Is it Real ?

[groovlstk]

I've worked in Manhattan for 20+ years, for 7 of those years in the Chelsea area (which is home to a huge gay population) and in all that time I've never witnessed men making out - I've seen guys holding hands and kissing demurely, but even in such circumstances it's not possible to label the men gay.

I think a lot of guys here simply have no experience around gay people - some of this stuff is really comical  Believe it or not, if you walk around a gay neighborhood or go to a gay bar you're not going to get your ass pinched (sorry fellas!) or be propositioned. You're also not going to be proselytized on supporting the "gay agenda." People are people, you will be treated pretty much the same way you treat others.

FWIW I still think going to a gay bar in the FSU is asking for trouble and going to ANY gay bar w/the intention of meeting women is ludicrous. There's a semi-derogatory term (coined by gay men, BTW) for heterosexual women who prefer the non-threatening company of gay men: fag hags.

[Misha]

However, for me personally, in much the same way that I don't practice Islam or Hinduism, neither do I care if they choose something different.  Free country, just respect my space as well.

The  comparison is not quite correct. You can convert to another religion, but no matter what some may say you can't really 'convert' to homosexuality or heterosexuality. You are born the way you are born, and nothing can really change that. There is not gene for Islam or Christianity for that matter. How can you choose whom you are attracted to? You can choose to try and deny it, hide it and stay in the closet, but I don't really see this as a better option IMHO.

[jdk1963]

Guess he has not heard the one about glass houses...

Perhaps if I was using a prenup to search for a potential devotee you might have something.

[mendeleyev]

This letter from her was in response to my note that she would have to sign a "prenuptial agreement" before we can get married. Such agreement would exclude her from receiving any financial assets in case of a divorce. In those unfortunate circumstances her best option would be to return to her country, essentially with her personal items. She was worried about becoming destitute if someday I fell out of love, I assured her, I would help her out regardless of circumstances, in making sure she returns to her country safely.

Before anyone jumps on the validity of prenupts, if and when I get married it would be in the state of Nevada; for Nevada weddings and divorces are a business, they have enacted laws that make prenupts iron clad, judges have no jurisdiction to interfere.

Sorry if this has already been sorted out.

Doesn't apply because Federal Statutes overrule state law in this case, not to mention the simple fact that any State prenups must comply with commonly held "fairness" clauses.  If you think the Feds would allow you to withhold everything, and simply send her back, you are smoking something really serious!  Its not a Nevada matter, immigration is a Federal matter. 

The Federal view of things, of which you will be a signatory to, is that you're on the hook 10 years minimum if you marry and it doesn't work out.  The only way you can send her back is within the 90 day K-1 period, before you marry.

[Diplomacy]

Ah, you had to tell him Mendel.

[ECOCKS]

The  comparison is not quite correct. You can convert to another religion, but no matter what some may say you can't really 'convert' to homosexuality or heterosexuality. You are born the way you are born, and nothing can really change that. There is not gene for Islam or Christianity for that matter. How can you choose whom you are attracted to? You can choose to try and deny it, hide it and stay in the closet, but I don't really see this as a better option IMHO.

As stated previously, you have your belief and I have mine.  Mine is right for me and you can make it along on yours.  If someone decides they are "gay", enters into a relationship with a person of the same sex and, state permitting, gets married, then most folks seem to agree they are, in fact, gay.  If you believe otherwise, more power to you.

If I wake up tomorrow morning and elect to go to my local mosque and request instruction on becoming a practitioner of Islam, then most people are going to agree my religion is Islamic.

[Ade]

As stated previously, you have your belief and I have mine.  Mine is right for me and you can make it along on yours.  If someone decides they are "gay", enters into a relationship with a person of the same sex and, state permitting, gets married, then most folks seem to agree they are, in fact, gay.  If you believe otherwise, more power to you.

This is outdated thinking by quite a few decades and contradicts all modern peer reviewed research from reliable sources. You can choose to believe the moon is made of cheese but that's called delusion too.

[OlgaH]

Well, if by "verbal probation" you mean a reminder to be civil - to NOT engage in personal attacks - and to NOT engage in insulting innuendo or biting sarcasm - then, YES, I guess my PM might be seen as "verbal probation" - though I intended it to be gentle guidance directed towards productive outcomes.

FWIW

- Dan

FWIW

- Dan

"verbal probation"...

