Homosexuality: Genetic or a personal preference?

Let's continue here. I want to find out what is going on with gay.

Can anyone share a link containing information about studies that have proved if the reason of homosexuality is genetic or environmental?

I suggest this article - "Is Homosexuality A Choice?" - scientificamerican.com

It seems to me that differences in sexual orientation are part of the natural spectrum of variables which form the uniqueness of individuals.

If a person feels conflicted about his or her sexual orientation, perhaps they could ask the wisdom of the dreaming mind to create dreams which provide insight to separate negative cultural attitudes from the true and worthy feelings arising from one's own heart.

I am glad that in our society, many straight people are coming to know, respect, and support gay family members, co-workers, and friends.

I agree with the open-hearted kindness and empathy expressed in the following poem by Rumi.

Be certain that in the Religion of Love There are no believers and unbelievers. Love embraces all.

I will read, thanks. If it was a choice, then it should be easy for homosexuals to get attracted by both genders. I really doubt it is a choice the most of the times.

In Megaman Discussions, you suggested that Chaos might have a point, Desert. He doesn't. Regardless of what may or may not cause homosexuality, hatred for it is never justified -- and a phobia of it is certainly irrational.

First of all, 'gene' is a generic term that describes a wide variety of DNA segments that beget all manner of observable -- and sometimes concealed -- phenotypes. A gene is not a single molecule that by itself dictates an individual's appearance and behaviour. It can be a unit, or a number of units combined, which tend to produce certain effects. A gene that tends to generate long legs in combination with a particular set of polypeptides might produce short, plump legs with another set. Genetics is not as straightforward as what most people imagine...

You ask: Homosexuality: Genetic or a personal preference? But you could have also asked: Heterosexuality: Genetic or personal preference?

Gay, straight, bi, asexual or what have you; people do NOT pick how they feel. It is a phenomenon that isn't easily explainable which involves their genome combined with development (and sometimes psychological influence pending life experiences). However, I will say this: Certain distinctions have been made regarding gay men -- their amydalae tend to be larger than those of heterosexual men (which could explain why the former tend to be more emotional than the latter).

Also, gay men tend to have older heterosexual brothers -- which tallies with the embryological cause I mentioned earlier. The more boys a woman gives birth to, the less testosterone is available for the latest male foetuses. Here is an interesting video which also highlights how DNA methylisation and epigenetics can play a role in determining an individual's sexual orientation:

https://youtu.be/saO_RFWWVVA

And why the hell are homophobic heterosexuals still complaining about gay people since they are the ones who produce them in the first place?

Sexual orientation -- stupid, self-deluded, trendy teenagers aside who want to act 'cool' by being what they think is unusual or different -- is never a choice. :-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

I'll watch the video, thanks. I said that Chaos may has a point, because he said it's an environmental cause and it might be that as well.

Wait a minute. I'm confused.

"Sexual orientation -- stupid, self-deluded, trendy teenagers aside who want to act 'cool' by being what they think is unusual or different -- is never a choice. :-)"

That seems to be the most usual occasion when homosexuality is a choice. Why do you say the opposite?

First, watch the video about the twins. Secondly, I'll reiterate: It's never a choice. (And even if it were, it wouldn't be a reason to hate it.)

The teenagers I was referring to, Desert, are those who act gay because it's the trend, but they are not genuine. They are really heterosexuals trying to stand out. Therefore, it's not even a case of 'choosing to be homosexual' because they never become it. It's pretence (choosing to act homosexual) to get attention and a phase that ends with maturity.

The genuine ones feel gay the minute they experience sexual attraction from an early age -- and they usually hide it!

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Ha!! Gayyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!! :mrgreen:

OK, that was very convincing. I didn't know that they already have discovered it!! Well done. I really think you just closed the case, Summer.

I know that there is no reason to hate it. I strongly believe that fear can be translated to hatred without even knowing it. But why do you call it irrational? That I do not understand.

Homophobia is irrational because there is no need to fear, avoid, or discriminate against homosexuals.

The same goes for caulrophobia (the fear of clowns). There are good and bad clowns. Is this a good enough reason to fear every clown you see? If you think 'yes', your fear is disproportional to the level of danger in reality -- therefore it is irrational -- for there are also individuals capable of iniquity who do not don the clown costume.

And if you are scared of dolls because you've watched 'Chucky', then what you are experiencing is definitely irrational! Why? Because Chucky is not real!

