offspring. You ever seen any animals ass fucking or grinding one another? Of course not, that's not how nature works. The idea that nature can somehow throw a wrench into the whole process that has continued for millennia is something that I just can't believe. Homosexuality is a choice made by that person, and their DNA has nothing to do with it.

Ever heard of pedophilia? I'm not exactly convinced that those people choose to be that way... that's a very different problem from homosexuality in most ways, of course, but in that basic way it's comparable.

No, pedophiles are just fucked up. Homosexuals are individuals of sane mind, choosing to live their lifestyle.

A Black Falcon Wrote:You're the one with a complete lack of facts behind what you say, not me...

I'm sorry, but "I just know I'm right" doesn't qualify as scientific fact, as far as I'm concerned. Genetics, behavioral patterns, common sense, and the magic 8-Ball all point to your position not being "I just know I'm right" but "Gosh, I hope one day science proves me right".

Of course, it is the liberal viewpoint that man cannot control his destiny, the bad things that happen to man, somehow, are always the fault of someone else or something else. It's absurd. People who are of sound mind in America have as much control over their lives as they care to exercise. Every good situation I've ever been in has at least in part been my achievement, and every bad situation I've ever been in has at least partially been my fault. I could easily blame genes or environment on some of my pitfalls, but it's wrong and irresponsible to do so. I was fat, and my family has a definite genetic predisposition towards obesity (that, unlike the whole gay gene, is a proven fact), but I was fat because I did not control my eating habits appropriately. It was my fault, not mom's, not dad's, certainly not McDonald's. Now I am not fat, because I live a more responsible life. I watch what I eat and I exercise.

I am the master of my own life. I live a straight lifestyle not because my genes force me to, but because I choose to. Not everyone has the strength of conviction that I do, and they do things that are not constructive or pleasing, but they ultimately decide to do these things.

And you do have a choice to NOT do things, too. People who live a gay lifestyle are choosing not to live straight.

I agree that, genetically, it really makes no sense for homosexuality to be an inherited trait. Along with being counter-intuitive with nature itself, it also opens the door to the possibility of a whole slew of endless possible sexual fetishes being genetic, and that's something I simply doubt. If homosexuality is hereditary, is pedophilia? What about fecalphilia? Necrophilia? What about something small, like foot fetishism, or domination/submission? Where do you draw the line?

Admittedly, at this point, I don't think anyone can say for certain whether homosexuality is genetic. I do believe, however, that it isn't a conscious choice. Yes, the homosexual lifestyle is a choice. A humongous flamer has the choice of whether to stroll outside in a complete 3-piece suit of magenta and a top-hat and walking cane with a wooden penis on the end of its handle. That much is obvious. On the other hand, I doubt that homosexuals can, essentially, "turn off" their attraction towards other men, and likewise "turn on" an attraction towards women. I think if that were the case, there'd be more proof. There would be more solid scientific and anecdotal evidence of homosexuals transforming their sexual orientation, which still has yet to present itself.

If I had to guess, I would say that these sexual fetishes (including something in extreme contrast to the norm, like homosexuality) are learned. When I say that, I don't mean that a mother and father can sit down and teach a child to be gay or straight. I mean that during the first 6-8 years of a child's life, there could be unknown factors that cause sexual deviancies. I'm no expert in psychology, but it doesn't take an expert to point out that sexual impulses play a large role in a person's life. It's a primal urge that's necessary for perpetuating our species. I think it's possible for that instinct to somehow deviate based on what a child has observed or experienced in those early years of his/her life.

Ahh, if only a masters/phd in psychology weren't so expensive... I'd love to study the subject. :)

Quote:Yes, the homosexual lifestyle is a choice. A humongous flamer has the choice of whether to stroll outside in a complete 3-piece suit of magenta and a top-hat and walking cane with a wooden penis on the end of its handle.

True. Not acting like a homosexual would not come naturally, but people don't always do what comes naturally.

Quote:On the other hand, I doubt that homosexuals can, essentially, "turn off" their attraction towards other men, and likewise "turn on" an attraction towards women.

And this is where people like Weltall stop listening. It seems like such an obvious (and completely incontravertably true) statement to me, and to most liberals, but to people like Weltall or EM... facts, and the experiences or observations of homosexuals, don't matter. Only their religious-based view of reality does.

Quote:. If homosexuality is hereditary, is pedophilia? What about fecalphilia? Necrophilia? What about something small, like foot fetishism, or domination/submission? Where do you draw the line?

