BS: the demise of the boring thread

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 May 14 - 05:32 AM

The post was not anonymous.
He made a second post to establish it as his, with a correction.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 May 14 - 06:02 AM

just think. if the SNP seized power while you were up the mountain, musket. they sealed the border and they weren't allowed to use the pound.

you'd be skint, like the rest of us.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,McMusket
Date: 03 May 14 - 09:21 AM

I'd never be as skint as you Al. I'd do a bit of window cleaning on the side.

Anyway, my interest in the referendum isn't about the health inequalities, the low expectation and reliance on public sector jobs to support the economy up here, bugger that.

I have two flats in Edinburgh and a few holiday rental cottages up here. How the flying fuck can I plan my champagne purchases if my Scottish tenants want to pay in Groats or want to pay in kind? There is only so much shortbread I can eat.

I don't make millions out of albums, concerts and opening supermarkets like you do. I have to rely on non celebrity means. I thought having celebrity associations such your good self, my Weymouth flats would have top whack holiday income but no. Unless you start flashing yer cash and building up the local economy, I'll have to rely on DSS income.

Any road, less of "the rest of us." Teacher friends bought me beer in 1984. Therefore they must be loaded eh?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 May 14 - 04:12 PM

This thread is being censored by moderators in favour of bigots. Just thought I'd mention it. I wonder, as ever, what that says about the predilections of said moderators.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 May 14 - 04:52 PM

I don't think so....perhaps you mistook 'bigots' as meaning someone who the close minded people don't agree with....but then you are not a very reliable gauge of that...because you tend to call a lot of people 'bigots' who are making a lot more sense the you!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 May 14 - 05:17 PM

It's going to be a little hard to distinguish between "biological" and "genetic."

The two are not distinctly different, they are inextricably intertwined.

Don Firth

P. S. I'm not making that up. Read a book.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 May 14 - 05:37 PM

..only going by what the link you so much agreed with..and there IS a difference..I suggest YOU read a book! So far NO study has found a direct 'genetic' link, as I've told you now for a couple of years....but there HAS been hormonal influences....only this particular link, in keeping up its bias, mentioned only the study with rats...they completely FAILED to mention that they found that in humans as well...which I already repeatedly told you...for years...
Hey, are you back home?

So far, Don, everything that I've told you about it NOT being genetic, (for years) is still holding up. You don't have a problem with that, do you?...I mean it not being 'genetic'....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 May 14 - 06:07 PM

I don't think you understand some things about basic biology. What do you think determines such things as the timely or untimely release of hormones if not genes?

You really should have stayed awake in high school biology class.

And the fact that a specific gene has not been located yet does not mean that it wont be. Most probably it is a number of genes working in combination. Many biological factors are exactly that.

No, I don't have a problem with sexual orientation not being genetic. But it most certainly has a physiological cause. It is not simply a matter of choice as some self-appointed "moralists" and religious demagogues would have people believe.

Don Firth

P. S. Argue on if you want to. The matter is settled as most intelligent people accept. AND not every biologist or geneticist agrees that the gene has not been found.

I'm on to more intelligent discussions.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 May 14 - 09:21 PM

Firth: "I'm on to more intelligent discussions."

You wouldn't qualify.

OK.. Are you now saying it it doesn't matter if it is 'genetic' or not??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 May 14 - 10:37 PM

I'm saying that if it is biological, which it most certainly is, it is most probably genetic, and the gene or genes simply haven't been found--YET. Do you have the foggiest notion of how many genes are on a single strand of DNA? I thought not.

And as to my intelligence, I'm quite happy with my Stanford-Binet I.Q. score and the percentile level on my college entrance exams.

Once again, Goofball, you're whistling out your--ear.

Don Firth

P.S. Blab on if you've a mind to, Goofy. This thread is too boring for me to spend more time on. Important things to do.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 May 14 - 12:02 AM

Firth(DF): "I'm saying that IF it is biological, which it most certainly is, it is most PROBABLY genetic,..."

