02 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by joe beyserI do not think that every gay person had problems such as abuse as a child. However, for example, I think it's fairly clear that being sexually abused as a child makes one more likely to want to abuse other children as an adult.
I know one person very well that had no environmental factors such as sexual abuse as a young child that is gay. This person behaved like a girl all throughout his childhood. I don't think it is an intentional behvioral issue here or life style choice. It seems that they are attracted to people of the same sex. It isn't a persons fault that they inherit a genetic trait.
In your example, is it possible that the natural tendency of this individual to "behave like a girl" may have influenced his sexuality and not necessarily vice versa?
Also there are plenty of very "masculine behaving" gay people as well. The two issues may have a statistical correlation, but one does not depend on the other.
Note also that environmental factors can be much much more subtle than something like abuse. What are they? Well, I have my guesses, but they're just guesses, so there's no need to go into them.
===It isn't a persons fault that they inherit a genetic trait.===
I don't understand why the word "fault" keeps coming up in this discussion. It's not a matter of "fault." A person is not at "fault" for the stimuli he's exposed to as a child during the time that his sexuality is developing.
In addition, you have to realize that hetero and homo sexuality is not a "one or the other" type of deal. It is a continuum. Many straight people have at least some level of same sex attraction and vice versa. If there were simply a "gay gene" and that's all there was to it, I don't see why you'd have "70% gay, 30% straight" or "60% straight, 40% gay" people and every other percentage you can possibly think of. Also, think of the multitude of other sexual attractions that exist and how one person's turn on can be another's revulsion. Take straight people for example. Some love oral or anal sex and some think that one or both are disgusting. etc. etc. It simply doesn't make sense to me that all of these things are simply a matter of irreversible, unalterable genetics.
02 Oct 09
3 edits
Originally posted by sh76I think that mistreating people that are born with a certain trait or if somehow they developed it in early childhood is wrong. I don't know any other way of saying it isn't their fault. They did not choose it. I guess it is best to say it is what it is and no one is to blame. This person behaved like a girl long before sexuality became a factor in his life. There are family photos when we were just small kids and you can see it even by how he holds himself in posture. He doesn't have the gay talk or that Liberache(sp?) sound. I have a friend I have know from highschool that does sound pretty flaming though. He is very successful in life and has made bunches of money and owns a lot of businesses. I am ok with his difference as long as he don't ever hit on me.🙂
I do not think that every gay person had problems such as abuse as a child. However, for example, I think it's fairly clear that being sexually abused as a child makes one more likely to want to abuse other children as an adult.
In your example, is it possible that the natural tendency of this individual to "behave like a girl" may have influenced his sexual things are simply a matter of irreversible, unalterable genetics.
02 Oct 09
Originally posted by joe beyserObviously, I'm not advocating mistreating anyone or treating anyone differently because of their sexual orientation. I don't think that whether environmental factors play a role is really relevant to the issue of "blame."
I think that mistreating people that are born with a certain trait or if somehow they developed it in early childhood is wrong. I don't know any other way of saying it isn't their fault. They did not choose it. I guess it is best to say it is what it is and no one is to blame. This person behaved like a girl long before sexuality became a factor in his li ...[text shortened]... owns a lot of businesses. I am ok with his difference as long as he don't ever hit on me.🙂
Personally, I think the fact that sexual desires can be based to some extent on environmental stimuli during development should be patently obvious to anyone who thinks about it for a few minutes. The food we like, the colors we like, the activities we enjoy, etc., are all based on environmental stimuli to some extent.
I think that the movement to assess 100% of sexuality to genetics alone is just a cynical attempt to foreclose on the possibility that sexual desires can be altered or change over time.
02 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76There has been research into this and gay people do not change preference. The only problems I have seen is gays in the military, having children, and some but not all wanting special rights and throwing it in our faces. I think that if people realized that it is no ones fault a lot of persecution would disapear and the live and let live attitude would prevail. But the fact racism still exists kinda cuts my little theory down a bunch. I don't know if they should change or even want to change their orientation as it is natural to them. I can't walk a mile in their shoes though and ultimately the social problems are not enough to warant gays to feel the preasure to change or have any less self esteem because of it.