By the same line of thinking, we can see that sexual orientation gives no indication of whether a person is good or bad. People of all types of sexual orientation have raped and killed. Should we fear them all? Why be a homophobe but not a heterophobe? Are heterosexuals justified in fearing homosexuals because these don't procreate and their proliferation could spell our extinction as a species? Are homosexuals justified in fearing heterosexuals because these contribute to an alarmingly unremitting population growth?

Heterosexuals and homosexuals are human beings that can peacefully co-exist and work towards building harmony and stability in our world.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Even if it's choice (which it most certainly is not), no person with a healthy, mature, functioning mind thinks it is a pathology or collectivizes homosexuals just to have some nebulous, falsely malign force to inflict their psychotic hatred on.

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

Yes, but when people think it's a choice or they just don't know how it works, they fear that they may turn out gay as well, which is not irrational at all. Because they just don't have any idea what this is. Irrational would be if the person knew that the reason is genetics and still be afraid by gays. There is no excuse in that. And let me tell you, I have encountered that kind. They know exactly what is going on, but they still choose to hate gays. Weird, right? You can't reason with these people.

But if someone doesn't know, his/her fear is completely justified. All you need to do is to prove him/her what homosexuality is and then you wait to see if he/she continues to behave in the same way, against it or not.

DesertExplorer wrote: Yes, but when people think it's a choice or they just don't know how it works, they fear that they may turn out gay as well, which is not irrational at all.

If they are afraid that they might become gay, Desert, then they can't be secure in their current sexuality. And their fear is still irrational because there is nothing to fear even if they turn gay save for a new lifestyle that they are completely unfamiliar with. In other words, why be afraid of pursuing your newfound homosexual interests?

Let's put it this way: You have never cared much for history. But today is the 4th of July and you heard some historians talk about the 18th century revolution of the American Colonies against Great Britain, which sparks an interest in you. Curiosity leads to research, and, the more you learn, the more you wish to delve into other historical subjects. You start craving for discussions with people who have the same interests; you talk to them and move to new levels of discourse involving speculation over the minds of people like George Washington and King George III; you want to write books informing others about American history and what you think; you don't mind participating in documentaries and debating about historical figures. Do you see any reason here, Desert, that suggests you should be afraid of becoming a historian when you want to be one? Unless you're afraid of novelty, which is still irrational. A new lifestyle might mean new risks, yes, but there are potential risks in everything you do.

The cosy, conservative lifestyle you hold, whereby you get up and make your way to school or work, involves the risk being run over by a drunk driver on the pavement. Should you fear going about your business? Look up the term 'irrational fear' and you will understand what I'm on about. It hinges on a hyperbolic sense of danger.

DesertExplorer wrote: Because they just don't have any idea what this is. Irrational would be if the person knew that the reason is genetics and still be afraid by gays.

I'm sorry but I still don't see where you are going with this. Be the causes of homosexuality genetic (perhaps genes for bigger amygdalae are involved), or epigenic from the embryonic stage as evidence seems to suggest, or a choice (which it isn't), why should they matter in justifying the abhorrence of said sexual orientation? Are you saying that people shouldn't be free to choose (if it was something that could be chosen)? Why should one be afraid of people's harmless choices? Conversely, we can also imagine a scenario where a religious person rationalises the embryological causes of homosexuality as evidence that Satan has tweaked mankind's biology so that humans would develop 'unholy' interests. (At least the pious have the excuse of having been profoundly indoctrinated -- they believe God forbids homosexuality) :mrgreen:

Where is your logic, Desert? What are you trying to say by attempting to justify the ignorance and bigotry exemplified by Chaos in Megaman Discussions?

DesertExplorer wrote: But if someone doesn't know, his/her fear is completely justified. All you need to do is to prove him/her what homosexuality is and then you wait to see if he/she continues to behave in the same way, against it or not.

No, it isn't. Imagine a world where humans are genetically engineered in labs, homosexuals are more numerous than heterosexuals, and the latter are seen as anomalous in some countries. Would it be justified for gay people to have the same fear? You do realise that you are apologising for homophobia, right?

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Summerlander wrote: What are you trying to say by attempting to justify the ignorance and bigotry exemplified by Chaos in Megaman Discussions?

Do you understand why someone is homophobic? If, so then there is an explanation and you still say that it's irrational. That very statement is absurd. That's what I'm trying to say. I'm not talking about what is wrong or bad, what is ethical or not, what is by nature and what it isn't. I'm talking about whether homophobia can logically explained or not.

