Homosexuality, is it a choice?

I can't. I'm gay and know I didn't choose this. I chose to accept this part of myself and allowed myself to be happy. Now that I am, I wouldn't change a thing even if I could.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I don't think you can intentionally shape someone though. I have early childhood memories of my children's choir director. I can recall wondering to myself what she looked like under her clothes. I was far too young to know about sex, so it wasn't sexual necessarily but it also wasn't just a passing thought you have about just anyone. I didn't wonder that about every woman, just that one. And I didn't wonder that about any men. To a child who doesn't yet know about sex, it just seemed like a curious thought. Now that I understand my sexuality I can see when I think back to some of those things that I was gay long before I would know a thing about sex. My sister on the other hand is straight straight straight. If it's about childhood, why did I turn out a lesbian but she didn't?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Hey! No shattering my delicate sense of worth here...

 

I'd have to say it was equal parts siblings and parents. I certainly learned what would annoy my parents the most by watching what my siblings did, and then I avoided those behaviors as much as possible. Like don't cut paper with mom's sewing scissors...

 

I agree!!! With all the modern genetic science and DNA analysis, they cannot differentiate between a homosexual and a heterosexual of a newborn. The day they can do that, I'll believe that homosexuality is not a choice. Until then it's a choice!!!!

 

never underestimate the value of all those sibling squabbles and arguments, as well as all that time playing games with siblings slightly above your age bracket, in encouraging mental skills, reasoning skills, vocabulary acquisition, planning, predicting strategizing and communication. you spend a lot of time interacting with them than an only child does not, and a first born does not get as early.

 

People cannot help what they are stimulated or attracted to. Period!

 

Wait! Where did I say that I proved anything? I said that the best evidence indicates that there is a genetic component . Is it possible you don't understand words or are you just playing some sick, juvenile head game here? I then suggested where you might find additional information on the subject, and as I predicted, you are too incurious and limited in your critical thinking ability to even explore that source. You are a waist of my time and not my intellectual equal. You have no interest in actually discussing the topic but rather are looking for ways to cling to your preconceived belief that homosexuality is not genetic, and therefor a choice which then allows you to justify your bigotry. You are exposed for what you are and my work is done here.

 

Because it is bigoted and demeaning to gay people......and it is stupid!

Dude, we are talking about human beings who's sexuality is an important, immutable part of who they are as people and you are comparing that to eating donuts??!! Eating donuts is a choice and a stupid one at that.

Same as above. A logical fallacy in the form of a false analogy.

It proves that some people can be manipulated, coerced , bullied and intimidated by religious dogma and clap trap. It does not prove that it makes there lives better and in fact I presented evidence that it is damaging- which you ignored. Should people be forced to live a lie and deny their true selves? Is that a good thing for those people, for society, for others in their lives? Get real dude!

 

That works in your own mind, but it's not any accurate reflection of reality per se.

They hardly know all about human sexuality. There is research going on that you likely don't even know about, concerning the same.

 

Pete is another one who insists on dumbing it down to a case where it is purely genetic and therefor detectable at birth, or - stupidly - a choice and then insist that it's a choice to justify their bigotry. They have no appreciation for the complexity of the development of human sexuality or how idiotic it is to say that it's a choice regardless of the role of genetics. I do think that we are close to identifying genetic markers that may indicate a propensity towards homosexuality but social and environmental factors will always play a role. The "genetic or a choice" meme just makes me want to spit!

 

I almost TOSSED all of my religious beliefs, because the people around me just couldn't get their heads out of 'dark' religious places (so to speak).

I'm not blaming ALL religious people and certainly am not bashing those merely ignorant. But seriously, anyone with access to the internet OUGHT to know the prevailing scientific views about this stuff. And my tolerance for either conscientious stupidity or relatively deliberate ignorance in this matter (and others), is lower than it was 20+ years ago.

Come on ("homophobes" especially)... get a working understanding of what's going on scientifically about human sexuality. If you're giving a simple answer and that is all you have in your mind to back it up... then something is wrong. Human sexuality is complex and still being studied... intensely so.

 

Ah .... okay. Not sure why you think it would apply 100% of the time when homosexuality only occurs 4% (or whatever) of the time.

 

They're theories arising from various studies. You asked.

PS: I personally embrace none of these. I don't think it's possible to pinpoint a universal.

 

Westerners consistently seem to be unable to grasp this.

These men don't ignore overt urges and pretend to be straight ... it never occurs to them that they could be anything BUT straight. Any dissatisfactions in their marriage will be regarded as ordinary marital issues ... they simply don't ever get to a place where sexuality is questioned. Under the social conditions in which they live, the germ of same gender attraction is starved of oxygen before it can even form into a thought.

