Hypothyroidism in the mother may lead to gay offspring

[Hugh Johnson]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... unity.html

This might be relevant.

 

[Peatish Ninja]

Have been lurking here for ages but have decided to post for this thread (most likely won't post beyond it) as this might one of the most important (and delicate) topics here at RPF.

I will go out and say straight up that this study is a no-brainer for me and have found a disturbing pattern through my research in spirituality, history (including the lens of psychohistory), psychology, biochemistry, philosophy, alchemy and feminism. This pattern is a long line of epigenetic dissonance through the sexes that shows its expression through the womb.

Women are ultimately the bearers of evolution and how our civilization forms through epigenetic gestation. The problem starts with Christianity and the birth of the alternate sexual orientations. Funny how the religious are so hateful towards the LGBT community when in actuality, they created it through the oppression of women down the arrow of time. Psychologically, emotionally and sexually speaking. Yes sexually.

What do I mean by this? Well, seeing as this is probably the most taboo thread on this forum, I will insist another extremely taboo subject:

Women are inherently bisexual.

The construction of marriage and its historical and cultural importance of said system in the realm of religion has prevented women fully expressing their feminine energies. Rituals (related to the moon) and other esoteric sociological traditions are aborted through the patriarchal force of constraining that energy from ever seeing its other half. This follows a lot of unique diseases with women (which Ray Peat has done A LOT of studies towards) and ultimately affecting the womb in a plethora of ways that arise through the epigenetic line. The womb is an epigenetic furnace that literally holds the future and evolution of humanity in order (menstruation is the other aspect to this phenomenon).

When a woman is pregnant, it is extremely important to have her protected and safely secure in her environment for the fetus to develop accordingly. What other disturbances come about during the pregnancy process will show up in the child. More deeper though is that their is a epigenetic thread that develops (in conjunction with pathological masculinity) which influences the direction of sexuality.

Science is very slow on the upkeep with female physiology. The g-spot is a classical example of this. The g-spot lacks physical shape with women and thus is claimed to not exist. But that's because the g-spot is a resonant-based energetic force. This all factors into why our culture is pathologically dominant by the destructive and misapplied masculine energies which pervade our society today.

Feminism came about because some women are endowing more masculine roles by fighting the pathological masculinities that I believe started around Socrates era. Those post-Pythagorean Greek philosophers had terrible ideologies on women and children. Thus reflective of our current problems today. History has a ripple effect that constitutes language, emotion and via the womb, physiology. Ideologies that inspire those to invent, create etc also inspire the way a particular sex is treated and thus the cycle of disorder continues.

The next taboo subject that is even more taboo than the aforementioned:

Men are inherently heterosexual.

Yep, that's pretty much off limits. Where this gets weird is that this pathological masculinity has given birth to homosexuality. Why? Because their is a shut-off mechanism somewhere within the psyche of women that has been suppressed through imprisoning the feminine energy that becomes displaced in the womb. The patriarchy (more so: toxic patriarchy) has helped to shape this suppression. It's a long rippling effect that takes thousands of years to occur.

As evidenced here by this thread, science is slowly catching up to these problems, but it may take a while longer before we see the full causality of such problems.

That is it for now, more to come...

 

[Nicholas]

post 113879 Women are inherently bisexual.

can you please support this statement. I can see how women are more inherently bisexual-leaning....but to say that they're from the womb, all of them (you said it) bisexual, doesn't have the ring of truth to it.

post 113879 Men are inherently heterosexual.

i believe this to be true as well. i believe it to be true in the sense that homosexuality (for men and women) is a psycho-social construct. i haven't seen this explored with women, but i have seen with men the idea of repressed heterosexuality being a root of homosexuality.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Yes! I knew porn movies told the truth deep down

 

[EndAllDisease]

Here's a related study that found when Ibises Perch birds were exposed to mercury they acted homosexual.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... y-science/

I suppose the mercury would increase hormones of stress, thus polluting the body's ability to produce and utilize thyroid and thus, hypothyroidism could very well be the cause of these homosexual birds exposed to mercury.

 

[tara]

post 113410 I think the increasing rates of homosexuality probably have more to do with societal changes involving acceptance and visibility and also possibly the decline in religious influence.

