• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Are homosexual natures created by nurture, nature, or God?

I meant that respectfully. Most people's opinions on this matter more than mine, People plugged in as parents and Advocates of young people should ideally be one in the same but often times aren't
There IS no explosion. But in the past people COULDN'T come out as trans because almost off of society would reject them and they'd often be hate crimed to death, so they either ended up killing themselves or lived miserable lives hiding who they really were and trying their best to force themselves to live a life. It's like how some Middle Eastern countries insist there are no gay Muslims. Of course there are, just as many as everywhere else but they can't TELL anyone because being gay carries the death penalty there.
That is very true
 
Well said.

That's the thing about 'god', it seems to exist as a deep slide-image in the depths of each individual brain. (A dynamic one, not static ime!)
I thought you were being graceful including it in the mix, because it can hardly be cut out the mix just because we run into incredible difficulties communicating our personal god slide/image to other humans.

I hear the dilemma you're describing, and not sure if this helps or whose words i'm paraphrasing.. This universe is made up of god-electricity/divine electricity at root-level. All creatures have the inner blueprint to spiral up towards god/ess-hood. Environmentally, and in every way it's a divinely electric universe. Constantly, god/esses & conscious elements are coming into existence of their own accord & increasing gravities & crystallisation. The long march of self-actualisation.

Its probably even more binding than karmic law, since deities/god/esses have been leapfrogging & cutting through fences of karma for a long time. Their origin stories often contain such anomalies.

I do know/feel we were engineered too, and i'd love to see the team photo taken after they completed the work, clinking glasses etc, listening to whatever jukeboxes they snort their lines with :alien:
Inevitably the engineering would've been collaborative anyway. For example you could engineer a seed of course and then plant it, but then nurture comes into play..so i think our thaheritage would have been a team effort, multiple teams, opposing teams, a total rainbow fuck-bunker.
I like the way you presented and verbalised that there, seeing precisely where I was coming from.

I have really been drawn into disillusionment pondering the potential layers of nefarious wannabe Gods all observing in command and watch, and firm guard minding this little crater down here.

No question, now, in my mind that in whatever way we are engineered goods.

Nano or no nano. But I've seen enough with my own eyes, living fibers and more, to persuade me Nanotech in the human body is a thing.

But kings used to rule for 100,000's of years.

80 is so damn convenient.

I bet there were "problems" with generations (in a wider sense here lol).

Even capped at 200.

80 is a piece of piss. Dumbed down to shit, no time to figure.

Imagine living 500 years. Body age now what, well relatively young. 6? Depends how it's calibrated.

But whatever. What will crush my own faith, hope. Is seeing no sign ever of what I simply refer to as the ultimate divine supreme.

No imitators. Including Ra lol that swine.

And I do think lots unseen recently, I mean recently too! Time being relative but..

Other formats of advanced intelligent civilisation. I'll put it that way.


But I hold hope, belief, on a kind of calculation. Nah none of these powerful inbetweeners decide, ultimately.

They're all just out for a buck.

I do feel pretty low down on the ladder here in this pit too.

There must be, in my mind, something above. Supreme, holy.

But we have to climb this ladder, lol, "Snakes & Ladders" 80's board game.

It seems, unless there is a shortcut.

It is said, the "Pillars of Hercules" are the exit to this crater. By waterway. Now.

And that Columbus did not discover the Americas, but the exit to the crater.

I had a spectacular vivid dream about these two pillars, on a giant river huge valley, leading up out towards light.

A big dragon was poised far behind the pillars, appeared to be keeping guard.

I never had even heard of those pillars that time.

I understand exactly what you say. I haven't a clue what is ultimately true. So I try not to scrub too much out, in case.

Nor simply follow without being able to have conviction.
 
It's LGBTQ+ bro, calm down. If your "100% support" can't stretch to a 6-character acronym then you might want to re-evaluate your support. Your post went from "totally fine" to "totally asinine" with that addition.

I shared with you an opinion. As usual, I attempted to be a little but humorous. We can't be stoic scientists constantly.

You, however, have countered with a direct statement implying both that you understand my thought process and state of mind well enough to critique them and that you judge them to be not right. They are not right because they do not fit your acronym-based definition of complex creatures. I'm sorry but you do not need to be classified and filed to be a proud gay person.

It calls into question my whole life experience from finding gay people "disgusting" as a child to meeting my first gay friends in middle school and coming to love and accept them and the divine release of overcoming my own stupid fears and feeling love where there was once disdain.

My main and primary gripe with the acronym is that it is impractical. I want to discuss issues regarding the community and saying "gay" has been accepted by 90% of people as respectful. Thus I prefer to say "gay rights" and such. It is easier and people get the meaning a ND you know full well that this is true.

I would meditate on my intentions a little but and ask yourself why you felt the need to call out such a deeply, mentally visceral part of me in reaction to what was at worst, stupidity. I have no hate in me and it is my honest belief that my objective love and support for these people in life is sufficient for the universe.

Id start with questioning before judgment. We share similar views. Why argue?
 
