The evidence for a genetic contribution to homosexuality is small and the size of the contribution is small.
What do we conclude from this? Obviously, we should conclude that anyone can potentially be attracted to the opposite sex. It is potentially the case that, as a global society, we are sexually inhibiting eachother.
Let’s break this down a bit: WHY is it such a common meme, even among gays, to say that being gay is not a choice? I’m going to propose (quite riskily) that this response minimizes cognitive dissonance - that it’s much easier, even for gays, to point to genetics as the root cause of their sexual preferences, versus owning that preference.
Perhaps it’s so taboo to say that it’s a choice because religious folks are so adamant that it is. Honestly, who cares what they think?
Bottom line: In the case that you are ONLY attracted to your sex, it might be the case that you don’t know why that is the case. Perhaps you had someone important in your life of your sex at a young age that you were close to and this closeness was the basis of future sexual preference. However, this absolutely does not matter - if you believe there is nothing wrong with being gay, then please just be gay, and stop citing scientific evidence that doesn’t really exist!
As a young pre-teen and young teen, I found both sexes pretty arousing. When I snuck online and looked at porn, I looked at lesbian porn and straight porn most… then eventually started looking at gay porn. I kind of dithered back and forth and found it all exciting.
Over time, gradually, with no conscious decision on my part, I stopped finding girls attractive. I started wanting to date boys, fantasize about boys, etc.
Now as an adult I’m entirely gay. I never chose it.
It’s just that smiple.
You are setting up a false dilemma of sorts by saying either being gay is a choice or it’s caused by genetics. That’s silly because obviously being gay can be both not a choice and not caused by genetics. It could have to do with hormones in the uterus, or life experiences you had no choice over.
So, it’s not a choice, and not entirely genetic. No problems.
I don’t think that there any evidence that willpower and conscious decisions can cause attraction, merely a change in behavior, which we as a culture do not classify as sexual orientation.
But genetic encoding as a simple gay/straight dichotomy is not the only alternative. For all we know we could be genetically programmed to have ~5% of us primarily attracted to our own gender at random. And of course there could be a mixture of several different influences, such as my posited inborn genetic randomness, genetic diversity, and environment, along with a little bit of your desired openmindedness.
It’s a very common fallacy to think that if a characteristic is innate (let’s say, present from birth) that it must be determined by genetics. This is simply not true.
Homosexuality is probably due to a combination of both genetic and developmental factors. Developmental factors in the womb may well help determine adult sexual orientation, and have nothing to due with genetics. Homosexuality may be similar to left-handedness in that there is a genetic component, but that development also has a strong effect in determining it.
Besides that, homosexuality may not have a single cause, but be due to different factors in different individuals. There may be a variety of genes, and a variety of developmental factors that can contribute to it.
And how “hard-wired” sexual orientation is may also differ between individuals. For some, sexual orientation may be virtually unalterable from birth. For others, experiences in childhood and adolescence may influence adult sexual orientation. But even in the latter, adult sexual orientation is only very rarely going to be a choice.
My post somewhat confusingly discusses both possibilities, i.e, that it’s not genetic, and that given that, it is either a choice or not. Both are consistent with my theory, since I think sexual preference is essentially learned, and can be unlearned.
“Born Gay” != genetics.
There are any number of things that can happen to an embryo during the early stages of gestation that have everything to do with the embryonic environment and little if anything to do with genetics.
So your starting point is flawed right out of the box.
Why do you think that? What evidence do you have that sexual orientation is learned?
Are you not familiar with birth order studies that show increasing likeliness of being a gay male, the more older male siblings you have?
Are you not familiar with phenotypes such as hair whorl or finger length ratios that correlate with being gay?
Are you not familiar with your own every-day life experience of your sexual orientations? If you honestly believe that sexual orientation can be learned/unlearned, then try it yourself and get back to us. If you are successful, then run a scientific study with a random sampling of people, both gay and straight of different genders, and see if you can get them to unlearn their sexual orientations.
What you’ve said (and Colibri) is “not necessarily,” but such an argument does not speak to any evidence supporting this possibility, and certainly does not address my alternate hypothesis that preference is learned. Therefore, it’s a weak argument IMHO.
I’m not. If you could point me to scientific papers on these topics, I’d be happy to read them.
This argument here is weak. alterego said he thinks that “sexual preference is essentially learned, and can be unlearned”. Merely stating that something is learned doesn’t necessarily imply that it’s learned easily, or quickly, or according to a consistent formula. It may be the case that learning to address and make changes in one’s sexual preference is learned over many years, and can be changed, but only over many years, with difficulty, and with a high failure rate. Learning complicated things takes time. Taking someone from ignorance about math to mastery of calculus takes about 12 years in the best circumstances.
In short, telling alterego to “try it yourself and get back to us” is a curt dismissal that ignores the complexity of the topic.
