Is homosexuality a choice or is it genetic?

[Pandora]

I am straight. I like women. I want them all the time. Many and often. Society doesn't understand my urgent need to have sex with all the girls. I love them all so bad. I don't want my wife or the people at church to know. They think badly of me. I am not a horny beast. I get so upset when I can't make sense of what I want and what people say I'm supposed to do. I don't want to be be so ashamed. I want to be a priest, but I know I would only want to fornicate with the nuns and nice ladies and girls of age. (no kiddies, that's disgusting!) I wonder if I have this in my genes, or is it only in my bulging jeans?
Do you think I may have inherited this urgent desire to smash the face of anyone who doesn't agree with me also?
If you could help us know that it's not really our fault, I and many serial rapists, killers, pedophiles and politicians who suffer like I do would be very grateful for the insight.
I love you guys,
JtheR

Pedophiles have absolutely no control over who they are attracted to. We can not blame them for what they feel inside but we must not let them act on their feelings for the safety of children.

You may not be able to control what you are thinking and feeling but you can control if you act on it or not. Get yourself together man! Keep it in your pants unless you are with your wife!

As for murders, I can imagine someone hating someone so much they want them dead for a number of reasons. They may not be able to control their thoughts and feelings but they must control their actions or pay the consequences of their actions!

Sorry to seem so harsh but really you got to control that lusting and keep it from leading to the bad nasty, I bet your wife will have a hard time controlling her wish to murder you if you don’t control your wanker!

 

[dahermit]

I disagree. This definition gives rise to some major contradictions -- a non-practicing homosexual, for instance.

I stand by what I said: Homosexuality is not a lifestyle, it is a sexual orientation. A man who is sexually attracted to another man is a homosexual. If he does not respond to that attraction, he is still a homosexual. A man who is attracted to women is a heterosexual. If he does not act on it (a bachelor for instance), he is still heterosexual.
It is the desire, not whether or not he frequents gay bars (and participates in that lifestyle) that makes a homosexual a homosexual.

 

[numinus]

I stand by what I said: Homosexuality is not a lifestyle, it is a sexual orientation. A man who is sexually attracted to another man is a homosexual. If he does not respond to that attraction, he is still a homosexual. A man who is attracted to women is a heterosexual. If he does not act on it (a bachelor for instance), he is still heterosexual.
It is the desire, not whether or not he frequents gay bars (and participates in that lifestyle) that makes a homosexual a homosexual.

Hmmm.

Does that definition apply only to sexual appetites? I'm curious as to where you classify sadism, masochism, bestiality and pedophilia? Do you consider deviant sexual predispositions as integral parts of this nebulous concept of sexual orientation?

 

[samsara15]

Homosexuality is not deviant.

 

[numinus]

Homosexuality is not deviant.

The standard gay rhetoric is that it is a predisposition, is it not? And as I understand it, sado-masochism and pedophilia are also predispositions.

So, as predispositions go, how is homosexuality different?

And it is a predisposition that exists only in, according to the most generous estimates, 10% of the human population, no?

Is that not what 'deviant' means?

 

[dahermit]

Originally Posted by dahermit
I stand by what I said: Homosexuality is not a lifestyle, it is a sexual orientation. A man who is sexually attracted to another man is a homosexual. If he does not respond to that attraction, he is still a homosexual. A man who is attracted to women is a heterosexual. If he does not act on it (a bachelor for instance), he is still heterosexual.
It is the desire, not whether or not he frequents gay bars (and participates in that lifestyle) that makes a homosexual a homosexual.

Hmmm.
Does that definition apply only to sexual appetites? I'm curious as to where you classify sadism, masochism, bestiality and pedophilia? Do you consider deviant sexual predispositions as integral parts of this nebulous concept of sexual orientation?

Are you shifting from my original statement? (Homosexuality is not a lifestyle, it is a sexual orientation.) Sadism, masochism, etc., etc., are not relative to my statement and there have been no studies (that I know of, unless you can provide a citation for one), that would indicate a predisposition.

Furthermore, the American Psychiatric Association, and their studies support what I have stated and concur that the "deviations" you have mentioned are acquired conditions.

Of course, I am willing to change my position if you can provide convincing evidence contrary to my statement.

 

[numinus]

Are you shifting from my original statement? (Homosexuality is not a lifestyle, it is a sexual orientation.) Sadism, masochism, etc., etc., are not relative to my statement and there have been no studies (that I know of, unless you can provide a citation for one), that would indicate a predisposition.

Furthermore, the American Psychiatric Association, and their studies support what I have stated and concur that the "deviations" you have mentioned are acquired conditions.

