Couldn't agree more. I do not want to be bombarded every time I switch on the television or read a paper. Corry, Eastenders, gay vicars,etc, it seems there has to be homosexual or lesbian scenes in abundance in everything you watch nowadays. I do not think it's natural for a man to stick his willy up another mans bum, sorry. If that makes me homophobic, so be it.
Bloody hell whats going on here!!!! I think people who have strong opinions on gay people have something to hide.
If youre strait and a gay guy isnt trying to bum you or do anything against your will, then why give a **** what they do in private !its none of our business as long as the laws not broken ? Live and let live ! I dont think the tv is doing the gay community many favours by overkilling their issues so intensively as it is getting on a lot of peoples nerves including 2 very intelligent lovely people gay guys i sometimes do building work for so i bet they are not the only ones.
The programme was about why gay footballers are too afraid to "come out" and what the footballing authoriies are doing about it.
I am only giving the specifics of bad parenting to which I have seen for my own eyes over many years as an example, it's not the only reason for Homosexuality, as I have stated before, seen enough documentaries on the subject that identify genetic flaws and abnormalities through imperfection, just giving my view through experience and learning, might not be the same as other views, but I'm comfortable with the reasons I have perceived over the years..............
NO YOU HAVE! Dai put this thread up, with the subject "What i do object to is being Gay being shoved down your throat everywhere you look." just get your facts right!......................
Try reading the whole post. It makes a specific point to the programme made about gay people in football. "Alfie son get a life i dont care if you are Gay or not and i am only interested on what a great player you were and not what you do behind closed doors." Why else would Dai make a post like this!!
Bieber was the first analyst to provide research data to support his theory. He examined the case histories of 106 men labeled homosexual and 100 men labeled non-homosexual, all of whom had sought treatment with 77 therapists. He was aware which label was given the men, a possible source of bias. Bieber found the homosexual men tended to report to the analysts that their mothers established close-binding often explicitly seductive relationships with them, producing sexual over-stimulation and intense guilt and anxiety about heterosexual behavior, so promoting compulsive homosexual activity. He found the fathers of the homosexual men were often detached, hostile and rejecting, so that they did not act as male models to protect their sons from demasculinization. Bieber also found that in comparison to heterosexual men treated, significantly more of the homosexual men in childhood were fearful of physical injury, avoided fights, played predominantly with girls and avoided participation in competitive sport, that is they showed opposite sex-linked behaviours. In contrast Bene pointed out in 1965 that a number of investigations of male homosexuals found the presence of poor relationships with their father to be more common than undue attachments to their mothers, and provided further data to support this finding. She subsequently reported evidence that homosexual women experienced parental relationships similar to those of homosexual men. She concluded that the role of the father was more important than that of the mother in causing homosexuality in men and women. The association of homosexuality with poor parental, and particularly paternal, relationships could be due not to the relationships producing homosexual feelings but to parents responding negatively to the childhood sissy and tomboyish behaviors of men and women with homosexual feelings, including the homosexual heterosexuals. Silove and I reported evidence supporting this conclusion. The above is from study papers on the subject from analyst who spent years studying the subject,
His main point on the subject is what I have quoted! Alfie is the current example and secondary to his main issue, and just enforces his prime contention.........
Taken from about the same time that they thought they could 'cure' homosexuality by placing electrodes in the brain.
He was making reference to the program that Alfie was in - a program about why gay footballers are 'still in hiding' and the failings of the FA etc in dealing with homophobia etc. The program wasn't about Alfie being gay at all.
Kitzinger considered that the debate in the 1980’s between the social constructionist and what she termed the essentialist position, that biological factors could be involved in determining sexual orientation was the hottest philosophical controversy to hit psychology for years. She believed that the reason the debate no longer attracted the same passion was not that one position had gained precedence, but that the debate became wearisome, and was seen as impeding developments within each theoretical position. Academics working within one position, now made little more than token reference to the work of those within the other position. A more plausible reason for the lack of interest in debating the social constructionist theory by “essentialist” researchers who considered biological factors could contribute, resulted from the lack agreed upon rules for debate. Evidence obtained using the scientific method is seen as central by “essentialist” but of no significance by social constructionists.
Interaction of genetic and environmental factors. In addition to genetic factors contributing to sexual orientation, environmental factors, biological or social, must be involved to account for the finding that only about half the identical twins of men and women who identify as homosexual also identify as homosexual although they have the same genes. The “gay gene”. The most powerful evidence of a genetic contribution to sexual orientation would be finding genes which influenced it. The media in the early 1990’s widely reported such a finding, the discovery of what was termed the gay gene by Hamer and colleagues. These authors investigated families in which at least two brothers identified as homosexual. A number had maternal relatives who also identified as homosexual, suggesting that in them homosexuality was transmitted through the mother rather than the father. Women have two X chromosomes (strings of genes), whereas men have one X and one Y chromosome. Genetic transmission that occurs through mothers only must be through their X chromosomes. The authors therefore sought for the responsible gene in the X chromosomes of the brothers and found a similar linkage of genes at a particular location on the chromosomes of 33 of 40 pairs of brothers, an association very unlikely to be due to chance. Independent evidence that genes on the X chromosome can in part determine homosexual interest was provided by a study of 16 men with the chromosomal abnormality XXY, that is, with two instead of one X chromosomes. The 16 were identified among 4139 men investigated by Schiavi and colleagues.
THE GAY GENE: LINK: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...gene-discovery-has-good-and-bad-implications/ The latest 'gay gene' study gives no comfort to homophobes Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...ene-study-gives-no-comfort-to-homophobes.html Half of all people could be carrying 'gay genes' Link: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...ple-could-be-carrying-gay-genes-a6982381.html
