Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture?

[dyre]

Nurture, obviously. That's why there aren't any homosexuals in Iran! Derp.

Nah, seems like nature. I'm pretty sure I thought girls were cute way before my parents/teachers/etc even acknowledged that boys "ought" to like girls. So, at least heterosexuality seems like nature to me.

i know everyone is saying that homosexuality is down to nature, however, i myself am gay & reflecting back on events in my life & the way i was raised i think i can safely say it was down to nurture

wait, really? Can you elaborate?

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

Well, are tall people tall because of the way they were raised?

Besides, a straight couple raised the first gay person.

None of your arguments hold up I'm afraid. The first one is kind of obvious, height is purely based on genetics, no argument, sexuality is a behavior or a preference, something we know can be affected. Not saying you are wrong, just that it's a dumb argument.
Also, Being gay because of your upbringing isn't the same as "raised by gay". Again, not saying you are wrong, just that your arguments dont hold up.
Personally I believe it's mostly nature, but not only that. We know for a fact peoples sexual preferences and fetishes is often strongly based in childhood. If you can gain an "artificial"* liking for ex; sex with fat people, old people, BDSM sex foot fetishes etc, what is to say you can't get an artificial liking for the same sex?
But yeah, still 90% nature I'd say

*I don't mean artificial as in wrong/ not real, just not born with.

I say they do. Your hair color, eye colour, weight, height and sexuality are all apart of who you are. Besides the hair colour (and to a degree the weight) you have no control over any of them and are born with all of them coded into you. Foot fetishes are also (so far as I can tell) caused by our genetic makeup, as the area of your brain responsible for controling your feet is directly next to the area that regulates your genitals. Doctors theorize a 'crossed connection' makes one's brain associate genitals with feet. This is why some people enjoy things like footjobs.

But it's all opinion. Maybe one day someone will be able to prove one way or the other.

"I say they do" isn't really an argument either. I'm not saying that you can have any control over your sexuality either. All I'm saying is that we do not know exactly why, and since our behavior is affected by 1. genetics and 2. environment, it's fair to assume it can be applied to sexuality.
You can probably be born with foot fetishes, I'm not educated enough to say either way, but I know for a fact that some sexual preferences are affected by our childhood. (Mothercomplex is a thing) Maybe it's different for everyone. Some are born homosexuals, some are not, some have a preference that is "triggered" by a childhood event. I don't see how it really matters, it's all real emotions. I just think that the "mixed bag" is the most likely explanation based on what I know of these things (which isn't that much)

I guess we'll have to wait until people much smarter than us get their act together and work it out, lol.

 

[Varya]

I think people are getting a little confused on the Nature Vrs. Nurture argument.

Nature: It is encoded into your genome. You have no choice, it just Happens.
Nurture: Through influncing outside factors it occurs.

now for a complex argument.

it is impossible to BE homosexual in normal conditions with 'nature'. you are not born homosexual and there are no gene's, genetics, hereditary traits, or influcing factors biologically to make a person homosexual. Your body is Designed from the ground up for the sole purpouse of reproduction, to find some one of the opposit sex and procreate.

the idea of 'Homosexuality' is purely a psychological one, or 'nurture' in this case. It is some ones choice to be homosexual or not. However, it is not as simple as 'i choose to be gay' or 'i choose to be straight'... Several psychological things and trama alter your prefrences, choices, and desires so that your choice and options shift.

Instead of asking ones self 'am i gay/straight?' they may ask themselves 'Should i be happy?' in which happiness is relations with some one of the same sex. Their feelings on the matter may be so very strong that, although the choice exists, they do not see it. Instead they identify with the choice that best suits them 'i am gay/straight'.


my stand point on the thing...
It is impossible to be Homosexual.
your body is designed to procreate and the body influences the mind.

It is impossible to be Hetrosexual.
Your mind finds sexual attraction in any features regardless of sex.

we are all varying degrees of Bi-sexual.

This doesn't hold up I'm afraid, since homosexuality is a common occurrence in nature. I can't leave a source, but I'm pretty certain I've read they have proven that homosexuality is in fact genetic.
Of course, being homosexual doesn't allow for you genes to survive evolution, but there is quite a possibility that the same gene that can cause you to become homosexual is beneficial in another way. So having the gene is beneficial, however only a few will actually become homosexual, when the gene is dominant. Not saying I know what that benefit is, just that there is a possibility.

acctually incorrect, homosexuality in nature is never by design of biology. It only happens due to influncing outside factors which force it to happen. some species of female Frogs, for instance, only adopt homosexual tendencies when a lack of males exist in the population. Penguins, probably the most famous Homosexual coupling in nature, Again only occur when there is lack of one sex over the other.

in almost every single case of homosexuality in nature that you can find you'll see that it Only occurs because of outside influence. i have yet to see one case where an animal of any type actively searches out a same sex relationship when these outside influences don't exist.

Not saying outside influence doesn't affect it, but the fact that different species has different approaches to homosexuality still means that there is a genetic disposition towards homosexuality. Homosexuality might be triggered by circumstances, but that doesn't mean it's not genetics

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

I think people are getting a little confused on the Nature Vrs. Nurture argument.

