Bella Thorne being a pansexual means that she is one of those few who has trascended the limitations of biology and is at a higher plane of existence. A higher level of consciousness.
Can’t imagine how liberating it must be.
It's a fancy term for trysexual
sharenah it is the pinnacle of human evolution. a true elevation of consciousness
shareIt's another way to say, "my career stalled what can I claim to try and get some quick publicity"... these women that suddenly become lesbians or bi, or pansexual or whatever the word of the day is, are pathetic. They really are insulting to people that really are lesbians because they help to perpetuate the belief that sexual orientation is something a person can change anytime they want.
shareThey really are insulting to people that really are lesbians because they help to perpetuate the method that sexual orientation is something a person can change anytime they want.
You've just fallen for a real hoax if you believe that crap. If you are straight do you really think you can suddenly decide you enjoy sex with the same sex? Sorry but that notion makes zero sense, you could get a straight guy, tie him up and let guys fuck the hell out of him but he isn't going to like it or end it all by saying please butt fuck me again. Your orientation is what it is and you can't change it anymore than a black man can become white or a white man can become black. You are what you are.
shareYou've just fallen for a real hoax if you believe that crap. If you are straight do you really think you can suddenly decide you enjoy sex with the same sex?
you could get a straight guy, tie him up and let guys fuck the hell out of him but he isn't going to like it or end it all by saying please butt fuck me again
You just proved me correct dumbass. When you said I will never be convinced by any of your studies, that same things holds to to people and their sexual preference. You will never change some people because it cannot be done. But go pull more bullshit studies out of your ass if they make you feel good... doesn't mean they are valid.
shareWhen you said I will never be convinced by any of your studies, that same things holds to to people and their sexual preference.
You will never change some people because it cannot be done.
But go pull more bullshit studies out of your ass if they make you feel good... doesn't mean they are valid.
So what are you saying in general cyguration, that homosexuality is a choice and that they are not born that way?
share100%.
It is literally physiologically impossible to be born gay, because the human neurology necessary to determine sexual attraction has not been developed at that stage of birth. There just isn't enough cell structure there.
Even the Left-wing propagandists had to admit there is no gay gene:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02585-6
After that avenue went bust they decided to study genetic traits in grown adults. The so-called genetic cues they picked up on from homosexuals were epigenetic traits (ergo, post-natal changes in phenotype based on environmental stimuli).
What did they find? That there were traces within many gay men associated with overuse of cannabis and alcohol, which fits in line with studies indicating that homosexuals and those within the LGBT spectrum are heavy substance abusers:
https://archive.is/rXYPi
https://archive.is/lQNLA
But then that means that heterosexuality is just as normal/valid as homosexuality no?
shareHeterosexuality is biological essentialism for human existence.
Men and women are sexually dimorphmic, men inseminate, women can be inseminated. During puberty as gonadotropin is secreting like crazy and the sex drives are in full bloom, most people naturally gravitate toward the opposite sex to fulfill said essentialism.
Women naturally seek safety and security provided by someone (viz., protection under a man).
Men naturally seek to secure sustenance for survival and as a way to release sexual buildup (viz., comfort from a woman).
Due to these antipodes biological traits the natural laws of attraction pair men with women, again, as a necessary and essential part of the cycle (and circle) of life.
There's a myriad of other variables involved but not necessary to the discussion.
Homosexuality, however, is the opposite of that. It's not essential for procreation and for men, an unnatural outcome usually coerced or manipulated to disorient their sexual preferences (typically abuse during childhood according to most studies: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11501300/).
For women homosexuality is usually induced by environmental means, which is why they're quicker to hop from hetero to bi to full-on lesbian depending on their emotional state, friends, bad break-ups, abuse, trauma, etc.
Even still, they make up an extremely tiny portion of the demographic. Gays only make up 1.3% of the population and lesbians 1.2% of the population, so by definition of demographic figures, they are an abnormal population figure. But what's more, they're a very socially disruptive figure, with gay men making up 67% of all STD cases per capita:
https://archive.is/b1kAx
...and bisexual women are not far behind:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2530417
So I wouldn't really say it's "valid" or "normal" based on the high depression, suicide, and disease rates:
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2009.177329
But you are not born heterosexual nor homosexual which is very much what follows from what you said in your previous post:
It is literally physiologically impossible to be born gay, because the human neurology necessary to determine sexual attraction has not been developed at that stage of birth.
The dimorphmic nature of humanity has no bearing on that.
You are setting things up to favor your point of view by talking about women or men "naturally" seeking things when those things are mostly social constructs that come from culture.
