Is homosexuality a choice or is it genetic?

[poptart]

Genetic. Why someone would want to do a guy is beyond me. And more of those "boys" are starting to realize this at a very early age.

 

[Chip]

Homosexuality is obviously not a conscious choice. That many religious groups bent on converting the "sinning" homosexual to "righteous" heterosexuality think sexual preference is a conscious and deliberate one is merely an example of their self-prophetic tail attempting to wag the dog of conflicting truth.

But neither is there any rational evidence convicting genetics or situationally abnormal gestational fluid chemistry as the culprit.

Merely because one end of the topical spectrum is false (conscious and deliberate chioice) certainly doesn't automatically make the other end of the topical spectrum true (genetics, gestational fluid).

The graph of this matter is not a straight line at any angle, and when multiple appropriate disciplines are applied to the question, the graph appears to be bell-shaped, with the ends falling in the false area and the truth at the center of the bell.

Indeed, geneticists have yet to even begin to find any clue-based evidence of a gene or gene combination for sexual preference in conflict with genitalia. And, considering the truth apparently lies elsewhere, they simply won't.

Nor can the alleged situational imbalance of chemical properties in gestational fluid be the cause of homosexuality, as otherwise there would be empirical evidence showing higher (and less) than 8% average proportions of homosexuality in certain demographics, which hasn't been shown to be true ... and, no, from ancient Athens to modern Frisco, ultimate congregation points do not reflect gestational orientation.

No, none of these alleged culprits are the guilty party.

The truth apparently lies more to the center of the matter, between conception and puberty.

The reflection of homosexuality at an early age is indeed a clue of the early onset of homosexuality, though it doesn't implicate conceptual genesis.

We psychologists now believe that there is sufficent evidence to implicate neuropsychological dysfunction while the brain is still forming as the origin of homosexuality.

The human brain does not stop forming at birth. For the next four years the brain continues to form to maturity.

During this time the child is exposed to idiosyncratic dysfunction in family-of-origin and related environments, dysfunction that damages the brain in the delicate early years, resulting in brain malformation and the occasional unconscious specific situational inculcation of homosexuality (as well as other pathologies thoroughly documented in psychological journals) ... and no, it doesn't take a homosexual parent(s) to thereby "cause" homosexuality in their children, so telling a gay/lesbian couple that they shouldn't parent an adopted (or half biological) child because they might thereby "infect" their child with "the gay/lesbian 'lifestyle'" is pure rubbish.

Because we know that this is how other similar psychopatholgies are inculcated, addiction, sociopathy, etc., and because there simply is no evidence to support either of the extremes in this manner, and because nearly all other biologically contraindicated "preference" can be traced to dysfunction in the early formative years, the logical conclusion at this point is that homosexuality is thereby unconsciously inculcated.

Because homosexuality is unconsciously inculcated during the early formative years of post-natal brain development, by the time the child is around four years old, not only is that dysfunction systemically incorporated into the warp and woof of the child's brain, the child will sometimes indeed reveal behaviorally the homosexual tendency shortly thereafter.

And, because homosexuality is so indeliby stamped upon the homosexual, religious attempts to "deprogram" the homosexual are understandably unsuccessful, at most resulting in additional cognitive dissonance for the homosexual who merely acts "as if" he/she was straight.

It is best not to inflict the homosexual with additional suffering -- like addicts and social deviants, the homosexual has enough conflict already, and will find fitting into society difficult enough (gay/lesbian marriage, government and corporate descrimination, hate-group crimes) without doomed-to-fail "reprogramming" and "you're going to hell if you don't change your ways" bashing.

One day, when we who practice the art and science of psychology sufficiently advance in our knowledge and understanding of the matter, and when society embraces an elimination of abusive behavior throughout, there will be less parents suffering from dysfunction to so "infect" their children ... and the incidence of homosexuality will naturally decline.

 

[Dr.Who]

As if anyone would choose to be gay.

There is nothing wrong with being gay but it must be a tough life especially with all those loving christians out there seeking to make your harmless life a misery.

Lot's of people choose tough lives. That argument is just silly.