Nature: It is encoded into your genome. You have no choice, it just Happens.
Nurture: Through influncing outside factors it occurs.

now for a complex argument.

it is impossible to BE homosexual in normal conditions with 'nature'. you are not born homosexual and there are no gene's, genetics, hereditary traits, or influcing factors biologically to make a person homosexual. Your body is Designed from the ground up for the sole purpouse of reproduction, to find some one of the opposit sex and procreate.

the idea of 'Homosexuality' is purely a psychological one, or 'nurture' in this case. It is some ones choice to be homosexual or not. However, it is not as simple as 'i choose to be gay' or 'i choose to be straight'... Several psychological things and trama alter your prefrences, choices, and desires so that your choice and options shift.

Instead of asking ones self 'am i gay/straight?' they may ask themselves 'Should i be happy?' in which happiness is relations with some one of the same sex. Their feelings on the matter may be so very strong that, although the choice exists, they do not see it. Instead they identify with the choice that best suits them 'i am gay/straight'.


my stand point on the thing...
It is impossible to be Homosexual.
your body is designed to procreate and the body influences the mind.

It is impossible to be Hetrosexual.
Your mind finds sexual attraction in any features regardless of sex.

we are all varying degrees of Bi-sexual.

This doesn't hold up I'm afraid, since homosexuality is a common occurrence in nature. I can't leave a source, but I'm pretty certain I've read they have proven that homosexuality is in fact genetic.
Of course, being homosexual doesn't allow for you genes to survive evolution, but there is quite a possibility that the same gene that can cause you to become homosexual is beneficial in another way. So having the gene is beneficial, however only a few will actually become homosexual, when the gene is dominant. Not saying I know what that benefit is, just that there is a possibility.

It is odd how many people don't think that A) humans are part of nature and B) that other animals are homosexual as well.

EDIT: forgot a very important word, sorry. XD

 

[Varya]

It is odd how many people think that A) humans are part of nature and B) that other animals are homosexual as well.

1) Fact:Other animals have shown homosexual tendencies.
2)Unless you are under the conception that there is a soul, and therefore "outside" of nature: we are. And if you mean that we have a society, unlike any other animal and therefore not comparable, you basically said homosexuality is a construct of society

EDIT: Ok, so ignore what I just wrote I was a bit confused, as this went against the impressions I got from you so far

 

[Sprinal]

A fairly reasonable comment in my opinion is to ask: Who really would actually want to be Gay?

mods hear me out here.

If you are gay there is large amounts of prejudice against you. As well as ther eare less rights. (gay marraiage)

Also there is the problem of only a small percentage of the population actually being able to be sexually befriended.

So as a result I would say Nature for if it were the other way. There would not be many (if any) gay people alive.

 

[i7omahawki]

Shouldn't it just be: Sexuality, nature of nurture?

I can't really say either one OR the other, both are definately at play. I think it's just far too complex to say either nature or nurture, as if there is a gay gene or giving a boy a barbie will make him gay...etc, etc. But neither is it a choice in the sense of a typical, almost arbitary choice (Xbox or PS3 for example), but I'd still say it definately IS, and should be treated AS a choice, more as a means of affirmation of the sexual identity that to put people off being gay.

Though I'd go so far as to be sceptical about the gay/straight dichotomy to be honest...I am attracted to females, but not all females, and generally females that look a certain way (not that any of my exes look similar). I think through a combination of genetic lucky-dip and experiences within our life we are attracted to a set of qualities which tend to fall to either men or women, with bisexuals being an exception that pretty much proves the rule.

I mean, if there was a man who looked exactly like a woman I'd find attractive, then I'd be attracted to them, regardless of their chromosones.

So yeah; neither, and both.

 

[Thespian]

Well, are tall people tall because of the way they were raised?

That's about the end of discussion.

NOT read my links.

I'm quite well learned on the psychological studies of sexuality, danke schoen. I am familiar with the flaws in much thinking toward the nature argument, but I hadn't encountered those specific links. Most of it I knew but it was interesting nonetheless, so cheers.
Anywho, this reminds me of the whole evolution/creationism argument and I feel I should remind you that just because Option A isn't certain, that doesn't make Option B the default. `
I certainly don't think that nurture has zero impact on sexuality but I don't think it can decide your orientation short of the nurture being some sort of futuristic genetic alteration to sexuality right in the genes.

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

It is odd how many people think that A) humans are part of nature and B) that other animals are homosexual as well.

1) Fact:Other animals have shown homosexual tendencies.
2)Unless you are under the conception that there is a soul, and therefore "outside" of nature: we are. And if you mean that we have a society, unlike any other animal and therefore not comparable, you basically said homosexuality is a construct of society

Yeah I totally messed up and forgot to add a word, lol. I edited my post.

Sorry!

 

[i7omahawki]

The only real thing I have to contribute is that a lot of what we call 'homosexuality in nature' isn't homosexuality per se. When dogs mount another dog it's used as a dominance play.

Basically it's not so much legitimate homosexuality as it is prison rape.

