Poll: Do you think sexuality is a lifestyle choice? Watch

Poll: Do you believe sexuality is a choice?
Yes, I believe sexuality is a choice. (11)
12.36%
No, I believe sexuality is innate and cannot be chosen. (78)
87.64%
buchanan700
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#21
Report 5 years ago
#21
I don't 'think' it's innate. I know it's innate.
0
reply
hobbit_
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#22
Report 5 years ago
#22
(Original post by The Angry Stoic)
I wonder if it is possible to change your sexuality. Stoicism teaches to overcome desires through meditation and self control and whatnot and other philosophies go straight at eradicating desires.

I'd imagine it would be very hard to do. Even harder to do without causing massive psychological damage. *Cough* sexually repressed religious fanatics *cough*.
Lol. I suppose your username explains it all: the angry stoic. I can't think of anything less stoical :rolleyes:. But I suppose I'm not the first to comment on this oxymoron!
0
reply
mimi112
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#23
Report 5 years ago
#23
there should be a third choice, that there is a sexual spectrum. so some people choose and others don't. very few things are black or white in this world.
0
reply
miser
  • Debate & Current Affairs Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#24
Report 5 years ago
#24
Technically speaking there is not a suitable poll option for me to pick; just because a person does not believe sexual disposition to be a choice does not mean they must therefore believe it to be innate.

What I expect is most likely is that sexual preference is determined through both natural and nurtural influences. Whatever the case though, it is not a choice (one merely has to try to change whom they're attracted to to see there's no freedom in it).
0
reply
Wr0nsk1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#25
Report 5 years ago
#25
(Original post by mimi112)
there should be a third choice, that there is a sexual spectrum. so some people choose and others don't. very few things are black or white in this world.
I agree. IMO, there are many cases where sexuality is a lifestyle choice, but also many where it is innate and where the person has little choice. Therefore to me it is a spectrum with various degrees of "choose-ability".
0
reply
miser
  • Debate & Current Affairs Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#26
Report 5 years ago
#26
(Original post by buchanan700)
I don't 'think' it's innate. I know it's innate.
Would you mind if I asked how you know it's innate?
0
reply
Plainview
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#27
Report 5 years ago
#27
I've just realised how weird it is that people vociferously defend the notion that gender is a social construct while also recognising that sexuality is stone-cold biology. Wonder what makes the difference.
1
reply
2ndClass
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#28
Report 5 years ago
#28
Yeah I've noticed being bisexual amongst girls has turned into a fashion trend tbh.
1
reply
mimi112
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#29
Report 5 years ago
#29
(Original post by Plainview)
I've just realised how weird it is that people vociferously defend the notion that gender is a social construct while also recognising that sexuality is stone-cold biology. Wonder what makes the difference.
it doesn't fit their ideology so they decide to ignore any kind of evidence that wouldn't make them feel warm and fuzzy inside. what is ironic is that they are using the same tactics and excuses as the religious fanatics when defending the silliness of their beliefs.

0
reply
officelinebacker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#30
Report 5 years ago
#30
(Original post by mikele)
Curious to see how many people believe that sexuality is a choice, prompted by recent threads on the TSR. Apologies if this has been done before, just intrigued to know what proportion of the youth of today believe the notion that it is a choice.
Of course it's not a choice.

You want proof that it's not a choice? Try changing your sexuality. I challenge you, if you're straight, live the next year as a homosexual, or vice versa.
0
reply
thunder_chunky
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#31
Report 5 years ago
#31
No I don't think it is. Being attracted more so or equally to the same sex as one might be attracted to the opposite sex is the same. It cannot be changed and it cannot be explained. It just is the way it is.
0
reply
Plainview
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 5 years ago
#32
(Original post by 2ndClass)
Yeah I've noticed being bisexual amongst girls has turned into a fashion trend tbh.
At my uni college, there are apparently about 5 straight people to every 1 LGBT person, which is about twice the national average I think.
0
reply
Mankytoes
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#33
Report 5 years ago
#33
(Original post by miser)
Technically speaking there is not a suitable poll option for me to pick; just because a person does not believe sexual disposition to be a choice does not mean they must therefore believe it to be innate.

What I expect is most likely is that sexual preference is determined through both natural and nurtural influences. Whatever the case though, it is not a choice (one merely has to try to change whom they're attracted to to see there's no freedom in it).
This. I think it's pretty obvious it isn't a choice, a lot of gay people wouldn't have chosen to be. At the same time, identical twin studies show sexuality isn't purely genetic, either.

In reply to other posts, teenage girls kissing each other doesn't make them bi, only real sexual attraction does.
0
reply
mikele
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#34
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#34
(Original post by officelinebacker)
Of course it's not a choice.

