Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture?

[incal11]

I'd say it's similar to all the endless blather about "girl gamers".

yeah i think you have a point.. lol. oh the fun of being both! :')

I'm not making a fuss over you being either a girl, a gamer, or gay. Rather it's you making a fuss about people trying to undertand you (the behavior of male teenage gamers is another issue really).
I understand you'd want everyone to be indifferent or tolerant, but as you said we live in a "straight world". The best way to defeat intolerance is to fight off the ignorance from which it is born. Not act all proud and expect it'll go away by itself.

that is the point, there is nothing wrong with me so why do so many straight people fuss over what i am?

Because of the victorian influence on our modern view of sexuality. More precisely we can trace the roots of that mentality down to the advent of the christian church. Which found no better way of setting itself apart, and therefore above, other religions than by arbitrarily declaring some behaviors "sinful". Here is your explanation.
Before that it never came to anyone that whatever you do in private is anything else than personal tastes.

i read your first link and yeah, that disproves/points out flaws in a few scientific claims about homosexuality, but it doesn't mean it can't be found there eventually, if at all. it just don't see why it matters, and why so many (mostly?) straight people are so focused on find a 'cause', no matter what their believes are.

You really should read the second link, it disproves most or all of those misconceptions from both sides of the issue, or do you feel insecure about it ? There is always a cause to something, there could be a genetic factor of influence but for now it has not been found. In my case it is plain scientific curiosity, what's so wrong with wanting to know ?
It's not the end of the world if you are not born gay. Rather insisting, as some gay communities do, that gayness is that unexplainable birth gift doesn't help in forwarding tolerance. The idea is very appealing, so it's normal that shooting it down may feel like an attack on homosexuality. Still, the fact is a misconception is never ever a good thing.
Not all straights, or gays for that matter, think about it to the point of seriously discussing the causes. What I was trying to explain is that finding and explaining those causes could help in formally proving homosexuality isn't some kind of disease. This could help you feel a normal person in a more sex-tolerant world than just normal in a straight homophobic world, though it will take time.
So, you shouldn't feel like a dissected animal because of those studies. Use them against the homophobes who pick on you.

TLDR, Nature people, nature, and you're all as queer as a 3-dollar bill ^_^

Oh, also a neat fact, giraffe's are the gayest animal ever, 95% of recorded couplings are male and male, 1% is female and female, so, 96% of recorded couplings are homosexual... interesting, no?

I too believe that we can be (are) aroused by anything and everything. Though how you act out and expand on those pulsions is still the result of various factors. Same for other animals, it may be their natural behavior, but it is to establish ranks and ties, and we (wrongly) antropomorphise this. But at least it proves homosexual behavior is not unnatural.

 

[Varya]

Its genetic. I've read about a study that claimed that its caused by hormones while in the uterus.

"A study" isn't really conclusive evidence, especially if you have no source. There are plenty of studies that claim opposite things in almost all subjects. Also, hormones in the uterus seems environmental, if the mother had a hormone imbalance that could cause this, that would be very much environmental.

 

[incal11]

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.

We might have misunderstood each other. I actually share your opinion, but back then you made it look like you thought that it was like being born tall or not.
Those links don't prove that genes have no influence whatsoever, just that their influence is minor at best.

 

[floppylobster]

It's absolutely nature (look at the gay fruit flies - are you going to tell me they were nurtured?).

However nurture can cause a human to repress their feelings and 'make them straight' despite what turns them on (I know some gay married men).

On the other hand peer pressure may make someone extremely weak willed 'experiment' with another sex, but if it doesn't work for them, they're going to have a hard time pretending to get off to it.

If anything 'nurture' is what stops some gay people from being themselves.

 

[esin]

Its genetic. I've read about a study that claimed that its caused by hormones while in the uterus.

"A study" isn't really conclusive evidence, especially if you have no source. There are plenty of studies that claim opposite things in almost all subjects. Also, hormones in the uterus seems environmental, if the mother had a hormone imbalance that could cause this, that would be very much environmental.

