Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why do people commonly cite the unchosen nature of homosexuality in its defence? Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HootersGalore)
    What would you say the difference between a "biological" taboo and a "cultural" taboo is? You seem to be merely stating your own idea of morality.

    Not sure how you've managed to implicate sex and civility. Are a married couple who have sex with one another twice a day every day hedonists?
    http://genetics.thetech.org/ask-a-ge...ics-inbreeding

    Like I said, there is a very, very good biological reason we don't condone this on a biological level. It is bad for everyone that this become acceptable behaviour.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I find it hard to decide whether homosexuality is natural, chosen or can be both.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birkenhead)
    Whenever homosexuality is included in debate it is invariably raised that it isn't a 'choice', as if that should act as a defence for it and a reason to be accepting of it. It's as if people are suggesting that if people had a choice of sexuality and chose to be gay they would somehow be more deserving of rebuke than if it were an unchosen and unchangeable part of their nature. I find it strange that the unchosen nature of homosexuality should always be included as a supporting reason to tolerate it.

    I would be interested to hear what others have to say about this.
    Interesting point, though I think the 'it's not chosen' comment tends to be used to try and rebuke people who believe gay people are purposely rebelling from some kind of regime - usually a religious one - and are therefore trying to 'sin', or are attention-seeking/going through a 'phase.' Also, the idea of gayness not being chosen helps to put forward the idea of it being an innate part of someone's personality. Still, I think you're right that it does have some issues in it. It's mainly used as a halfway house to try and rebuff certain prejudiced views.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raymat)
    I find it hard to decide whether homosexuality is natural, chosen or can be both.
    The majority are seen to be born with it and then develop the mindset and desire.
    But they're those who choose to delve in undercover or temporary homosexual acts.
    Bisexual men and women will always be classed as gay in my books.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blue_Mason)
    The majority are seen to be born with it and then develop the mindset and desire.
    But they're those who choose to delve in undercover or temporary homosexual acts.
    Bisexual men and women will always be classed as gay in my books.
    What evidence is there to suggest that babies are born gay? Are there any neurological differences that correlate to an enjoyment of orifice-stuffing by other men during early childhood?

    This is the proof a sceptic should demand for such a claim of natural behaviour. Anyone can bone a bloke, but it's not in the population's best interest to spread such a behaviour. Hence the outlawed behaviour since the dawn of time.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    What evidence is there to suggest that babies are born gay? Are there any neurological differences that correlate to an enjoyment of orifice-stuffing by other men during early childhood?

    This is the proof a sceptic should demand for such a claim of natural behaviour. Anyone can bone a bloke, but it's not in the population's best interest to spread such a behaviour. Hence the outlawed behaviour since the dawn of time.

    Well I believe that if you're born with an interchangeable defect it sticks with you for life whether it be physical or mental.
    It is part of you.
    It starts from a mild attraction to full blown coming out the closet.
    Your brain just learns to suppress and shadow thoughts and expression that can be conflicting in your environment.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    what has to be considered is this: how often is the declaration it isn't a choice (which personally I disagree with to a certain extent, but not a total black to white choice) in reaction to somebody claiming the converse, or alternatively k shoot that down before it happens?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Liberals are stating outright that racism is wrong. This war has been won,, therefore equating being homsoexual with being a race makes it an easy comparrison with an already won battle.

    Although to me it implies homosexuals have a mental disability.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blue_Mason)
    Well I believe

    Keep on believing. Is this a religion now?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    What evidence is there to suggest that babies are born gay? Are there any neurological differences that correlate to an enjoyment of orifice-stuffing by other men during early childhood?

    This is the proof a sceptic should demand for such a claim of natural behaviour. Anyone can bone a bloke, but it's not in the population's best interest to spread such a behaviour. Hence the outlawed behaviour since the dawn of time.
    Homosexuality is observed in many species. It is natural. Also lol at you thinking a human societal construct such as "outlawing" something means that act is unnatural, that's adorable

    Why exactly do you even care so much? What do you mean it is not in the populations best interests?

    There is an evolutionary theory nicknamed "sneaky ****ers" which is all about how males that are less adept at getting a mate can find other sneaky ways of passing on their genes. One example of this is bisexual male humans being left behind whilst the other males go off to hunt. This male has been left with the females since he is assumed to be homosexual and no threat of him stealing their women. He then has free reign over all the females. Thus the gay/bisexual gene is passed on.

    There are other ways people can contribute to the populations best interests other than procreating. Alan Turing (who was gay) played a major role in Britain defeating the Nazis. He contributed massively. A gay human is also capable of helping raise someone else offspring in the group.

    Even if someone does beciome gay through conditiosning so what? It is still natural and it doesn't harm anyone. YOu lot just mask bigotry being pseudo science waffle.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Homosexuality is observed in many species. It is natural.

    You mean it is observed that many animals instinctually get it wrong. Male-male fertilisation and reproduction is what constitutes homosexuality and some animals just don't care where they stick it. This is a clear indicator that it's a choice.

    Again, I want neurological proof from analysis on a baby, untouched by society, to find homosexuality to be a real "orientation". If you can't show me this, I can't do anything but call this a lifestyle choice.