Summerlander wrote: No, it isn't. Imagine a world where humans are genetically engineered in labs, homosexuals are more numerous than heterosexuals, and the latter are seen as anomalous in some countries. Would it be justified for gay people to have the same fear? You do realise that you are apologising for homophobia, right?

No, I do not. Because you already know what it is and the reasons behind it. You can understand it perfectly, but you say it's irrational. Isn't that irrational? :D

But maybe you want to say that the fear itself is irrational. Well, that applies for all the feelings.

"I don't like it--it freaks me out--it's unnatural--God says it's wrong." However they rationalize it in their pathetic minds, it's still irrational, because they have no real reason to hate homosexuals. Their reasoning, if they have any, is fallacious. Thus it is null and void. Why am I arachnophobic? "Spiders are grotesque creatures--all those wriggling legs freak me out." I understand that this is not rational, but these are my pathetic "rationalizations." It is a phobia.

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

OK, I get it. You mean that while there is no actual danger, they fear it. In that way yes, that's indeed irrational.

Even more irrational is when people hate them, while they do know it's not a choice and there is no danger of spreading this orientation.

They actually think that homosexuality can make others behave in a feminine way. But the reason for having so many people behave in a that way is not homosexuality. And I will explain why. Example: There is the very one possibility that someone is born gay, but he grew up by heterosexual parents and his older brother is straight. His orientation won't be enough to make him go out the way of his parents and behave like a woman.

What do I want to say? Many people hate gays because there are so many men behaving in a feminine way (thinking that more and more people accept it and even more do it), which is completely absurd, because the behaviour is the one that can spread and not the orientation.

They actually hate the wrong people. :P

Even if sexualities could be spread, where would the danger be? You see now why it is irrational? Also, women and gay men are not the only ones who can possess effeminacy. There are effeminate heterosexual males out there, too. Effeminacy isn't just a womanly trait just as masculinity isn't reserved for men.

Everyone is entitled to be who they are and the hatred/fear of masculinity/femininity is still irrational and unjustified. So is misandry and misogyny for that matter.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Yes, I understand. Taking a step forward, do you think bisexuality is a choice?

No, I don't. They simply feel attracted to both genders. I'd also like to correct my previous post: There are effeminate heterosexual males out there, too. [EDITED]

I need to go easy on the booze! (Who am I to criticise Christopher Hitchens?) :mrgreen:

Speaking of the great Hitch, there is a debate on Youtube where he teams up with Stephen Fry (gay intellectual actor) against the repulsive Anne Widdecombe. Hitchens defends homosexuality and portrays religion as a poison. 8-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

So you believe that someone can be born bisoxeual? Someone who is attracted 50% by women and 50% by men?

It's quite possible that there is a spectrum.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

in a world with so many lies we might as well just go with our gut, my opinion is there probably always was a percentage of gay people, but that a person can be influenced by external things, i think this is quite probable with camp gays, what they see on tv, clicks, and there is also the possibility of PCBs, pleas don't take offence, every one all was dose, and i really don't mean any offence, i just have an opinion that differs from most. :D

Never go with your gut as first impressions could lead you astray. Look, instead, at the evidence from an unbiased perspective as this type of investigation is the only one that will help you to discern the truth from the lies.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

and where would i find such a thing.

The evidence is all around you. If you are not an expert, heed, instead, the conclusions arrived at by peer-reviewed tests carried out by the scientific community. This applies to any subject you'd like to know about. If you want to know more about the topic we are currently discussing, you can review our posts and find useful links already provided. They are quite enlightening.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

DesertExplorer wrote: Let's continue here. I want to find out what is going on with gay.

Can anyone share a link containing information about studies that have proved if the reason of homosexuality is genetic or environmental?

Maybe its caused by not either of those, maybe its a choice done at soul level.

Does heterosexual people choose to be attracted to the opposite sex? I personally just think it just happens (or maybe is a soul level choice).

There was some interesting research years back on homosexuals (I think this study was just males).. which showed there was something different about their ears but then if genetic, why is homosexuality such a random thing? ..........

One thing with homosexuality, is that I've found one can tell this even before the one day homosexual is sexually mature. It's even obvious in young children. I had a friend and I always thought her son was gay even at the age of 6 years old, turns out he is (his voice never even matured into like a males voice and he has like a high female like voice). He's adult now and lives with his male lover, he has no sexual interest in females at all. So obviously if one can tell another is gay from a wee child, it isn't about them making a choice to be gay, there is something really different there.