You want proof that it's not a choice? Try changing your sexuality. I challenge you, if you're straight, live the next year as a homosexual, or vice versa.
I agree of course, hell in my year at the moment 'turning' straight would be immensely gratifying. But alas, this is a poll so it is fun to see how the results are turning out.
0
reply
anarchism101
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#35
Report 5 years ago
#35
(Original post by miser)
Technically speaking there is not a suitable poll option for me to pick; just because a person does not believe sexual disposition to be a choice does not mean they must therefore believe it to be innate.

What I expect is most likely is that sexual preference is determined through both natural and nurtural influences. Whatever the case though, it is not a choice (one merely has to try to change whom they're attracted to to see there's no freedom in it).
Personally I think it's a bit like what kind of food you like. For example, saying that whether you like pizza or not is innate and something you were born with sounds a bit ridiculous, but so does the idea that you 'choose' whether to like pizza.
1
reply
buchanan700
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#36
Report 5 years ago
#36
(Original post by miser)
Would you mind if I asked how you know it's innate?
Course not. I'll just C+P a passage from the book 'Why men don't listen and women can't read maps.' It's a really excellent book and has an extensive chapter on the subject, addressing everything from gays to transgender issues. The scientific community absolutely agree that it is not a choice.

"6 to 8 weeks after conception, a male foetus receives a massive dose of male hormones called androgens which form the testes, then a second dose to alter the brain from a female format to a male one. If the foetus does not receive enough hormone at the appropriate time, one of two things may happen. First, a baby boy who is born with a brain structure that is more feminine than masculine, in other words, a boy who will most likely be gay by puberty. Secondly, a genetic boy may be born with a fully functioning female brain and a set of male testicles. they will be transgender"

That of course is not the entire chapter, far from it. But it pretty much explains what your question asked. I'm a huge 'nature' advocate. We behave just like every other animal - because of our biology.

As well as the scientific reasoning of course, there is just too much reasoning to deny. When did everyone else decide they were straight? People have little crushes from when they are tiny. I'm bisexual, so I don't mind either way, but do you honestly think a straight man could be 'trained' to love another man? Or more to the point, sucking another guy off? No.


So yeah that's why. There is absolutely no doubt, and sorry if this is too blunt, but anyone who says otherwise is plain wrong.
0
reply
Watch Key Phone
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#37
Report 5 years ago
#37
(Original post by buchanan700)
Course not. I'll just C+P a passage from the book 'Why men don't listen and women can't read maps.' It's a really excellent book and has an extensive chapter on the subject, addressing everything from gays to transgender issues. The scientific community absolutely agree that it is not a choice.

"6 to 8 weeks after conception, a male foetus receives a massive dose of male hormones called androgens which form the testes, then a second dose to alter the brain from a female format to a male one. If the foetus does not receive enough hormone at the appropriate time, one of two things may happen. First, a baby boy who is born with a brain structure that is more feminine than masculine, in other words, a boy who will most likely be gay by puberty. Secondly, a genetic boy may be born with a fully functioning female brain and a set of male testicles. they will be transgender"

That of course is not the entire chapter, far from it. But it pretty much explains what your question asked. I'm a huge 'nature' advocate. We behave just like every other animal - because of our biology.

As well as the scientific reasoning of course, there is just too much reasoning to deny. When did everyone else decide they were straight? People have little crushes from when they are tiny. I'm bisexual, so I don't mind either way, but do you honestly think a straight man could be 'trained' to love another man? Or more to the point, sucking another guy off? No.


So yeah that's why. There is absolutely no doubt, and sorry if this is too blunt, but anyone who says otherwise is plain wrong.
I lost the ability to trust anything you got from that book at the point where it equated femininity with being gay. What about feminine, straight men? What about gay, trans women (i.e. people assigned male at birth, who identify as female and are attracted to women)? What about trans men, gay women, bisexual people, non-binary people....?
0
reply
buchanan700
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#38
Report 5 years ago
#38
(Original post by Watch Key Phone)
I lost the ability to trust anything you got from that book at the point where it equated femininity with being gay. What about feminine, straight men? What about gay, trans women (i.e. people assigned male at birth, who identify as female and are attracted to women)? What about trans men, gay women, bisexual people, non-binary people....?
Ah yes, my friend, it addressed this too! The reason it equates being feminine with being gay is because...it is. In quite a lot but not all cases. I've shortened the explanations in order to fit in as much as possible, but there are 15 pages addressing everything to homosexuality in history, transexuals, lesbians, twin studies etc...get the book to read everything!
*finds book*
Feminine, straight men and lesbians.
"In simple terms, there are two main centres associated with homosexual behaviour - the mating centre (in the hypothalamus) decides which sex we will be attracted to. In males it needs to be dosed in male hormones to convert it to male function, ie. being attracted to women. If it recieves insufficient hormones, it will remain to a greater or lesser extent female, and be attracted to a greater or lesser extent, to men.
If the behaviour centre doesn't receive enough male hormones, the man will remain feminine in behaviour. The two can receive different amounts (how is still somewhat a mystery), creating feminine, straight men or masculine gay men.
Lesbians are created in much the same way as gay men - if the female foetus recieves male hormones, she is likely to become 'butch', although the behaviour and mating centres can again be affected differently, thus 'femmes' and 'butch' lesbians."