That's why when I have received from a man "I'd prefer to see how far I can stick my foot up your a$$" the local members-men kept their silence. I don't want to think that men of this board kept their silence as an approval of such behavor of their brother and then they continue to educate each other about Russian women culture... But who knows maybe it is so... and in such case even I have enough courage to stand up for myself... I think such men's club is not for me and my presence is undesirable here, especially my unsuitable for the club opinions.

I'm sorry if I have given any hard time to any man here.

Sincerely
Olga

[Makkin]

Simioni,

  Now I'm a tad confused about this gay bashing you have spoken of. I tend to think that those of us who don't agree to move the "gay" agenda forward are sometimes mistaken with being a gay basher?

  Funny how the party line they set is often watched very closely and formulated on several layers. Even funnier are the honest folks who actually speak there minds in the subject. I deem this as refreshing.

  I understand that people are people but I also understand the feelings of the majority who will probably never agree to the demands of the "gays". If the gays feel as if they can change the minds of those who disagree then why has it not already been done?

  I look at myself as a good and moral individual who obeys the law. I pay my taxes and perform my civic duties. Never will I agree for gays to have what they ask for and that's my decision. You can call me basher if you wish but that's just another created "paint" brush answer from gays who cannot face the facts.

Makkin

 

[ECOCKS]

This is outdated thinking by quite a few decades and contradicts all modern peer reviewed research from reliable sources. You can choose to believe the moon is made of cheese but that's called delusion too.

Delusional?  Decades ago?

Interesting. 

I know of no state that performs DNA testing to determine sexual orientation.  I am aware that there is a school of thought that thinks this but googling Genetics and Sexual orientation shows me no medical breakthroughs that do this.

Ah well, better things to do.

[Misha]

I know of no state that performs DNA testing to determine sexual orientation.  I am aware that there is a school of thought that thinks this but googling Genetics and Sexual orientation shows me no medical breakthroughs that do this.

Certain traits are the results of complex interaction of a number of genes and what happens in the womb during gestation (i.e. prior to birth). Homosexuality is certainly one of these traits. This from an article published last month:

"US researchers are finding common biological traits among gay men, feeding a growing consensus that sexual orientation is an inborn combination of genetic and environmental factors that largely decide a person's sexual attractions before they are born."

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/01/homosexuality-genetics-usa

You may have to hone your googling skills 

[Simoni]

Simioni,

  Now I'm a tad confused about this gay bashing you have spoken of. I tend to think that those of us who don't agree to move the "gay" agenda forward are sometimes mistaken with being a gay basher?

  Funny how the party line they set is often watched very closely and formulated on several layers. Even funnier are the honest folks who actually speak there minds in the subject. I deem this as refreshing.

  I understand that people are people but I also understand the feelings of the majority who will probably never agree to the demands of the "gays". If the gays feel as if they can change the minds of those who disagree then why has it not already been done?

  I look at myself as a good and moral individual who obeys the law. I pay my taxes and perform my civic duties. Never will I agree for gays to have what they ask for and that's my decision. You can call me basher if you wish but that's just another created "paint" brush answer from gays who cannot face the facts.

Makkin

 

Makkin, I did not call *you* a gay basher.  I was referring to another poster on another thread who ridiculed gay men.
In his example, he degraded all gay men, and unfairly, too.

That just does not fly in America anymore.  Try sending out an anti-gay email in your company and see where that gets you these days.  A professional athletic recently did a similar rant on youtube and got a $30,000 fine.

Yes, it might be common to make such jokes among some/many in the FSU.  But this poster was talking about American men in America.  It was in poor taste and was inaccurate.

I look at myself as a good and moral individual who obeys the law. I pay my taxes and perform my civic duties.

What are you contrasting here?

Gay men are good and moral and obey the law.  They also pay their taxes and perform civic duties.

[Faux Pas]

Certain traits are the results of complex interaction of a number of genes and what happens in the womb during gestation (i.e. prior to birth). Homosexuality is certainly one of these traits. This from an article published last month:

"US researchers are finding common biological traits among gay men, feeding a growing consensus that sexual orientation is an inborn combination of genetic and environmental factors that largely decide a person's sexual attractions before they are born."

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/01/homosexuality-genetics-usa

You may have to hone your googling skills 

Being proclaimed and proven isn't the same thing. This idea has been going around for years and has yet to be substantiated with any verifiable proof. Pure speculation. There is no isolated "homosexual" gene.

