That is a serious tripping hazard…
I love it, but stairs and hanging objects that obstruct vision, can get stepped on, and can get tangled around your feet is just a recipe for a broken neck.
I really don’t like the “born this way” argument. The science does not support it, and it concedes to argue on the terms of the homophobes.
Rather than “this is me, there’s nothing wrong with who I am”, it argues “this is me, and it’s not my fault”.
EDIT: the science accepts genetics is a factor, but not the only factor. Sexuality is not a choice either way. My point is, even if it were, it wouldn’t matter because there is fundamentally nothing wrong with being gay.
… Wat.
The science DOES support it and it doesn’t concede anything to homophobes. Their whole argument is we have to choose the way we are. We do not because we are born this way. Moreover, we must be born this way as homosexuality exists in other animals as well.
Also the argument does NOT say “it’s not my fault.” The argument is “I didn’t choose this.”
Massive difference between what you’re suggesting and what’s happening.
The current accepted model involves both genetic and early psycho-developmental factors. There are studies on identical twins that grew up in separate households and the co-inheritance is nowhere near 100%.
My point is, it should not matter whether you were born gay, or not. What matters is, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the way you are.
“Their whole argument is we have to choose the way we are.”
That is exactly my point. Let’s not pretend their argument is in good faith or in any way truly relevant. Even if it were a choice, it would in absolutely no way detract from the point, there is nothing wrong with it.
I’d be interested in learning more about those studies
My point is, it should not matter whether you were born gay, or not. What matters is, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the way you are.
Then make that point instead of the nonsensical comment that you previously made. Especially when you’re claiming something that is in direct opposition to your comment here/elsewhere. You were unclear. You do not get to be upset that people didn’t take your point as intended when your comment simply doesn’t reflect that stance on its own.
Where exactly was I upset? I did my best to explain my stance. And yes, my initial comment failed to put my thoughts across clearly and got rightfully downvoted as a result.
That is why I edited it and that is why I tried to explain my thoughts further.
I sincerely do not think the first comment goes against what I said here though. It was written poorly, but the sentiment and thoughts behind it are the same.
It being written poorly changes the sentiment. What you intend is one thing. What everyone sees is something else. What everyone saw was you saying “You’re not born this way, the homophobes are kind of right right.” That’s why I, and others, are so frustrated at the way you’re acting here. You keep doubling down on the science aspect, which is fine, but you’re outright contradicting yourself. You started this by saying “The science doesn’t prove that” and then go with “Well the science proves it but…”
As for why I’m so frustrated by your behavior, it’s because you are being insanely inconsistent. To me you’re now saying “Ah yes, I worded it poorly”. Yet a few minutes ago you said “I also NEVER even implied it is a choice to begin with” and refused to agree with @Carnelian@lemmy.world on the simple point that your comment implied you were saying that it was a choice to be gay. The very thing that homophobes keep smacking us with.
Moreover, the science is absolutely irrelevant. Those studies (which I just looked through) don’t even agree with you.
The first study you linked?
These findings are interpreted as supporting the argument for a biological basis in sexual orientation.
A questionnaire. So no genetic studies or tests. A survey. One that just happens to not agree with you.
The second study?
The results of these analyses should be interpreted in the context of low statistical power and the use of a single item to assess the complex phenotype of sexual orientation.
In other words, it is saying “This study should be taken with a grain of salt because our study pool was low and we only used a single item to summarize sexual orientation.”
You don’t know what you’re talking about and keep backpedaling when people point that out. You do not have a study that backs you up because the studies themselves either disagree or openly admit that they’re weak studies. You are pushing a dangerous narrative that aligns with that of homophobes and trying to claim that you’re not part of that. Your claims are unfounded, your comments unappreciated, your behavior unacceptable.
You do not come into a gay community and state “You were not born this way because of studies I do not understand” and then try to act like you’re just being misunderstood.
Rather than “this is me, there’s nothing wrong with who I am”, it argues “this is me, and it’s not my fault”.
You can say both either way, this is me, its not my fault and there’s nothing wrong with that.