Obviously, I'm not advocating mistreating anyone or treating anyone differently because of their sexual orientation. I don't think that whether environmental factors play a role is really relevant to the issue of "blame."
Personally, I think the fact that sexual desires can be based to some extent on environmental stimuli during development should be patentl ...[text shortened]... empt to foreclose on the possibility that sexual desires can be altered or change over time.
02 Oct 09
Originally posted by joe beyserI agree that once an adult, it's unlikely for someone's sexuality to fundamentally change (although I think slight alterations in desire are possible).
There has been research into this and gay people do not change preference.
But have they done these studies on children starting at birth (or even conception) and being constantly measured until age 15 or 16? If not (and the answer is obviously not), then the studies are irrelevant to determining whether environmental factors during development play a role in determining sexuality.
02 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76That could be true. There are a lot of AC DC people too. I don't know how they could study children unless they did it through the school systems. I don't care much for that idea as it is getting away from education. If they did find there was a way to steer people away from it, it would benefit those people somewhat socially. Fighting genetics may be the barrier.
I agree that once an adult, it's unlikely for someone's sexuality to fundamentally change (although I think slight alterations in desire are possible).
But have they done these studies on children starting at birth (or even conception) and being constantly measured until age 15 or 16? If not (and the answer is obviously not), then the studies are irrelevant ...[text shortened]... rmining whether environmental factors during development play a role in determining sexuality.
03 Oct 09
If gayness was determines by environmental factors, surely there would be no gay people in societies which severely repress homosexuals. Yet we find plenty of them in say, Arab societies. Therefore it seems much more likely that gayness is not a "choice", but genetic. But as far as I understand, there is no scientific consensus on the cause of gayness or other sexual "deviations".
03 Oct 09
I think the fact that there is a debate about whether homosexuality is genetic or environmental is itself a consequence of the fact that many people entertain a moral disapproval of same-sex love. One of the arguments that gay people used to counteract this moral disapproval was that their preference was genetic. Those people who assert that homosexuality is environmental usually have relatively negative attitudes to it.
Presumably if there wasn't a moral and political debate about homosexuality, no one would be worrying about its causes. After all, no one spends time debating whether a preference for apples over oranges is genetic or environmental.
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by PIZZA ROLLSThere is a gay "gene"--although we've yet to identify it last thing I heard although I'm admittedly not up to date--but that only provides one with a predisposition to being 'gay'. Being gay is a mixture of biological and environmental/social factors.
How does it happen that a big family of say about nine children who each experience the same things in life, yet one of them turns out gay? Does this mean being gay is something you are born with, or is it something that happens during life.
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76I'm from the Bay (gay!) Area, CA so I've been around more gay people than you can imagine. I have no doubt that the feminine demeanor of many gay males is a biproduct of them... being gay.
I do not think that every gay person had problems such as abuse as a child. However, for example, I think it's fairly clear that being sexually abused as a child makes one more likely to want to abuse other children as an adult.
In your example, is it possible that the natural tendency of this individual to "behave like a girl" may have influenced his sexual ...[text shortened]... things are simply a matter of irreversible, unalterable genetics.
I think we can all agree that sexual attraction, even what gender you're attracted to is a biological phenominon. To be more specific, men are (normally) born biologically attracted to women and visa versa as a means to keep our species alive.
That being said, I think it's absurd to suggest that environmental factors can offset something as powerful as biological sexual attraction. Nothing in the world can make me want to kiss a 5 'O clock shadow or look at another man's hairy azz.
It IS a medical fact that some people are born A-sexuals, meaning, they have no sexual desire whatsoever. And this includes to any gender. And the funny thing is we don't have anyone denying they're born that way because the lack of sexual desire doesn't offend anyone's religion.
It's also a medical fact that some people are born with both sex organs (hermaphrodites).
So people can be born heterosexual, people can be born both male and female, people can be born with no sexual attraction.... but it's IMPOSSIBLE that people can be born gay?
The religious right's battle against science is always entertaining.
05 Oct 09
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperI don't see anyone on this thread saying that no one can be "born gay." I'm not even sure what that phrase means, as babies don't experience sexual arousal or have sexual needs. I've yet to see my three month old jacking off in his crib.
