Homosexuality - biological, or a choice?

Original post by FredOrJohn

You said what do I consider "distinct sex type"....

Lets take this to neutral territory - Bonobo Apes, our closest living relatives. They have been extensively studied. Researchers tend to agree with my hypothesis - that there is no homosexuality as a separate type of Bonobo Ape, the apes are all FULLY bi-sexual.

Do you know why they say that they are 'bisexual'? It has to do with the preferences that the animals are expressing through their behavior. Scientists have most certainly not said that all bonobos are 'fully bisexual' they do say that the majority are. Although this is also complicated because of the social role that sex plays in bonobo 'society'.

So taking that to us as a working hypothesis I would say that what I've always been saying, we're all individuals on a the same graph, sometimes we can be higher up the homo chart (possibly all the time ) and at other times nearer the bottom of the homo chart (nearly never fantasise about same sex).

This is not at all what the researches say about bonobos.... And still hasn't explained 'sex type' really you just seem to be trying to create a new word for sexual orientation. You haven't distinguished the two at all.

If you watch the TV show - "Orange is the New Black" - the sex of the main character more or less co-insides with my belief. She will switch from fully Hetro to fully Homo without a seconds thought. It just flips right over. That is how I think we work. There is no special gene, the gene is in us all.

There is already a word for this: bisexual. And no she is not switching from 'fully hetero to fully homo'. She has attractions to both but chooses which she wishes to act on. This also doesn't relate back to genetics at all.

There is no biological gay person - I would say that was plain daft. A gay person is a person who currently fantasies about same sex - good luck to them, I hope they find their life partner just like we all want to fall in love .

A gay person is someone who has a primary or exclusive attraction to someone of the same sex. This is almost always stable and unchanging over time. So...your idea of 'everyone being bisexual' is not accurate.

Reply 382

Original post by RandZul'Zorander

This is almost always stable and unchanging over time. So...your idea of 'everyone being bisexual' is not accurate.

I would have to disagree with you. I am not a scientist just a normal chap.
I can easy fantasise about more or less anything. I just cannot get into my head that someone can only fantasise about one type of person EVER for all time. Even when they are 100% bored (at about age 30 or 40 or 50 or 60) they cannot even then day dream about the grass on the other side of the fence - I would just say that does not sound likely.

Some weird sites (probably rubbish but who knows)
this
http://socialinqueery.com/2013/03/18/no-one-is-born-gay-or-straight-here-are-5-reasons-why/

leads to this:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Sex/story?id=117465

Reply 383

Original post by FredOrJohn

I would have to disagree with you. I am not a scientist just a normal chap.
I can easy fantasise about more or less anything.

It is ore than just a fantasy, it is a base attraction and desire of who you want to have sex, relationships, etc. with. Fantasies are specific instances, this is far more general than that.

I just cannot get into my head that someone can only fantasise about one type of person EVER for all time. Even when they are 100% bored (at about age 30 or 40 or 50 or 60) they cannot even then day dream about the grass on the other side of the fence - I would just say that does not sound likely.

... why? The vast majority of people gay, straight, bi, you name it, all have said this.

Some weird sites (probably rubbish but who knows)
this
http://socialinqueery.com/2013/03/18/no-one-is-born-gay-or-straight-here-are-5-reasons-why/

leads to this:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Sex/story?id=117465

The blog post is not entirely accurate in all of its claims, and concludes that they feel that their sexuality is fluid NOT that it is fluid for everyone. The point they make is that sexual orientation may not be inborn (but this is not the same as saying it has no biological factors OR that everyone is bisexual).

As for the 'study' it has been heavily criticized as noted in the article and has even been redacted by Dr. Spitzer. Hardly seems to be authoritative considering the mountain of evidence going the other way. https://prospect.org/article/my-so-called-ex-gay-life/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/19/psychiatrist-admits-gay-cure-study-flawed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_change_efforts#Position_of_professional_organizations_on_SOCE

Reply 384

Original post by RandZul'Zorander

... why? The vast majority of people gay, straight, bi, you name it, all have said this.

you can only go by what your own head tells you.. To say its biology is just plain daft. Sorry, I think people are possibly not seeing how they could be in different circumstances.

