If you put a baby in a glass box...

[Donkey]

With nothing but a TV up until the age of 18, do you think it would come out gay, straight or asexual and how do you think it would be like.

It would be shown children's television from 0-10, then older children's television from 10-13 then adult TV from 13-18.

Posting my view once I get tea.

[The Batman]

What would that have to do with sexuality?

[BlackenedSilver]

Different tv shows can affect things, Even sexuality especially if the tv show only shows one way of doing things. It all depends on what view you have on the whole Nature vs Nuture, also children/teens can be impressionable.
This is actually something I have been thinking about lately, as I've noticed that older children's tv has become more relationship involved and also sex involved.. but it's always straight relationships. I never understood why.

Tbh I have no idea. It would all depend on what tv shows it was being shown, Specifically during it's teenage years. If all the the tv shows were about straight relationships I would say straight. If they were all about Gay relationships I would say Gay. There's lots of different factors that still could affect it for example the Child.

[RenamedUser]

I don't really see how the types of television it watches would affect its sexuality.

[theOperaGhost]

I have a feeling this experiment would prove whether homosexuality is actually genetic or not. That is if the television shows had nothing to sway someones sexual preference.

I don't really feel anyone is truly asexual, as it is evolutionarily necessary to reproduce and it is instinct. I'd guess they would be heterosexual as their animalistic instincts would take over and one of the strongest instincts is that to reproduce.

[Donkey]

What I think is if they were kept in a glass box WITHOUT a TV, they would be completely asexual as they wouldn't know of any other humans, therefore are not able to be attracted to any. However with a TV they would see humans and as it is rare for homosexuality to be portrayed on television (esp. childrens), they would grow up to be heterosexual.

I think the baby would probably speak OK English and would seem very strange and weird if they got out of the box into the real world. Everything would seem very absurd and surreal.

[Requin]

Depends what they watched. If they watched American shows and they're british?

Would they end up talking like the prince of bel-air? :P

[RenamedUser]

What I think is if they were kept in a glass box WITHOUT a TV, they would be completely asexual as they wouldn't know of any other humans, therefore are not able to be attracted to any. However with a TV they would see humans and as it is rare for homosexuality to be portrayed on television (esp. childrens), they would grow up to be heterosexual.

I think the baby would probably speak OK English and would seem very strange and weird if they got out of the box into the real world. Everything would seem very absurd and surreal.

If the baby were stuck in a box its entire life, it wouldn't be able to speak any English.

[The Batman]

What I think is if they were kept in a glass box WITHOUT a TV, they would be completely asexual as they wouldn't know of any other humans, therefore are not able to be attracted to any. However with a TV they would see humans and as it is rare for homosexuality to be portrayed on television (esp. childrens), they would grow up to be heterosexual.

I think the baby would probably speak OK English and would seem very strange and weird if they got out of the box into the real world. Everything would seem very absurd and surreal.

It's human nature to be attracted to anyone no matter the outside influences.

[Donkey]

If the baby were stuck in a box its entire life, it wouldn't be able to speak any English.

It has a TV :P

It's human nature to be attracted to anyone no matter the outside influences.

Only if you know other humans exist.

[The Batman]

It's instinct to want to survive and procreate. Think about a dog, you raise him as a puppy and he's not seen anyother dogs but only humans, when that dog starts to mature he starts humping legs and other things without any outside influence from another dog.

[Donkey]

It's instinct to want to survive and procreate. Think about a dog, you raise him as a puppy and he's not seen anyother dogs but only humans, when that dog starts to mature he starts humping legs and other things without any outside influence from another dog.
Yeah but is that dog really sexually attracted to the human or is the humping just instinct? I'm talking about sexuality rather than instinct to maybe rub your sexual organs against things for pleasure, if you get where I'm coming from.

I don't think dogs are sexually attracted to humans and I think that if they haven't seen other dogs than they can't have any sort of sexual attraction to anything. However it is pleasurable to hump against things as it is to masturbate.

Perhaps the person in the glass box would pick up on masturbation too.

[theOperaGhost]

Yeah but is that dog really sexually attracted to the human or is the humping just instinct? I'm talking about sexuality rather than instinct to maybe rub your sexual organs against things for pleasure, if you get where I'm coming from.

I don't think dogs are sexually attracted to humans and I think that if they haven't seen other dogs than they can't have any sort of sexual attraction to anything. However it is pleasurable to hump against things as it is to masturbate.

Perhaps the person in the glass box would pick up on masturbation too.

But they aren't doing it for pleasure. It is instinct to procreate. This is why I think if someone is brought up with absolutely no outside influence, they would likely be heterosexual. The only reason sex is pleasurable (it really shouldn't be, because it is actually one of the most painful things there is) is because it is necessary for evolution. Sex is an evolutionary instinct that is necessary to continue existence.

