Straight- Nature vs Nurture

Okay, as a sort of parallel to the other thread ("Gay- Nature vs Nurture"), I thought it'd be ineteresting to see what we come up with if we to reverse it as surely if we can have a debate about one end of the sexuality spectrum, we can equally have a debate about the other. Basically, if you think about it this way- you can't really explain it- AT ALL. I'm straight and I have no idea why I am- surely this can be equally justifiable to a gay person? I don't see why because they're gay they ought to have some kind of explanation to justify their choices- it seems ridiculous to talk about why some of us are straight, so likewise it's ridiculous to talk about why some of us are gay or bisexual.

Sorry if this thread is entirely irrelevant to the H&R forum, I just thought wuth the other thread here the two almost side by side would be interesting.

Reply 1

jb_sweden

I have quite a good idea as to why you're straight. You have a set of genes that produce rewarding systems leading to heterosexual behaviour, which have, from an evolutionary perspective, ensured that you exist. Those are more dominant (in gene and/or cultural sense) than any eventual cause for homosexuality.

Why people generally consider explaining homosexuality more interesting, is probably due to differences in difficulty of explaining the cause of behaviour.

Reply 2

Jackykins

1

Hmm this is interesting, if not entirely relevent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-human_animal_sexuality

Reply 3

Steve Stifler

My dad would cut my Jacobs off if it turned out I was bent. Therefore I am straight.

Reply 4

Barny

17

LOL, brilliant.

I'm straight because I'm....normal.

Reply 5

c0co

12

I think homosexuality is a combination of both! I'm entirely certain that it's largely genetic, although a lot of people would disagree because it disallows the element of choice somewhat...you are either gay or not. Perhaps ur upbringing/experiences would help someone in realizing there sexuality but I don't think for example, having a stronger mother figure can 'turn you gay'.

Reply 6

Barny

17

I personally don't see how anyone could be gay, and think its a choice rather than genetics or whatever, but I would think that, I'm straight.

Reply 7

Zoecb

11

Look dude, if being gay was the social majority (forget reproduction and all that, it's irrelevent to this question) and hetetrosexuals were a minority group, wouldn't you defend your right to love women?
Wouldn't you insist that that was who you were attracted to, no matter what anyone else said?

You can't control love... you are attracted to who you are attracted to, you can't choose.
If you could choose who you fancied (generally), no-one would have unrequitedness - they'd just stop being attracted to the one rejecting them.
If loving someone the same gender as you was both a problem and choice you'd just stop doing it.

Reply 8

ChemistBoy

16

Clearly it is 'natural' to be heterosexual as that is how we reproduce. However, humans have long practicing mind over matter so raw nature doesn't always win. They may also be genetics at play - although it is difficult to see why as they are always selected out in the system.

Reply 9

aleathiel

16

imasillynarb

LOL, brilliant.

I'm straight because I'm....normal.

right well that's just your very closed minded definition of "normal"

Reply 10

high priestess fnord

9

aleathiel

right well that's just your very closed minded definition of "normal"

no normal is being the same as the majority. being gay clearly isnt "normal" if 90% of the population is straight. there again if u look back in time in this country being a bisexual male was "normal" and just showed your high masculine sex drive. in fact if u went to the pub and boasted about how many men you'd had you would be hailed as a total stud.

isnt it wierd how things change

Reply 11

grace

15

high priestess fnord

no normal is being the same as the majority. being gay clearly isnt "normal" if 90% of the population is straight. there again if u look back in time in this country being a bisexual male was "normal" and just showed your high masculine sex drive. in fact if u went to the pub and boasted about how many men you'd had you would be hailed as a total stud.

isnt it wierd how things change

what?!!! at what point in english society was it seen as studly to bang as many men as you could? prior to now...

Reply 12

high priestess fnord

9

was allways a working class thing and was ment to show a guys masculinity if he could shag as many ppl as possible (yes that means women too). cant find the web sight now. was going to post a link. but yes apparently its a long standing tradition (excuse the pun). i dont beleive everything i read on the net but this looked kosher. watch this space... i will find it eventually lol

Reply 13

sssh

10

grace

what?!!! at what point in english society was it seen as studly to bang as many men as you could? prior to now...

I thought that was ancient Greece?

Reply 14

db

17

is there really any need for this thread? surely the same arguments are going to be brought across, I'm just choosing to post here because I don't want the word gay spread throughout my web history

anyway I think your sexulaity would have to be based mostly on genetics, it's very easy to say 'I'm gay/straight because of X, Y, Z' but it would be extremely hard to prove that to any certainty.
For the reecord I would describe myself as gay. I wouldn't say that I'm proud to be gay or anything, I just am and get on with it, I could sit an analyse everything that has happened in my life and determine why I am, but to be honest I can't be arsed and don't really see the need to justify it either.

Reply 15

grace

15

i think the original question is a bit unneccessary...clearly it's anatomically natural for humans to be straight. it's how we reproduce. heterosexuality is predominant throughout the animal kingdom blah blah blah. Does anyone actually dispute it?!

Reply 16

high priestess fnord

9

sssh

I thought that was ancient Greece?

nah the ancient greece thing was soldiers were encouraged to be gay so that when they fought they would be fighting for the lives of their lovers and so fight harder. there again lesbianism was acceptable in sparta and have you heard the ending of Orpheus and Eurydice? is a sad story the summery of it being that Eurydice was bitten by a snake and died. her inconsolable lover went all the way to the underworld to bring her back ,and failed. guilt stricken he then swore to never love another woman again... and spent the rest of his life making love to young boys. thats right he was a peadophile and that was perfectly acceptable. this is why i never use ancient greece as an example :wink:

Reply 17

ben!

1

rich_

I don't see why because they're gay they ought to have some kind of explanation to justify their choices

Well said!

Reply 18

cheesecakebobby

9

high priestess fnord

nah the ancient greece thing was soldiers were encouraged to be gay so that when they fought they would be fighting for the lives of their lovers and so fight harder. there again lesbianism was acceptable in sparta and have you heard the ending of Orpheus and Eurydice? is a sad story the summery of it being that Eurydice was bitten by a snake and died. her inconsolable lover went all the way to the underworld to bring her back ,and failed. guilt stricken he then swore to never love another woman again... and spent the rest of his life making love to young boys. thats right he was a peadophile and that was perfectly acceptable. this is why i never use ancient greece as an example :wink:

It wasn't just soldiers, where did you get that idea? Read some Platonic dialogues and you'll soon see that Socrates' mates, and those in powerful positions who he would argue with, had a liking for young boys. Women were basically there to make babies and bring them up rather than be objects of pure sexuality.

Reply 19

sssh

10

devilbunny

is there really any need for this thread? surely the same arguments are going to be brought across, I'm just choosing to post here because I don't want the word gay spread throughout my web history

anyway I think your sexulaity would have to be based mostly on genetics, it's very easy to say 'I'm gay/straight because of X, Y, Z' but it would be extremely hard to prove that to any certainty.
For the record I would describe myself as gay. I wouldn't say that I'm proud to be gay or anything, I just am and get on with it, I could sit an analyse everything that has happened in my life and determine why I am, but to be honest I can't be arsed and don't really see the need to justify it either.

This is a pretty good attitude to have. People just are what they are, no amount of discussion and justification is going to change that. Still, I think that while there are people who are repressed because of their sexuality it's a good thing for there to be people talking about it in public, discussing it in a sensible way and making it normal.

Straight- Nature vs Nurture

Related discussions

Articles for you