IF????......PROBABLY???????????????
They've already ruled it out, oh intelligent one.
You just have a bad habit of bullshitting your way through life...and on here.

Either start getting some straight responses, or don't mind me if I think you're a raving lunatic!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 14 - 04:12 AM

It is becoming clear, that the original definition of homosexual behaviour was correct, it appears in most cases to have psychological causes. Factors occurring during childhood have possibly a bearing on which types of behaviour are adopted by adolescents and adults.

The "transgender" thread illustrates this quite well.

There are many types of human behaviour, many have to be quite rightly tolerated, but also regulated, to prevent damage to those who participate or to society.
In parts of Scotland where we suffer a lost generation of young people, drug addiction is the behavioural problem for many of our kids.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: akenaton
Date: 04 May 14 - 07:02 AM

Pease stick to the issues, you cannot possibly think any worse of me personally, than I do of your cruel ideological stance, so what is the point of continually lying and making a fool of yourself?

Gradually the hysteria over minority rights is beginning to subside, independently minded people are weighing up the issues, not the slogans.

Most of idiocy which has been foisted on society over the last couple of decades, in the guise of human rights, is an insult to the people, including myself, who marched, were injured, and even incarcerated in the cause of black emancipation.

Try to develop a sense of proportion.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 May 14 - 04:00 PM

Musket: "You know, as this was becoming the Don & Goofus Show,..."

This is NOT going to be another 'DF and Goofus Show'...instead I'm going to offer a proposal, which hopefully will be a 'win-win-win' for all sides.
As some of you know, Don comes on with his spin on things and changes the topic to finally talking about himself and how bright and accomplished he is(I covered that progression on another thread)..SO, here's what I propose....Don, until you find a credible* link to a study that confirms your 'political persuasion', that homosexuality is from a 'homosexual gene', and you post that link saying, yes they have indeed found the gene and it is________(such and such, with the number), do yourself and the rest of us a favor, by not broaching the subject again on the forum. I'm pretty sure that even the mods would appreciate it.
As you may have noticed, Ed T and I, among others, have been able to have intelligent exchanges of ideas regarding it, and the thread was interesting and enlightening. Reiterating the same old political talking points and policies only leads to a spectator sport of watching us duke it out again and again and again.
All you have to do is provide a FACTUAL basis for your position and bias....other than you have a couple of homosexual friends who you have over for dinner.
I think people would want to have confirmed that yet another political persuasion is not predicated on another false premise(lie).
Fair enough??

* credible link: Not politically affiliated, not 'big pharma' affiliated, Not funded by anyone who's outcome was to prove a false premise.

That should keep you busy while you recover...and give a respite from argumentative speculation to the forum..and we can proceed with less bickering, and/or embarrassing yourself even further, ...and keep the thread from being boring(in accordance with the thread topic)

.....and might even end the topic!

Hopefully you'd accept(?).

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,The Hooter
Date: 04 May 14 - 04:14 PM

All you potheads hide your faces.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 May 14 - 04:24 PM

Thanks, Musket. Two weeks in the hospital and a little less than a month in a nursing home and I survived! Sudden unexplained weakness in my arms and shoulders. Not a stroke, thank God! I had polio when I was little, and I have a suspicion that it's what they call "post polio syndrome," when presumably unaffected muscles and neurons start acting up a bit. Bummer!!

The Bible tells us that Samson slew a thousand Philistines with the jawbone of an ass. Whenever the Goofball opens his mouth—or sits down at the keyboard—he seems to have a habit of attempting to commit suicide with the same weapon that Samson used. The best I can do is to leave him to it. The intelligent folks around here have no problem spotting congenital cluelessness when they see it.   

That geneticists haven't been universal in their agreement that a specific "gay gene" has been located and identified yet doesn't mean there isn't one. Considering the complexity of the DNA molecule and the number of DNA molecules per human cell, it's like trying to find a single tree in all the forests of North America. That, along with the probability that sexual orientation is most likely an interaction composed of several genes, which compounds the problem.

