Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm familiar with the fetal brain development theory. Thanks for posting actual, strong evidence. I find it to be the most convincing reason for homosexualty. That theory correlates well the difference in brain structure in gays and straights.
About Jerry Sandusky. "Regressed....", yeah, possible regressed homosexuality. We don't know if he's attracted to adult women and men. Maybe a struggle with his sexuality didn't allow for him to seek other adult men. Admit, what I said is at least possible.
If Sandusky, who you support as being straight, and other men of his ilk aren't attracted to the male children, why do they have sex with them? Opportunistic? I understand masturbation doesn't mean one is sexually attracted to their hand. So, are you basically saying somebody like Sandusky merely had sex with boys because he knew they have anatomy that can 'host' him? If that's the case, why not just use his hand? It seems like something about these boys was attractive to him. I don't know what exactly he did to those boys or if it's even described in any of the coverage, but if he went beyond penetrating them, I'd think he had more interest in them than to 'host' himself in something that was more like the real thing than his hand. If he was giving them oral sex or receiving them, I'd say he's gay. But then I don't know what all he did. Is there anyway to find out?
Pedophilic child molestors often don't even have an adult sexual orientation. Some have preferences for children of a particular gender, some don't. But they are attracted to the AGE, innocence, and vulnerability of a child much more than the gender. They are often repulsed by the secondary sexual characteristics of adults.
For 'normal' adult males (whether straight or gay), it's the secondary sexual characteristics that they find attractive. For pedophilic child molestors, its the lack of secondary sexual characteristics that is attractive..
Have any links to support that many child molestors don't have sexual orientations?
I guess we're talking about child molestors here, but it seems really odd to not have any attraction to secondary sexual characteristics. Even children who are very young and haven't gone through puberty have some sort of secondary sexual characteristics - you can tell a boy from a girl. Girls have fat in certain places for feminine shape. Boys are skinnier, have narrower hips, and have broad shoulders.
I didn't have to go far into that (1st victim) to see that Sandusky allegedly peformed oral sex on a boy who was 11 and/or 12 years old. I don't know about the rest of you all, but I know when I was that age I had equipment that had at least begun devloping and worked, even if a bit too efficiently.
So you're going to tell me Sandusky likes giving blowjobs but isn't gay? I stand by what I said. He may not be gay, but it's at least possible he is and had struggles with his orientation that lead to him being a predator.
Probably because all the research over the past 50 years says that it doesn't?
Quote:
The Royal College of Psychiatrists states: [indent]"Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation.It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment."
"One of the weaknesses of research on sexual orientation and social factors has been the lack of long term prospective studies. Most research into abuse and sexual orientation is based on retrospective self-report."
Here, a detractor of the "reparative drive theory" admits of the awfully small sample size in refuting the theory. He then goes on to say that most of the studies testing it were not valid because of "retrospective self-reporting" but in turn applauds the stated study because it was a LARGER sample size with significant documentation on the cases.. but still was LARGELY anecdotal because of????.......retrospective self-reporting.
With all that said....there is still a very minuscule sample size when it comes to validating these claims EITHER WAY.
The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb.
In order to "organize into brain structure" you have to be "aware" or "conscious".....look at the terminology that study uses...
Gender Identity - The conviction of belonging to the male or female gender.
definition of conviction -
1: the act or process of finding a person guilty of a crime especially in a court of law - definitely not the context we are talking about...
2 a : the act of convincing a person of error or of compelling the admission of a truth - well according to Libs, Fems and many Gays....babies aren't "people" so can't be that
b : the state of being convinced of error or compelled to admit the truth - again....can't convince a fetus nor compel it to "admit" anything right? They are just clusters of cells
3 a : a strong persuasion or belief - who or what is being persuaded or believing?
b : the state of being convinced Who or what is being convinced
Now, here is something awesome for you to come to grips with....what you are saying is humans are predisposed to being homosexuals, trans, confused and whatever else you wish to state. You then go on to say it's by genetic code...
Did you know this logic is the EXACT SAME logic that was followed by The Bell Curve study to prove that Blacks were inherently more violent? And that the IQ disparity between races was largely genetic based?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax
However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain.
Then this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax
There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation.
How does the gay brigade not pull their own brains out with their ambiguous hokey pokey trash science???
Is gender a social norm or is it not??? Gender and Sex are different are they not? How can a fetus identify gender when gender is defined by society? They have NO STIMULUS... if you are saying the brain can discern at that stage.. THAT early.....in the event of abortion is a woman not killing an incredibly intelligent being?
Sorry for the digression...but it's necessary. These claims are made under the premise that a fetus knows it's confused before it is even developed.....
OR....it's just some pseudo-science bullcrap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymax
Why would he be gay? Do you know of any adult men he has been involved with? Has his wife said she thinks he is gay?
Fact is, that there are many studies showing that there are men who are attracted to adult women and not adult men (ie: straight), who sexually abuse young boys because they have easy access to them. This type of child molestation has nothing to do with sexual attraction to children. It's called 'regressed' or non-pedophilic child molestation. It's opportunistic.
I'm familiar with the fetal brain development theory. Thanks for posting actual, strong evidence. I find it to be the most convincing reason for homosexualty. That theory correlates well the difference in brain structure in gays and straights.
Having read a lot of the research from the past 40 years or so, and especially the most recent research in the last few years, it makes the most sense to me as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOKAN
About Jerry Sandusky. "Regressed....", yeah, possible regressed homosexuality. We don't know if he's attracted to adult women and men.