Now my nephew, he's currently about 10 years old, he's the only other child Ive so far come across in which Im feeling something quite different about him too, I cant currently hit on what it is. I strongly suspect he has Aspergers but I think Im feeling something with him more then this, Im feeling like there is something sexually different about him.

I would of thought he too may be gay though he isn't at all girly like my other friends son always was, I then went to considering if he's the male aspect as like gay couples but Ive ruled out that idea as he had a strong weird thing for girls when only 3 or 4 years old. (he used to make sexual comments as what you'd expect a 13-15 year old to be doing.. he'd study girls in magizines in skimpy bathers or laundrie (sp?) and basically obsess over the pictures of girls bodies all the time.. he was only 3-4, it was quite strange. He doesn't though seem to be interested in dressing in girls clothes so I don't think its him wanting to do that or him wanting to be a girl that Im feeling.

I'm now wondering if Im picking up (though not through any actions) that he's a true bisexual (I never though knew bisexual people to give off a different feel to gays and heterosexual?? can they?). Anyway Im confused but Im really strongly feeling like he's sexually different though he's not showing anything unusual yet (maybe he's going to be asexual? if that can be felt? What on earth could I be feeling different about him even before sexual maturity?).

Anyway, all I can say is it can sometimes gayness can be felt when these people very young children and that they aren't heterosexual (well at least in gay people. I guess I'll find out what it is Im feeling different sexually with my nephew in the next 6-8 years. Im sooo curious what it is). I've even queried my sister if she's noticed it something different with him but she hasn't yet.

These people are not "choosing" to be the way they are.

These people are not "choosing" to be the way they are.

Precisely my point. They simply feel that way (as do hetero- and bisexuals). And even if it were a choice... so what? :-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

DesertExplorer wrote: Yes, I understand. Taking a step forward, do you think bisexuality is a choice?

I know you directed your question to summerlander but bisexuality to me is a very complex thing as those of us like myself who have come across soul mates from other life times (if you believe in that stuff), we can be feeling the emotions from the other lifetime including the feelings that we are lovers etc, where we or the other or both of us could of been a different sex. I can instantly be feeling very deep love and visa versa the very moment we come across each other again (one of my soul mates actually collapsed on coming across me again his emotional response was so strong).

So what would I be if I come across someone who is female in this life but was in a hetero love relationship with me another life. I could be drawn back into the relationship as lovers while at the very same time not attracted to her this lifetime body in a sexual way. (gee I hope that never ever happens to me...thinking of doing certain sexual things with another female really grosses me out.., so far my soul mates I've come across this lifetime have all been male this life like they were male and I was female in the other lives).

But I know based on soul love, that it would be possible for me to get in a full on relationship with a female as my lover that Im not sexually attracted too. I know my actual soul has had lifetimes both as being male and female so I must have both kinds of soul mates out there.

What a departure from the falsifiable! ^^

[ Post made via Android ] Image

The other day, I formally introduced to my former neighbour Samantha's boyfriend. My neighbour Helen finds the bloke's machismo, narcissism and general testosterone-driven mannerisms obnoxious. I facetiously---and perhaps stupidly---remarked that Stuart is a 'proper man', to which she retorted, 'No! That's not a proper man! I'm sick of all that macho bullshit!' Perhaps there is some truth in what you're saying, Dane! :mrgreen:

I think most people can more or less agree on what 'camp' means, though. (Bearing in mind that both heterosexual and homosexual men can either possess or lack this quality.) :-D

When I was a teenager in the 1980s, I experienced a form of bullying by someone who began a rumor that I was gay. It had no basis in truth. But, it was rampantly whispered and spread. I was very athletically capable, so I did not get physical bullying by the time I was 16. But, it was a powerful form of emotional bullying, which was highly effective in hurting me.

I therefore understand what it is like to endure such homophobia. In reality, those who eagerly spread such rumor had no true and loving concern to help me. It was just plain juicy slander.

I found myself laughing in recent years, as I began to see opinions change. It has become cool for guys to display exaggerated femininity, and for observers to be exceedingly supportive. Were I to be among those now who thought I was gay, would I get some grand praise?

Therefore, I see this subject not really a matter of homophobia, in many cases. People simply like to function in the safety of herds, and bully/exclude others. Whoever is slightly different from the herd will get bullied.