I reckon this is likely part of it. Plus there are lots of other social factors that could be influences. When the available standard heterosexual male and female roles and stereotypes are so rigid and irrational, it's not surprising that some people look for alternatives.

post 113427 Not saying they were foolproof, just that the scientists were aware of the social impact/changes and tried to account for it.

I can't imagine how you'd do this. Pretty hard to find a way to set up a control when anti-gay (and anti-'alphabet') oppression is so ubiquitous.

post 113427 ... assuming homosexuality in animals exists. Just b/c a male animals humps another male does not make him gay.

I agree that same-sex activity is not the whole story, and definitions are not always to clear. For humans at least, identity and cultural factors play a part too.
I don't think same sex pair-bonding in animals is all that rare. One example I heard about was a couple of female albatrosses who apparently made excellent foster parents for abandoned eggs or chicks.

post 113444 but hypothyroid people do seem gayer than most in my experience

I assume this is at least in part a reflection of the stereotypes around about gay people.

 

[tara]

post 113498 but the popular media image of the gay is "born this way" and being very antagonistic towards those who try to explain the issue in the realm of "psychology".

I think some people (including some GLBs) have promoted this idea as a way to argue that the oppression is unjust. Ie ' We were born this way, we don't have a choice about it, so it's not fair to punish us or try to make us change'. I think the oppression is unjust whatever the reasons are for people's identities and choice of partner (assuming consent and integrity in other respects, etc). Just because an identity has been adopted for psychological or cultural reasons doesn't make the abuse OK. It is no more reasonable to abuse someone for being gay than for their culturally acquired religious identity, or any physical differences we may be born with, or whatever challenges they may struggle with.

There are clearly also a bunch of social and psychological forces at play in encouraging people into the straight model.

post 113858 But people would probably hang us for performing such an experiment.

Do you see an ethical problem in making sure all hypothyroid gay people got suitable support/healthcare to restore thyroid function? Are you thinking there'd be a rash of broken civil unions when all the gay people lose interest in each other, and this will make for many more unhappy people and undermine the fabric of society?

Doesn't seem anywhere near as problematic as, say, aversion therapy and other tortures that have been tried before.

I'd love to see an experiment where all GLBs etc got excellent health care and were spared all the stressful anti-gay abuse they endure. I kind of doubt it would result in all abandonning their GLB identities, but if some people made such decisions when their health improved, and when they weren't having to constantly defend themselves, would that be a terrible thing? (Who knows, maybe some hypothyroid straights would change some of their choices if their thyroid function was restored, too. Bet there are few who are just going along with the standard model because they haven't got the energy to do different.)

post 113511 Even if you claim that a large gay population will "ruin the family model" and society will fall, even if that's true, you can't stop people from being gay.

I'd say compulsory heterosexuality has been a contributor to some pretty serious trouble in marriages. I can't see how anyone who favours good marriages would want people to base a marriage on pretend attraction to an opposite sex spouse. Very painful for the other spouse.

Anti-GLB oppression messes with everyone - obviously it's very hard on GLBs, but I think it is also a serious problem for everyone else, too.

 

[tara]

post 113879 Funny how the religious are so hateful towards the LGBT community when in actuality, they created it through the oppression of women down the arrow of time.

I think you may have a point - the enforcement of overly restrictive gender roles has probably had a part to play in the dynamics.

post 113888 Yes! I knew porn movies told the truth deep down

 

[DaveFoster]

It shouldn't seem too far-fetched. A greater calorie intake leads to a faster metabolism that further leads to more dopamine and an ensuing cascade of androgens.

Undoubtedly, you'll have cultural relativists that will argue that androgens do not dictate sexual taste and that it's all culturally learned, but this can be dismissed due to the fact that women universally prefer men to women with very few exceptions and vice versa.

I guess this could all play into the sexual strategy of males versus females, with the former relying on a higher calorie lntake than the latter. When you have a reduced calorie intake, the amount of androgenic activity decreases, leading to a lowered sex drive, more cautionary behavior (due to increased serotonin levels, of which women have a greater concentration than men), short-term energy bottlenecks that result in an elevation in stress-hormones such as estrogen, prolactin, and cortisol, (all of which jeopardize biological integrity in the long-term), and generally a group-oriented survival strategy that sacrifices creativity in favor of security a la tribalism (or rather socialism in the modern sense).

