Sexuality, mice and medication What if medication can control sexuality?

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

If homosexuality was found to be a chemical imbalance then it would be scientifically proven that it's not supposed to be. It would be classes as a mental health issue alongside depression and biplor disorder.

It would no longer be feasible to say "It's just the way I am", science would have proven otherwise. I think people would take it, but a lot of them wouldn't.

Then again people turn to science because religion expects something of them, then when science says something they don't like they'll cast it aside just as quickly.

Well seeing how homosexuals aren't harming anyone by doing what they do then I doubt that anyone would classify it as a disease but more as a quirk. The reason it is feasible to say "It's just the way I am" is that we live in a civilized world where the rights of the individual trumps the comfort of the majority.

This is what I believe to be true and to be the reason we should not allow heterophobic or homophobic mobs to determine what is right for the individual. It should be left up to individual to decide their sexuality, and if a medication allowed them to do so, they should have that option.

To give into either mob that is afraid that " that group would make everyone gay" or " that group would make everyone straight" would be to give into oppression rather than support the right of the individual to choose for themselves.

 

[MRMIdAS2k]

Medicine can leave you unable to walk, doesn't mean walking is unnatural.

 

[NightRavenGSA]

OK!!!
you know what humanity??!
Just make an "all-gender pill" that will give us the ability to enjoy both worlds.
One could just switch between genders whenever they feel like it or rather whenever their libidos feel like it.

WHO AGREES WITH ME!??!?

I do, in a way

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

This has probably already been said, but I don't think such a medication should be made available at all, because in certain areas, it may not be voluntary, but indeed forced

Do you feel the same way about sex changes?
I am surprised by the sheer number of people who would deny one persons right to choice because of the possibility of anothers actions.

I am not sure which is worse, Heterophobia or homophobia. Both seem absolutely mad to me.

No I don't. and I just think it would be far too easy for a community to "fix" homosexuals by enacting legislation making medication compulsory. I personally think they should have a right to choose for themselves however my faith in humanity is sadly lacking in these respects, and as such I'd rather people be stuck how they are, than have them forced to change by a society that considers them "un-natural" or wrong

I think think from a personal standpoint true heterophobia would be worse due to the fact that they're the majority, and from a societal standpoint I think homophobia is worse due to the fact that homosexuals tend to make up a minority
However we shouldn't confuse homophobia (fearing homosexuals) with hating homosexuals as they should be two diferent things

Those who fear that homosexuals would turn the whole world gay if given a "sexuality pill" or those that fear that the heterosexuals would turn the whole world straight if given the pill would make them both big time phobes. They would be equally crazy in my book.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

I think it would be good to have available, but it would have to be highly regulated (I mean really, really highly). I think it's good to offer the choice to people who think it would be easier for them if they were straight, but could be abused so easily. All those ridiculous gay-cure camps in America would have to be kept the hell away.

 

[Bags159]

Fucking disgusting. When will humanity quit playing God?

Is there a badge for getting a lot of people to quote you? Because that seems like the only reason you'd post something like this.

Humanity should "stop playing god" when we've fixed everything "he's" messed up.

 

[NightRavenGSA]

This has probably already been said, but I don't think such a medication should be made available at all, because in certain areas, it may not be voluntary, but indeed forced

Do you feel the same way about sex changes?
I am surprised by the sheer number of people who would deny one persons right to choice because of the possibility of anothers actions.

I am not sure which is worse, Heterophobia or homophobia. Both seem absolutely mad to me.

