(Jan 13, 2019 05:48 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Wow, you REALLY need to learn how to read...or how to quit making intellectually dishonest straw man arguments.Syne Wrote:If you really think humans have no more say or complexity in their sex drive than animals, that's on you. That would make rape just as valid a form of copulation in humans as in animals.
…
I think it is pitiable, due to the correlated prevalence of substance abuse, depression, and suicide. But I similarly think a cancer diagnosis is pitiable due to its diminished life quality and mortality rate.
Valid? Pitiable?
You’re comparing it to rape and cancer—an immoral act and a disease.
"If you really think humans have no more say or complexity in their sex drive than animals" then that means YOU think rape is just as valid in humans. I don't, because I know humans are much more complex. You seem to keep insisting that animal sexual behaviors are the same in humans. Those behaviors necessarily include rape, and the only connection between that and human homosexuality is your assumption of similarity to animals. That's completely your doing, deary.
And where disease is caused by behavior, that behavior is wrong, like a smoker knowing the risk of cancer. Or do you think smokers have zero blame if they develop lung cancer? O_o
Quote:Again, you have yet to show that animals can have a homosexual orientation, while I have shown otherwise.Quote:Homosexuality in animals is seen as controversial by social conservatives because it asserts the naturalness of homosexuality in humans, while others counter that it has no implications and is nonsensical to equate natural animal behaviors to morality. [source]
LeVay suggests that the same gene that promotes homosexual behaviour in male sheep could also make females more fertile, or increase their desire to mate. The female siblings of homosexual sheep could even produce more offspring than average. "If these genes are having such a beneficial effect in females, they outweigh the effect in males and then the gene is going to persist," says LeVay.
While male sheep do show lifelong homosexual preferences, this has only been seen in domesticated sheep. It's not clear whether the same thing happens in wild sheep, and if LeVay's explanation is right it probably doesn't. Domestic sheep have been carefully bred by farmers to produce females that reproduce as often as possible, which might have given rise to the homosexual males.
So LeVay and Vasey still say that humans are the only documented case of "true" homosexuality in wild animals. "It is not the case that you have lesbian bonobos or gay male bonobos," says Vasey. "What's been described is that many animals are happy to engage in sex with partners of either sex."
- http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150206-...al-animals
Homosexual behavior is not the same as homosexual orientation. Quit intentionally equivocating or learn the difference already.
Quote:No one wants to be the object of your pity, Syne. They want acceptance. You don’t have to be a genius to understand that social acceptance is central to our lives. Rejection, in and of itself, can wreak havoc on, not only our mental health, but our physical health, as well.No one wants cancer or depression or addiction or to be suicidal either.
No one has a right to be accepted. I'm sure even pedophiles want acceptance, but that in itself is no reason to accept their behavior. Or are you arguing otherwise? O_o
The “social stress” model proposes that stigma and discrimination directly cause the numerous mental health issues disproportionately found in the nonheterosexual population. The report identifies several shortcomings of the social stress model: Scientific evidence for the social stress model is limited, the parameters of social stress (what it is, what it means) are vaguely defined, and the model itself “does not put forth a complete explanation for the disparities” in mental health “between nonheterosexuals and heterosexuals.” In addition, the social stress model is unable to “explain the mental health problems of a particular patient.”
- https://www.osv.com/OSVNewsweekly/Articl...ldren.aspx
Most studies of minority stress are correlational.[3] While these studies have the advantage of using large, national datasets to establish links between minority status, stressors, and health, they cannot demonstrate causality. That is, most of the existing research cannot prove that prejudice causes stress, which causes poor health outcomes among minority individuals, because correlation does not imply causation.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_s...imitations
Many victims of abuse have poor coping skills that would make them more susceptible to social stresses most people can readily cope with.
Quote:No, just your usual misandry rearing its ugly head again.Syne Wrote:Now you're just lying.
No, I wasn’t lying. It wasn’t a jab, silly boy. It was an uppercut, and just so you know, that’s how you read—someone that struggles with their masculinity.
And I never said it was a "jab", I said it was a "gibe". Learn how to read...crack a dictionary.
Quote:(Jan 11, 2019 06:45 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ](Jan 11, 2019 01:51 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]Who knows, though? It looks like most people think that sexual orientation is supposed to be more stable in men.I wouldn't doubt it. Sexual desire in men is very object oriented, whereas in women it is experience oriented. Objects don't change, but experiences can come from a wide variety of sources.
I disagree.
There’s a little thing called 'status' that might contribute to this. When a man takes a jab at another man, the terms are usually associated with our feminine nature because men are more valued in society. I think that this is why women are granted more freedom to act on their fluidity than men. It’s more socially acceptable.
If a jab from another man can harm your status, you don't have any to speak of, so it makes no difference.
Do you ever have any evidence for your speculations? No, just cherry-picking mine out of context, huh?
Women are more flexible because they've evolved to depend on social support.
When they're not mating, the females stay close together to sleep and groom, and defend each other from possible rivals. - http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150206-...al-animals
