Villainess
smooth talk on a rainy summer evening
And even scientists can't even prove it.
Even the American Psychological Association — which is very supportive of the LGBT movement — has conceded:
“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.”
There may be some limited genetic influence on the development of same-sex attractions — but there is a significant difference between a trait being genetically influenced and genetically determined. Studies of identical twins show that, when one twin is homosexual, the other (genetically identical) twin is usually not homosexual. This disproves the idea of homosexuality as a fixed, genetically determined trait.
Some researchers have suggested non-genetic biological theories for the origin of same-sex attractions, such as hormonal influences or intra-uterine experiences. For example, it has been reported that men with more older brothers are more likely to be homosexual, and it has been speculated that this could relate to a biological effect in the mother’s womb. No such effect has has ever been demonstrated, though, and critics have argued that a psychological explanation can account for this data as well as a biological one.
Most researchers prior to the 1970s believed, as many still do today, that homosexual attractions are primarily a developmental result of childhood experiences. There are some patterns that appear frequently in the life histories of those with same-sex attractions. These include poor bonding with the same-sex parent or peers, or having been a victim of child sexual abuse.
Even some people who self-identify as gay are rejecting the idea that they were “born that way” — and the defensiveness of the implied argument, “I’m only like this because I can’t help it.” Columbia University sociologist Shamus Khan laments that “biologists, social activists and scholars have not just tolerated a fiction, but in many instances propagated it” — giving credence to “a false idol of bad science.”
The “born gay” theory lacks scientific credibility, and it — and policies premised on it, such as the Equality Act — should be abandoned.
If you're born gay then how come reer baadiye kids don't even know what being homosexual is? noo sheeg.
Same goes with transgenders, 99% of your body is male yet that one corner of your brain suddenly decides that you're a woman? Bullshit.
And when you ask member of the HFDAJKFHFADS community they say "well.. it was found in 450+ types of animals"
animals also f*ck their sisters and brothers. should we do cannibalism because it's "found in nature"
Even the American Psychological Association — which is very supportive of the LGBT movement — has conceded:
“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.”
There may be some limited genetic influence on the development of same-sex attractions — but there is a significant difference between a trait being genetically influenced and genetically determined. Studies of identical twins show that, when one twin is homosexual, the other (genetically identical) twin is usually not homosexual. This disproves the idea of homosexuality as a fixed, genetically determined trait.
Some researchers have suggested non-genetic biological theories for the origin of same-sex attractions, such as hormonal influences or intra-uterine experiences. For example, it has been reported that men with more older brothers are more likely to be homosexual, and it has been speculated that this could relate to a biological effect in the mother’s womb. No such effect has has ever been demonstrated, though, and critics have argued that a psychological explanation can account for this data as well as a biological one.
Most researchers prior to the 1970s believed, as many still do today, that homosexual attractions are primarily a developmental result of childhood experiences. There are some patterns that appear frequently in the life histories of those with same-sex attractions. These include poor bonding with the same-sex parent or peers, or having been a victim of child sexual abuse.
Even some people who self-identify as gay are rejecting the idea that they were “born that way” — and the defensiveness of the implied argument, “I’m only like this because I can’t help it.” Columbia University sociologist Shamus Khan laments that “biologists, social activists and scholars have not just tolerated a fiction, but in many instances propagated it” — giving credence to “a false idol of bad science.”
The “born gay” theory lacks scientific credibility, and it — and policies premised on it, such as the Equality Act — should be abandoned.
If you're born gay then how come reer baadiye kids don't even know what being homosexual is? noo sheeg.
Same goes with transgenders, 99% of your body is male yet that one corner of your brain suddenly decides that you're a woman? Bullshit.
And when you ask member of the HFDAJKFHFADS community they say "well.. it was found in 450+ types of animals"
animals also f*ck their sisters and brothers. should we do cannibalism because it's "found in nature"