 

[tara]

post 113999 Undoubtedly, you'll have cultural relativists that will argue that androgens do not dictate sexual taste and that it's all culturally learned, but this can be dismissed due to the fact that women universally prefer men to women with very few exceptions and vice versa.

I'd say that general androgen levels alone have not been demonstrated to determine sexual taste. I don't think an experiment can currently be devised to distinguish the more purely biological influences from psychological and/or cultural ones. Human choices are complex. My guess is its a variable mixture.

Biological determinism has it's limitations. Sometimes dominant groups use it to justify their dominance.

 

[Nicholas]

post 113996 I think the oppression is unjust whatever the reasons are for people's identities and choice of partner (assuming consent and integrity in other respects, etc). Just because an identity has been adopted for psychological or cultural reasons doesn't make the abuse OK.

oh, i agree.

post 113996 There are clearly also a bunch of social and psychological forces at play in encouraging people into the straight model.

if by "social and psychological forces at play" you mean religious oppression and now debunked psychological models at turning gay people straight then i agree. but this is not the social and psychological forces at play in turning heterosexual people gay (whether consciously or not). there are now, apparently, two types of gay Christians: those who practice homosexuality and still identify as Christian....and those who pursue celibacy and identify as Christian. There used to be a 3rd group (though not even supported now by the organizations which championed the approach) which was gay Christians who go through various therapies to turn straight and become heterosexual (heterosexual to them meant falling in love with and marrying a woman). I think it's perfectly valid for a homosexual to turn straight, but the "ex-gay" model is no longer considered a valid model even by a majority of its original proponents. The psychological construct of homosexuality is not a web which is easy to untangle. Not even all gay Christians agree that it's a psychological construct. But even non-Christian gays (this is purely anecdotal from maybe 10 gay men i have talked to about this) can agree that homosexuality is something they developed and not likely something they were born with on a physiological level. The mainstream homosexual message is actually very contradictory. Out of one mouth is spoken: "sexuality is fluid" and out of the other: "we were born this way and have no choice in the matter."

 

[Nicholas]

post 113996 all the stressful anti-gay abuse they endure

i get your point (it does exist), but it's also worth noting that homosexuals have a TON of leverage in society now....homosexuality is practically glorified now. in some environments, homosexuals are basically untouchable like powerful black women. i was bullied when i was younger and have had some levels of bullying in every job i've worked at, but i wouldn't imagine it to be much different than the social stress that a lot of people find themselves in. The past is a different story....even as recently as the 70s it was something you simply didn't talk about or you could face physical abuse (so i hear).
Since this forum is open to taboo topics, it is worth mentioning some of the other psychological factors at play. The gay man or woman often sees their sexuality as a virtue (not a heterosexual trait)....in the sense of it being a better sexuality. It's not across the board of course, but it's a very common trait. Stereotypes do exist for a reason. Many gay men and women have a lot of pride about their sexuality - in a way which would seem unnatural to the heterosexual. Thirdly, homosexuality is almost synonymous with narcissism in all cultureal/literary/biblical references. Narcissism obviously exists in heterosexuality, but not in such a consistent way as homosexuality. Most homosexuals are narcissistic across all sub-types. Again, purely anecdotal from my own life research.

unfortunately, homosexuality has become another social group mostly vying for special status.
I believe that homosexual psychological qualities are in all men and women - for the homosexual it just manifests physically as well.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

post 113994 I assume this is at least in part a reflection of the stereotypes around about gay people.

People actually do have pretty accurate gaydars, especially gays. I think there is a certain tightness in the voice, and that is also seen in many hypothyroid people.

 

[Ideonaut]

No offense to gay people, I believe they are normal

Fine-- it's a free country and anything goes-- but what kind of usefulness can the word "normal" have then? If it is normal for "men" to be buggering each other, then so too is it "normal" and "natural" for them to stuff baloney sandwiches up their holes. To each his and her own, but a reasonable line seems to be not to allow this "ism" to be pushed on vulnerable kids, as is presently done in the US and which is not allowed in arguably saner Russia. I have no doubt that the phenomenon is to some extent a meme, a belief system, an "ism," excess estrogen or no. I have had practicers tell me so: they chose it because they were convinced idea-wise that it is the right thing to do.