If you let a person develop with no physical or cultural restrains that person would achieve the most natural and indeed higher state: pansexual
[deleted]
Using single links to draw extremely broad conclusions, and then editorializing by adding your own heavily biased interpreations of those single links is not how real science operates
Funny how posters here always bitch about woke propaganda when there are literal bigotry propagandists on here
Using single links to draw extremely broad conclusions, and then editorializing by adding your own heavily biased interpreations of those single links is not how real science operates
Of course it matters. You're using one link PER point
You're making a ton of claims and cherrypicking bits of data to draw universal conclusions
It might fool the morons that frequent these boards, but it would never fool real scientists
Of course it matters. You're using one link PER point
When biologists speak of the gene for something it's usually meant to be figurative
Of course there is no gay gene. Sexuality is way too complex to be determined by a single gene
That's not remotely the same as proving that genetics don't play a role in sexuality
As for the health outcomes of certain lifestyles, one cannot definitively prove that. Cultural and sociological factors don't play a role in the data. You cannot say that there is something inherent about lesbianism that when ALL other. variables are held constant, makes them inherently violent
It'd be like claiming that police officers are biologically proven to be more violent because of their domestic abuse rates. It's just a silly conclusion to draw from someone inexperienced with interpreting raw data
Don't quit school, kid 😬
That's not remotely the same as proving that genetics don't play a role in sexuality
Why are you phrasing the question so specifically lol?
Why would I need to find genetic markets that relate to embryo development?
That implies that we know how to determine when any individual's sexual orientation is determined, but we don't. Not for gay, straight, , bi etc.
There is not even a concrete way of defining these terms other than self reporting
And you are making specific claims too. That homosexuality is worse for the individual, that lesbians are more violent, etc. But you are not providing BIOLOGICAL proof of any of this
Statistical "proof" isn't the same. Under different environments those trends may vanish. Hence you have proven nothing other than that researchers compile sociological statistical data
It's funny that you challenge me to provide very specific biological proof but you don't hold yourself to that standard when you paint in your broad strokes
You're not just bad at science, you're dishonest
Why would I need to find genetic markets that relate to embryo development?
That implies that we know how to determine when any individual's sexual orientation is determined, but we don't. Not for gay, straight, , bi etc.
That's not what epigenetic means 😭
Epigenetic changes are changes to gene expression via regulatory mechanisms
The environment CAN induce epigenetic effects, but epigenetic is not synonymous with environmental
I've entertained your lame attempts to rationalize your biases long enough, so I'll make it real simple
If you believe you've amassed enough google research to irrefutably prove that human homosexuality. is NEVER correlated to genetics, then you should go down to your nearest university and ask them to submit your stuff to a scientific journal
Then sit back and wait for your Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 😭
Because that is how grandiose your claims are
The environment CAN induce epigenetic effects, but epigenetic is not synonymous with environmental
Because that is how grandiose your claims are
Find me in utero genetic markers for heterosexuality lol
Stop cosplaying as someone with an education
Find me in utero genetic markers for heterosexuality lol
I know. So then is your assertion that sexuality is a completely blank slate determined by the environment and experience? If so, I don't agree, but I do agree that it's possible
So from here the argument becomes uninteresting
You can bring up a bunch of statistical data about why it's better to be straight, but since those won't be rooted in physical explanations, there will remain the possibility that they are due to sociological /psychic/cultural causes. In other words, the environment
Since the environment for everyone is mutable, there is no real argument for claiming that LGBTQ is inherently bad. It may become neutral or good depending on the circumstances
At which point you are now in the unofficial position of most scientists
Checkmate. GG
It may become neutral or good depending on the circumstances
Okay, so I am nitpicking here because I do want to get into a conversation with you about homosexuality because you don't want to converse you want to be right. But with this comment
as evident by the statistics showing that everyone on the LGBT spectrum seems to be suffering from some kind of mental illness, suicidal thoughts, depression,
did you ever stop to consider that perhaps there are suicidal thoughts and depression is that in many places it is still a taboo to be LGBTQ?
And yet there is also this about social media
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3477910/
Or we can say that white men are most at risk
https://www.brgeneral.org/news-blog/2021/july/men-and-suicide-why-are-white-men-most-at-risk-/
We can all find studies that agree with whatever point we are trying to make. Look. I just found some on how being kind is beneficial.
https://www.mayoclinichealthsystem.org/hometown-health/speaking-of-health/the-art-of-kindness
https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/explore-mental-health/kindness/kindness-matters-guide
https://www.dartmouth.edu/wellness/emotional/rakhealthfacts.pdf
None of what you posted is incorrect, though.
It fits in line with my points rather well.
Which points are you referring to? I'm saying that there are many reasons why people are depressed and suicidal, and a lot of those reasons have nothing to do with their sexuality. People who are accepted for who they are, are much more likely to have a better place in mental health. When society makes people feel badly, or inadequate, that can make cases worse.
There are also many other reasons why people can suffer with mental illness. There is no one reason. I think that if we just strive to be more kind to ourselves and to each other, the world could be a better place in many ways.
An aside here that I'm not going to respond to. Not once did I ever decide who I was attracted to. I now refer to myself as pan after almost 30 years of saying I was bi, because I have met, and have been incredibly attracted to more than one trans individual. It wasn't something that was planned or a choice. It just is.
Fancy term for bisexual anyway most Women are bi whether they say it or not
sharewhats wrong with women having options i wish my girlfriend was this way in regards to other women
shareBasically means if she's your girlfriend, you're gonna be jealous of all of her boy/gal/whatever friends. Great!
share