Ex-male escort ... 'turns straight'

[Syne]

"The latest findings open the prospect to identifying the whole pathway of genes involved in both homosexual and heterosexual orientation, says Dean Hamer at the US National Institutes of Health, who led the study that pinpointed chromosome X back in 1993. “It adds yet more evidence that sexual orientation is not a ‘lifestyle choice’. But the real significance is that it takes us one step closer to understanding the origins of one of the most fascinating and important features of human beings.”---from linked article above.

[Leigha]

Just curious on something, MR - why is it offensive if someone suggests that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? If someone were to suggest that being heterosexual is my lifestyle choice, I don't think I'd care. I say that of course, not being in your shoes, and I've never been persecuted as the LGBT has been. But, it's just curious as to why it is offensive, either way.

[Magical Realist]

Just curious on something, MR - why is it offensive if someone suggests that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? If someone were to suggest that being heterosexual is my lifestyle choice, I don't think I'd care. I say that of course, not being in your shoes, and I've never been persecuted as the LGBT has been. But, it's just curious as to why it is offensive, either way.

Stating that being gay is a lifestyle choice is the homophobic right's strategy for morally condemning being gay as a perverted lifestyle choice. That's what the homophobes do. Try to make one's orientation something one consciously chose so that they can hold gay people responsible for their orientation as an immoral action. Fortunately science proves otherwise. It is no more a choice than one's eye color. The guy in the OP was probably bisexual and didn't know it. It happens all the time.

[RainbowUnicorn]

Just curious on something, MR - why is it offensive if someone suggests that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? If someone were to suggest that being heterosexual is my lifestyle choice, I don't think I'd care. I say that of course, not being in your shoes, and I've never been persecuted as the LGBT has been. But, it's just curious as to why it is offensive, either way.

Stating that being gay is a lifestyle choice is the homophobic right's strategy for morally condemning being gay as a perverted lifestyle choice. That's what the homophobes do. Try to make one's orientation something one consciously chose so that they can hold gay people responsible for their orientation as an immoral action. Fortunately science proves otherwise. It is no more a choice than one's eye color. The guy in the OP was probably bisexual and didn't know it. It happens all the time.

we are living in the 21st century with people in leadership whos cultural moral and spiritual reality is about 100 years behind.
it is no wonder there is consistent opposition from the very same group whom oppose climate change science.


going to church is a life style choice
being a human is not a life style choice
choosing to lie to your kids & cheat on your wife and give money to a church is a life style choice


your sexual orientation is not defined by observers
it also doesn't change because of a sexual act.
that's like suggesting that any christian or Muslim that reads a different religious text is now a convert to that religion and can never change back and they did so freely.
homophobia is based on flawed logic, corrupt science, 'power & control abuse as a role model' & projected psychological manipulation using fear as a control device to prevent free will. it is also a normalization of sexual predation upon others and used to justify sexual attack on women.

intellectually and moraly it is crawling in the gutter to talk with such people.
now i need to wash.

[Syne]

Stating that being gay is a lifestyle choice is the homophobic right's strategy for morally condemning being gay as a perverted lifestyle choice. That's what the homophobes do. Try to make one's orientation something one consciously chose so that they can hold gay people responsible for their orientation as an immoral action.

False dilemma. There could be no subjective sense of choice in the matter AND it could also be trauma instead of genetics. Plenty of people make poor decisions from traumatic experience without any real awareness or sense of choice.
Two things can be true at once. Actual homophobes can use choice to morally condemn people AND there can be evidence to support a non-genetic cause.

Fortunately science proves otherwise. It is no more a choice than one's eye color. The guy in the OP was probably bisexual and didn't know it. It happens all the time.

No, science hasn't, as evidenced by all the qualifiers in everything you cite.

So people can't tell you what you are or why, but you feel free to claim this guy was likely bisexual? O_o

One's eyes cannot change, but anyone can change their behavior. Even though we have feelings we cannot change, we can choose which feelings we act on, and it's only actions that have possible moral repercussions. That being said, good people condemn the action, not the person.