And sexuality is usually entirely made up of a play between dominance and submission, maybe the roles switch often and aren't static, but dominance and submission is pretty much the basis of sex.

 

[Liudeius]

Nature, but nurture can have an influence.
For example, since American society is so anti-gay, some homosexuals go on trying to ignore it for quite a long time.

 

[Vault101]

A fairly reasonable comment in my opinion is to ask: Who really would actually want to be Gay?

mods hear me out here.

If you are gay there is large amounts of prejudice against you. As well as ther eare less rights. (gay marraiage)

Also there is the problem of only a small percentage of the population actually being able to be sexually befriended.

So as a result I would say Nature for if it were the other way. There would not be many (if any) gay people alive.

1. hopefully is becoming less, and perhaps it is possible to avoid (though I cant speak from experience)

2. I didnt know they were THAT rare, I mean there are specific places to find potential partners

3. one plus is all the sex you want without worrying about kids

4. one negative would be..kids somwhat difficult to obtain

 

[Varya]

A fairly reasonable comment in my opinion is to ask: Who really would actually want to be Gay?

mods hear me out here.

If you are gay there is large amounts of prejudice against you. As well as ther eare less rights. (gay marraiage)

Also there is the problem of only a small percentage of the population actually being able to be sexually befriended.

So as a result I would say Nature for if it were the other way. There would not be many (if any) gay people alive.

Well, the question isn't if being gay is a choice, but if you can be conditioned(nurtured, raised, take your pick) to be gay. Just because you weren't born with a disposition, doesn't make it less real

 

[DanDanikov]

I dislike the inherent implications of a 'nature vs nurture' question. I think many people who fall outside of the gender binary or are anything but heterosexual feel attracted to the 'nature' option because that allows one to state that they were 'born that way' and this should grant them automatic acceptance. Equally, those who believe such deviations are sinful, it must be a 'nurture' thing because people should be able to, with the right environment, encouragement and faith, chose otherwise.

The reality of nature is that genomes are far from the whole picture, and environment/nurture will always play a part and affect genome expression. However, humans are evolved enough to have a sense of self and an awareness of how our selves change over time, so we are able to affect ourselves in a feedback loop. Whether many people choose to exercise this capability (consciously or not) is debatable. You are then stuck with the infinitely recursing meta-problem of whether you choose to choose to affect yourself (etc.).

I suspect that when medicine become advanced enough to allow for quick, easy, otherwise side-effect-less dynamic changes (i.e. pop into a 'bodyshop' and change your height, age, gender, whatever) sexuality will become regulated to a preference, just like hair colour or complexion. The only reason it's a big deal now is that people are strongly opposed to change being forced upon them.

 

[Vault101]

The only real thing I have to contribute is that a lot of what we call 'homosexuality in nature' isn't homosexuality per se. When dogs mount another dog it's used as a dominance play.

Basically it's not so much legitimate homosexuality as it is prison rape.

And sexuality is usually entirely made up of a play between dominance and submission, maybe the roles switch often and aren't static, but dominance and submission is pretty much the basis of sex.

even if both people are willing?

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

sexuality will become regulated to a preference.

It is a preference. That's what sexuality means - sexual preference.

 

[Blestsol]

I think nurture sometimes and mostly nature.

 

[Dys]

Considering you're 500% more likely to be homosexual if anyone in your family is homosexual, I'd say mostly nature.

Really? What's that based on? My understanding was that adopted children of gay couples had no increased chance of being homosexual link.

Nature or nurture...I don't know, I'm not gay so it's pretty impossible for me to comment, and many of the gay people who voice an opinion have obvious motivation for bias. Either way, I don't see why it matters. If people want to be gay, or just are gay, they should be equally free to sleep with whoever they feel.

 

[i7omahawki]

And sexuality is usually entirely made up of a play between dominance and submission, maybe the roles switch often and aren't static, but dominance and submission is pretty much the basis of sex.

even if both people are willing?

Yes.

But a male dog that mounts another male isn't necessarily doing it because it's homosexual and feels an attraction, it's more than likely it's mounting the other dog to assert dominance.

He is having sex with a male dog, isn't much that isn't homosexual about that.

You're perhaps right that it isn't because he is strictly attracted to males or THAT male, but it IS homosexuality none the less.

As I said in my other post, I don't think there is a true straight/gay split between people, more that most people happen to prefer one or the other. Some folks dig broad shoulders, and some like small hips and big waists. Usually only one gender you find those in.

 

[Pyro Paul]

Not saying outside influence doesn't affect it, but the fact that different species has different approaches to homosexuality still means that there is a genetic disposition towards homosexuality. Homosexuality might be triggered by circumstances, but that doesn't mean it's not genetics

acctually it says quiet the opposit.
because homosexuality does not naturally occur in nature in normal circimstances, it means there is no genetic disposition towards it. All doccumented cases of homosexuality in animals that i have seen are purely because of outside influncing factors.

Case in point...
why don't you see homosexual female penguins?
if it was a genetic disposition, then you should see homosexual female penguins too...
but you don't.