But—choice? Out of the question!

Blunder on, Goofball. The more you post, the more obvious your ignorance and prejudice become.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 May 14 - 04:34 PM

Ake - who gives a shit why they fancy blokes, physiological or psychological - they do. they do -always will do - always have done.

I have conducted peace talks with the Provisional Wing of the left wing Homo's.

They have agreed to leave you unmolested as long as you undertake not to climb a ladder wearing a kilt.

as for Musket, I have reported your plans to clean windows to the tax people. they have promised to investigate the unearned income from your Scottish investments.

if you clean Ake's windows - make sure to knock first. if he sees your face at the window unexpectedly - when he's playing with his bagpipes - he might come out swinging his claymoor.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 May 14 - 04:43 PM

Was that in lieu of a credible link??

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 May 14 - 05:00 PM

DF: "That geneticists haven't been universal in their agreement that a specific "gay gene" has been located and identified yet doesn't mean there isn't one."

...and just because you haven't found and Easter egg under your mouse pad, doesn't mean there isn't any Easter Bunny either!

DF: "That, along with the probability that sexual orientation is most likely an interaction composed of several genes, which compounds the problem."

Prove it!

Link, Don, link!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 04 May 14 - 05:03 PM

Al. Lesson 1 in how to be rich.

Don't offer to clean the windows of someone whose views dirty them in the first place. And being Scottish, will Welsh when it comes to paying you. (Two for the pride of one there. )

In any event, I didn't get where I am today by cleaning the windows of those whom eyes can't see through the dirt. (CJ )

As to HMRC, there is no profit after you allow for new shammys and there's always a hole in my bucket.

Any road, I notice Tesco are building a new supermarket near us. I'll happily put you up for the night when you come to cut the tape. Cash only mind, tell your agents no receipt. Know what I mean?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 May 14 - 05:23 PM

There is no proof, no matter how ironclad, that YOU would accept, Goofball.

I'm content to go along with the most authoritative data that geneticist come up with. THEY say that they're sure the gene--or genes--are there, even if positive identification hasn't been made yet.

Some geneticists, however, maintain it has been found. But there is not yet universal acceptance of this, so I'm content to wait until they arrive at some conclusion.

That's the intelligent thing to do.

I'm not sweating it. So why are YOU all lathered up?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 May 14 - 05:31 PM

Mmmmmmmm. I can see there is still more nonsense that I can invent being talked here. Though numerous arses. I must try harder.

Pink? Oh yes m'lady. The feet prove that it grew 4 years in the last 2 inches.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,McMusket
Date: 04 May 14 - 05:36 PM

Notice the snide comment about minority rights? Just before inferring he suffered for supporting black emancipation. Akenaton, the thinking man's Bernard Manning.

Mind you, I wasn't aware black emancipation had been an issue in Scotland within living memory?

More bollocks eh? Never mind. Nurse will be with you shortly.

Anyone got a bucket handy?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 May 14 - 06:22 PM

Presumably the moderators don't see any reason to delete his odious bile, and if I speak for decency, I get mine deleted...

Me too. The moderators here are clearly on the side of the bigots, the homophobes and the fundamentalists. It's their gig, of course, but they clearly don't mind that we thinking people shall tell the world that by their stinking moderating fruits shall we all know them.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 May 14 - 06:24 PM

obviously never heard of the Black Watch

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 04 May 14 - 10:17 PM

so you reckon you can get me a gig opening a Tesco's. doesn't really surprise me. we all know you capitalists and your tory/Tesco tearaway mates are corrupt buggers.

who are you going to tell them that I am? I was once a star on Crossroads. I played 'man in bar1'. I had to walk across in the background where Amy Turtle was having it out with Benny.

I am willing to sign autographs.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,McMusket
Date: 05 May 14 - 02:44 AM

That CV might not get you a Tesco Extra but you might just get to cut the tape at a Tesco Local. I'll see if I have any Tory friends who could find you a new agent. Your old one doesn't seem to recognise your potential.