That argument being false does not mean that gays must choose it but we do know that it is silly to say that they did not choose it because it would be a hard life.

 

[poptart]

Homosexuality is obviously not a conscious choice. That many religious groups bent on converting the "sinning" homosexual to "righteous" heterosexuality think sexual preference is a conscious and deliberate one is merely an example of their self-prophetic tail attempting to wag the dog of conflicting truth.

But neither is there any rational evidence convicting genetics or situationally abnormal gestational fluid chemistry as the culprit.

Merely because one end of the topical spectrum is false (conscious and deliberate chioice) certainly doesn't automatically make the other end of the topical spectrum true (genetics, gestational fluid).

The graph of this matter is not a straight line at any angle, and when multiple appropriate disciplines are applied to the question, the graph appears to be bell-shaped, with the ends falling in the false area and the truth at the center of the bell.

Indeed, geneticists have yet to even begin to find any clue-based evidence of a gene or gene combination for sexual preference in conflict with genitalia. And, considering the truth apparently lies elsewhere, they simply won't.

Nor can the alleged situational imbalance of chemical properties in gestational fluid be the cause of homosexuality, as otherwise there would be empirical evidence showing higher (and less) than 8% average proportions of homosexuality in certain demographics, which hasn't been shown to be true ... and, no, from ancient Athens to modern Frisco, ultimate congregation points do not reflect gestational orientation.

No, none of these alleged culprits are the guilty party.

The truth apparently lies more to the center of the matter, between conception and puberty.

The reflection of homosexuality at an early age is indeed a clue of the early onset of homosexuality, though it doesn't implicate conceptual genesis.

We psychologists now believe that there is sufficent evidence to implicate neuropsychological dysfunction while the brain is still forming as the origin of homosexuality.

The human brain does not stop forming at birth. For the next four years the brain continues to form to maturity.

During this time the child is exposed to idiosyncratic dysfunction in family-of-origin and related environments, dysfunction that damages the brain in the delicate early years, resulting in brain malformation and the occasional unconscious specific situational inculcation of homosexuality (as well as other pathologies thoroughly documented in psychological journals) ... and no, it doesn't take a homosexual parent(s) to thereby "cause" homosexuality in their children, so telling a gay/lesbian couple that they shouldn't parent an adopted (or half biological) child because they might thereby "infect" their child with "the gay/lesbian 'lifestyle'" is pure rubbish.

Because we know that this is how other similar psychopatholgies are inculcated, addiction, sociopathy, etc., and because there simply is no evidence to support either of the extremes in this manner, and because nearly all other biologically contraindicated "preference" can be traced to dysfunction in the early formative years, the logical conclusion at this point is that homosexuality is thereby unconsciously inculcated.

Because homosexuality is unconsciously inculcated during the early formative years of post-natal brain development, by the time the child is around four years old, not only is that dysfunction systemically incorporated into the warp and woof of the child's brain, the child will sometimes indeed reveal behaviorally the homosexual tendency shortly thereafter.

And, because homosexuality is so indeliby stamped upon the homosexual, religious attempts to "deprogram" the homosexual are understandably unsuccessful, at most resulting in additional cognitive dissonance for the homosexual who merely acts "as if" he/she was straight.

It is best not to inflict the homosexual with additional suffering -- like addicts and social deviants, the homosexual has enough conflict already, and will find fitting into society difficult enough (gay/lesbian marriage, government and corporate descrimination, hate-group crimes) without doomed-to-fail "reprogramming" and "you're going to hell if you don't change your ways" bashing.

One day, when we who practice the art and science of psychology sufficiently advance in our knowledge and understanding of the matter, and when society embraces an elimination of abusive behavior throughout, there will be less parents suffering from dysfunction to so "infect" their children ... and the incidence of homosexuality will naturally decline.

I agree totally. but since you inferred that you are a psychologist, answer me this. How does this explain why 8 to 10% of the population are pedophiles.
Many of those that now are charged with being a pedophile have the same early age urges, and cannot change the way they are.
Many psychologist are now seeing that a true pedophile cannot be changed with treatment of any kind. Just like a true homosexual. So why do we now embrace those that are homosexual, and lock those that are pedophile up for life. Do most psychologists now favor changing the laws against those that are pedophiles? That the laws that say a therapist or other health professionals MUST turn in any "evidence" over to prosecutors for thier immediate prosecution.

