Homosexualty

[gherman]

Nature or Nurture?
Genetics or Choice?

This thread is not meant to start contriversy just want to discuss.

Just curious what U2 fans think about this topic.

[dazzlingamy]

genetics. ITs not a choice in per say some guy or girl wakes up and decides 'wow im going to be attracted to the same sex, cause im bored with the oppisite sex' i mean you choose to take that step, to act on how you feel rather then have society pressures keep you in the closet (for use of a better word) but other then that, i believe its just as normal as me desiring my boyf body as soon as he walks in the door is for me

[Canadiens1131]

Not even getting into it scientifically, I'm straight and I don't really care what you do. If you're a guy and you like guys then good cool keep it up, if you're a girl and you like girls cool good job.

[redhotswami]

definitely genetics. i stand by it, and so does the APA. most of the arguments i've heard against it didn't have a kickass backing like the APA. seriously...can't top that! theories, proof... i'm not even a rational person. but i've read a number of sexual identity development theories, and i've yet to find something strong enough to counter them.

[DaveC]

This should be interesting.

I'm placing the over/under at 8 pages. Any takers?

[redhotswami]

Originally posted by DaveC


This should be interesting.

I'm placing the over/under at 8 pages. Any takers?

do you mean before it gets locked or when people lose interest or migrate to a spin-off thread?

[DaveC]

The former.

[SpaceOddity]

I hope I don't get flamed, but I really can't say for sure. There are times when I think it's not by choice, but then... for example, I 've had people tell me they've known they were gay pretty much their entire lives. On the flip side, there are, say, girls who are pretty much romantically-involved with other girls, but they get defensive, saying, "Hey, no, I'm actually straight". There are so many different facets to sexuality that it gets confusing at times - and it's such a gray area - that I really can't be certain about anything. LOL.

[redhotswami]

11

[Axver]

Originally posted by SpaceOddity
There are so many different facets to sexuality that it gets confusing at times - and it's such a gray area - that I really can't be certain about anything.

I think this is a fair statement. I feel that human sexuality is so complex that to boil it down to nature OR nurture, genetics OR choice ultimately over-simplifies the matter and probably overlooks or misses some valuable points.

[VertigoGal]

especially at the high school age I know a lot of people that seem to experiment with the idea but aren't actually sure if they're "genetically" gay or straight or what.

I agree with Canadiens though, if someone woke up and decided they were just going to choose to be gay I still wouldn't care. Good for them.

I do generally believe that it's more genetic, especially when talking about people that end up being homosexual longterm not just sexually confused high schoolers.

[indra]

nature/genetics

[dazzlingamy]

well sexuality is a bendy line, you can still be mostly straight and be with the same sex occasionally, its all a matter of what you feel happy with!

But as a teacher, i have seen some children who will clearly grow up to be gay, and they have brothers or sisters who are clearly straight, so this goes against nurture.

ITs really quite interesting to observe students at primary school interacing with each other. There is a boy in year 5 who is very effeminate, hangs round with the girls, wears lip gloss and sighs about how handsome justin timberlake is, and also how beautiful christina is. He comes from a family of girls so perhaps he grew up mimicing them and this is the product of that, perhaps he just has not blossomed into a boy yet, and prefers the non agressional company of girls, perhaps he is gay and suddenl;y starting to realise and still relish in being ths way before the stares and comments start in the older he gets, or perhaps he is gender confused? Either way, i think the study of human behaviour in regards to sexuality is a fascinating subject and makes me wish i studied that instead of teaching.

[A_Wanderer]

Environmental; I would wager that if we cloned anybody and controlled the hormone situation in utero we could control the sexual preference of the baby.

[Laura M]

Originally posted by SpaceOddity
I 've had people tell me they've known they were gay pretty much their entire lives.

When I was growing up I knew I liked the opposite sex. It wasn't a choice. It just was. I would assume it's the exactly the same for anyone else whether or not they like the opposite sex, the same or a bit of both. Like Mr Zappa says, you are what you is.

I don't see why the topic is talked about so much. I don't hear straight people wonder why the like the opposite sex but can be fascinated as to why someone is gay.

[Billy Rotten]

Many "christian" (in quotes) people consider homosexuality to be an abomination and a choice and are very strong in their opinions. I personally don't think someone chooses to be different and be ostracized by many people for preferring people of the same gender.

It's one of those topics that will probably never be resolved satisfactorily.

[Angela Harlem]

who cares. i dont care if sexuality is bought from the shop and charged GST.


your example is flawed, by the way, a_wanderer.

[A_Wanderer]

How so? If hormone levels for the developing foetus act as the environmental control during development then we could take two genetically identical individuals and end up with different sexual preferences.

[Ormus]

Originally posted by A_Wanderer
How so? If hormone levels for the developing foetus act as the environmental control during development then we could take two genetically identical individuals and end up with different sexual preferences.

Except those hormone levels are often determined by genetic factors--in either the mother or the child--and, in the case of twins, it is not unheard of for one twin to "hog all the resources" at the expense of the other.

While neither case falls under simple Mendellian genetics, which is what most people assume covers "all" genetics (incorrect), neither instance is environmental either and sufficiently explains away your rather terse answer here.

If we were to use your logic that "hormones" are not genetic, however, then, frankly, all sexuality and gender is "environmental," as all fetuses in the first trimester have *both* male and female sex organs, regardless of the your sex chromosomes. It's those "hormones" that result in sexual differentiation, eliminated your uterus and ovaries, and likely fixed your sexual orientation into what it is today. However, this process requires a coordination of several hormones and several genes in both the mother and child in a very narrow window of time.

1) If the mother has a genetic mutation, she may not release one or more hormones.
2) If the child has a genetic mutation, he/she may not be able to receive one or more hormones.
3) An unknown factor may cause one or more hormones to be released late, but beyond that narrow window, it's useless.

So looking at all three of these combinations, statistically, there's a wide number of possibilities here. And, unsurprisingly, pretty much all the possible scenarios exist in nature. There's XY females (the hormone to destroy the female sex organs was received normally; the hormone to develop physical male sex characteristics was not) and there's the intersexed (a.k.a., "hermaphrodites") (the hormone to destroy the male or female sex organs was not released or received at all). So why are we at all surprised at the existence of heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, the transgendered and asexuals? It fits perfectly in the pattern of nature, and it fits perfectly within the pattern of this genetic process that I've described.

[A_Wanderer]

Extrapolation from a short intial statement; we both agree that there is no gay genetic marker. If I raised the issue of birth order and sexual preference would it have ilicited a different response?