Nature. 100%. Nurture doesn't come into it even 0.000000000000001%.
God, if you believe in that....I don't. So...just nature.

There. I answered your question with actual knowledge/fact and not just an opinion :)

How are you so certain that nurture has 0 part and why are you so emotional about it?
 
It's LGBTQ+ bro, calm down.

Actually, according to Duke University's Office for Institutional Equity, it's LGBTQQIP2SAA.

Which, as everyone knows, means: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, queer, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit (2S), androgynous and asexual.

Tbf, I knew I was gay at 4 years old. ^^^^

how did this happen? I barely even remember when I was four. I definitely wasn't thinking about my sexuality at that age.
 
Actually, according to Duke University's Office for Institutional Equity, it's LGBTQQIP2SAA.

Which, as everyone knows, means: lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning, queer, intersex, pansexual, two-spirit (2S), androgynous and asexual.



how did this happen? I barely even remember when I was four. I definitely wasn't thinking about my sexuality at that age.
I was the last of 7 kids.

We lived in a specific house when I was born to the age of 5 when we moved again. I can vividly remember my siblings having older guy friends over that I found attractive. I didn't actually know what "gay" was at that point yet or what "sex" or "sexuality" even was.

I also went through a flamboyant phase when I was in 2nd grade (TLC were my idols in the early 90s). I've always known I was *different*.
I grew out of being flamboyant by 4th or 5th grade though. Pretty glad no one changed my gender back then. lol

But as for my attraction to other males..
I tried to think I'd grow out of it when I got older and tried dating chicks in middle school but once it got the romantic parts, I felt uncomfortable and finally admitted to myself & everyone else that I was attracted to other men. And I realized that it wasn't something that was just gonna 'go away'.
 
Last edited:

Oh god. I was sort of in the after-glow of a psychedelic experience guys. I thought this was funny, but it leans a little more toward offensive. I don't want to imply that I somehow am the Alpha and Omega creator of Lesbians, although I'm probably reading into the cosmology and philosophy of my own stupidity a little too much.
Never apologize for psychedelic Afterglow
 
This isn't my forum but I am a mod so let me interject that the insults need to stop. If people want to comment on a thread that is pretty controversial than we can all do so without judging their moral and mental defects. And people that come to BL for help aren't stupid. So if

"every evening i pray to jesus christ that i will be able to wake the next day with the strength the not listen to 50 cent's in da club for just one day but it always fails, i've lost all faith in god and myself

i started doing heroin just to calm the urge to listen to in da club but it barely helps, if anything it just makes the beat feel like it goes even harder

there is no hope, religion and injections have failed, and that's all western culture has at it's disposal other than working myself into the ground as a disposable cog in an uncaring machine while i listen to in da club cause that song is my jam"


i read this and thought

you know what

fuck it
Fitty
 
How are you so certain that nurture has 0 part and why are you so emotional about it?

I'm not emotional? I literally posted a smiley face.
And because I'm gay and have spoken to thousands of other gay people and every single one agrees unanimously. It's just a fact. The only people that EVER think otherwise are straight people (which is stupid as obviously they have no knowledge or experience there).
 
I'm not emotional? I literally posted a smiley face.
And because I'm gay and have spoken to thousands of other gay people and every single one agrees unanimously. It's just a fact. The only people that EVER think otherwise are straight people (which is stupid as obviously they have no knowledge or experience there).

Saying you were not emotional about it really isn't feasible. Using an emoticon does not remove harsh categorical sentiment.

Observing that gay people believe that environmental factors have nothing to do with gayness isn't proof. Belief isn't proof, generally. I bet you even know this already.

It's a rather radical claim to be making, saying that some trait is 0 influenced by environmental factors. Since you're essentially calling anyone who disagrees with your assumption stupid ("God, if you believe in that..."), you need real proof. Otherwise you're just spouting your opinion, while ironically dismissing people who make less unproven assumptions as operating purely out of opinion.

Nope. PC points and in-group biases do not override basic epistemology.

This is coming from someone with no hate or contempt for gays, and no religious conviction.
 
Last edited:
Saying you were not emotional about it really isn't feasible. Using an emoticon does not remove harsh categorical sentiment.

Observing that gay people believe that environmental factors have nothing to do with gayness isn't proof. Belief isn't proof, generally. I bet you even know this already.

It's a rather radical claim to be making, saying that some trait is 0 influenced by environmental factors. Since you're essentially calling anyone who disagrees with your assumption stupid ("God, if you believe in that..."), you need real proof. Otherwise you're just spouting your opinion, while ironically dismissing people who make less unproven assumptions as operating purely out of opinion.

Nope. PC points and in-group biases do not override basic epistemology.

This is coming from someone with no hate or contempt for gays, and no religious conviction.

which environmental factors do you think affect sexuality the most?
 
which environmental factors do you think affect sexuality the most?

Not sure. I'm just arguing that if we are to exclude the possibility of any environmental factors for gayness, proof is required.