I'm from the Bay (gay!) Area, CA so I've been around more gay people than you can imagine. I have no doubt that the feminine demeanor of many gay males is a biproduct of them... being gay.
I think we can all agree that sexual attraction, even what gender you're attracted to is a biological phenominon. To be more specific, men are (normally) bor ...[text shortened]... born gay?
The religious right's battle against science is always entertaining.
I said that I understand that there are probably genetic predispositions but I also think that environmental stimuli play a role.
If you think I'm saying that because of some crusade against homosexuals, you could not possibly be more wrong. I have no problem with gay people or equal rights for gay people whatsoever. I also think that the tactic of tacitly or openly accusing all people that think that homosexuality is not 100% genetic is a nefarious device dishonestly employed by certain militant elements of the gay rights movement to silence any and all dissent. (USAP: If this is not what you meant by your last line, then I am not referring to you.)
In any case, regarding KN's point, I don't think the environmental stimuli are as open and shut as societal approval or disapproval. The environmental factors are much more subtle.
If you think I'm being completely ridiculous to suggest that environmental factors might be an issue, then at least answer these:
1) Do you think there might be a reason why nothing close to a "gay" gene has ever been discovered?
2) Do you agree that some fetishes or paraphilias can be developed based on experience?
3) Have your sexual turn ons, whatever they are, ever altered or changed to some degree over the course of time? Or has your sexual desire been constant and unchanging since you were 13?
05 Oct 09
Originally posted by sh76Lord Shark
I don't see anyone on this thread saying that no one can be "born gay." I'm not even sure what that phrase means, as babies don't experience sexual arousal or have sexual needs. I've yet to see my three month old jacking off in his crib.
I said that I understand that there are probably genetic predispositions but I also think that environmental stimuli play ...[text shortened]... e of time? Or has your sexual desire been constant and unchanging since you were 13?
Joined : 30 May '09
Moves : 1904 10 Aug '09 22:42 :: 0 recommendations
Originally posted by utherpendragon
There is evidence that genetics plays a role in sexual orientation, let me know if you want me to dig up some references
Please do. As far as I have heard "there is evidence it MAY be genetic",which means nothing.But,I may be wrong so show me.
Ok, the first reference is:
Hamer, Dean, Stella Hu, Victoria A. Magnuson, Nan Hu, and Angela M.L. Pattatucci. "A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation." Science 261.n5119 (July 16, 1993): 321(7).
Here is a link to an article about the Ciani study:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6519-survival-of-genetic-homosexual-traits-explained.html
I said I would, I admit I cut it fine
ReplyReply & Quote
Lord Shark
Joined : 30 May '09
Moves : 1904 10 Aug '09 23:00 :: 0 recommendations
Some more:
LeVay S (1991). "A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men". Science 253 (5023): 1034–7
L.S. Allen and R.A. Gorski, "Sexual Orientation and the size of the anterior commissure in the human brain," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 89 (1992): pp. 7199-7202
Lord Shark found these references on the spirituality thread. It may be of interest to you. The thing you said about your three month old is the same thing I was saying about my brother. He was girlish long before he even knew about sex.
05 Oct 09
2 edits
Originally posted by joe beyserThe article you cited:
Lord Shark
Joined : 30 May '09
Moves : 1904 10 Aug '09 22:42 :: 0 recommendations
Originally posted by utherpendragon
There is evidence that genetics plays a role in sexual orientation, let me know if you want me to dig up some references
Please do. As far as I have heard "there is evidence it MAY be genetic",which means nothing.But,I may be ng I was saying about my brother. He was girlish long before he even knew about sex.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6519-survival-of-genetic-homosexual-traits-explained.html
Italian geneticists may have explained how genes apparently linked to male homosexuality survive, despite gay men seldom having children. [i]Their findings also undermine the theory of a single "gay gene".
The researchers discovered that women tend to have more children when they inherit the same - as yet unidentified - genetic factors linked to homosexuality in men. This fertility boost more than compensates for the lack of offspring fathered by gay men, and keeps the "gay" genetic factors in circulation.[/i]
emphasis added
This article seems to support my contention of genetic factors being an element but not the sole determinative of a person's sexual orientation.