Now, from my own perspective, particular inclinations by birth do not justify behaviors. One can just as easily say that being inclined toward heterosexuality is sin. Sinful acts are not necessary, in that most people do not die without sex. Adultery and fornication are described as wrong in the Bible, as are homosexual acts. A genuine desire to love and help people is what is typically missing among those who pass harsh judgment, pretending holier than thou.

Pilgrim wrote: Therefore, I see this subject not really a matter of homophobia, in many cases. People simply like to function in the safety of herds, and bully/exclude others. Whoever is slightly different from the herd will get bullied.

I agree with that. It takes guts to be different, and if you're going to do that, charisma goes a long way. You know what I think? Christopher Hitchens matters. His Letters to a Young Contrarian should become a textbook in all schools. It should be part of the curriculum.

Pilgrim wrote: A genuine desire to love and help people is what is typically missing among those who pass harsh judgment, pretending holier than thou.

Well said.

I think one aspect of this issue we haven’t fleshed out is that, while certainly there are biological factors that contribute to homosexuality, it doesn’t necessarily follow that every homosexual is a product of biological factors. Someone may simply have an extraordinarily open mind, a willingness to partake in “the socially obscene,” for example. Nitimur in vetitum, as it were. Or someone may have had something happen to them as a child, something Freudian that influences their taste.

At the end of the day, outside of a purely clinical or scientific interest, it doesn’t matter at all, and it’s probably a variety of factors in most people, just like any other personality trait.

Gender dimorphism, though, is an actual biological concept. No way of getting around it. In a sexual species, there are males and females with distinctive anatomical and hormonal traits that make them so. But, again, this does not necessitate that every individual of the species will conform to the exact identities that their respective genders suggest. This is the more the case when it comes to humans, who are highly influenced by factors other than the genetic.

I personally can’t stand macho men, though. Stuart sounds insufferable! :lol: To be fair, though, I also don’t care for “girly girls.” I like it when people defy their gender norms. But that’s just personal taste.

deschainXIX wrote: like it when people defy their gender norms. But that’s just personal taste.

I support that. 8-)

deschainXIX wrote: I think one aspect of this issue we haven’t fleshed out is that, while certainly there are biological factors that contribute to homosexuality, it doesn’t necessarily follow that every homosexual is a product of biological factors. Someone may simply have an extraordinarily open mind, a willingness to partake in “the socially obscene,” for example. Nitimur in vetitum, as it were. Or someone may have had something happen to them as a child, something Freudian that influences their taste.

I absolutely agree with that. It is possible for people to suddenly find themselves sexually attracted to shoes (only) because their upbringing involved the inculcation that coition is obscene---or that the opposite gender is repulsive---and they happened to be focusing on shoes during those embarrassing times when their repressive parents spoke about the subject with such conviction. Needless to say, sexual attraction for shoes alone is a weird outlet. I was also thinking that it's not far-fetched to think that homosexuality can, sometimes, be triggered in otherwise heterosexual people along similar lines. The fact remains, however, that it's still not a choice, but rather, either something that people are naturally inclined to follow from birth or later due to certain experiences or lack thereof if they come to hold an open-minded philosophy on life ...

Which brings me to the Nietzschean nitimur in vetitum semper cupimusque negata you've mentioned! As a parent, I try to remind myself of such dictum because my own experience attests to it regarding drug use and atheism. My mother forbade me from experimenting with drugs and warned me against renouncing God (although she eventually reconciled with my atheism). Needless to say, I did exactly the opposite of what she intended.

deschainXIX wrote: I personally can’t stand macho men, though. Stuart sounds insufferable! :lol: To be fair, though, I also don’t care for “girly girls.” I like it when people defy their gender norms. But that’s just personal taste.

Me and you share the same personal taste then. 8-)

Dane wrote:

deschainXIX wrote: like it when people defy their gender norms. But that’s just personal taste.

I support that. 8-)

Ditto. Well said. :mrgreen:

American geneticist Dean Hamer published a book with Peter Copeland called Living with our Genes. He has researched genetic markers that correlate with personality differences and found that people with more copies of the D4DR gene (associated with dopamine in the brain) on chromosome 11, tended to necessitate a more adventurous approach to life that in order to obtain the same dopamine 'buzz' that short-gened (less D4DR copies) people get from simple things.

Hamer also provided an example of novelty-seeking that pertains to this topic. Heterosexual men with long D4DR genes are six times more likely to have slept with another man than those with the short genes. Among homosexual men, long genes are five times more likely to sleep with women than short genes. In both groups, the long-gened people had more sexual partners than the short-gened people.