You are correct that if there is nothing wrong with being gay - and there isn’t - that its causes are not relevant. However you’ve skipped over the minor fact that a lot of people still say it’s a choice and a sinful choice that is being “promoted” by gays or gay rights advocates. People do often say (wrongly) that homosexuality must be genetic because it seems to be innate. However you seem to be just as wrong in the other direction: the fact that it’s not genetic doesn’t mean it’s not innate or that it is a choice. So I think you should stop making demands about what other people may or may not argue.
Data from twin studies quite clearly show that shared environment factors have little to no effect on gender preference.
There is a unique environment correlation but if your theory was correct the family, which is a big part of the shared environment and “learned behavior”, would have a huge measurable effect.
Note this study was about behavior and not preference but if it were “learned” as your argument claims the shared environment impact should be huge.
It is not, and this also fits in with other studies that show that children raised by same sex couples tend to have a similar gender preference profile to children raised in heterosexual families.
Obviously we don’t know that factors “cause” homosexuality at this time and to be honest there are probably many factors but I would say with a lack of evidence to support your claim that it is learned behavior we can pretty much rule that out for the majority of individuals who have a preference for the same sex.
It is not nearly as “weak” as alterego’s assertions that a lack, (in his unsubstantiated opinion), of evidence for “genetic” cause means that it must be learned.
If one wishes to assert (or defend) the proposition that homosxulity is learned, then the proper course would be to provide some evidence that it could be–or even some hypothesis regarding just what has been learned.
I have never encountered any person who suggested that any sexual reaction they have experienced was learned. I am aware of the probability that sexual response may lie on a continuum with people recognizing that they are heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. However, even drewtwo99’s tale provides no evidence of a “learned” response.
Until alterego provides more than a gratutitoes assertion, I think that a gratuitous denial is quite adequate as a response.
Perhaps, if the topic had not been presented in a simplistic way, this would be an issue.
Has a prisoner ever left prison with a different sexual orientation?
In my experience of living in a single large room with 70 other men in the Navy, things got surprisingly fresh. Ass grabbing, gay jokes and intimate contact abounded.
I am nearly certain that it is the case that we can find enough evidence to corroborate the claim that your environment can strongly affect your sexual orientation.
@rat_avatar, lack of shared environmental factors simply suggests that there might be non-shared factors that are important and not being measured.
@tomndebb, there wasn’t anything substantial in your post for me to grab onto.
I’m with the OP insofar as I think (and I’ve said) that “born that way” is a poor argument for why anyone should receive human, civil or social rights. Gay people should have the same human, civil and social rights as any other human being because they are human beings who are not hurting anyone. They should also have the same restrictions that are not gender specific (ie, no underage partners, no nonconsensual partners) as anyone else because they are people.
The second biggest problem I see with the “born that way” or “it’s not a choice” arguments is that it may be incorrect. Or it may be incorrect for some people and not others. (Yes, I’ve had times when I’m attracted to men, and times when I’m attracted to women, and times when I’m attracted to both about equally. So…find me a label, please. Or just don’t.) Maybe some of us are not born that way and maybe it is a choice. So…if I choose to be gay, I shouldn’t have civil rights, but if you don’t choose to be gay, you should? That doesn’t make sense.
The biggest problem I see with the “born that way” or “it’s not a choice” argument is that it may be correct. And it may be correctable, given proper technology (genetic manipulation, fetal selection, hormonal supplementation) and that leads to a whole GATACA style nightmare scenario. If your parents aren’t rich enough or “don’t care enough” or don’t share homophobic sentiments and take steps to ensure you’re not gay, that’s still no reason to discriminate against you.
It’s implicitly supporting the heteronormative point of view that homosexuals are broken, or flawed…only it excuses them because it’s not their fault, poor dears.
Frankly, I’d be pretty pissed off if someone tried to base my having human rights on the fact that it’s not my fault I was born a woman. Fuck you. I should have human rights because I’m a human.
Yes, but that that still doesn’t support your unsubstantiated assertion that it is learned behavior.
You may want to realize that sexual orientation is not binary and a number of individuals are flexible, thus your “ass grabbing” claim is pretty baseless even outside the fact it is anecdotal.
Note the burden of proof is on you to provide cites and evidence that support your claim, I have provided a cite that is pretty strong in showing it is most not effected by familial influences including learning, if you are going to claim that there is something “special” about gender preference that precludes it being “learned” inside of that unit but is still a “learned” behavior you are going to need to provide something besides pure speculation.
So…cites or I will assume you are not really looking for the answer but are purely opining your speculative unsubstantiated claim.
Because claiming otherwise doesn’t fit the facts, is typically rooted in homophobia, and is inconsistent with human psychology. Human beings do not choose matters of taste. I didn’t choose to be straight. Nor did I choose to like spaghetti or hate beets or think puppies look cute. That’s just not how human minds work; and I see no reason to think homosexuality is the one exception.