How does the psych community think of the the double standard. And that Hebeophiles, those attracted to 12 to 18 yr olds, are included in with those atracted to those 11 and younger?

PS: I am talking about those that have a "attraction" to children, not the psycho's who rape 5 year olds. There is a DIFFERENCE.

 

[Chip]

I agree totally. but since you inferred that you are a psychologist, answer me this. How does this explain why 8 to 10% of the population are pedophiles.
Many of those that now are charged with being a pedophile have the same early age urges, and cannot change the way they are.
Many psychologist are now seeing that a true pedophile cannot be changed with treatment of any kind. Just like a true homosexual. So why do we now embrace those that are homosexual, and lock those that are pedophile up for life. Do most psychologists now favor changing the laws against those that are pedophiles? That the laws that say a therapist or other health professionals MUST turn in any "evidence" over to prosecutors for thier immediate prosecution.

How does the psych community think of the the double standard. And that Hebeophiles, those attracted to 12 to 18 yr olds, are included in with those atracted to those 11 and younger?

PS: I am talking about those that have a "attraction" to children, not the psycho's who rape 5 year olds. There is a DIFFERENCE.

I have a particular aversion to off-topic digression -- this is a thread about the cause of homosexuality, so if you want to start a thread on pedophilia and related disorders, I'd weigh in with more detail, as time allows.

For now, however, environmental inculcation of aspects of pedophilia is a given, not subject to rational conjecture.

With regard to imprisonment (correction/punishment in general), we don't criminally indict because of the disorder one suffers, we criminally indict because of the behavior one perpetrates.

It is not a crime to suffer a disorder, no matter what the pathogenesis.

If a homosexual commits no crime, there is rightly to be no indictment.

If a pedophile commits no crime, there is rightly to be no indictment.

Homosexuality, in general, does not usually lead to crime.

Pedophilia, however, in general, does often compel the sufferer to commit crimes against children/teenagers.

The argument that the pedophile can't help himself because his pedophilia was inculcated into the warp and woof of his brain isn't the point.

The point is that if the pedophile molests a child/teenager, he has commited a crime, and such cannot rightly go unconvicted for any reason, lest we do a horrific disservice to an entire class of potential victims.

Once a pedophile has shown to act out from the disorder, thereby victimizing someone, that pedophile has presented evidence that he lacks sufficient control, and is thus a danger to others.

Action with regard to that person, to protect others from that person, then needs to be taken.

Disorders inculcated during the first four years of life while the brain is still forming are a class of disorders that deserve greater attention, in my opinion.

Hopefully one day we will have better compensational medications.

Ultimately, improvements in education of identifying repairable dysfunction when one is young, therapy to correct that dysfunction prior to marriage, education on how to select a truly compatible mate, and major changes in the socioeconomic system to effect socioeconomic stress reduction ... all will play a valuable role in reducing parental family-of-origin dysfunction, thereby leading to a reduction in the percentage of early-childhood unconsciously inculcated permanent disorders.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Is homosexuality a choice or is it genetic?
Ummm, neither?

I'm not a shrink, but I can guess about a situation where the correct answer is "Neither". And it's proabaly fairly common, though I'm sure it doesn't happen to every person who turns out gay.

A little boy is born, and grows up normally, no problems. No reason to think he will turn out gay.

Then he gets molested by a crazy uncle or someone. Happens a number of times between ages 4 and 7.

When he grows up, he turns out to be gay. And the superduper psychologists of the day, decide that it was because of the molestations.

Was the kid "born gay"? No.

Did he choose to be gay? No.

Homosexuality might also be a result of your environment - things that were done around you or to you, rather than anything you were born with or chose to do.

 

[samsara15]

I really don't care. I don't feel that there is anything wrong with anyone being a homosexual, as long as all sexual contact takes place beween consenting adults. The world is over-populated anyhow. Let them do what they want to do, as long as it is consenting adults, and on one suffer bodily harm.