[Misha]

Being proclaimed and proven isn't the same thing. This idea has been going around for years and has yet to be substantiated with any verifiable proof. Pure speculation. There is no isolated "homosexual" gene.

There is likely never going to be "A" gene for homosexuality. What exactly do you not understand? In genetics, some traits are the result of a number of genes that together determine a certain inherited trait. As the article states, these genes along with what happens in the womb in the 9 months from conception to birth can irrevocably shape the individual. This is why an individual can be born with an innate predisposition without there being a gene that has been identified. Besides, the study of human genetics is still in its infancy. Just because "a" gene has not been found, does not mean that something is not genetically predetermined.

Answer me this one question: why would anybody "choose" to be homosexual? Throughout much of recent history, it meant being ostracized by family and friends, imprisonment, humiliation, or worse. Why would anybody willingly choose this? Yet, in spite of the intolerance, men across the world and through history have "chosen" to be gay in spite of the risks, though they may have worked harder to hide it depending on the place and the era.

[Gator]

... and in such case even I have enough courage to stand up for myself...

And you should.

I think such men's club is not for me and my presence is undesirable here, especially my unsuitable for the club opinions.

Olga, you add much here and I assert that the vast majority want you to continue to participate.  I would assume that most men did not comment because that thread looked like another pissing contest and so they did not bother to read it.  I read only a part before my eyes glazed over and I went to something more interesting such as why gays are no different or different, dependent upon one's perspective.  Why all this talk about gays?  Sheeesh.

I'm sorry if I have given any hard time to any man here.

Don't apologize.  It destroys my image of RW, especially the huge amount of pride each and every RW possesses.  Besides, you have never given me a hard time.

[Faux Pas]

There is likely never going to be "A" gene for homosexuality. What exactly do you not understand? In genetics, some traits are the result of a number of genes that together determine a certain inherited trait. As the article states, these genes along with what happens in the womb in the 9 months from conception to birth can irrevocably shape the individual. This is why an individual can be born with an innate predisposition without there being a gene that has been identified. Besides, the study of human genetics is still in its infancy. Just because "a" gene has not been found, does not mean that something is not genetically predetermined.

Answer me this one question: why would anybody "choose" to be homosexual? Throughout much of recent history, it meant being ostracized by family and friends, imprisonment, humiliation, or worse. Why would anybody willingly choose this? Yet, in spite of the intolerance, men across the world and through history have "chosen" to be gay in spite of the risks, though they may have worked harder to hide it depending on the place and the era.
[/quote

Misha perhaps I understood the article better than you yet remain objective enough to label it pure POPPYCOCK. "If the earth moves out of it's current orbit it could collide with the sun." That statement is just as true as that complete article. Where does this put  younger siblings whose hair whorls counter clockwise and are not homosexual? The entire article is complete hypothesis, pure speculation hiding behind a pepper of scientific data. There is no connection proven that homosexuality is genetic or that homosexuals are predetermined in the womb. These ideas are as free flowing as global warming.

As for the latter, I have no idea what makes or why someone chooses to be homosexual. Thats not a choice I've made. I do not know why homosexuals are attracted to the same gender and heterosexuals are attracted to the opposite gender. But you prove neither with the tripe that is that article.

[Misha]

Misha perhaps I understood the article better than you yet remain objective enough to label it pure POPPYCOCK.

What part of the article do you not agree with? It is easy to label something poppycock and not address the ideas. Give me the proof that the article is incorrect. Give me the contrary evidence that homosexuality is not predetermined prior to birth.

[Faux Pas]

What part of the article do you not agree with? It is easy to label something poppycock and not address the ideas. Give me the proof that the article is incorrect. Give me the contrary evidence that homosexuality is not predetermined prior to birth.

Misha give me some proof that it is correct. See? That works both ways. It would appear you want me to invent a strawman to attack your strawman. You didn't explain what happens to the left-handed younger sibling with whorling  counterclockwise hair who is heterosexual? Kind of throws a wrench of fact into your whole position. If all I need to is post a link like you did to prove a point I can do that too. It is just another side to an argument which neither has been proven: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8802

just because you read it and believe it doesn't make it true

[Mir]

But I have never seen two dudes walking hand and hand kissing in Kiev.

Hmm kissing no but two men walking with arms linked is seen> so are two or three girls holding hands. And none of these people are gay, they are just friends.

