If you look them up.
Young Adélie penguins which have no experience in social interaction may react to false cues when the penguins gather to breed. They may, for instance, attempt to mate with other males, with young chicks, or with dead females.
On account of the birds’ relatively human-like appearance and behavior, human observers have interpreted this behavior anthropomorphically as sexual deviance. The first to record such behavior was Dr Levick, in 1911 and 1912, but his notes were deemed too indecent for publication at the time; they were rediscovered and published in 2012.[n 1] “The pamphlet, declined for publication with the official Scott expedition reports, commented on the frequency of sexual activity, auto-erotic behaviour, and seemingly aberrant behaviour of young unpaired males and females, including necrophilia, sexual coercion, sexual and physical abuse of chicks and homosexual behaviour,” states the analysis written by Douglas Russell and colleagues William Sladen and David Ainley. “His observations were, however, accurate, valid and, with the benefit of hindsight, deserving of publication.”
They blame global warming.
It makes frogs gay too?
unpaired = r-selected
Reminder: compulsive masturbation is a paraphilia-related disorder.
The subgroup of males with both PAs and lifetime PRDs (n = 123) self-reported the greatest number of lifetime SIDs, the highest incidence of physical and sexual abuse, the fewest years of completed education, and the highest likelihood of current unemployment or disability.
Oh look, a male promiscuity study – the promiscuous are losers!
“no experience in social interaction” – in humans, that is abuse experience
a strangely common prevalence in homosexual adult males
Why not test IQ too?
Impulse control is tied to it.
Why is this relevant?
Well, pedophilia has already been claimed as NOT a paraphilia.
Like homosexuality before it. I guess it’s just a coincidence most pedophiles are homosexually-oriented men.
The present article examined the question instead by comparing the major correlates and other features of homosexuality and of the paraphilias, including prevalence, sex ratio, onset and course, fraternal birth order, physical height, handedness, IQ and cognitive neuropsychological profile, and neuroanatomy.
You could just study it directly.
Various ‘preferences’ and sexual interests have fallen in and out of being defined as paraphilic, for example, up until 1973 homosexuality was classified as paraphilic under the DSM (diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders)-II. Its subsequent removal led to some arguing that if homosexual orientation is not in itself abnormal, then the inclusion of other sexual behaviors classified as paraphilic cannot be justified as a concept and should be removed entirely from future editions
Paraphilia essentially means anti-Darwin, that was the purpose of the concept.
Besides homosexuality, the DSM also listed sadism, masochism, exhibitionism, voyeurism, pedophilia, and fetishes as mental disorders.
Members of the activist committee believed that the law and psychiatric diagnosis were and should be independent.
Our hope was that one day the entire group of sexual disorders would be dropped from DSM, at least those currently listed as the paraphilias.
I’m resting my case gently so you can do your own research.
Many misconceptions held by brainwashed Americans.
I also wanted to inquire as to if in my previous comment I abided effectively by your 3 specified rules. The civility part seems to be a non-issue. However, what about the other rules? Religion has no right to claim a monopoly on the subject of marriage. Fundamentalist Christian types are opposed to abortion, however, that has not been made illegal. Of course, the U.S. was based on religious freedom, not religious supremacy. There are other freedoms as well, not just religious freedom. Some people claim that homosexuality is a sin, that homosexual behavior is sinful. Now, if people are born gay, that claim holds no water. If people woke up and decided to be gay, that claim may be legitimate. You say nature did not select gay people to be parents for good reason. What about women that still have ovaries? What if the pregnancies of lesbian couples are the result of those kept intact and sperm donations? In that case, your claim could be refutable. There is also no scientific support that same sex parenting is bad, at least none that has been reported insofar as I know. Some talking points regarding same sex parenting is that kids will inevitably become gay. As if that is actually a bad thing. Want to know why there are gay and lesbian people in our world’s population? Blame the straight parents in some cases for that. Either that or blame biology.
I replied with the same rules in mind, so yeah.
You’d think civility is a given but the American comments I get in the junk feed dispute that.
Marriage is a religious institution. There’s no such thing as a secular marriage, it’s the union of two spirits. Atheists don’t have spirits. State endorsement is a layer of protection, it doesn’t make the matter. People can pretend to get married all they like, doesn’t make it any more legitimate in the only law that matters, the enshrined divine law. Whichever religion you pick.
Roe v Wade is easy to overturn, it’s just case law.
It will happen eventually, under a Christian state full of Mexicans or an Islamic one.
The US was never based on religious freedom, it was based on the Rights of Englishmen and America still retains English Common Law, which is founded on the principles of the Church of England.
You should be able to tell from the fact you speak English?
There is religious tolerance, not freedom. It’s a misnomer. We tolerate prayer mats, we don’t tolerate infidel blood sacrifice. Satanists, for example, are still committing animal rights abuses.
Religion isn’t an excuse.
But unlike atheism, at least it has one.
New ones are invented every century. Cough Scientology cough.
You hold liberty and egalitarianism as the state religion. Those are philosophical principles based in the Christian religion. They don’t exist elsewhere.
Keyword there: IF.
It is not, so it is not so.
The burden of proof is on those claiming genetics.
Sexuality is fluid. That fluidity is represented as consensual choice in sexual matters.
It’s a classic mistake to assume scientific reproduction applies to Darwinian sexual selection. Darwin wrote frequently on human intervention making everything worse.
To straw man a hypothetical impossibility based on the premise of evolution is not even wrong. Refutable, though.
“There is also no scientific support that same sex parenting is bad, at least none that has been reported insofar as I know.” You have never tried to look then, there is plenty if you look for it.