Never had you down for a luvvie Al. All that hand wringing and supporting causes whilst enjoying yer stash. Makes a wannabe capitalist like me green to the gills with envy. If you could support my membership application for The Garrick, I'd be much obliged.



Here's something. I'm not 100% certain I have any Tory friends. Or at least admitting to party membership. In an ideal world, they'd come out and be proud of the fact. After all, passing the port at a black tie do after the ladies have retired is no problem.

Between consenting adults.

In private.




I know a few armchair socialists though, if that helps?

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guestfrom Sanity
Date: 05 May 14 - 04:12 AM

DF: There is no proof, no matter how ironclad, that YOU would accept, Goofball "

Try me...ya' gotta link?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 14 - 04:49 AM

How about this one?

One paragraph I find very significant

While genes do contribute to sexual orientation, other multiple factors play a greater role, perhaps including the levels of hormones a baby is exposed to in the womb. "Sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice," said Bailey. "We found evidence for two sets [of genes] that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it is not completely determinative; there are certainly other environmental factors involved."

To make it simple for those who need it, genetics are involved but there is a lot more to it. But please note Sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,McMusket
Date: 05 May 14 - 05:25 AM

Sexual orientation around here is doggy fashion.

I sit up and beg whilst she rolls over and plays dead.






Ithankyouverymuch.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 May 14 - 05:39 AM

Dave: "While genes do contribute to sexual orientation, other multiple factors play a greater role...."

"...'.....other multiple factors play a greater role...."

A 'greater' roll than genes???

Gosh, where have I heard that before??....Ah yes, it was from me...for about the last 3-4 YEARS!...

....The gene in question is 'Xq28'...it has 3-5 markers(jeez, I've already said this twice within the last 75 posts...) and that gene seems to be affected by the mother's hormonal condition, (being as the mother's nervous system affects the fetus's nervous system, and 'conditions' the receptors.....but the gene itself, is not the main factor.....(I believe that is what your link is referencing....only said it about three years ago..to Don, when he was insisting that it was political issue, based on 'genetics'.

See, what you guys don't get, is that, yes, there are homosexuals who are homosexuals for whatever reason...and there is NO hate for them..they are not as fucked up as the political agendas which are using false and misleading propaganda, to make it a LOT bigger issue than it really is. The same political idiots are even arguing against informing the homosexual community to be checked...and denying that they CAN change their 'orientation' IF THEY WANT. By not recognizing that they can, they deny that they could get counseling, IF THEY DESIRE, because that shoots holes in the propaganda lie.....not to mention that a miniscule percent of homosexuals have shown any signs of 'being born that way'...and the rest, about 97% of the 2.2% of the total homosexuals, all jumped on the bandwagon....then the political idiots try to make believe is ALL of them, and a huge proportion of the general population!!...and those figures are all in the links already posted on this thread!

Almost...but not quite, Dave...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 05 May 14 - 06:11 AM

GFS,
While you may have posted alot of stuff on a number of threads over thee past 3 to 4 years, how do you expect others to have seen it all, remember it all. That statement, plus a summation of a bunch of statistics posted over a period of time is IMO is not much help. I am not trying to bring your position down, just saying that IMO, an approach that seems to say "trust me, I posted proof over 3 to 4 years" does little to prove your point.

Additionally, while it is important to show (and update) all the sources (for others to determine the research and researchers quality, potential bias and if it holds up over time) it is especially important when you link many things together to make some fairly broad claims. Joining the dots together in such a manner, to make some pretty broad and encompassing claims, can be very problematic - it would require each element and proposed connections be subject some rather rigiourous investigation. My past observation has been most attempts at using multi-sourced research to "thatch" together such a conclusion are frought with problems and frequently with many errors.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 14 - 06:54 AM

For the record I have never said that homosexuality is genetic. I have no idea what brings it about and do not have a scientific enough background to know. Like most people on here. What is unequivocal is, at the risk of repeating myself, sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice.

