Homosexuals have a greater risk of suffering psychiatric problems

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 27 2006, 04:18 PM) [snapback]367355[/snapback]</div>

Of course we do.

Do you see any relation between this factoid, and the general intolerence shown homosexuals by most prevalent segments of our society?

 

I'm going to third that. I don't believe it's homosexuality that causes the mental problems, it's society's perception and infringement of their beliefs on homosexuals that causes their "problems". I know several homosexual people. Those that have been accepted by their families and friends are very well adjusted and those that have encountered problems with these support networks have been suicidal. Of course, there will be variables to this but I have certainly witnessed a pattern.

Their religion has probably rejected them, they aren't welcome in the general fabric of society and they can't even join the Boy Scouts for goodness sake. More than likely, portions of their families are having problems with their "lifestyle". That's a huge burden for any human to bear when we are social creatures and generally want to be accepted.

When parts of our society still believes that homosexuals can still be "retrained" to be attracted to members of the opposite sex, we still have a long way to go.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 27 2006, 07:20 PM) [snapback]367417[/snapback]</div>

I'd be more interested about the mental problem that causes an "interest" involving psychiatric problems and homosexuality, and then posting about it on PC.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 27 2006, 06:20 PM) [snapback]367417[/snapback]</div>

Are you familiar with the saying --- perhaps cliched, but true --- that goes, 'no man is an island'?

And, yes, I too am curious why you're the OP.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Dec 27 2006, 08:02 PM) [snapback]367426[/snapback]</div>

White trash. Our resident troll has a long history of bigoted, racist comments and threads.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 27 2006, 09:44 PM) [snapback]367462[/snapback]</div>

Well. Next time don't take it out on your insecurities while tangentially insulting other people.

 

We tend to classify anyone with "non-standard" sexual preferences as homosexual when we probably should use all the different classifications that apply. My observation is that human sexuality isn't necessarily limited to hetero- or homosexual exclusively, but that human sexuality comes in quite a few different "types." Most studies and surveys limit the categories to just homosexual or heterosexual.

For instance, pedophiles may prefer children of the same sex, while preferring adults of the opposite sex, yet studies may show the pedophile as "homosexual" because of the sex of his victims. Regardless of the victim's gender, we would all recognize pedophilia as deviant behavior, and not really related to his normal preference.

[Before I get slammed, read that again: pedophiles are misclassified in my example and often included as "homosexuals" when in fact they are heterosexual men preying on boys.]

If human sexuality falls within a range, rather than an "either / or" type of thing, then it stands to reason that you would have classification errors. Without a category for bisexuality, then every bisexual gets added to the homosexual category since, heterosexuals, by definition, only have sex with the opposite gender. There's also the problem of the smaller sample size when discussing homosexuals; they are a small percentage of the population, so a smaller number of people with problems can more easily skew the stats.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 27 2006, 06:20 PM) [snapback]367417[/snapback]</div>

OK, YOU live in a society where it's illegal to marry the person you love, you can get fired just for who you love, and your lover gets no benefits a heterosexual couple gets, and see how happy YOU are.

 

"There is no such thing as a "gay gene" and there is no evidence to support the idea that homosexuality is simply genetic."

...from "About NARTH", website

This tells you all you need to know about this source, whose purpose is to "assist" people who "think" they're gay to "develop their heterosexual side".

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mystery Squid @ Dec 28 2006, 11:08 PM) [snapback]367937[/snapback]</div>

The research so far indicates homosexuality is a strong genetic predisposition with possible detectable phenotypes. So yes, it appears that being gay or not gay is largely determined genetically.

 

ROMOsexuals are kind of depressed now.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Dec 28 2006, 07:23 PM) [snapback]367939[/snapback]</div>

I don't think so ... as far as I know, there has not been any definitive evidence that sexual preference is genetically based. I'd be interested to hear otherwise, because the last time I looked at the so-called studies, they were simply collated papers with an editor that had a bias (read: bad science).

It may be that there's a genetic component, because we do know that sexual preference is determined early on and is generally not changeable (although humans are capable of incredible suppression or adaptation to environmental stresses, they revert to original preference if given the chance). But the evidence is not there yet.

The anti-gay advocacy group may be right in saying there is "no gay gene" (they should really be saying there is no reliable evidence for a genetic predisposition, but big words usually foil the fund raising goals).

The thing I'm always perplexed with in this question is why the heck it matters? Individual liberty is not liberty if it doesn't apply to free will choices. Imagine granting freedom of speech to extroverts, but prohibiting introverts from speaking up. Or giving freedom of religion to adherents of the FSM, but jailing all the Jews.

It doesn't matter if I want to sleep with someone of my own sex today because I want to or because I have a genetic predisposition. If I have freedom to do so, it is not the state's business to tell me I can't do it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Dec 28 2006, 09:07 PM) [snapback]367962[/snapback]</div>

I agree with the above.

The "nature vs nurture" debate continues among the uneducated, but I think there is concensus in the scientific community that in almost every respect, what makes an individual what he is, is a combination of both. Every human being who is not severely damaged, has the innate (genetic) capacity to learn language, but what language you learn depends on your upbringing. Humans are innately sexual animals, but how that sexuality is expressed is the result of multiple factors.

At the end of the day, we cannot call ourselves a free society if people who speak a different language, or people with a different sexual orientation, are discriminated against.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Dec 29 2006, 12:07 AM) [snapback]367962[/snapback]</div>

Agreed.

I'm worried that if there IS a gene that's found to cause homosexuality/transgenderism, some folks under the name of 'family first' or 'the association for American values' or like that will likely become proponents of genetic research designed to remove the "offending" gene.

-------------------------------------

It's almost --- almost --- amusing how we're called upon to defend ourselves for being...ourselves.

Frankly, one's sexual preference --- or hindering the expression thereof --- is no one's damn business...and it's becoming extremely crass how some people here have no problem dissecting every aspect of a homosexual relationship, like it's a frog in some high school lab class.

We should talk about YOUR private life for a while...your sexual preferences...we'll bring it into public discussion and determine if your feelings and emotions are valid or not...debate whether you're worthy of the rights accorded to every other citizen...and see how YOU like it!