I can brainstorm a bit for you if you for some reason are interested in my speculations regarding environmental factors for gayness. Right now i'm unsure of your intentions.

I'm not saying your intention is to "disprove" my appeal to skepticism by trying to show that i don't have counter-examples at hand, but if it is: You should know that this is not a valid rebuttal since i'm simply arguing that the other guy is lacking proof for his assumption. If on the other hand you're simply expressing interest in my speculations, that's fine although mysterious. Feel free to clarify and i will happily speculate about environmental factors. Either way, i intend no harm.
 
So, no examples but you're sure the experience & wisdom that comes from people who have actually had to live their lives being gay is not enough "proof"?

I'm skeptical of "environmental factors" because most gay people will tell you they've always known they were gay and gay people grow up in so many different types on environments.
Sexuality is innate. It's not something as easily swayed by your environment. I grew up in a time when everything on TV was the classic "Husband + wife + family" script, yet none of my 'environmental factors' turned me straight. If it was that easy, then all the straight porn I watched as a teenager should have "influenced' me to be straight. lol
 
Tbf, I knew I was gay at 4 years old. ^^^^

So how I could have been "nurtured to gayness" within 3-4 years of my existence, I'm unsure.

You seem to be responding to me, although i'm not sure.

Saying that environment could play some part other than 0 in the development of homosexuality is not saying that every case has to do with environmental factors or that your particular case does.

Having said that, it is of course entirely possible to be affected by environmental factors before the age of 4. Even in the womb.

Perhaps we are again having some confusion between "nurture" as a short-hand for all environmental factors and nurture as a more specific thing about child-rearing and imprinting.
 
So, no examples but you're sure the experience & wisdom that comes from people who have actually had to live their lives being gay is not enough "proof"?

I'm skeptical of "environmental factors" because most gay people will tell you they've always known they were gay and gay people grow up in so many different types on environments.
Sexuality is innate. It's not something as easily swayed by your environment. I grew up in a time when everything on TV was the classic "Husband + wife + family" script, yet none of my 'environmental factors' turned me straight. If it was that easy, then all the straight porn I watched as a teenager should have "influenced' me to be straight. lol

Now i'm pretty sure you're responding to me! Quotes would be helpful. Maybe you have your reasons for not using quotes.

No, i don't have examples. As i already explained in the post you didn't quote but seem to be responding to, i was simply criticizing an invalid assumption with appeal to skepticism. No examples are required. If i see any good reason to go and come up with examples, i may do that. I will not do it in order to satisfy and lend confirmation to your invalid argument. That seems like a bad reason to me.

I understand the perceived need to combat homophobic assumptions about homosexuality as somehow unnatural and only a cultural perversion. However, we don't actually know that environmental factors are at 0% for homosexuality. And just to be clear: I'm not arguing that homosexuality is 100% environmental or somehow unnatural in any way, i don't agree with the homophobic assumptions and i harbor no hate or contempt toward homosexuality.
 
Last edited:
Well you're allowed to have your opinion.

It's not totally impossible that exposure to something in the womb could cause it.

Although since homosexuality goes as far back as antiquity, im not quite sure what people would have been exposed to that would. Possibly hormones or something made by the mother.
Not sure how that fits into the animal kingdom either though.

I'm not using quotes cause I consider what I'm saying as just general discussion, for anyone. You most likely aren't the only one here who believes it's environmental.


At the end of the day, I don't think it matters what 'causes' it. It matters more how society reacts to it and how they treat people who might happen to be gay.
For me, pushing that it's "environmental" only gives leverage to those who want to label it "unnatural" and even "curable". But I haven't seen any evidence that environment is at play and you're reluctant to give any examples, so..
 
Saying you were not emotional about it really isn't feasible. Using an emoticon does not remove harsh categorical sentiment.

Observing that gay people believe that environmental factors have nothing to do with gayness isn't proof. Belief isn't proof, generally. I bet you even know this already.

It's a rather radical claim to be making, saying that some trait is 0 influenced by environmental factors. Since you're essentially calling anyone who disagrees with your assumption stupid ("God, if you believe in that..."), you need real proof. Otherwise you're just spouting your opinion, while ironically dismissing people who make less unproven assumptions as operating purely out of opinion.

Nope. PC points and in-group biases do not override basic epistemology.

This is coming from someone with no hate or contempt for gays, and no religious conviction.

Let me guess: you're straight? I'm not spreading misinformation OR an opinion; I'm telling you how it is. Factually.
You are straight and therefor your opinion on homosexuality and it's basis in nature and/or nurture is null and void. It's like a white person claiming the Africans were HAPPY being oppressed slaves. You have no knowledge, experience or insight. In both cases this means should should sit down, be quiet, and let the people who KNOW what they're talking about, talk about it.

Not calling them stupid, just ignorant and ill-informed. They're making an ASSUMPTION based on nothing.
I don't give a flying fuck about being P.C. btw.

*To be clear, I was being ironic there, not hateful. I meant neither the emoji's nor the diatribe
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top