Think I addressed trans people in the first paragraph?! :confused: But the book does address intersex people as well. Basically, the male hormone receiving looks a bit like this
Little or no male hormone - Feminine girl (Likely to be straight)
A bit more male hormone - Masculine female (Likely to be gay)
Just enough to make a male - Feminine male (likely to be gay)
Sufficient male hormone - Masculine male (Likely straight.
That's what it is all banking on. Intersex people are somewhere in the middle of recieving A bit more and just enough hormone, it turns in to a physical grey area.

Its all a bit difficult to explain without typing out the whole book :P I need to check again whether I explained trans people in the first instance, sure I did.
0
reply
SecretDuck
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#39
Report 5 years ago
#39
(Original post by buchanan700)
Ah yes, my friend, it addressed this too! The reason it equates being feminine with being gay is because...it is. In quite a lot but not all cases. I've shortened the explanations in order to fit in as much as possible, but there are 15 pages addressing everything to homosexuality in history, transexuals, lesbians, twin studies etc...get the book to read everything!
*finds book*
Feminine, straight men and lesbians.
"In simple terms, there are two main centres associated with homosexual behaviour - the mating centre (in the hypothalamus) decides which sex we will be attracted to. In males it needs to be dosed in male hormones to convert it to male function, ie. being attracted to women. If it recieves insufficient hormones, it will remain to a greater or lesser extent female, and be attracted to a greater or lesser extent, to men.
If the behaviour centre doesn't receive enough male hormones, the man will remain feminine in behaviour. The two can receive different amounts (how is still somewhat a mystery), creating feminine, straight men or masculine gay men.
Lesbians are created in much the same way as gay men - if the female foetus recieves male hormones, she is likely to become 'butch', although the behaviour and mating centres can again be affected differently, thus 'femmes' and 'butch' lesbians."

Think I addressed trans people in the first paragraph?! :confused: But the book does address intersex people as well. Basically, the male hormone receiving looks a bit like this
Little or no male hormone - Feminine girl (Likely to be straight)
A bit more male hormone - Masculine female (Likely to be gay)
Just enough to make a male - Feminine male (likely to be gay)
Sufficient male hormone - Masculine male (Likely straight.
That's what it is all banking on. Intersex people are somewhere in the middle of recieving A bit more and just enough hormone, it turns in to a physical grey area.

Its all a bit difficult to explain without typing out the whole book :P I need to check again whether I explained trans people in the first instance, sure I did.
What about bisexuals?
0
reply
Watch Key Phone
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#40
Report 5 years ago
#40
(Original post by buchanan700)
Ah yes, my friend, it addressed this too! The reason it equates being feminine with being gay is because...it is. In quite a lot but not all cases. I've shortened the explanations in order to fit in as much as possible, but there are 15 pages addressing everything to homosexuality in history, transexuals, lesbians, twin studies etc...get the book to read everything!
*finds book*
Feminine, straight men and lesbians.
"In simple terms, there are two main centres associated with homosexual behaviour - the mating centre (in the hypothalamus) decides which sex we will be attracted to. In males it needs to be dosed in male hormones to convert it to male function, ie. being attracted to women. If it recieves insufficient hormones, it will remain to a greater or lesser extent female, and be attracted to a greater or lesser extent, to men.
If the behaviour centre doesn't receive enough male hormones, the man will remain feminine in behaviour. The two can receive different amounts (how is still somewhat a mystery), creating feminine, straight men or masculine gay men.
Lesbians are created in much the same way as gay men - if the female foetus recieves male hormones, she is likely to become 'butch', although the behaviour and mating centres can again be affected differently, thus 'femmes' and 'butch' lesbians."

Think I addressed trans people in the first paragraph?! :confused: But the book does address intersex people as well. Basically, the male hormone receiving looks a bit like this
Little or no male hormone - Feminine girl (Likely to be straight)
A bit more male hormone - Masculine female (Likely to be gay)
Just enough to make a male - Feminine male (likely to be gay)
Sufficient male hormone - Masculine male (Likely straight.
That's what it is all banking on. Intersex people are somewhere in the middle of recieving A bit more and just enough hormone, it turns in to a physical grey area.

Its all a bit difficult to explain without typing out the whole book :P I need to check again whether I explained trans people in the first instance, sure I did.
What about people who are bisexual, asexual, non-binary genders?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Business Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (200)
22.55%
The paper was reasonable (403)
45.43%
Not feeling great about that exam... (165)
18.6%
It was TERRIBLE (119)
13.42%

Watched Threads

View All