Some of your other statements do not bear up to close scrutiny either.

they CAN change their 'orientation' IF THEY WANT.

Why would they want to? If homosexuals can change, can heterosexuals? Have you ever heard the term bisexual? As to,

See, what you guys don't get, is that, yes, there are homosexuals who are homosexuals for whatever reason...and there is NO hate for them

What universe do you live in? I'll tell you what. Seeing as you believe sexual orientation can be changed, you become gay for a while, visit any right wing or fundamental religious organisation, tell them you are gay and then come back to tell us there is no hate. If you can still breathe that is.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 05 May 14 - 07:19 AM

I saw the last research you posted earlier on the web, dtg.

I will wait for if to be published, to see if it holds up to peer review.I a normally suspicious about news of research that is released before the research itself is published.

I believe Bailey was involved, to a degree, in some earlier related research. He also has been associated with some controversy, though it may not have had any impact on the quality if his research?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 14 - 10:01 AM

Hmmm - Thought I had posted a link, Ed. never mind, just put it down to gremlins. Look him up - Wiki is a good place but check out others too. Bailey certainly is controversial but, as you thought, not in this area.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 05 May 14 - 11:03 AM

I did see the link, as it worked dtg. I had checked out Bailey's backgroud earlier. I dont believe the linked research is published, though (peer reviewed).

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 May 14 - 11:44 AM

I don't think a lot of the stuff posted on here has been reviewed at all, let alone peer reviewed :-) Wonder where my post went then? If you saw the link it must have been there but it ain't now :-( Nothing controversial in it so I can't see it being deleted. Ah well, one of life's little enigmas.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 05 May 14 - 11:48 AM

most of us who were gigging used to do extra work. there were telly studios in Nottingham and kirkstall rd leeds. as well as brum.

lots of folkies - roy harris, jack Hudson, mick peat, doug porter. you'd meet them on the sets of Boon, Peak Practice etc

the worst company was the comedians- miserable sods the lot of them. quite merciless in their put downs of other comedians, plus they reckoned all us musos would have been comedians if we had the bottle.

'passing the port after the ladies' - some peculiar sexual practice, they got up to in pit head shower rooms....?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:01 PM

Really Al. You just ain't cultured like what we are.

Yeah, I know quite a few from the folk circuit who used to get extras work. I reckon Bernard Wrigley at one point WAS the cast of Coronation St.

Still, we dirty rotten stinking capitalists wouldn't appear on such prole nonsense as soaps. Even the real me can claim to have never watched Knobenders in my life. (I watch Top Gear, Fifth Gear and Wheeler Dealers with a passion though. )

I'll have to tell my grand kids I once conversed on a website with a famous person. Granted, one who claims to be more skint than me, and unlike my granddaughter, Mansfield isn't posh enough for him....

Be good Al,

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:08 PM

Dtg

The link I rdfer to is still there at 04:49 AM.

True that alot of research material and science (and other) opinion is not peer reviewed. In those cases,IMO, the statements should be also seen as factual with caution. But, at a minimum, research information should be available to view, and assess unofficially by anyone, including other researchers.

In this case, it involves statements about research results (in the link) that does not seem to be published, or available to review ? It seems to be a statement by a researcher,   on the research results, at an annual science meeting.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: pdq
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:09 PM

Is there a chance that some of these Brits could post in English?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:27 PM

Aye , once you yanks learn to read it.

Really. Tsk. You leave them alone after giving them a country to play with, a language to nurture and a British heritage to respect, not to mention a ship load of tea, and they come out with comments like that.

They'd be horsewhipped for impertinence in my day.

(If you left a bucket of yoghurt to it's own devices in 1776, do you think that could have successfully developed a culture too?)

Fucking cheese in a fucking spray can! Hah! Other than convincing people to buy greasy chicken by the bucket, literally, what right does Johnny Foreigner have to question Her Britannic Majesty's loyal subjects? (Hi Canada! How's it hanging?)

