Sexual Orientation - A Choice?

Originally Posted by sugarpoultry

I think the choice is the "acting" upon it. You can't help being attracted to someone the same sex or whatever, but you can choose not to act upon it. You can change too. It's possible.

That is all I will say about that.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by John

I, honestly, don't know if my being heterosexual is by choice or by genetics, but does that mean that I can't be attracted to people of the opposite gender?

Anyways, most research seems to agree that homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, etc. are that way due to built-in stuff, not due to personal choice.

But why not act on it?

I don't want to debate, but isn't it proven that sexual preference is not based on our genes or how much testosterone or estrogen/progesterone we have in us? I don't mean this as any type of "attack" toward you. When you said "genetics" that made me remember that piece of information from my Biology teacher.

Originally Posted by Devout Justice

I don't want to debate, but isn't it proven that sexual preference is not based on our genes or how much testosterone or estrogen/progesterone we have in us? I don't mean this as any type of "attack" toward you. When you said "genetics" that made me remember that piece of information from my Biology teacher.

Your biology teacher needs to go back to school.
Research has shown that genetics may very well be a factor in determining sexual orientation time and time again.

Originally Posted by Devout Justice

Agreed.

I don't like that entire argument because it implicitly has that acting on attraction is innately bad if you're gay.

I don't want to debate, but isn't it proven that sexual preference is not based on our genes or how much testosterone or estrogen/progesterone we have in us? I don't mean this as any type of "attack" toward you. When you said "genetics" that made me remember that piece of information from my Biology teacher.

Genetics likely isn't the cause, no, but it provided a nice catch-all placeholder for "things beyond our control."

What does "cause" gayness? Current ideas seem to show that hormonal exposure in the womb might play a role, as may some other factors. The only difference between such things and genetics doesn't particularly matter for this discussion.

Originally Posted by Soren707

Agreed.

I'll just copypaste my response to sugarpoultry to you. Feel free to answer it - she has failed to, so far, like usual.

I find the ease with which you dismiss my romantic dreams to be both insulting and patently offensive. What you are really saying is, "...in order for you to live a moral life, you can never have sexual relations and you must live a life devoid of true romantic love. You have to give up on your dreams of finding your soul mate."
Prejudice often demands something of others that the prejudiced person is unwilling to demand of himself.
How unfortunate that you have such a hardened heart that one of your major goals is to prevent a certain group of people from loving each other.

Originally Posted by Soren707

I don't want to debate, but isn't it proven that sexual preference is not based on our genes or how much testosterone or estrogen/progesterone we have in us? I don't mean this as any type of "attack" toward you. When you said "genetics" that made me remember that piece of information from my Biology teacher.

Obviously it's not testosterone/estrogen because there's manly homosexuals and there's feminine homosexuals - it's hard to believe, but there's more in your brain than just testosterone/estrogen.

Actually, I think it's still not absolutely known whether the factors that cause homosexuality are predominantly biological or environmental, since a genetic cause has never been explicitly proven.

However, some studies have come up with some interesting results. For instance, it has been found that homosexuality tends to run in families, which at first glance does seem to suggest a genetic cause. However, one could make the case that this is actually an environmental influence - if someone has a large part of their family who are openly gay, it may be easier for them to be open about their own homosexuality than someone whose family is (apparently) entirely or predominantly heterosexual, and who thus is more likely to remain in the closet. Those studies really only make the case for families in which people are openly gay.

I think most scientists believe that it is a more complex combination of genetics and environmental factors that influence whether an individual is gay or not. See, for instance, http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/113259.php.

Personally, as I've said before, I have my doubts about there being "gay genes" that just switch on a person's homosexuality at birth. What about bisexuals and those who are bicurious? How does that explain people whose sexuality morphs over time?

Originally Posted by Devout Justice

I don't want to debate, but isn't it proven that sexual preference is not based on our genes or how much testosterone or estrogen/progesterone we have in us? I don't mean this as any type of "attack" toward you. When you said "genetics" that made me remember that piece of information from my Biology teacher.

From my knowledge, I don't think there is any significant evidence to prove there is a correlation between genetics and homosexuality.

I've heard of many studies claiming there is a different brain structures between homosexuals and heterosexuals, or similar related studies claiming biological factors to some extent determines how sexuality.

However not many of these studies were able to be replicated and produce the same findings. Most of the findings found in the studies, are very insignificant and don't provide overwhelming evidence to convince that there is definite a link between biology and homosexuality.

I do personally believe that some biological factors to some extent determine our sexuality, however the current studies have yet to gather evidence that proves this without any form of speculation.

Originally Posted by Teekay

Research has shown that genetics may very well be a factor in determining sexual orientation time and time again.

The discovery of the "gay gene" was eventually withdrawn.

This makes sense on a common sense level as well, because it is hard to see multiple gays in a family tree, even when they do reproduce.

Originally Posted by John

Genetics likely isn't the cause, no, but it provided a nice catch-all placeholder for "things beyond our control."

You got it first.

Originally Posted by John

I don't like that entire argument because it implicitly has that acting on attraction is innately bad if you're gay.

Then again, it's also good for the sake of debate, because it shows just how flimsy the "choice" argument is.

Since attraction is biological and inherently uncontrollable, the only way for someone to "choose" their sexual orientation would be to act upon those natural feelings. And since the act of doing so is frowned upon solely because it has been socially unacceptable for a long time, this proves that society's aversion to homosexuality is just like any taboo: irrational.

The main reason people bring up the "is homosexuality a choice" issue is because they usually assume that it is unnatural. But since attraction is a naturally-occurring phenomenon in and of itself, the motivation behind asking the question can essentially be rendered moot. Thus homosexuality isn't a choice, and acting upon homosexual desires shouldn't be considered wrong.