    On the other hand, I know a Jehovah's Witness who hates himself for committing acts of a homosexual nature. You could see it as proof that someone who believes they are now going to Hell for a contradictory view is gay. I'm still not sure, however. Very anecdotal and he is still exposed to the liberal propaganda of the USA.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    You mean it is observed that many animals instinctually get it wrong. Male-male fertilisation and reproduction is what constitutes homosexuality and some animals just don't care where they stick it. This is a clear indicator that it's a choice.

    Again, I want neurological proof from analysis on a baby, untouched by society, to find homosexuality to be a real "orientation". If you can't show me this, I can't do anything but call this a lifestyle choice.

    On the other hand, I know a Jehovah's Witness who hates himself for committing acts of a homosexual nature. You could see it as proof that someone who believes they are now going to Hell for a contradictory view is gay. I'm still not sure, however. Very anecdotal and he is still exposed to the liberal propaganda of the USA.
    The liberals are coming to get you :mob:

    also

    "There is an evolutionary theory nicknamed "sneaky ****ers" which is all about how males that are less adept at getting a mate can find other sneaky ways of passing on their genes. One example of this is bisexual male humans being left behind whilst the other males go off to hunt. This male has been left with the females since he is assumed to be homosexual and no threat of him stealing their women. He then has free reign over all the females. Thus the gay/bisexual gene is passed on."
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    "There is an evolutionary theory nicknamed "sneaky ****ers" which is all about how males that are less adept at getting a mate can find other sneaky ways of passing on their genes. One example of this is bisexual male humans being left behind whilst the other males go off to hunt. This male has been left with the females since he is assumed to be homosexual and no threat of him stealing their women. He then has free reign over all the females. Thus the gay/bisexual gene is passed on."

    That proves my point that it's not a gay gene. It is a mechanism in which men will claim to be homosexual, but are in fact not. They'll commit acts of sodomy for fun until the time comes to mate. How this equals your idea of homosexuality, I don't quite know.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    That proves my point that it's not a gay gene. It is a mechanism in which men will claim to be homosexual, but are in fact not. They'll commit acts of sodomy for fun until the time comes to mate. How this equals your idea of homosexuality, I don't quite know.
    Genetics are not the only way it would be not a choice. As you don't choose your environment, environmental factors influencing sexual orientation would also mean it wasn't a choice.

    However, that's not what this thread is about. If you'd like to have a debate regarding if you think homosexuality is a choice then please start your own thread for that topic.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Homosexuality is observed in many species. It is natural. Also lol at you thinking a human societal construct such as "outlawing" something means that act is unnatural, that's adorable

    Why exactly do you even care so much? What do you mean it is not in the populations best interests?

    There is an evolutionary theory nicknamed "sneaky ****ers" which is all about how males that are less adept at getting a mate can find other sneaky ways of passing on their genes. One example of this is bisexual male humans being left behind whilst the other males go off to hunt. This male has been left with the females since he is assumed to be homosexual and no threat of him stealing their women. He then has free reign over all the females. Thus the gay/bisexual gene is passed on.

    There are other ways people can contribute to the populations best interests other than procreating. Alan Turing (who was gay) played a major role in Britain defeating the Nazis. He contributed massively. A gay human is also capable of helping raise someone else offspring in the group.

    Even if someone does beciome gay through conditiosning so what? It is still natural and it doesn't harm anyone. YOu lot just mask bigotry being pseudo science waffle.
    An attempt of cross species breeding has been observed in nature but you would also state that as being natural?
    I have always seen homosexuality as a flawed way to stop the passing of weak genes.
    Homosexuality is unnatural from a physical sexual stand point.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Unnecessary thread, theose who say it have internalised homophobia ofc
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    Genetics are not the only way it would be not a choice. As you don't choose your environment, environmental factors influencing sexual orientation would also mean it wasn't a choice.

    However, that's not what this thread is about. If you'd like to have a debate regarding if you think homosexuality is a choice then please start your own thread for that topic.
    The thread is about whether you'd be against homosexual acts if it definitely was a lifestyle choice. Others are bringing up that it is not a choice, so why don't you have a go at them for bringing it up?

    Personally, I don't care as long as it's not promoted and done behind closed doors, but officially it should be prohibited, to ensure it doesn't become a popular thing to do.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raymat)
    I find it hard to decide whether homosexuality is natural, chosen or can be both.
    Neither

    The nature/choice argument is a false dichotomy.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    What evidence is there to suggest that babies are born gay? Are there any neurological differences that correlate to an enjoyment of orifice-stuffing by other men during early childhood?

    This is the proof a sceptic should demand for such a claim of natural behaviour. Anyone can bone a bloke, but it's not in the population's best interest to spread such a behaviour. Hence the outlawed behaviour since the dawn of time.
    Given the whole overpopulation thing, you could argue that people forming relationships where there is no chance of reproduction between themselves is actually beneficial for the population..

    Anyway - OP; it's a weak argument without context, but to be fair I think I've only ever seen it used in response to people suggesting that it is a choice. In other words, it's used as a rebuttal of an incorrect assumption rather than as an argument in its own right. That's obviously only within my frame of experience, though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *pitseleh*)
    Given the whole overpopulation thing, you could argue that people forming relationships where there is no chance of reproduction between themselves is actually beneficial for the population..
    This is a valid argument. Nature's way of limiting the population through STDs.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 10, 2015
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.