He may be referring to this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_hormones_and_sexual_orientation

Can't make any bold statements, but it does give me pause for thought that I had a complicated birth and my mother has always been in semi-fragile health with an overactive immune system which I've read can have hormonal causes.

 

[incal11]

It's absolutely nature (look at the gay fruit flies - are you going to tell me they were nurtured?).

To begin they are fruit flies, not humans.
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/download.htm

Can't make any bold statements, but it does give me pause for thought that I had a complicated birth and my mother has always been in semi-fragile health with an overactive immune system which I've read can have hormonal causes.

It only make people "more likely" to have certain behaviors though.

 

[Varya]

I am not homosexual and am therefore unqualified to comment.

1) You just commented
2) I'm not either, but no matter. In fact, homosexuals might be the worst to answer. Since it affects them, they are more likely to input what they WANT to be true in their theories rather than what they KNOW to be true. This is of course also true of homophobes.
The only ones who actually qualify to comment in that case would be scientists who study this. But they are probably off and you know, doing science stuff, so let's do what we do on forums: discuss our theories.

 

[floppylobster]

Apparently in can be an evolutionary reaction to perceiving your environment as overpopulated.

So there you go...

Source? This seems... strange, since while it would be a beneficial gene, how could it survive? You cannot have a "failsafe" gene, designed not to get reproduced, it would die out in a generation.

Perhaps it's the first step toward becoming, or a left over trait from being, asexual? And that is certainly beneficial.

 

[Harry Mason]

Both. Just like everything else. I'm not sure why Nature Vs. Nurture is still even a debate in any regard. It seems like the answer is always "Well, it depends..."

It's like Coke Vs. Pepsi. There is no answer, it's just different from person to person.

As far as the whole "What's up with all the bisexual and lesbian girls?" Conundrum, I've never thought that sexuality made sense as a binary system (you are EITHER THIS OR THAT!), but rather as a scale, with most people lying in the middle-ish area and either rounding up or down.

Culturally, women are more comfortable with exploring the same gender because... Well... It's not frowned upon in the same manner. If a woman experiments with a woman, contemporary culture tends to look at it as tolerable, even "hot" in some cases. If a man experiments with another man, contemporary culture tends to view them as a GAY HOMOSEXUAL SKIRT WEARING SISSY-MAN. And that, boys and girls, is because contemporary culture sucks ass.

Could you imagine if the roles of experimenting with homosexuality in pop-culture were reversed? A girl would be caught being intimate with another female and her friends would shun her and say stuff like "No, you can't come shopping with us! Why don't you go watch football or wrestle or do something manly, you MAN." And on the flipside there would be drunk guys making out a college keggers while a group of women looked on and cat-called.

If the world were perfect, people would stop trying to label everything and condemn this and that and just chill the fuck out and love who you want to love, how you want to love, when you want to love.

Sure, from a purely biological standpoint, homosexual behavior is unnatural and doesn't make sense, but so is wearing a hat, going skydiving, having oral sex, eating Doritos, and EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS FUN.

 

[The Stonker]

Nature but some of the ticks that some homosexuals have *cough,cough* flamboyancy, is nurture.
I've seen some manly gay guys and some femine gay girls so *shrug* I guess that is nurture and society but homosexuality is genetic in every sense.

 

[Varya]

Apparently in can be an evolutionary reaction to perceiving your environment as overpopulated.

So there you go...

Source? This seems... strange, since while it would be a beneficial gene, how could it survive? You cannot have a "failsafe" gene, designed not to get reproduced, it would die out in a generation.

Perhaps it's the first step toward becoming, or a left over trait from being, asexual? And that is certainly beneficial.