The answer is a very unsatisfying "we have no idea".

Quote:If I had to guess, I would say that these sexual fetishes (including something in extreme contrast to the norm, like homosexuality) are learned. When I say that, I don't mean that a mother and father can sit down and teach a child to be gay or straight. I mean that during the first 6-8 years of a child's life, there could be unknown factors that cause sexual deviancies. I'm no expert in psychology, but it doesn't take an expert to point out that sexual impulses play a large role in a person's life. It's a primal urge that's necessary for perpetuating our species. I think it's possible for that instinct to somehow deviate based on what a child has observed or experienced in those early years of his/her life.

Maybe that plays a role, but I know that I've heard it described as how homosexuals just, when they hit puberty, get attracted to the same sex instead of the other one. Would just environmental factors be enough to cause that? I don't know... maybe it's possible, but... we really don't know. It's obviously very complex, because science hasn't figured it out yet...

Ryan Wrote:I was fat, and my family has a definite genetic predisposition towards obesity (that, unlike the whole gay gene, is a proven fact), but I was fat because I did not control my eating habits appropriately. It was my fault, not mom's, not dad's, certainly not McDonald's. Now I am not fat, because I live a more responsible life. I watch what I eat and I exercise.

Carving out most of your stomach helped too, somewhat, but we're on the same side of this debate so I'll drop it :D

ABF, you just said "science hasn't figured it out". Look:

You Wrote:I don't know... maybe it's possible, but... we really don't know. It's obviously very complex, because science hasn't figured it out yet...

See? That can be said for everything you're proposing. We DON'T know yet. Until we do, all we're doing is speculating. My opinion isn't fueled by religion, politics, or anything else. I think what I think because that's what I choose to believe. I've made my own decision. That is possible, you know.

Sure, homosexuals might not be able to stop being attracted to men, but at what point do they <u>start</u>. Normal human male behavior and instinct tells him to mate with a female and create children. That is nature. The idea that nature can, singlehandedly, change around the natural order that has existed for years. At what point does a boy going through puberty start to be attracted to males instead of females?

The idea that humans are born with attraction to the same sex just doesn't ring true to me. Sure, nature's been known to screw up, like with the advanced-aging disease DJ mentioned, but this is so widespread that it seems so unlikely for so many people to be born with this, after millenia of an unwavering pattern of male/female breeding. It seems far, far more likely that a person BECOMES gay and after they're wired that way, they find it difficult to go BACK.

Quote:Carving out most of your stomach helped too, somewhat, but we're on the same side of this debate so I'll drop it :D

That's true, but among people who have the operation I had, there's a pretty high rate of people undoing the effects over time, and becoming as fat as they once were, and in some cases even worse. As the docs told me before I had it, it's a tool, but it's by no means a miracle cure.

That aside, my viewpoint that gays are not born, but made, does not mean I hate them. I know ABF will never admit that, because being able to claim such gives him an illusion of moral authority. He is willing to ignore everything we know about human behavior and genetics in order to advance whatever agenda is going around campus this month.

Weird thing is, I think I disagree more with EM than I do with ABF.

Quote:Anyway, some things are instinct, simply hard wired into the brains of every animal. One of those things is the desire to mate and create offspring. You ever seen any animals ass fucking or grinding one another? Of course not, that's not how nature works.

You think humans are the only animals in which homosexuality occurs?? Riiiight..

Quote:Nature has two genders, male and female, and they're meant to mate and create children, thus is the circle of life.

Yes, that's true. But there's something about sex between humans that crosses the boundary of "sexual intercourse for procreation". Humans have sex for pleasure. You have sex with your hand every day (probably) but I bet you don't kick up a big stink about that, do you?

Quote:People who live a gay lifestyle are choosing not to live straight.

Well, true. But they don't make a conscious decision to actually be attracted to the same sex. But it would take incredible will power to live a straight life-style while you're actually gay at heart. That's why the majority of people who come out of the closet are in their 30's+, married with 2 children.

My take on how/why people are homosexual, I dare say that environment plays the biggest part. But I wouldn't rule genetics out of the mix completely. It's possible that there would be certain effects by certain genes that would make a person more prone, when exposed to certain environmental circumstances, to be attracted to the same sex.