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:42 PM

GfS gives one something to think about. "Homosexuals can change if they *want* to." That must mean that heterosexuals are able to do the same. Hmmmm. Personally I found it very difficult to stop *smoking*. This one may be beyond me.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:45 PM

Dave, I already posted, on this thread, the search page for 'ex-gays' 'ex-homosexuals' and the personal testimony of Michael Glatze, which you among a few of the pack summarily dismissed because of 'politics'.

Here is the opening on his bio from Wikipedia:

"From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Michael Glatze
Born         Olympia, Washington, US
Alma mater         Dartmouth College

Michael Glatze (born c. 1975)[1] was co-founder of Young Gay America and a former advocate for gay rights. Glatze received media coverage for publicly announcing that he no longer identified as a homosexual and denouncing homosexuality."

Take it up with him. Either inquire directly or read more on him, because that way you can hear it from the 'horse's mouth'...who would you believe, 'an opposing political position', or someone who's been through it??

Are you going to keep asking the same question expecting a different answer?...and then saying "It can't be", because of what you were politically indoctrinated with?

Ed T, I know that I have referred several times to 'something I posted...' ...but as you can see, some people just refuse to accept the answers. This has been going on for years, usually from 'DF' Firth....and then they just keep haranguing. (see above)...

Proof is proof is proof....something I've put up. Stubborn political disbelief is Stubborn political disbelief is Stubborn political disbelief, which I don't have to put up with!!
(Nor does it make those employing it appear very bright, either!).

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:50 PM

Just to wrap up the dialog between the Goofball and me, there you have it Goofy.

Dave the Gnome posted the link. I have posted links with the same information for your enlightenment and edification for the last several years and you keep blowing them off in your usual manner. This is why I say there is no proof that you will accept. You've been offered this information time and time again by myself and others, but you STILL go back to your same old wheeze.

Your alleged mind is made up and it appears to be impossible for you to LEARN anything.

There is no point in me or anyone else wasting any more time on you.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: pdq
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:54 PM

question to Gandhi: "What do you think of Western civilization?"

Gandhi: "I think it would be a good idea."

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,McMusket
Date: 05 May 14 - 12:59 PM

Mmm. A crock of bullshit about choice from Goofus and some religious cranks or the professional opinion by The Royal College of Psychiatrists, whose fellows practice evidence based medical expertise.

I think I shall stick with reality if it's all the same to you.

Can you cure someone of having a big dick or even being one?

Why would anyone want to be cured of being themselves anyway? Once religious cranks stop stigmatising people, most people would be happy with themselves.

It's only this insistence that a so called god of love hates you and the fools who believe in the fucking idea perpetuate the evil myth that gay people could ever feel inadequate in the first place.

Something you want to get off your chest Goofus?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 05 May 14 - 01:22 PM

There is no doubt that, not given a free choice, (for example in prisons), some people participate in homosexual activity-but return to the opposite sex when back in a free-choice society.There are also bisexuals,anx bi-curious folks who swing on one side or another during various life periods. It is reasonable to expect there is a diversity of people who have a variety ic homosexual interests.

Stating that all homosexuals are the same does not even reflect common sense. Looking for a "silver bullet" that explains the entire orientation is also lacking in logic- as does using examples of people who have changed their sexual orientation interests to catagorize a large group of people from a broad global spectrum.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 05 May 14 - 01:27 PM

I suspect there are a few folks on mudcat who have no genune fear of being head-stuck to the ceiling on velcro, if they bounce on a hotel bed.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 May 14 - 02:14 PM

From a 'comment', below your article, on the same page:

"You clearly died pretty early on in the article as it repeatedly states that it is very clearly not all in the genes.
I believe there is a comprehension gene also that occasionally goes missing, no need for a genetic test in extreme cases...."