Originally Posted by Captain Crusader

The discovery of the "gay gene" was eventually withdrawn.

He said genetics, not gay gene.

It's like me and my foot fetish. Did I ask to have it? No, but damn, I love it!

Originally Posted by fratey

He said genetics, not gay gene.

Genetics has to do with genes.

Originally Posted by fratey

He said genetics, not gay gene.

I think the gay gene theory was rejected due to the study was replicated but was not able to produce the same findings.

Originally Posted by IkanaGeneral197

It's like me and my foot fetish. Did I ask to have it? No, but damn, I love it!

Precisely. I didn't choose to be bi, but damn, boys are SO hot.

Originally Posted by Captain Crusader

Genetics has to do with genes.

He didn't specify anything about a "gay gene". It's like him talking about fluids and then ignoring his point because you can make cheese out of milk.

Originally Posted by fratey

Precisely. I didn't choose to be bi, but damn, boys are SO hot.

Wouldn't being bi involve girls too?

He didn't specify anything about a "gay gene". It's like him talking about fluids and then ignoring his point because you can make cheese out of milk.

The "gay gene" scientific discussion was why genetics seemed like a convincing answer to most.

Originally Posted by sugarpoultry

I think the choice is the "acting" upon it. You can't help being attracted to someone the same sex or whatever, but you can choose not to act upon it. You can change too. It's possible.

That is all I will say about that.

So, what you're saying is that someone who is homosexual should keep it to themselves and 'change'?

Do you know how many people surpress their homosexuality just to try and lead an acceptably 'normal' life? So that people like you won't be judgemental?

Someone in my family did that for most of his life, he was married and had kids, but he had known since he was very young that he was gay. Eventually he could'nt keep it to himself anymore and came out. He is now married to a man and very happy.

Think of all the pain and misery he must have gone through trying to keep such a big secret from the world. Its so awful that people can't just accept others for who they are. So what if you are interested in the same sex? There is no problem at all with that, its no different to the opposite gender loving eachother. I just really wish people could be more open minded and accept people for what they are. They do not need to change because people like you can't accept it!

I know it's not the same thing, but my foot fetish is a "deviation" none the less. When people ask me "Why don't you get help?" I say "I'm happy with it. Too bad for you" and flip them off. Even if I did get "help", it'd never be the same as having the foot fetish. I just can't seem to like tits all that much. If I was "cured", I'd probably become asexual, which can't be any fun. I don't know, but I assume it would have the same effect as changing their orientation.

Originally Posted by PocketCucco

Someone in my family did that for most of his life, he was married and had kids, but he had known since he was very young that he was gay. Eventually he could'nt keep it to himself anymore and came out. He is now married to a man and very happy.

^Exactly, that's another reason why the idea of it being a choice is not only wrong, but unhealthy.

Suppose a gay man tries to reject the "homosexual lifestyle" and settle down with a woman. The pair of them have a family, but eventually he can't lie to himself anymore and decides to tell her the truth.

Then, he's not the only person who gets hurt. The woman he married also suffers from his dishonesty and if they have kids, it would be emotionally detrimental to them too.

Originally Posted by IkanaGeneral197

If I was "cured", I'd probably become asexual, which can't be any fun. I don't know, but I assume it would have the same effect as changing their orientation.

Actually I'm asexual. I personally find the idea of having a sexual relationship disgusting. No offence to heterosexuals, homosexuals and bisexuals out there. XD

One less thing to be worried about. Asexuals are normal and have a fun life just like heterosexuals etc

Life isn't always about sex =)

Originally Posted by Twilight Wolf

YOUR LOGIC IS FLAWED

Not entirely. It sounds like he's coming from the perspective of operant conditioning, i.e. you can encourage or discourage a practice through reward and punishment. He is presupposing the fact that no individual has a particularly set, determined sexual orientation - something I agree with.

Let's tease this out a bit. In society at large, heterosexism is the norm - not only is it the assumed default, but there are a huge number of tangentially-related practices, beliefs etc. that are also associated with heterosexism (such as say, style of dress, religion, etc.). Often, deviation in any of these respects goes punished, while heteronormative behaviour goes rewarded by parents and friends (social capital and praise are gained, etc.). Even if most people are biologically bisexual - or at least have the capacity for such an orientation - we are raised from birth to believe that heterosexuality is the correct orientation and behaviour, and that queer identities are unfavourable and even inferior.
'
This brings us to the original point. Boys are expected to like girls, and if you are a young boy learning about the world, you are expected to learn to like girls, and vice versa for girls. One of the ways in which this is done is through the viewing of pornography, as well as media as a whole such as television and film, not to mention micro-level social interactions as well. Through validation and reward, which, yes, includes orgasms and other positive sexual experiences, you learn to like that heterosexism that is set before you. It's certainly an Aristotelian, i.e. the whole "the more you practice, the more you enjoy, and after long enough, you learn to love it", but I think it's definitely applicable to sexuality, at least to some degree.

Of course, that is not at all to discount that biology has a role. I think some people, through whatever genetic mechanism, are born with a predisposition to an attraction to a particular sex, sexes, gender, or genders, and a few people are so particular that they exclude everything else entirely. Social pressure does the rest. Note that I'm just talking about attraction here. Practices such as dress, speech, social interactions etc. are entirely socially constructed and cannot be ascribed to genetics any more than a particular accent or language can be.

In any case, I believe that's what nighthawkx was working towards... he just did it in a rather crass way.

Originally Posted by Captain Crusader

Wouldn't being bi involve girls too?

Sure it does. However, the boys are the deviation here.

Originally Posted by Captain Crusader

The "gay gene" scientific discussion was why genetics seemed like a convincing answer to most.

the 'gay gene' in itself isn't a fact, but genetics in general isn't disproven.