Closet

NJ #70 Your post is as nonsensical as your article. Forget gays or g----s (in utdu) or whatever. Take a communications class instead (I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are not a jerk in real life, and simply come across as one when you write).

re tAhmed #67:

Dude, I like you so I`ll explain.

Unless your name is Vin Diesel or Barry Diller, the percentage of women that like bald men is the same that likes midgets. Hair treatment(Rogaine, Propeica, hair plugs etc.) is a $6 billion a year business for the same reason.

Baldness like color blindness is genetic. If your father and grandfather are bald, you have a 70% chance of being bald by the time you are 40. So if baldness is genetic and confers a sexual disadvantage, it would make sense that the number of bald people in general population would decline. Scientists have seen no such evidence. The percentage of bald people has remained pretty steady. Same thing with color blindness.

Its not easy to explain away the presence or disapperance of traits based on genetic theory alone. There are a lot of missing pieces to the puzzle. But the evidence so far is largely in favour of sexual orientation being determined at birth rather than after.

Now let me go play with the Field Marshal.

later
-sac

Dear readers

I am sorry; I should have come earlier but due to other commitments (not the homo ones)…………. Ok I had no idea that word Homo would start that much debate here…………….i do know this word is kind of insulting but I never had any intention to do so, but as you people are suggesting, may be unintentionally I did insult homosexuals, may be because I am also a part of society and intentionally or unintentionally we don’t miss any chance to taunt on homosexuals, transsexuals etc. So I admit I am feeling guilty on my neck but I believe although I am guilty not responsible. I apologize, if any homosexual is reading, for using the word homo, I had no intention to insult u and If I wanted to insult I have better word in Urdu which you know what is it.

Some of the members remind me of my father who always remained concerned about my communication skills…all I can say” I try”. On use of the word “Making out”…neither I understand what’s the problem with it nor I care much. I am not sure most Chowk readers do have time to analyze what is politically correct or what is incorrect after all we are not Bill Maher , I owe a responsibility to Khurram and I thought putting his feelings on Chowk might help to highlight this issue, although Chowk don’t attract the masses addressed in the article. Those who think this issue is not important to discuss, if you visit Pakistani gay websites and their chatting channels, you will realize its not as least important as you guys are thinking.

Some of my friends raised questions which I can’t answer as how much I can try I can’t think with the mind of a homosexuals…if any one (which I am sure no one) interested to talk with Khurram you can reach him at boyjone_pk@yahoo.com.

Thanks again for all comments, see you people again with some other item.

Allah Hafiz

N.J

..oh my, lot of excited men on the gay board...have fun, people...adios...

tahmed#65

[each others smelly bodies]

Words of disdain ? Or do they really smell??

sac #64 I thought women considered baldness to equal virility and so baldies had an edge over the rest of us. You seem to know better.
btw, I dont know how bald casanovas, or lack thereof, has anything to do with my conclusions.

khamkhwa #63 You ask ``Do you see the hypocricy? ``
No. Please enlighten.

I don`t know too much about this sex gene theory, but I do know that homosexuals like the rest of the society have the right to be who they are, and they shouldn`t have to hide or `do things in private`. In south-asian culture, and in some places a woman and a man still cannot hold hands, let alone kiss in public etc. It`s a different culture. But in `western` culture people do - so people of any sexual orientation should be able to express their affections without being harrassed about it.

I also want to explore this feeling of `disgust` towards the sexual practices among people of different sexual orientation. Why is that many people find this disgusting? Because it`s not natural? Nature itself, I believe, does not promote `conformity` but rather `growth` or `change`.
Of course not many people would confess to these feelings, simply because it`s not politically correct to do so, so it`s better to be quiet than to say what they feel. Obviously if you don`t identify as a homosexual, you will find that the expressions between two people of your own sex are not attractive to you, but I would imagine that it would bring a feeling of `neutrality`. It would not excite your imagination, but why would it disgust people?

re tahmed32 #59:

``Thus, my original conclusion on this point...``

er....is completely bogus. How many bald casanovas do you know?

re ZafarA #61:

``Bugger (!) the inferences, I want to know the stats for desis...``

This field requires your eminence to shed some light. I`ve been told that desis don`t do it...............................

later
-sac

tahmed#60
[not to point fingers at others]

tahmed#59
[if two men wish to enjoy each others smelly bodies in private]

Do you see the hypocricy?

Reply sac #51

``Now taking your question in earnest, according to a widely quoted study the average gay person(whatever that means) in America has more than 70 sexual partners in their lifetime. The number for a white guy is between 10 and 15. For white women its 4-10. Draw your own inferences.``

Bugger (!) the inferences, I want to know the stats for desis...

(Also, this white guy/woman are straight? Or is this the average?)

Mr Stuka, please email me on zafreallyzaf@yahoo.com regarding a COMPLETELY unrelated matter - ie lassi at bengali market.

maulabux #55 I am glad you feel the need to excuse your insults towards the happy one since this means maybe we will get more mature posts from you in future on chowk.
And indeed I am flattered that you should present these excuses to me as a schoolchild does to the schoolmaster. As your schoolmaster, therefore, let me respond by asking you not to hide behind excuses, not to point fingers at others, and try not to repeat this mistake again.
Now do 50 pushups to remind you not to repeat this mistake again. Class dismissed!! :-)

mastram2 #56 I think my response to sac below also applies to the point you make about gene Xq28 (actually, it is a region containing genes in the x chromosome). I see from google that there are gay websites on it (my first search brought out a Thai gay web site!!), but clearly the conclusion they draw is not supported by science. That is, with the decoding of the human genome we are still far from understanding how human behavior is determined. But it is quite clear even at this stage that genes alone do not determine it.
Thus, my original conclusion on this point - namely that a person is not pre-determined to be gay at time of birth, and that external influences play a significant role.
Having said all this, I agree of course that if two men wish to enjoy each others smelly bodies in private, I have no problem with that. They just need to stop making a virtue out of it and claiming that this is the natural order of things when all evidence and logic points the other way.

sac #54 The underlying point you make - namely, that genes alone do not determine behavior - is of course correct. However, I think you will agree that genes are the sole determinant of the hormonal mix in an individual. Nor is the hormonal mix the sole determinant of human behavior. External influences play a significant role in many different ways. For example, get invited to her apartment by an attractive co-worker, and your sex hormones will increase regardless of what the genes have to say about it. Similarly, get chased by a lion and a different set of hormones start pumping.
Thus, while gays make a big deal about the ``sex gene`` (I discuss that separately in my response to mastram2), I think they are kidding themselves.

sac #54 In my response to your post #54 I forgot a ``not``. The sentence ``I think you will agree that genes are the sole determinant...`` should read ``I think you will agree that genes are NOT the sole determinant....``.