Actually that would be ‘repressed’ not regressed. ‘Regressed’ in terms of non-pedophilic molesters, means that the person had developed a normal sexual attraction to adults with secondary sexual characteristics in alignment with their sexual orientation (heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual), but has regressed to an earlier stage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOKAN
Maybe a struggle with his sexuality didn't allow for him to seek other adult men. Admit, what I said is at least possible.
I suppose that’s possible, but as far as I know there is no evidence that he is sexually attracted to adult males.
From years of research / studies with child molestors we know there are men who have an adult heterosexual sexual orientation, who respond erotically to adult women, but not adult men in phallometric testing, and who also sexually molest young boys. He matches the profile from what I know.
Here’s an example of a regressed non-pedophilic child molestor who has a heterosexual adult sexual orientation but molested boys. From: Archives of Sexual BehaviorGroth and Birnbaum, “Adult Sexual Orientation and Attraction to Underage Persons.”
Clinical Example of a Regressed Offender.
Quote:
Ted is a 29-year-old, white, divorced man serving a 1-year sentence for indecent assault. He offered a 10-yearold neighbor boy a ride, drove to a wooded area, and forced the boy to fellate him. He then gave the boy a dollar, offered to buy him some pizza, and drove him home. Ted's earliest remembered sexual experience was that of mutual sexual play with his brother and sister around age 5. He began to masturbate at 15 while looking at pictures in magazines such as Playboy. He began dating at age 18 and first experienced intercourse at 20. He would engage in intercourse three or four times a month with various girls until, at 25, he met his future wife. They went together for a year before marriage and engaged in premarital sex.
Ted's wife had a 4-year-old son from a previous marriage and bore him a daughter a year after their marriage. He states that their marital and sexual adjustment was good for the first year, but that after the birth of their daughter his wife went to work nights, and "that's when it all went downhill She found somebody at work she liked better. I felt rotten." Within a year Ted's wife separated from him and his first sexual offense occurred.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOKAN
If Sandusky, who you support as being straight, and other men of his ilk aren't attracted to the male children, why do they have sex with them? Opportunistic?
Yes, it’s opportunistic. How many men have access to little girls outside their own family? Sandusky has easy access to little boys aged from 7 to 12 or so, but not to little girls. Men like this abuse others for their own sexual gratification - For the same reason a straight male might rape an 90 year old woman. It’s less about the sexual attractiveness of the victim and more about the use of someone they can control easily for their sexual gratification.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOKAN
I understand masturbation doesn't mean one is sexually attracted to their hand. So, are you basically saying somebody like Sandusky merely had sex with boys because he knew they have anatomy that can 'host' him? If that's the case, why not just use his hand? It seems like something about these boys was attractive to him.
I think you are missing the point. It’s about the thrill of control over someone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MOKAN
I don't know what exactly he did to those boys or if it's even described in any of the coverage, but if he went beyond penetrating them, I'd think he had more interest in them than to 'host' himself in something that was more like the real thing than his hand. If he was giving them oral sex or receiving them, I'd say he's gay. But then I don't know what all he did. Is there anyway to find out?
I read the transcript summary from the trial. Pretty disgusting. He’s a vile predatory man. But sexually abusing boys does not mean he has an attraction to adult males- which is what would make him ‘gay’. If his main attraction is to adult women but he still sexually abuses boys, that makes him a non-pedophilic child molestor with a regressed heterosexual adult sexual orientation. If we find out that he is sexually attracted to adult males, then yes, he would be a non-pedophilic child molestor with a regressed homosexual adult sexual orientation. His wife might know.
Yes, it’s opportunistic. How many men have access to little girls outside their own family? Sandusky has easy access to little boys aged from 7 to 12 or so, but not to little girls.
Men like this abuse others for their own sexual gratification - For the same reason a straight male might rape an 90 year old woman. It’s less about the sexual attractiveness of the victim and more about the use of someone they can control easily for their sexual gratification.
I think you are missing the point. It’s about the thrill of control over someone else.
I read the transcript summary from the trial. Pretty disgusting. He’s a vile predatory man. But sexually abusing boys does not mean he has an attraction to adult males- which is what would make him ‘gay’. If his main attraction is to adult women but he still sexually abuses boys, that makes him a non-pedophilic child molestor with a regressed heterosexual adult sexual orientation. If we find out that he is sexually attracted to adult males, then yes, he would be a non-pedophilic child molestor with a regressed homosexual adult sexual orientation. His wife might know.[/font][/color]
The program called Second Mile he started also had girls. He chose to molest boys. He also abused his own adopted son. He had daughters as well they were not abused.
Male on Male sex is called homosexuality. I don't give a fig if one is 100 and the other is 10 years old. If both are 12 years old, or if they're both 8 years old. Same sex activity is called homosexuality.
You sound like a representative for NAMBLA - it's not homosexuality it's "love". It's an adult male showing his love for the boy, it's got nothing to do with homosexuality, it's not even pedophilia, it's "love". In the mind of the adult male he's actually regressed mentally to the same age as the boy so it's not a violation at all, he's convinced himself he's not an adult he identifies with the child so it can't be homosexuality... Is that right?
Have any links to support that many child molestors don't have sexual orientations?
I guess we're talking about child molestors here, but it seems really odd to not have any attraction to secondary sexual characteristics. Even children who are very young and haven't gone through puberty have some sort of secondary sexual characteristics - you can tell a boy from a girl. Girls have fat in certain places for feminine shape. Boys are skinnier, have narrower hips, and have broad shoulders.
I provided several upthread.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
