Freud thought sex was THE biggest motivator for all humans and that the stages of development were rooted strongly in childhood reactions. But that did not mean that homosexuals were already predisposed to homosexuality at birth, Freud had a bit of what Skinner would later explain--conditioning, the same learning that Freud described was explainable in more mechanistic and predictable ways. Neither were good at demonstrating a definite path or correlation to the histories or incidence of homosexuality. That then led some to assume that instead of misattachment at puberty as others believe, it began before even Freud and Skinner's area of scrutiny, before birth. The idea of a genetic predisposition, however, has no more proof than any other idea. Humans have a propensity to confound the social sciences at every turn--people with suggested indications and influences don't turn gay and people without suggested indications and influences sometimes do, vice versa. We don't know, but this I do know from personal experience, adolescent boys sure hear from a lot of gay evangelists that put pressure and arguments on their targeted boys that would make a used car salesman proud. Now why would so many homosexuals put on the sales pressure to convince other boys that they too are gay or can become gay--especially since the current notion is that we either are or aren't from birth? Not opinion, but experience fact, I don't care how many thumbs down I get.
2007-01-29
08:30:14
·
11 answers
·
asked by
voicegoddess9
2