Here we can bring in a reason why more men cheat than women. It is evolutionary instinct to reproduce. Well, a woman absolutely knows that a child is hers...obviously...she carried it for 9 months. The man can never be certain it is his child and it is our instinct to pass on our genes. Men try to pass their genes on as much as possible, through multiple women or whatever. This is why in nature, male animals mate with multiple females during mating season. It is male instinct to pass on their genes as much as possible.

[BuryYourFlame]

If the TV shows had any effect at all, I am fairly certain they would turn out straight. Simply because you see a lot more raunchy things/sexual innuendos on TV aimed at heterosexuals...well...as far as I have seen anyway.

[Camazotz]

Depends. Was the baby gay or straight when put into the box? I think we've already established that you cannot choose you're sexuality and it cannot be persuaded by things, such as television. If the baby was born gay, it's gay. If it was born straight, it's straight. If it was born asexual, it's asexual.

[Raynes]

I think it would come out dead, considering you didn't place any food in the pretty glass box.

[JackOfClubs]

Well, he would probably be excessively overweight, if you gave him any food, or dead if you didn't give him any. It would all depend on the TV show. He would probably end up straight, due to the sexually equal selection of children's TV shows. I'd prefer to be stuck in there with a computer and internet anyway :D

[Underground_Network]

If you put him in a glass box with just a TV I have a feeling he would die of starvation. 0.o

[Modus Operandi]

Jon, I almost hate to ask, but where'd you come up with this?

Anyway, the kid would probably turn out straight, because of all the raunchy content designed for men. And if the kid was a girl she'd get that she's sposed to like men.

[Donkey]

I think it would come out dead, considering you didn't place any food in the pretty glass box.

Food is irrelevant to this thread... Why would I even mention it? That's not what this is about.

[The Joker]

Edit: Doesn't matter if it's relevant or not, the kid would be dead.

Damn, two people got to it before I did, but that baby would die pretty quickly due to starvation.

[Underground_Network]

And I was unaware that dead babies possessed sexualities. 0.o

But you learn something new everyday. 0.o

[Donkey]

Can you stop being smartarses? If you had an IQ anything over 10 you could realise that that's not the question.

Because you obviously see too black and white, let's say the baby is given basic foods and water everyday. Food is irrelevant to this.

[sebbie]

Well if you think that sexuality is to do with nature eg. something you are born as then it would be pure chance as to what the baby would turn out as.

If you think that sexuality is to do with nurture eg how it is raised, then it would depend on the tv programmes that the child watches.

[Underground_Network]

What I want to know is what would happen if you put a glass box in a baby...

But in all seriousness, I think sexuality is PARTIALLY nature and PARTIALLY nurture.

I think exposing the baby to TV would probably make him lean more towards heterosexuality, but he could just as likely end up bisexual or homosexual.

Different human beings are prone to different things.

It's all in our genes.

You're not born homosexual. But you can be born with a tendency toward homosexuality. I.e., you're more likely to end up homosexual than you are to end up heterosexual or bisexual, but anything can happen. It's all about actual experiences.

It's not just about sight. It's also about touch.

[ShatteredWings]

I really don't think that there's any way that nurture has anything to do with sexuality

Or we wouldn't have people who were raised homophibic who are gay.

[uihwljtkegr]

In all honesty I doubt it would have any effect at all upon the individual subjected to this; But if it did, I would generally say that they would come out straight, due to the current DPI (Dominant Patriarchal Ideology). The DPI defines everything in the media today, and the DPI currently has a very negative approach towards homosexuality, and there are very few alternate/possitive representations within the media; Most representations are based upon the stereotypes that are present in todays society.

So in other words the individual would probably come out of it with a negative view of homosexuality.

(And don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with it myself!)

[tripolar]

With whats on tv now, that kid would be so fucked up when it got out of the box. TV isn't bad but outside experiences help with the child's development, being in the box would really mess it up. As for its sexuality, it depends on what is on the TV. If its watching bravo all day it may be gay, but if it watches other shows it maybe a homophobe. Or then again the TV may make no difference at all.

[The Joker]

Can you stop being smartarses? If you had an IQ anything over 10 you could realise that that's not the question.

Because you obviously see too black and white, let's say the baby is given basic foods and water everyday. Food is irrelevant to this.

It may not be the question but it factors into the answer.

Anyways, it would have whatever is in it's genes, but the baby could be swayed by TV. If the baby is watching shows that feature straight people, it will probably turn out straight since it doesn't know their is an option.

[The Batman]

Have you guys ever thought that maybe the baby will look at the straight oriented shows and only like the person of the same sex, but question why?