Evolution does not think, so there are no "first steps" just random mutations.
Also, asexual people are less likely to, you know, have sex, so they probably won't reproduce. It might be beneficial for the individual, or even the society, but the gene still wouldn't survive to the next generation unless we start "breeding" humans. Even if we bred asexual humans, the horny ones would still reproduce and dominate, since that actually makes you want to reproduce.

 

[The Stonker]

It's absolutely nature (look at the gay fruit flies - are you going to tell me they were nurtured?).

To begin they are fruit flies, not humans.
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/download.htm

Can't make any bold statements, but it does give me pause for thought that I had a complicated birth and my mother has always been in semi-fragile health with an overactive immune system which I've read can have hormonal causes.

It only make people "more likely" to have certain behaviors though.

My riposte is.
So?

 

[floppylobster]

It's absolutely nature (look at the gay fruit flies - are you going to tell me they were nurtured?).

To begin they are fruit flies, not humans.
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/download.htm

And secondly...?

Where do these millions of kids who come out to their parents, but their parents are shocked and horrified and won't speak to them come from? I would assume they were not nurtured? I've seen plenty of pre-pubescent children over the years who you can tell are gay (by the way they act, by their interests, by their nature), then lo and behold 5-15 years later - gay. So from general observation in my lifetime - I'd still say nature.

 

[Pearwood]

Both. Just like everything else about us except our physical attributes our environment and our genetics play a part. I'm more inclined to believe it's mostly influenced by social experiences but I'm a little biased because I'm bisexual myself and I'm not sure I like the idea that I'm only like that because of a mutation.

I am not homosexual and am therefore unqualified to comment.

You can't really be qualified, geneticists have been looking for the gene responsible for sexual orientation without much success so even if you're a homosexual with a doctorate in genetics it's all guesswork really.

Speaking of mannerisms. I find it curious how many gays lisp.

Yeah that is weird, it's really disproportionate. I've got a bit of a stutter myself.

 

[esin]

Nature but some of the ticks that some homosexuals have *cough,cough* flamboyancy, is nurture.
I've seen some manly gay guys and some femine gay girls so *shrug* I guess that is nurture and society but homosexuality is genetic in every sense.

Speaking of mannerisms. I find it curious how many gays lisp. Yes I know there are a few straight men who have them too, but there seems an overwhelming amount of gays with some degree of lisp. I even caught it in myself listening to my voice recorded. And I don't even like the sound of a lisp.

 

[Varya]

It's absolutely nature (look at the gay fruit flies - are you going to tell me they were nurtured?).

However nurture can cause a human to repress their feelings and 'make them straight' despite what turns them on (I know some gay married men).

On the other hand peer pressure may make someone extremely weak willed 'experiment' with another sex, but if it doesn't work for them, they're going to have a hard time pretending to get off to it.

If anything 'nurture' is what stops some gay people from being themselves.

Just because there are examples of "genetic homosexuality" doesn't mean it's true for humans, or all humans. It's proven fetishes can be triggered by our experiences, why couldn't you develop a "gay-fetish" Also, if you read the discussion here, you'll see that homosexuality in animals isn't proof of genetic homosexuality.

 

[Pyro Paul]

Also, your last statement is wrong. As someone with ADD, coming from a family with a history of ADD, ADHD, Aspegers and similar handicaps, I know this for a fact.

This is when i stopped reading that entire point.

You're comparing a physical condition to a psychological standing...
you don't see the flaw in that comparison?

this is like comparing Apples to the year 1933...

You state your views as fact, and that kind of nags at me. Yes, you MIGHT be right, but there is no conclusive evidence for this. Saying that homosexuality definitively is a "nurture" thing is wrong, it's not definitive at all. I do not know if you are a geneticist or not, but even if you are, the facts aren't in yet, so please at least acknowledge that you are stating your views.

to borrow incal11 link:
http://www2.nau.edu/~bio372-c/class/behavior/apbg.htm

outside that.
i've raised several arguments which you have failed to adress which fundimentally prove you wrong.

cheif among them-
If there are Homosexual male penguins, and this is caused by a hereditary trait... then why is there no doccumentation of Homosexual Female penguins?

i state my views as logical conclusions based on the evidence i have seen and know.
unlike you which have only provided knee jerk reactions wielding your point of view like it has some merit simply because you believe it so.