“Some talking points regarding same sex parenting is that kids will inevitably become gay.” parents forcing their children to conform to their own lifestyle choices? no, that never, ever, ever, ever happens
“As if that is actually a bad thing.” Did you skip over the part with the drug abuse, self-loathing, HIV rates etc….
“Want to know why there are gay and lesbian people in our world’s population?” child abuse and teratogens, statistically
“Blame the straight parents in some cases for that. Either that or blame biology.” Why not both?
Disenchanted Scholar, some people claim that homosexuality is a sinful behavior. Some people claim that gay people are born gay and some people claim that gay people choose to be gay. What are your views on things like same sex marriage or same sex parenting?
Worthy of a post.
That’s a heap of questions and all are interim pending as much evidence as feeble human hands can physically carry. Trouble is, it isn’t PC to collect the very data we need to justify the collection of the data.
I’m going to riff on Jayman’s notion that male and female homosexuality are different. This sounds probable. I’m agnostic on Gay Germ but given microbiome research and how it must affect the sexual system, I wouldn’t be shocked either. Anonymous Conservative rarely discusses the behaviours typical of homosexuals in light of evolution, which is intriguing.
I don’t think my opinion should be an authority on this to be fair with you, I’ll summarize since you asked politely and seem to care.
Religion: Male homosexuality is a sin in many religions, especially Christianity. Anal sex in particular. The topic of g0y men restricting themselves to oral is trickier to find in scripture. Many things are prohibited in the Bible that promote disease e.g. pork and shellfish and the promiscuity of STDs.
They also cause miscarriage. Forcing them to wed women is a bad idea too.
We know anal cancer rates now in homosexual men at the very least are higher. The rates of tearing and prolapse should not be funded by taxpayers for a lifestyle choice. We don’t fund other pleasures like smoking or drinking or gambling.
The Human Genome Project found no genetic evidence of homosexuality. That is the end of the matter, the proof required does not exist. If new genetic evidence comes forward, this might change pending review by academics.
You know if there were the slightest glimmer of evidence we’d never hear the end of it.
It hasn’t been found.
It was an ambitious claim made for legal reasons and leaves everything after, including decriminalization, on shaky grounds. They’d better hope it isn’t true because the law prohibits many things that are found genetic e.g. serial killer predisposition and genetic screening for abortion would be preferred by many parents who intend to have children only with the inherent promise of full, genetically normal grandchildren.
Kinsey’s work on sexuality is tainted. Look into it.
Claiming everyone is homosexual is ridiculous.
I’m not sure I agree with sexual orientation theory either. It made sense in the Darwinian paradigm – that is, behaviour based – do you want the vagina and breasts or the penis and anus?
Sterile sex or fertile sex would be a superior paradigm, in a post-contraceptive world.
In light of pornographic experimentation and the paltry Gender Studies shift to a nebulous identity, we’ve gone mad on the topic of self-styled sexology. It has become a practice to excuse all degeneracy with a veneer of scientism, and further suppress evidence of the antisocial.
Marriage? No such thing. It doesn’t count unless the religious texts say it does. Civil partnerships? I know of no religious person who objects to them, myself included. Parenting? Nature did not select them as parents for good reason, see the recent case of Cinderella effect playing out in British media. Men in particular have not evolved to care for infants, their brains are not as responsive and they tend to fight more than flight, unfortunately. Tribally, children were raised in a group of largely women.
Look at their (“gay”) domestic abuse rates, drug use, many many things which would disqualify heterosexuals from adoption – and rightly so! It would be better they adopt a surrogate, itself a moral quandary, but one their rich asses can afford, than to adopt a baby of parents who disagree with raising their children in such an environment (this also goes for religion). Thank you for the question, please read around, I’m no expert.
Forgot to mention the psychiatric diseases, including fetishes.
A gay influence in culture is forgivable but sexuality in general should not be a public matter, wherever you prefer to stick it. A limit on this culture keeps everyone happy, they get the thrill of taboo and creative freedom, some measure of acceptance but we get the art, the philosophy, the musicals and the higher trust society again.
I KNEW IT.
I KNEW IT.
Credit: Jesus is just alt-right with me
Which, Biblically, means any anal sex.
I wonder how many girls (and guys into rimming, pegging, whatever ‘anal play’) will need reconstructive surgery because they did something unnatural with bisexual men in denial?
Jesus has abandoned us. There is no God here. ~dogs howling~
Remember, this and STDs are the wages of sin.
No pity. No remorse.
It isn’t the same, just look up the terms ‘anal tear’, ‘anal leakage’, ‘anal sex cancer risk’, ‘anal prolapse’ and ‘anal sex diapers’.
If you cared so much about your body, what feels good and how you look – you wouldn’t do it. But NOOOOOOO. You just wanna be trendy.
For those of a sciencey bent;
“bacteria from the anus and groin can gain access to the bladder through the urethra,”
It actually changes the vaginal microbiome (swirly swirly). You can follow on the cited studies.
It hasn’t been studied long-term. It isn’t safe.
“Previous studies have linked elevated semen VL to sexual practices such as unprotected insertive anal sex , which could introduce gastrointestinal bacteria into the male urogenital compartment and semen.”
If you wouldn’t lick your finger after sticking your finger in there, use a condom at least?
Money study: gays responsible for antibiotic resistance. Significantly.
The next plague, coming to a gay bar near you.
It is an abomination.
But if you have gay sexual habits, that includes you.
“It is argued that in comparison with heterosexuals, high-risk MSM (hrMSM) have a higher prevalence of oro-penile, oro-rectal and anal sex which facilitates an enhanced mixing of the pharyngeal, rectal and penile microbiomes.”