[confused2]

I went to school with (mostly) the same children from the age of 10 to 18. When we were 10 the class put their hands up to answer a question and two boys raised their hands and spontaneously held hands. They were called to the front of the class and their hands were viciously lashed with a ruler.

Years later (childhood is an eternity) we would walk home from school together so I could buy smokes with the bus money and he for his own reasons. By this time we are 16 and I am besotted with a rather naughty girlfriend - so I talk about the girl - first base and so on. One day he turned on me and said "I'm sick of pretending I like girls I can't do it any longer.". This is the UK in 1970, three years after sex between consenting males over the age of 21 was no longer criminal offence. The reason for the vicious punishment years before became obvious - the teacher had seen something I had no way to know anything about. If we looked back to 1970 we would find my younger self had no loyalty, no morality and was a coward and a turd.

He killed himself when he was 20 - I think that kind'a says how well it all worked out for him.

[Leigha]

Just curious on something, MR - why is it offensive if someone suggests that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? If someone were to suggest that being heterosexual is my lifestyle choice, I don't think I'd care. I say that of course, not being in your shoes, and I've never been persecuted as the LGBT has been. But, it's just curious as to why it is offensive, either way.

Stating that being gay is a lifestyle choice is the homophobic right's strategy for morally condemning being gay as a perverted lifestyle choice. That's what the homophobes do. Try to make one's orientation something one consciously chose so that they can hold gay people responsible for their orientation as an immoral action. Fortunately science proves otherwise. It is no more a choice than one's eye color. The guy in the OP was probably bisexual and didn't know it. It happens all the time.

Yea, that makes a lot of sense, MR. Agree about the guy in the OP being potentially bi, and perhaps not knowing it. But, in your view, is bisexuality a lifestyle choice?

[Magical Realist]

But, in your view, is bisexuality a lifestyle choice?

I think it's a choice if a bisexual is with men or women. But the orientation itself isn't a choice. You can't just choose to be attracted to a certain gender.

[Syne]

But, in your view, is bisexuality a lifestyle choice?

I think it's a choice if a bisexual is with men or women. But the orientation itself isn't a choice. You can't just choose to be attracted to a certain gender.

But a bisexual can have that choice and not know it? O_o

If so, everyone is bisexual. They just don't know they're attracted to the other sex too.

[Secular Sanity]

Flirting? Wow, that must be a parapraxis, as no one implied or inferred you were flirting. Why on earth would you assume anyone thought you were flirting? O_o

Oh, I don’t know, Syne. Maybe because you’ve accused of me that before, and since we’re discussing desire, I thought it best to be clear.

Yes, it's trivial that plants take advantage of an animal's need to eat and that somethings are more pleasant in competition with others. That is the plant's reproductive strategy.

We all know that sensations trigger chemical responses. The color or the smell of the fruit attracts animals. Every single survival and reproductive strategy operates in tandem with social, environmental, and biological triggers, but the desire to have children is a product of our environment. Babies are adorable but so are puppies. That sneaky little coiled helix just tricks us into reproducing. You can think whatever you want…but you’d wrong. One thing that I did find disappointing, however, was Buss’ book on desire. There was hardly any discussion on the biological mechanisms.

As far as pleasure is concerned, there are some interesting hypotheses on orgasms. One that I found intriguing was on female orgasms. Most of the old boys’ club just assume that it’s a nonadaptive byproduct of orgasm in men, which by the way, is vital for reproduction. However, there are more feasible ideas. One is that our common ancestors may have been induced ovulators.

Yet we are a social species and can be very altruistic.

Of course, and all sorts of chemical reactions are involved.  Take oxytocin for example, it's released during orgasms and facilitates in bonding, not only between mates, but offspring, as well.

We need each other, and like the bonobos, we, too, use sex, whether it's heterosexual or homosexual, as tool to form bonds and promote tolerance.

"Intolerance in a society is the sum-total of the intolerance of its individual members." Maybe you could work on this, eh?

Promoting Tolerance