 

[ImperialSunlight]

I believe it's nature because of what I've heard from gay people and my personal experience as nothing in my life would have made me gay that I know of. But I think whether a person actually can identify with that and accept it is influenced by society's views.

Edit: Also, flamboyacy and feminine traits are completely unrelated.

 

[EmperorSubcutaneous]

My question for everyone who says it's genetic: what's your evidence?

Since there is currently no evidence for it either way, I tend toward believing that it's the same as all your other preferences and aspects of your personality: almost entirely nurture.

Keep in mind two things from this point on:
1. I AM NOT SAYING THAT ANY SEXUALITY IS WORSE, OR LESS, THAN ANY OTHER. Love is love, and love is good. (Obviously I'm talking about mutually consenting love here.)
2. I am also not saying that it's a choice, or that it's simply a matter of "My parents told me not to be gay, so I grew up straight! Simple as." Stuff doesn't work that way. It's subconscious.

Your sexual orientation is like your favorite color. You can't one day wake up and say "I think I will choose to feel that red is the prettiest color." Nor can your opinion be swayed just by your parents telling you that you must believe that red is the prettiest. You feel what you feel, and that's that. However, you're not born with a favorite color; you develop one as a result of your experiences. It's also possible for it to change over time, though it doesn't have to. Then there are some people who would rather not have a favorite, they just treat everything as situational ("I like this green, but usually I like yellow best.").

In this discussion you'll hear a lot of people saying "But my family hates gay people! How could I be gay if what you say is true?" Obviously humans aren't robots. We don't get receive simple, straightforward programming and continue on with simple, straightforward lives. It's much more subtle than that. For one thing, constant pressure to not feel a certain way often leads you to feel that way even stronger. (Example: Victorians finding ankles arousing.) Also, what your parents say to you means very little in the grand scheme of things.

Here are three examples from real life (all friends of mine):
1. A woman is raped. She is not too keen on penises from then on, and so she decides to seek out women only from that point.
2. A boy grows up with very low self-esteem. Soon, he starts paying attention to other boys whom he admires and wishes to be like. At a certain point, this admiration becomes sexual attraction.
3. A woman is going about her life, contentedly dating only men, when suddenly she meets another woman and unexpectedly falls completely head over heels for her. They get married and live happily ever after (for ten years so far).

These examples are all pretty straightforward, though. It's much more complicated for the majority of other people, and you will most likely have no idea why your sexuality is the way it is. Either it happened before you were conscious of what was going on around you, or it happened so gradually that you couldn't possibly trace it all back to its various different sources.

Another important thing to mention is that no one can force anyone to change their feelings about anything unless they really, truly want to change themselves (in which case they probably already have). Unless you brainwash them, which is pretty much evil. All that nonsense about camps trying to turn people straight is just that: nonsense. Same with the belief that growing up in a culture that accepts homosexuality will turn you gay.

However, people like to believe that they are who they are, and they always have been and always will be. This is not true. Pretty much everything you consider to be "you" is something that could very easily be different if you had grown up differently. Your personality is not you. Accept this and you will be a happier person.

I have to mention this because many people find that their sexuality does change, and they usually react pretty poorly. They figure that if their sexuality has changed, it means that they must have been wrong about themselves all along and that they should reevaluate their entire lives up until that point. It doesn't mean that you're a different person, it doesn't mean that you're a traitor, and it doesn't mean that anything is wrong with you in any way. It's just life.

 

[Pyro Paul]

Its genetic. I've read about a study that claimed that its caused by hormones while in the uterus.

if it is caused by hormones in the uterus... then it wouldn't be genetic would it?