Can you be born gay or is it a choice?

[Journyman16]

...If everyone was really bisexual or was bisexual but didn't know it society would be totally different, LGBT people wouldn't need to come out at all, issues like same sex marriage, LGBT rights, etc. wouldn't be issues at all.

You may be discounting the effects of Religion. Finding ways to make people feel guilty about natural urges is a great guilt-trip mecjanism for making everyone feel they have to obey the priests.

 

[Foreigner]

I used to think this when I was younger and first accepting myself; but then I met lots of people who really are actually heterosexual, and some who are homosexual/gay/lesbian, in that they're just simply not sexually attracted to the opposite gender and never have been even if they've had sex with people of the opposite gender/sex or were married at one time.

If everyone was really bisexual or was bisexual but didn't know it society would be totally different, LGBT people wouldn't need to come out at all, issues like same sex marriage, LGBT rights, etc. wouldn't be issues at all.


Kinsey and the other sex researchers who did those studies decades ago never claimed that very few people are really heterosexual or gay/lesbian.

The Kinsey scale has one section for being hetero, at the other end is gay/lesbian, and everything in between those two points consists of bisexuality.

The studies themselves were interesting to read about; but they're very dated, biased, and Kinsey did interview a lot of bisexual and gay men, men in prisons, and male prostitutes, lesbian and bi women, women in prisons, and female prostitutes, so that's why people claim that the studies show that very few people are really heterosexual/gay or lesbian but that's not what the studies actually show, since they simply just show the variations of human sexuality.

Plus, no other human sexuality researcher has ever shown that most people are bisexual, or that it's rare or impossible for someone to be gay/lesbian, or heterosexual.

Way to miss my point completely.

 

[PotatoMan]

At the end of your development, whether nature or nurture, you don't have control over who or what turns you on. But the identities "gay", " straight", and "bi" are choices.

If you go to China, "gay" is a western thing. It means you're one of those guys that likes to live in ghettos and dance on pride floats.

Many men who are into men call themselves queer because gay is a cultural label. I'm into men but I only use the word gay for conversation sake. I don't identify as gay because I specifically distance myself from sociopathic, consumerist, body fascist gay culture.

Likewise there are men who are into men who call themselves straight because they mostly are, except for the odd time they fuck a guy.

The confusion comes from the identity labels. The underlying attractions and behaviors are a lot easier to understand. Whatever people think of themselves as is merely the software of their self-concept. The body, the physical animal meat space, has its own plans and designs. Hence we see megachurch evangelicals getting caught in motels with boys. The software is just the social song and dance, nothing more. Your body already dictates what it wants, the origins of which, IMO, are quite irrelevant because they won't ever change.

That's why I find the labels pointless. Kinsey showed that only a small number of people were close to 100% anything. The rest showed deviances. Labels make people choose false software that limits instinctual feelings. Coming out as gay these days is just as imprisoning as saying you're straight because you've now adopted a series of social moores which dictate what others think of you. Why bother? I'm a free person, I can do what I want. I might never sleep with a woman but if one day I do it shouldn't be controversial because "zoooommmg I thought you were gay?!" Likewise guys who have a weird one night stand who then go off freaking out about how they might be gay, and the crisis it causes them. It's so stupid. Just do what your soft animal body wants, it doesn't have to mean some major life overhaul. It's your body enjoy it how you want in your limited time here.

I loved this

 

[PriestTheyCalledHim]

You may be discounting the effects of Religion. Finding ways to make people feel guilty about natural urges is a great guilt-trip mecjanism for making everyone feel they have to obey the priests.

OK, not everyone that is religious or spiritual, or who was raised in spirituality or an organized religion grew up hearing that. I was raised spiritually, and in a Protestant church that has always been highly accepting of LGBT people, we had openly LGBT members both adults and youth that came out or eventually came out, and the church I was raised in performs and supports same gender marriage as it's legal here.

Way to miss my point completely.

No I did not completely miss your point. I simply wrote something you did not personally agree with.

FYI, not all or even most gay men are body fascists, into rampant consumerism, or engage in behaviour like sociopaths.

 

[alasdairm]

At the end of your development, whether nature or nurture, you don't have control over who or what turns you on. But the identities "gay", " straight", and "bi" are choices.

If you go to China, "gay" is a western thing. It means you're one of those guys that likes to live in ghettos and dance on pride floats.

Many men who are into men call themselves queer because gay is a cultural label. I'm into men but I only use the word gay for conversation sake. I don't identify as gay because I specifically distance myself from sociopathic, consumerist, body fascist gay culture.

Likewise there are men who are into men who call themselves straight because they mostly are, except for the odd time they fuck a guy.

The confusion comes from the identity labels. The underlying attractions and behaviors are a lot easier to understand. Whatever people think of themselves as is merely the software of their self-concept. The body, the physical animal meat space, has its own plans and designs. Hence we see megachurch evangelicals getting caught in motels with boys. The software is just the social song and dance, nothing more. Your body already dictates what it wants, the origins of which, IMO, are quite irrelevant because they won't ever change.