No I don't. and I just think it would be far too easy for a community to "fix" homosexuals by enacting legislation making medication compulsory. I personally think they should have a right to choose for themselves however my faith in humanity is sadly lacking in these respects, and as such I'd rather people be stuck how they are, than have them forced to change by a society that considers them "un-natural" or wrong

I think think from a personal standpoint true heterophobia would be worse due to the fact that they're the majority, and from a societal standpoint I think homophobia is worse due to the fact that homosexuals tend to make up a minority
However we shouldn't confuse homophobia (fearing homosexuals) with hating homosexuals as they should be two diferent things

Those who fear that homosexuals would turn the whole world gay if given a "sexuality pill" or those that fear that the heterosexuals would turn the whole world straight if given the pill would make them both big time phobes. They would be equally crazy in my book.

agreed

 

[JMeganSnow]

If it was determined with advancements in medicine, that homosexuality was determined by a chemical imbalance in the brain, do you think that a treatment should be made available to the public on a volunatry basis?

I have no problem with anyone deciding to make medications available to help one alter one's sexuality. However, I disagree with this wording. Chemical "imbalance" implies that there's a dysfunction of some kind, but as far as I'm concerned there's only a dysfunction if the person is unable to be happy with the result.

Some people need very little sleep and are naturally very upbeat and cheerful due to an oddity in brain chemistry. Some people (me) can sleep 14 hours a day and still never feel like they've had enough sleep. Granted, I can get BY on 6 hours of sleep--I still never feel like I've gotten enough sleep, my brain just thinks it's sleep-deprived no matter what I do. The only time in my life when this wasn't the case was when I was on anti-depressants, which had some seriously bizarre side effects in my case. My case is a dysfunction because it interferes with my ability to live my life. The short-sleepers are just as abnormal but hardly dysfunctional, in fact, they'd probably resent the implication that they OUGHT to sleep as much as everyone else.

I don't see why "natural" homosexuals ought to want to be straight, unless they decide that they do. In which case, whatever makes them happy.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I think it would be good to have available, but it would have to be highly regulated (I mean really, really highly). I think it's good to offer the choice to people who think it would be easier for them if they were straight, but could be abused so easily. All those ridiculous gay-cure camps in America would have to be kept the hell away.

Actually a pill like this should render those gay cure camps obsolete. They would already have control over their sexuality,through their medical care provider, therefore there would be no use for those camps at all anymore.

If someone choose a religious belief that does not support their decision, then maybe it is their choice in religion that is the issue. They can either choose to be apart of that religion or not. For many, they simply "opt out" of those religions that they do not believe to represent their own beliefs. That to me appears to be the solution rather than blaming the religion or trying to change it. In a free nation, one can simply walk away from those people. Why stand and argue with someone when you feel they are insane?

 

[Wintermoot]

this is not ethical. like any other form of personality (like Autism) we shouldn't heal it, it,s not a disease!

 

[Asuka Soryu]

This reminds me of X-Men Last Stand when they made a cure for being a mutant.

To me, it seems wrong to make a cure for someone being themselves. Like conformity in pill form, setting a what is and what isn't right on sexuality is just wrong.

We shouldn't be trying to cure this, 'sickness'. We should be trying to accept these people as human beings who have nothing wrong with them, other then being different from what some narrow minded people think is 'right'.

Sadly, there's no cure for intolerance of people who are different from what you expect.

The only time a cure should be made is if people are actually dieing from the sickness or are in horrible pain.

Not because they feel and act different from others. It's really wrong to take away the freedom of people. Yes, the drug could be voulentary, but it just comes off as offensive that people need to take a medicine just so some asses will accept them as human beings.

 

[garjian]

Fucking disgusting. When will humanity quit playing God?

we play Sheldon Cooper,
we play Captain Jack Sparrow,
we play God.

all are fictional, whats wrong with acting as one, and not another?

anyways, i dont like the idea of messing with peoples so-called "free will" at all.
but if "curing imbalance" is the arguement, then everyone should be bisexual... and noone could complain about anything.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

If it was determined with advancements in medicine, that homosexuality was determined by a chemical imbalance in the brain, do you think that a treatment should be made available to the public on a volunatry basis?