[Misha]

If all I need to is post a link like you did to prove a point I can do that too. It is just another side to an argument which neither has been proven: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=8802

just because you read it and believe it doesn't make it true

Quite simple, the scientific evidences points to three important factors that play an important role in determining homosexuality:

1. Genetics (both the child's and the mother's);
2. Prenatal hormonal influence (i.e. the hormones that a child is exposed to in a mother's womb);
3. The Brain and how it is "wired" as the child develops in the womb and in the first years.

Research is indicating that sexuality is complex and there might even be different sub-sets of gay men. This is what Sven Bocklandt, Steve Horvath, Eric Vilain and Dean H Hamer, four researchers who conducted a study examining both the genetics of mothers who had had more than one gay son as compared to a control group, concluded:

"Recently, several identified autosomal loci suggested a multi-gene regulation of the sexual orientation pathway (Mustanski et al. 2005), as expected for a complex behavioral trait. We hypothesize that one central neuronal pathway establishes sexual attraction to either males or females, usually towards the opposite sex. However, a variety of genetic and nongenetic
biological effects might intersect this pathway. Hence, there might be several sub groups of gay men and women, each with their own specific biological origin. Although these results need to be replicated, the unusual X chromosome methylation pattern in our sample of mothers of homosexual men supports a role for the X chromosome in regulating male sexual orientation, and offers a path for further research on the (epi)genetic basis of a complex and biologically critical human trait."

The full article can be downloaded here: http://repositories.cdlib.org/postprints/1413/.

In other words, this research, and that of others, is certainly indicating that genetics and biology does play a role in sexual attraction. True, it hasn't been "conclusively proven" but few things ever are "conclusively proven" in science.

[Faux Pas]

In other words, this research, and that of others, is certainly indicating that genetics and biology does play a role in sexual attraction. True, it hasn't been "conclusively proven" but few things ever are "conclusively proven" in science.

Poppycock

[Misha]

Poppycock

Let me guess, you must also not believe in evolution 

Oh well, there is no sense arguing with a man whose reasoning abilities are limited to one word 

[Faux Pas]

Let me guess, you must also not believe in evolution 

Oh well, there is no sense arguing with a man whose reasoning abilities are limited to one word 

I wouldn't argue with you anyway. Your have yet to provide an argument. You provide slanted hypothesis and state it as fact. I've shot that down with equal hypothesis and you continue with more hypothesis. Misha, your position is is based on voodoo and pull the rabbit out if the hat magic. Nothing more. There is nothing to back your claim and you can't present anything to change that because it doesn't exist

[Misha]

Misha, your position is is based on voodoo and pull the rabbit out if the hat magic.

Well, if you define scientific research as "voodoo" I will opt for voodoo in lieu of ignorance 

[ScottinCrimea]

Quite simple, the scientific evidences points to three important factors that play an important role in determining homosexuality:

1. Genetics (both the child's and the mother's);
2. Prenatal hormonal influence (i.e. the hormones that a child is exposed to in a mother's womb);
3. The Brain and how it is "wired" as the child develops in the womb and in the first years.

Research is indicating that sexuality is complex and there might even be different sub-sets of gay men. This is what Sven Bocklandt, Steve Horvath, Eric Vilain and Dean H Hamer, four researchers who conducted a study examining both the genetics of mothers who had had more than one gay son as compared to a control group, concluded:

"Recently, several identified autosomal loci suggested a multi-gene regulation of the sexual orientation pathway (Mustanski et al. 2005), as expected for a complex behavioral trait. We hypothesize that one central neuronal pathway establishes sexual attraction to either males or females, usually towards the opposite sex. However, a variety of genetic and nongenetic
biological effects might intersect this pathway. Hence, there might be several sub groups of gay men and women, each with their own specific biological origin. Although these results need to be replicated, the unusual X chromosome methylation pattern in our sample of mothers of homosexual men supports a role for the X chromosome in regulating male sexual orientation, and offers a path for further research on the (epi)genetic basis of a complex and biologically critical human trait."

The full article can be downloaded here: http://repositories.cdlib.org/postprints/1413/.

In other words, this research, and that of others, is certainly indicating that genetics and biology does play a role in sexual attraction. True, it hasn't been "conclusively proven" but few things ever are "conclusively proven" in science.

Would anyone accept as even close to conclusive any study that had as many qualifiers as those noted in bold above?  I know I wouldn't even dare to publish such an inconclusive study.