A "straight" person sees a homosexual man and thinks "I could not possibly be like him"...

But I'd say the difference between the two is probably a lack of imagination on the "straight" persons part and probably a very different life stories.

The straight people here who say "biology" I cant help thinking they say this because they lack the imagination to see themselves dreaming of a same sex episode.

Sorry I know you're going to cut all my sentences up and deconstruct them to your own ends.. Go ahead, I'm just sure in my own mind that I am correct about this. We're all just apes - there is no homo ape (or if you prefer "orientation" - good grief, as if the label makes any difference...

Reply 385

No - I knew you would not understand me. You really try to see yourself too much in the person you are debating, but you don't quite get it right. Sorry. I'm off to bed now and dreams - no idea if it will be left or right field.

Reply 386

ShotsFired-9941

7

I see homosexuality as a product of our society. People choose to associate themselves to what they feel is comfortable. Such "feelings" are derived from the environmental/social factors rather than from the mama's womb.

Reply 387

Anonymous #2

14

It's definitely not a choice but I can't say what makes people homosexual. Would be interesting to know though if I had a different upbringing would I still be gay.

Reply 388

ShotsFired-9941

7

Lets go one at a time.

For the first link; my issue is clearly in the title
[h="1"]Homosexuality May Start in the Womb[/h]
This title suggests that this is an inconclusive study and is far from a through research

I've also skimmed through that article. I'm not really convinced tbh.

Reply 389

Original post by FredOrJohn

you can only go by what your own head tells you.. To say its biology is just plain daft. Sorry, I think people are possibly not seeing how they could be in different circumstances.

You can also go by experience and evidence (ie studies).

A "straight" person sees a homosexual man and thinks "I could not possibly be like him"...

But I'd say the difference between the two is probably a lack of imagination on the "straight" persons part and probably a very different life stories.

The straight people here who say "biology" I cant help thinking they say this because they lack the imagination to see themselves dreaming of a same sex episode.

What makes you so convinced that a straight person would be more likely to succeed where many LGBT people have not. LGBT people have had an incentive to change their orientations and have not been able to do it. So why would a heterosexual be more able?

Reply 390

ZeroEntropy

1

Original post by XcitingStuart

That last part makes no sense. If non-homosexuals perform a "homosexual" act, it invalidates it being a "homosexual" act. It can be that there's a higher demographic of e.g. anal sex in homosexuals than non-homosexuals, but that doesn't make an anal sex a "homosexual" act.

EDIT #1: Please do give examples of "homosexual" acts.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Hi - guilty of being a little unclear there, sorry. By "homosexual act" I meant any kind of sexual interaction between two members of the same sex.

Reply 391

OK guys you all rejected my bonobo Apes thing..
So, IDENTICAL TWINS...
If it was Genetic then 100% of identical twins would either be Gay or Straight.
I would say that in the tests that exist it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that it is not particularly genetic or if it is, its only a minor part of the story. Its nearly all just thoughts in ones head.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#Twin_studies

From reading some of the "Can't change" type stuff here, I'd say that type of thinking has an under-current of depression mixed in it. Most people think changes can happen - perhaps a long time in a same sex prison, falling in love with a man that looks like a woman "The Crying Game" perhaps gets to the heart of some of the issues:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crying_Game

Bottom line:

"
. Nonetheless, it is possible to conclude that, given the difference in sexuality in so many sets of identical twins, sexual orientation cannot be attributed solely to genetic factors
"

Come on guys give up... Its a slam dunk!