Here's some quotes from the same link of the study:

"Another stretch of DNA on chromosome 8 also played a role in male sexual orientation – though again the precise mechanism is unclear."

"Researchers have SPECULATED in the past that genes linked to homosexuality in men MAY have survived evolution because they happened to make women who carried them more fertile"

"In follow-up work, he found that 33 out of 40 gay brothers inherited similar genetic markers on the Xq28 region of the X chromosome, SUGGESTING key genes resided there."

"The gene or genes in the Xq28 region that influence sexual orientation have a limited and variable impact."

"Not all of the gay men in Bailey's study inherited the same Xq28 region. The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay."

"The flawed thinking behind a genetic test for sexual orientation is clear from studies of twins, which show that the identical twin of a gay man, who carries an exact replica of his brother's DNA, is more likely to be straight than gay. That means even a perfect genetic test that picked up every gene linked to sexual orientation would still be less effective than flipping a coin."

"While genes do contribute to sexual orientation, other multiple factors play a greater role, perhaps including the levels of hormones a baby is exposed to in the womb."

"We found evidence for two sets [of genes] that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it is NOT COMPLETELY DETERMINATIVE; there are certainly OTHER environmental factors involved."

"Last year, before the latest results were made public, one of Bailey's colleagues, Alan Sanders, said the findings could not and should not be used to develop a test for sexual orientation."

"When people say there's a gay gene, it's an oversimplification," Sanders said. "There's more than one gene, and genetics is not the whole story. Whatever gene contributes to sexual orientation, you can think of it as much as contributing to heterosexuality as much as you can think of it contributing to homosexuality. It contributes to a variation in the trait."

"This is not controversial or surprising and is nothing people should worry about. All human psychological traits are heritable, that is, they have a genetic component," he said. "Genetic factors explain 30 to 40% of the variation between people's sexual orientation. However, we don't know where these genetic factors are located in the genome. So we need to do 'gene finding' studies, like this one by Sanders, Bailey and others, to have a better idea where potential genes for sexual orientation may lie."

"Steven Rose, of the Open University, said: "What worries me is not the extent, if at all, to which our genetic, epigenetic or neural constitution and development affect our sexual preferences, but the huge moral panic and RELIGIOUS and POLITICAL AGENDAS which surrounds the question."

.....AND THIS ONE, which at first looks to be Bailey's position, but he did NOT take it further, which is deceptive by omission:

"Sexual orientation has nothing to do with choice," said Bailey. "We found evidence for two sets [of genes] that affect whether a man is gay or straight. But it is not completely determinative; there are certainly other environmental factors involved."

Other factors??? You mean the hormonal influences cause by the mother's stresses and/or resentments in the womb???
Does a mother who takes drugs (heroin, crack, cocaine, etc)during pregnancy set up the 'receptors' to cause the baby to be born with an addiction to those same substances??...The answer is a CLEAR, DEFINITIVE YES!!!!!!!!!!!! Is that 'genetic'? No, it just makes it clear that the baby is born with a 'choice-less' craving to satisfy the 'receptors' with the drug that it got accustomed to in the womb. It is the same principle. The receptors, once they get fed, not particularly from a 'substance' but rather a 'conditioned' hormone, altered by the effects of resentment/stress WILL have a DIRECT result on the baby!.......and ALL the studies, including this one, point to that direction...but, as the poster commented, on the page of the article:

"You clearly died pretty early on in the article as it repeatedly states that it is very clearly not all in the genes.
I believe there is a comprehension gene also that occasionally goes missing, no need for a genetic test in extreme cases...."

Sorry, NO definitive, conclusive findings in this study to hang ones hat on!

Oh, and if one can NOT change their sexual preferences, what about:

Michael Glatze (born c. 1975)[1] was co-founder of Young Gay America and a former advocate for gay rights. Glatze received media coverage for publicly announcing that he no longer identified as a homosexual and denouncing homosexuality."

Somehow that keeps getting ignored....it must be that, "...comprehension gene also that occasionally goes missing,..."

GfS