Of course, I am willing to change my position if you can provide convincing evidence contrary to my statement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

Beginning in 2002, other researchers, most notably Canadian sexologists James Cantor and Ray Blanchard and their colleagues, began reporting a series of findings linking pedophilia with brain structure and function: ....They report that their findings suggest that there are one or more neurological characteristics present at birth that cause or increase the likelihood of being pedophilic. Evidence of familial transmittability "suggests, but does not prove that genetic factors are responsible" for the development of pedophilia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BDSM

There are only a few studies researching the psychological aspects of BDSM using modern scientific standards. A pivotal survey on the subject was published by US-American psychotherapist Charles Moser in 1988 in the Journal of Social Work and Human Sexuality.[49] His conclusion was that while there is a general lack of data on the psychological problems of BDSM practitioners, some fundamental results are obvious. He emphasizes that there is no evidence for the theory that BDSM has common symptoms or any common psychopathology; Clinical literature, though does not give a consistent picture of BDSM practitioners. Moser emphasizes that there is no evidence at all supporting the theory of BDSM practitioners having any special psychiatric problems or even problems based solely on their preferences.

Same thing, really -- predisposition, orientation, preference.

 

[invest07]

There ain't no homo gene and there ain't no homo "predisposition". Homosexuality is a BEHAVIOR and behaviors are choices we make. Straight men and women go into prison and may chose to engage in homosexual behavior. When they get out, who knows?

The human genome project is now winding down, after having mapped virtually the entire human DNA molecule (6 billion base pairs of nucleotides and around 25,000+ genes). Guess what they found?

THERE AIN'T NO HOMO GENE.​

I appreciate the fact that the lack of a homo gene is not considered politically correct. But it is the truth, regardless of whatever preconceptions the homo/lesbo/transwhatever crowd brings to the table.

Perhaps one of you knowlegeable believers that homosexual behavior is in the genes would be so kind as to explain one simple fact to those of us skeptics here at HOP. If homosexuality is in the genes, how did Darwinian evolution put it there?

Homosexuality always results in a lower birth rate which is a detriment to survival of the species. According to Darwinista theories, everything is geared toward improving the odds for survival. So there is no room in Darwinian evolution for a homo gene to survive.

Any population that developed a homo gene would be at a survival disadvantage compared with other populations without the homo gene. According to the Darwinistas, the homo gene would self destruct itself within several generations.

The percentage of people in the US population that admit to engaging in homosexual behaviors regularly is somewhere around 3-5% and that percent has been reasonably constant for several generations now.

Science says there ain't no homo gene. And since a homo gene is not scientific, the only remaining option is that homosexual behavior is a choice. It may be a complex choice and the individual may not understand all the elements that go into this choice but it is a choice, none the less.

And to call homsexual behavior a behavior is not PC but it is the truth.

 

[samsara15]

Since we're quoting Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_homosexuality#Genetic_factors

From the article:

Genetic factors
Main article: Biology and sexual orientation
Research has identified several biological factors which may be related to the development of sexual orientation, including genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure. No single controlling cause has been identified, and research is continuing in this area. At one time, twin studies appeared to point to a major genetic component, but problems in experimental design of the available studies have made their interpretation difficult, and one recent study appears to exclude genes as a major factor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Hamer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_LeVay

Which provides some of both sides of the story.

 

[MichaelB]

I truly believe that none of us truly know the answer. And saying that, I do have an opinion: I don't think we have a choice. We don't have a questionnaire asking us "Do you want to be heterosexual or homosexual?" I believe we are who we are at birth. When my 21 yr old grandson was not even 2yrs of age I knew (and so did his parents) that he was gay. He was more of a little girl than a little boy even at that age and it never changed. He's never acted like a boy at any age. Going any farther with this would be going off topic so unless asked (to let you know what it's like being the grandparent of a gay) I think I've answered the question.

 

[numinus]

Since we're quoting Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_homosexuality#Genetic_factors

From the article:

Genetic factors
Main article: Biology and sexual orientation
Research has identified several biological factors which may be related to the development of sexual orientation, including genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure. No single controlling cause has been identified, and research is continuing in this area. At one time, twin studies appeared to point to a major genetic component, but problems in experimental design of the available studies have made their interpretation difficult, and one recent study appears to exclude genes as a major factor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Hamer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_LeVay

Which provides some of both sides of the story.

So, if homosexuality is an 'orientation', we can also correctly say that pedophilia and bsdm are also sexual orientations. Is that the gist of your opinion?

If not, how is it different?

 

[Chip]

A choice implies a conscious decision.

Drives are largely unconscious in nature.

We are unconsciously driven to our attraction to a specific sex/gender, and that's simply not a matter for rational conjecture.

Acting upon that drive, no matter what specific sex/gender to which one is attracted, is a choice.

This "Is Homosexuality A Choice Or Is It Genetic?" debate for the most part is not really about the nature of sexual attraction orientation as topically stated ...

... It is really about one's personal emotional reaction to homosexuality.

 

[laymen]

Well put.

 

[samsara15]

I think Chip has hit the point pretty well.

My point, Numinus, was that we can site 'experts' and 'expert opinion', on both sides of the fence, and find formidable references to back up either side of the debate. as well.

 

[numinus]

I think Chip has hit the point pretty well.

My point, Numinus, was that we can site 'experts' and 'expert opinion', on both sides of the fence, and find formidable references to back up either side of the debate. as well.

Of course that is your point.

And my point -- what exactly is a desire or thought without an action that gives it substance?