I have no problem with anyone deciding to make medications available to help one alter one's sexuality. However, I disagree with this wording. Chemical "imbalance" implies that there's a dysfunction of some kind, but as far as I'm concerned there's only a dysfunction if the person is unable to be happy with the result.

Some people need very little sleep and are naturally very upbeat and cheerful due to an oddity in brain chemistry. Some people (me) can sleep 14 hours a day and still never feel like they've had enough sleep. Granted, I can get BY on 6 hours of sleep--I still never feel like I've gotten enough sleep, my brain just thinks it's sleep-deprived no matter what I do. The only time in my life when this wasn't the case was when I was on anti-depressants, which had some seriously bizarre side effects in my case. My case is a dysfunction because it interferes with my ability to live my life. The short-sleepers are just as abnormal but hardly dysfunctional, in fact, they'd probably resent the implication that they OUGHT to sleep as much as everyone else.

I don't see why "natural" homosexuals ought to want to be straight, unless they decide that they do. In which case, whatever makes them happy.

Chemical imbalance would refer to any chemical outside the normal range from the majority. If the chemical is determined to be within a certain range for the majority of people, then anyone outside that range would be considered to have a "chemical imbalance" this does not make them "wrong" it is just different.

You cannot expect people to change medical terms in order to be more "sensitive" rather people should be educated on medical terms to understand their meaning. Would you rather them say "below normal range for an average male between the ages of ... " or should they just not say anything at all, instead show a graph with the normal levels of the general population and then then show a level much lower? I think nit picking at words is silly. I do not expect them to have to "tip toe" around a fact to spare sensitivity. They should just state it as accurately as possible to make sure the person affected is gaining a proper understanding of the information.

 

[Sandernista]

I would take the 'gay pill'

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

this is not ethical. like any other form of personality (like Autism) we shouldn't heal it, it,s not a disease!

You do realize that without proper care and treatment, those with severe Autism would not even be able to feed themselves. There are different degrees to everything. For mild autism, it should be up to the individual to decide. Who are we to tell them they can't be treated?

 

[k-ossuburb]

I'd rather they used the technique to moderate the adverse effects on sexuality some psychological medication has on some people. So, if a certain drug caused a depletion in sperm count or a loss of sex drive then the technique of hormonal moderation could be used to put both of those back to a functional norm, effectively "canceling out" that particular side effect.

I may have completely missed the point of this thread, but any advance in science is a good advance in my opinion, it's only bad when people abuse it. Like the difference between cell modification to create bio-fuels and cell modification to create biological weapons. One helps everyone the other helps no-one.

 

[Chefodeath]

Fucking disgusting. When will humanity quit playing God?

Maybe when he decides to show up and do it himself.

ot: Sounds good to me. I mean shit, if you're living in this culture which still has the heavy residues of anti-homosexuality bias. I mean look at gay culture. Its fucking ridiculous we even have a thing like that. These people are forced to abandon individuality and sink into this ridiculous stereotype that society can be comfortable with. Fuck that shit. If the individual doesn't want to be gay and we can prevent it, then lets prevent it. Everyones happy. If you want to stay gay, then stay gay, if you don't, don't.

 

[JMeganSnow]

You cannot expect people to change medical terms in order to be more "sensitive" rather people should be educated on medical terms to understand their meaning. Would you rather them say "below normal range for an average male between the ages of ... " or should they just not say anything at all, instead show a graph with the normal levels of the general population and then then show a level much lower? I think nit picking at words is silly. I do not expect them to have to "tip toe" around a fact to spare sensitivity. They should just state it as accurately as possible to make sure the person affected is gaining a proper understanding of the information.

I'd prefer the graph and the range, because a great many people fall wildly outside that "normal" range. (I'm one of them.) The actual PROPER way to determine whether you have an "imbalance" is to compare your own personal "normal" levels with the levels you have when things aren't working right. Granted, this takes more effort and thus is more expensive. But this fetish medicine has with taking a median and calling that "normal" is bullcrap.