If you think a straight man can be coerced or convinced to like other men, it's because you're secretly super duper gay. It's that simple.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (34)
sorted by:
I would correct bisexual to asexual. Because your premise is a nature vs nurture idea, and that is reinforced with woke sex ed.
Keep kids innocent, but safe. Teach biological sex ed, or traditional actions, and you get what you see in nature. Teach woke sex Ed, and you've nurtured QUILTBAG for the pedos that call themselves MAPS.
No my debate is solid. The nature is that you have reproductive organs and hormones. It leads to sex by nature from reproducing, adapting, and surviving. The choice by nature is therefore bisexual. It is with every mammal, and many other species. But specifically our species. Sex is a product of environment and experience, leading to instinct or preference.
Science would argue unbalanced rogue genes. But this isn't factual when regardless of hormone levels your biology will always be bisexual, choosing how you have sex and any preferences towards it.
Or please try to argue otherwise. Asexual is contrary to our species reproduction. But sex becomes a preference.
Nature has pheromones that attract the opposite sex.
Nuture is a separate debate. But preference developed how. Environment and experience, developing.
All species have pheromones. Including our own. Although we tend to rely mostly on a combination of all our senses, and we are also driven by our hormones.
I am not debating my preferences, it again is hetero. I don't care about how you developed your choices, or what they are. I am debating this topic, and rationalising why as a species there are increasing preferences?
My comment was intended as constructive criticism for you theories flaws.
The answer to your question is nurture. You may elaborate that to woke sex ed.