A long time ago in certain parts of the world, we all would have had pre-teen male lovers. :P

Exactly. EM (and Weltall), you're just not basing your opinion on facts, as PH shows quite well there. Quite simply, the only thing you have defending your side is religiously-inspired bias. And it doesn't hold up to the light of day, if you choose to look. You don't, of course.

I believed what I believed even when I was atheist. Religion doesn't influence me here. You're using that as a convient dismissal, but I doubt you'll find in the Bible anything alluding to the cause of homosexuality.

Quite simply, the only thing you have to defend your argument is a few spotty science reports and a boatload of wishful thinking. You want to make gays the next endangered species.

I believe environment plays a huge role in determining sexuality. I don't believe genetics do. There's simply too much about it that doesn't fit with the gene theory. Such a recessive gene that inhibits procreation would very likely have been weeded out to the point where we would view homosexuality as some sort of exotic disease, like Down's Syndrome or one of those wonderful disorders that calcify the entire human body or makes one terribly allergic to sunlight. Healthy procreative activity would prohibit such a gene from becoming as widespread as it would appear to be now.

Of course, that's all an aside. There's not a shred of evidence proving homosexuality to be a genetic disorder, and as the human genome becomes more completely mapped, and the total absence of the mythical 'gay gene' remains a truth, it's only a matter of time before you find some other magical problem to blame homosexuality on.

I've gone on the record dozens of times stating that homosexuals are normal, decent human beings, who differ from me only in one particular choice they make. I don't see how my faith and beliefs can make that appear to you as "I think they're subhumans who should die in hell", other than the fact that you're an atheist and you revel in your painfully ignorant assumptions about Christians. That I have such beliefs also gives you a convenient opportunity to divert the argument to my beliefs, shadowing the fact that your stance on the topic is one that does not hold up to logic or established scientific fact.

Quote:It's possible that there would be certain effects by certain genes that would make a person more prone, when exposed to certain environmental circumstances, to be attracted to the same sex.

This is the most probable of any explanations I've come across.

My post from another forum:
As far as comparing us to animals, we're just as into instant gratification as animals are. Infact humans are the poster child of excessive gratification behaviours, in spite of our knowing better.

Capacity plays into it.

We have the unique ability for the most part of being able to take a stand offish approach and be selective about our behaviour unlike, for example, a dog.

That doesn't change the fact that the drive is still there.

And the degree in which we can deal with those compulsions is a luxury not everyone has either. There are a slew of mental conditions that people are aware they have, but lack the ability to do anything about it.

Ryan Wrote:...my viewpoint that gays are not born, but made...

Spoken like a true close-minded republician. You have been bombarded by facts time and time again and you still ignore them.

EdenMaster Wrote:You ever seen any animals ass fucking or grinding one another? Of course not, that's not how nature works.

Funny you should bring that up, cause the discovery channel had a special several years ago about homosexuality, and they explained that it is not just limited to humans. Homosexuality exsists outside of the human species, its not pretty, but its there.

I know I've read about homosexual penguins.

Here's something interesting. Not taking sides here, just stating a story...

Well, I used to have like 2 cats. One of them was male, and the other one was... also male. Anyway, the one (named "Frisky") was always trying to, well, get outside. Turns out it was trying to find a mate. It basically just went nuts for weeks on end because he couldn't get outside, to where the females were... I mean they were hanging around our front door. Anyway, some time later he just sorta "gave up" or something and began hunting down the OTHER male cat. Well, the other one didn't take kindly to it, but point is this cat went totally gay out of... well not being able to find a mate or something... I dunno...

Behavior can be changed based on circumstances (or learning), such as people in prisons, but their brains are wired for one thing in the beginning and that's what will always be the most natural thing for them. The point is, everyone's brain is wired differently. And this includes sexual orientation.

Nick Burns Wrote:Spoken like a true close-minded republician. You have been bombarded by facts time and time again and you still ignore them.

Incorrect. No one has ever posted any sort of established scientific fact agreeing with the concept of genetic homosexuality, and very, very little credible evidence even suggesting it's possible. There was that one scientist years ago who claimed to have found the gay gene, but he turned out to be disproven.

What I've been bombarded with is essentially the line you just used. "you're a close-minded republican, therefore you're wrong". It's immature and does little to shade over how ridiculous your argument is. After all, if you're in possession of so many facts, what stopped you from presenting any just now? Instead, you just use the same stupid line ABF throws, leading me to believe that neither of you have any such evidence. Surely at least some of it would have been presented after two years of constant debating over the issue.