Ifs genetic to about the same extent as liking Science Fiction, or historical Novels, or Cowboys or Mills and Boon.... No more no less.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 392

Rorschach II

20

Original post by FredOrJohn

OK guys you all rejected my bonobo Apes thing..
So, IDENTICAL TWINS...
If it was Genetic then 100% of identical twins would either be Gay or Straight.
I would say that in the tests that exist it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that it is not particularly genetic or if it is, its only a minor part of the story. Its nearly all just thoughts in ones head.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#Twin_studies

From reading some of the "Can't change" type stuff here, I'd say that type of thinking has an under-current of depression mixed in it. Most people think changes can happen - perhaps a long time in a same sex prison, falling in love with a man that looks like a woman "The Crying Game" perhaps gets to the heart of some of the issues:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crying_Game

Bottom line:

"
. Nonetheless, it is possible to conclude that, given the difference in sexuality in so many sets of identical twins, sexual orientation cannot be attributed solely to genetic factors
"

Come on guys give up... Its a slam dunk!

Ifs genetic to about the same extent as liking Science Fiction, or historical Novels, or Cowboys or Mills and Boon.... No more no less.

I've never said, nor has many of the posters on here, that it can be contributed SOLELY to genetic factors. Many of us has said epigenetics; gene expression; genes switching on & off due to environmental factors. Even twins would not have the same environmental factors as each other.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 393

Original post by XcitingStuart

I've never said, nor has many of the posters on here, that it can be contributed SOLELY to genetic factors. Many of us has said epigenetics; gene expression; genes switching on & off due to environmental factors. Even twins would not have the same environmental factors as each other.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Never have I - I'm just saying its UNDER ARE CONTROL IF WE WANT IT TO BE.....That is why I'm hi-lighting that genetics is just a tiny part of the thing (if at all)..

(I've got a huge number of the gay traits - both handed being just one - but I am happy (currently) the way I am).

Reply 394

Bames

2

Gay people are amazing people no one simply chooses to be Gay anymore than people choose to be heterosexual but you got to be careful with this 'born this way' talk as those mentally ill people that do peadophilia are now trying to use the same argument saying they are born with in an innate attraction to children and want rights, if you not careful then people who go around having sex with animals will say the same.

Reply 395

Original post by FredOrJohn

OK guys you all rejected my bonobo Apes thing..
So, IDENTICAL TWINS...
If it was Genetic then 100% of identical twins would either be Gay or Straight.
I would say that in the tests that exist it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that it is not particularly genetic or if it is, its only a minor part of the story. Its nearly all just thoughts in ones head.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#Twin_studies

1. We have all already agreed that there is some genetic component but that it is not the only factor. Twin studies have showed a stronger correlation than would be expected if it was not genetic in some fashion. This is why scientists have looked into the genetics and found such things as epigenetics etc.

2. Repeating "its all just thoughts in one's head" does not make it true. Besides we all recognize that it is mental state but that does not change that it has biological factors.

From reading some of the "Can't change" type stuff here, I'd say that type of thinking has an under-current of depression mixed in it. Most people think changes can happen - perhaps a long time in a same sex prison, falling in love with a man that looks like a woman "The Crying Game" perhaps gets to the heart of some of the issues:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crying_Game

Show me evidence that most people think changes in sexual orientation are possible. And do not conflate prison rape with 'falling in love' - you'll notice that inmates that come out prison (even after long periods of detention) still return to their heterosexual practices when given the opportunity.

The Crying Game explores the idea of identity which is not what we are talking about per se. We are talking about biological attractions rather than a less strict sense of identity.

Biologically speaking whether or not you identify as homosexual is irrelevant. If it is shown that your sexual attraction is primarily to those of the same sex then you are biologically a homosexual. Whether or not you choose to use that as a personal identifier is up to you, whether or not you choose to act upon those attractions primarily or at all is up to you, but the two are distinct categories.

Bottom line:

"
. Nonetheless, it is possible to conclude that, given the difference in sexuality in so many sets of identical twins, sexual orientation cannot be attributed solely to genetic factors
"

Come on guys give up... Its a slam dunk!

...yes its a slam dunk for us. Notice how is says 'solely attributed to' that implies that it can be attributed to it still - just not on its own (which is exactly what we have been saying this whole time).

Ifs genetic to about the same extent as liking Science Fiction, or historical Novels, or Cowboys or Mills and Boon.... No more no less.

There is no evidence to support this statement and your constant repeating is does not make true.

Reply 396