 

[Dr.Who]

Pedophilia, however, in general, does often compel the sufferer to commit crimes against children/teenagers.

The argument that the pedophile can't help himself because his pedophilia was inculcated into the warp and woof of his brain isn't the point.

The point is that if the pedophile molests a child/teenager, he has commited a crime, and such cannot rightly go unconvicted for any reason, lest we do a horrific disservice to an entire class of potential victims.

Once a pedophile has shown to act out from the disorder, thereby victimizing someone, that pedophile has presented evidence that he lacks sufficient control, and is thus a danger to others.

I did not recognize that you were a psychologist as the other person indicated. I practiced for 15 to 20 years working mostly with children with multiple disabilities usually behavior disorders. In that time while I worked with many children who had been abused I only worked with one who had been an abuser. Anyway I am way off topic and just wanted to shout out a "hey" to someone who may have been in the same field.

Without continuing to get too far off topic I did want to address the idea that pedophiles are often compelled to commit crimes.

Surely there are many examples of pedophiles who have committed crimes. What we have less data on is how many people have pedophilic urges that they do not act on at all.

For all we know half the male population thinks that 14 year old girls are sexually attractive but do nothing about it. In fact, given just how much similarity there is between many 14 year old girls and many 18 year old girls I would not be surprised it that were true.

 

[invest07]

It is impossible for there to be a genetic link with homosexuality.

If homosexuals reproduce at a lower rate than the straight population, then the homosexual gene would shrink in frequency over the years. Population genetics tell you that homosexuality can't be a gene or even a genetic predisposition because the number of homosexuals, as a percentage of the general population, has been relatively constant.

If it's a gene, there must be fewer each year. Homosexuality as a choice is the only explanation that explains the stable population.

 

[Dr.Who]

It is impossible for there to be a genetic link with homosexuality.

If homosexuals reproduce at a lower rate than the straight population, then the homosexual gene would shrink in frequency over the years. Population genetics tell you that homosexuality can't be a gene or even a genetic predisposition because the number of homosexuals, as a percentage of the general population, has been relatively constant.

If it's a gene, there must be fewer each year. Homosexuality as a choice is the only explanation that explains the stable population.

You could brush up on your genetics.

 

[invest07]

To the good Dr. Who

Perhaps you should explain to us all why I should brush up on my genetics.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

how about choice, genes, environment...in any case, they are people and should be respected and have the same rights as others. Personally I find choice a hard option, as not only did I never pick to be strait, I could never pick to be gay...and I imagine its the same fore most, gays cant choose to be strait, straits cant choose to be gay.

 

[invest07]

To pocketfullofshells

If you believe in evolution, then you should understand why it is not necessary to chose to be straight.

Accoding to evolution, the traits that will survive are those that make the species more likely to survive. Homosexuality, with a reduced birth rate, makes survival of the species less likely.

If you believe in evolution, then development of a "straight" gene is consistent with evolutionary theory. Development of a "homo" gene is inconsistent with evolutionary theory.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Re: To pocketfullofshells

If you believe in evolution, then you should understand why it is not necessary to chose to be straight.

Accoding to evolution, the traits that will survive are those that make the species more likely to survive. Homosexuality, with a reduced birth rate, makes survival of the species less likely.

If you believe in evolution, then development of a "straight" gene is consistent with evolutionary theory. Development of a "homo" gene is inconsistent with evolutionary theory.

and if you knew it, you would know that genetics change and and not evry change makes you more or less able to survive or have kids. Also in modern times for mankind, as a society we correct things in other ways to keep going, regardless of genetic flaws. I cant see for **** without glasses, in normal evolution I would die off...but I am also smart, so I found a way to see, I paid for glasses. There are 7 billion peopl on earth, mankind does not need 100% breeding to keep going, so its not a needed part of human survival or even for gays to have kids anymore. thus evolution does not realy play a part.

 

[Dr.Who]

Re: To the good Dr. Who

Perhaps you should explain to us all why I should brush up on my genetics.

Everything in this link is possible. If someone wants to go on to say that it is fact it would be pure speculation. But it is possible.

http://www.windypundit.com/archives/2008/06/gayvolution.html