Yep, sure do. The fact that an awful lot of people who come out as “gay” when they’re young mysteriously turn straight as they get older would seem to support that.
Bryan follows the rules of the road? :dubious:
No, no.
The real answer is that we just don’t know why some people have same-sex attractions while others have opposite-sex attractions, and some people have both and some people have neither. Therefore, anyone claiming to have discovered the real reason people turn gay is obliged to show their evidence for believing their theory.
We know it can’t be completely controlled by genes, because we have examples of identical twins where one twin is gay and the other is straight. However, contrary to what some people here have said, most people with same-sex attraction find that it is impossible to totally rid themselves of their same-sex desires, no matter how much they wish they could. Prayer, therapy, social conditioning, none of it works. I’ve never met an adult male homosexual who has never had sex with women.
It seems that the insistence that homosexuality must be a choice stems not from observation of actual human sexual behavior, but rather from some sort of theoretical framework. The logic seems to go something like this:
- Homosexuality is a sin.
- Humans have free will.
- Therefore, humans have a choice to either chose sin or reject sin.
- Therefore, a person who choses homosexuality does so by consciously choosing sin–not because they actually enjoy gay sex, but BECAUSE gay sex is sinful.
Except this denies the fact that while humans have control over their sexual ACTIONS they don’t have control over their sexual desires. If I walk down the street and see an attractive woman, I can’t control my desire for her. What I can do is control my actions–and this is why I don’t commit adultery or rape. I suppose if I had to I could have sex with a man–but what I couldn’t do is desire to have sex with a man. So a man who is attracted to other men can surely choose to never act on those desires, but he can’t stop himself from having those desires.
A bit defensive? This seems to be the sort of argument we see launched against the notion of evolution because someone believes that humans must be the result of special creation.
First, “tampering” does not imply that the rat was shifted to “something unnatural,” it merely indicates that womb conditions were changed from what would typically occur during rat pregnancy. So you’ve made a huge assumption at the outset without having any reason (beyond your own desire) to claim it.
Second, I really doubt that the biologists doing the experiment claimed that the rats were “gay,” so you can stiffen up your wrist and stop making silly claims on that score.
That human sexuality is an extremely complex phenomenon that is not necessarily directly comparable to sexuality in animals that exhibit less social adaptation is probably true. However, making the leap from “we are more complex” to “we can learn nothing from examining them” is not merely wrong, it is silly. We have learned a lot about the effects of overcrowding in humans that initially began as studies of rats despite the fact that all the various human characteristics involved in the whole social dynanism of raising children over multiple years, pair bonding, having separate situations for labor and family and recreation, etc. are also more complex than that of rats.
You then go on to propose an entirely unlikely sscenario of a bunch of scientists who work with rats for years not recognizing an automatic reaction in a crowded cage, as though they would not know how to set population limits in their studies to control their experimentrs. That is beyond silly.
I agree that we still do not recognize the specific triggers and developments that lead to human sexual orientation and I would not accept the rat study as being in any way definitive–even if we actually had the results of the study before us. However, your dismissal is a gross overreaction to the idea that suggests a bit of fear that something might actually be discovered some day.
“An awful lot”? Can you name one? I have never encountered a claim that any gay person has changed to being straight. (I am aware that there are various right-wing Christian groups who profess to “cure” homosexuality. They have a horrendous track record (both of abuse and failure) with lots of notable “backsliders” but I doubt that anyone has ever “turned straight” and it would be interesting to see any numbers.)
I can picture a situation in which a bi-sexual person chooses to settle down with a single life partner which would necessitate them appearing to have “become” either gay or straight, but I think your claim is just wishful thinking on your part.
Cite? I want a peer-reviewed rigorous study showing numbers and percentages. I want controls and a falsifiable hypothesis. I want science, not anecdote.
Otherwise, this is just more of the same old “JAYsus cured me of teh gay! Hallelujah brothers & sisters! Send money so we can cure more!” bullshit that we’ve seen before.
What is my evidence for what?
Oh, absolutely. When I came out in 1997, it was definitely because my development had arrested in a phase of same-sex play and because being gay was terribly glamorous.
Or else I was a virgin at a homophobic school. My, so difficult to remember.
Is a scientific test that would settle this argument even possible? How can a survey determine whether people who claim they’re straight are actually gay, or vice versa? People will lie if it keeps them from looking like a hypocrite. Anecdotal evidence is all we can use here for either side, Zakalwe. It’s not the best way to conduct a debate, but what do you expect from a topic like this?
We can use our brains. Since your hypothesis makes no sense anywhere, it can be safely discounted.
Which specific hypothesis are you dismissing. (I have not found agreement with very much that Mosier has posted on this topic, but this many days after Mosier has posted several differnt comments on the topic, I would prefer that the thread not get blasted off the rails by simple misunderstanding regarding specifics.)
You too?! Except that it was even more glamorous in 1975. And I was not a virgin at a non-homophobic school. Wow! It’s just uncanny!