And no one is actively opressing them or condemning homosexuality, because they don't need to. It isn't a thing ... therefore nothing needs to be said about it one way or the other. It's really more like a neutral setting. Addressing it (positively or negatively) just isn't done. In the same way we wouldn't necessarily ever address crack cocaine addiction, or the growing of begonias, or morris dancing.

It is what it is.

- - - Updated - - -

Cool. You can find the studies on line.

 

Of course you can intentionally shape someone. IQ development being a good example. Parents who consistently engage with babies with focused eye contact will have smarter kids than disengaged parents. It's true that we can't be certain of precise outcomes, but we can be reasonably sure. The fact that the Chinese (for example) consistently raise fairly square and studious kids is not an accident.

As regards why all kids aren't identical ... show me two examples of identical parenting. Doesn't exist. Even for twins.

 

Only in the sense that it's environmental. It's no more a choice than IQ, or learning delays. The die is cast very early.

 

You tried to feel attracted to the opposite sex and you were not able to. That's one data point. It's also consistent with data I've reported from many other people, straight and gay. Those observations suggest people can't choose who they are attracted to.



​

 

It most certainly is. Why the F would you care how many donuts one eats, especially if you don't know them?

Credibility is at 0.

 

Does a gene make one attracted to blonds, or redheads, or brunettes? Does a gene make one attracted to heavy people, skinny people? Does a gene make one attracted to blue eyes, brown eyes, green eyes?

What makes one attracted to all the differences human have?
Does it have to be a gene?

 

I've seen similar sincere threads on gay, transgender, or bisexual.
I notice the bigots who typically start hate threads never show up to be honest and sincere. It speaks volumes on their character.

 

They don't want to know because the facts will undermine what they desperately want to and need to believe. They are terrified of the changes they see, and/or of gay people and don't know what to do. So they do the only thing that they can, remain hatful and ignorant.

 

Westerners are human. We may embrace different views as ALL human beings do... but we can fathom plenty; just as everyone else.

Yet, many do (perhaps for a time), in order to play a 'role' they've been told is right or acceptable. Ignore was likely the wrong term anyway, because what I am actually talking about is homosexual people being compelled to 'repress' their sexuality. And that is NOT a 'good' thing, on a long term basis; many mental issues have come as a result of that.

Again, that is on a per person basis. Lots of people struggle with their sexuality and related roles. Some people are open about that and others conceal it for various reasons. In that sense, actions taken to deal with it may surely vary. For example, if one lives in a society where under a great threat or penalty of DEATH they must conceal their homosexuality, the measures and individual takes to ensure they are not discovered will go further than elsewhere. But while 'fitting-in'... they will STILL BE HOMOSEXUALS (simply hidden or out of sight).

Sure. There are LOTS of people on the "down-low" as it is often called in America. And that is something I am absolutely adamant about people NOT having to do, and that is... HIDE their sexual-orientation. It isn't right or healthy for a society overall to have people doing that.

Nonsense. Homosexual people and even wildlife are EVERYWHERE. Sexual-orientation is not a "germ'. You are making things up there.

They shouldn't be 'pretending' they are heterosexuals. That isn't healthy for human beings. Just because homosexuality is 'HIDDEN', doesn't mean all is well under the surface. There is a LOT of mental illness in that. Ancient folk may not have known that, be we do now.

That is just another was of saying, if it is 'denied', then it is not a problem. (People do that all the time here with "racism".)

That isn't reality; it is denial or a type of facade. To me, it indicates many are quietly oppressed.

Which only means THAT particular society isn't enlightened or open enough, to deal with the full ranges of 'reality' (for whatever reasons).

Your logic is lacking... as I hold it up to 'REALITY'. Your view reads to me, like a version of George Orwell's, "1984".

No... FULL REALITY is what is.

 

Exactly. I know you are speaking truth there... because I went through that myself. My dedication to religion was by no means 'casual'.

 

I was never very religious although I was told that I was Catholic, as though it was genetic and not a choice. I soon grew out of it and now I'm pretty much an Atheist who leaves the door open a crack to the possibility of God although we can never know the nature of God- also known as a "High Agnostic or Theist Agnostic. Don't get me wrong, I am not bashing the religious and I recognize that there are many good religious people. However, you have those who have weaponized it against those who they disapprove of. At the same time, it is not only the religious who are responsible for the bigotry.

I came up in the late 40's to early 60's and was pretty stupid about homosexuality and did my share of gay bashing. Hell, everyone did, and no one that I knew revealed themselves to be gay. But I always was "left leaning" and progressive not to mention rebellious and iconoclastic and over time- I don't really know when I started - learned more and changed. I never found change, or the idea of gay people being around threatening in any way. I don't think that most people do anymore, although there is a concentration of ignorance on this forum.