That's why I find the labels pointless. Kinsey showed that only a small number of people were close to 100% anything. The rest showed deviances. Labels make people choose false software that limits instinctual feelings. Coming out as gay these days is just as imprisoning as saying you're straight because you've now adopted a series of social moores which dictate what others think of you. Why bother? I'm a free person, I can do what I want. I might never sleep with a woman but if one day I do it shouldn't be controversial because "zoooommmg I thought you were gay?!" Likewise guys who have a weird one night stand who then go off freaking out about how they might be gay, and the crisis it causes them. It's so stupid. Just do what your soft animal body wants, it doesn't have to mean some major life overhaul. It's your body enjoy it how you want in your limited time here.

i agree with much if not all of what you write here but it doesn't address the original topic.

however you chose to label, describe or characterise your sexuality, were you born with it or did you actively choose it?

do we choose to what we are attracted or are we 'just' attracted to things?

alasdair

 

[LuGoJ]

i agree with much if not all of what you write here but it doesn't address the original topic.

however you chose to label, describe or characterise your sexuality, were you born with it or did you actively choose it?

do we choose to what we are attracted or are we 'just' attracted to things?

alasdair

I wonder if it's possible that sexuality and what controls sexuality is similar to taste buds, similar to how we are born with specific taste buds that gravitate toward certain flavor profiles. The taste buds we are born with cannot be changed and could very well dictate what we like and dislike for the rest of our lives. Yet at the same time, these taste buds can develop differently as we grow, they can also dull over time which may or may not alter what one gravitates towards.. which is completely out of one's control.

I imagine many functions of the body work like this. Perhaps that's why I like to assume that what people are attracted to can change over time, yet still completely out of one's control. Almost as if sexuality worked as one of our senses in some sort of way. Just thinking out loud here, i'm not scientist.

 

[Colonel Contin]

The topic of sexual 'choice' is actually a big part of my masters thesis... this is just a thought, but what do you guys think?:

We can talk about sexuality from an essentialist perspective wherein we all have "born-in desires" from which our sexual essences flow... I think this is the common view of sexuality and sexual preference. There may be an opportunity, on the other hand, especially where BDSM is concerned along with 'queer' sexualities (anything that deviates from the repressed western sexual tradition), to engage in sexual behavior that is creative, expressive, and individual... this type of sexual behavior would be less preoccupied with 'fulfilling essential desire' and more in tune with creating 'aesthetic' scenarios in the pursuit of pleasure. This type of sexuality would be constructed as having aesthetic value - a quality that marks the experience as a form of art. Value and meaning are located within sexual practice and pleasure rather than in their underlying cause; sexuality’s 'raison d’être' (rayz-on day tray - primary function) is tied to its aesthetic value, at surface level rather than beneath it. 'Aesthetic sexuality' would be more a product of choice, a deliberate strategy of self-creation as well as a mode of social communication, and therefore can be chosen and cultivated by potentially any individual on the basis of its intended aesthetic value.

I am not gay, perse, but I am always open to queer experimentation in the pursuit of pleasure. If sex is a performative artform - an expedition of the Individual - BDSM and other non-normative forms of sexual expression are paints on the palette, tools in the belt.

 

[pofacedhoe]

I don't think he meant that it was a choice. I think he meant that our experiences in life can have a great influence on what we ultimate become. The idea that everyone has their sexuality sealed in stone the second they are born kind of irks me though. Wouldn't it be reasonable to believe that's how some people are, yet some people may be influenced by life experience more than innate traits?

I always thought that people were always born with their sexuality sealed in stone, until I met Harrold. Harrold is a gay friend that's 78, he says he never had a desire or attraction for men for almost his entire life. Was happily married to his wife for 40 years with kids. His wife died when he was 66 and he remained single until 70 years of age. At this point he claims he developed his attraction for men and does not find any attraction towards women anymore. He currently identifies as gay, not bi. Was he born gay, bi or straight? If you ask him, he will say he was born straight. If you asked me 10 years ago I would have said he was born gay and was unhappy and repressing it his whole life. At the end of the day I came to a realization though, who are we to tell him what his sexuality was at birth?

Everyone is different, everyone's brain is different and everyone develops differently. The important thing is that we let each other live our lives as we want, building the relationships we want, so long as everything is consensual. We should respect those that feel it is not a choice for them, and we should respect those that do feel it is a choice for them.

how nurture affects you is not your own choice. you are just the product up to the point where you can self evaluate your own behaviours in many different ways

 

[LuGoJ]

This popped up on reddit earlier today, funny coincidence.

Conditioned same-sex partner preference in male rats is facilitated by oxytocin and dopamine: Effect on sexually dimorphic brain nuclei
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432815000236

I know this has nothing to do with being born gay but it may offer some further insight into how one's sexual preference may be able to change over time. Would need a scientist to chime in and confirm though

how nurture affects you is not your own choice. you are just the product up to the point where you can self evaluate your own behaviours in many different ways

I agree completely, i don't think I said it was a choice or eluded to that. Apologies if I did.

The jist of what I meant was, whether or not someone believes them being gay is a choice, they should be respected. If a person that identifies as gay tells me "It's a choice for me" i won't argue with them nor do I feel I have the right to. Just the same as if an addict told me it was or wasn't a choice for them. ( no i'm not equating being gay to being an addict, that was the only example of a "choice debate" I could think of this early in the AM )

 

[PotatoMan]

The entire topic is so heavily debated. It's interesting to see people's views and you guys have made me think differently about the labelling. It's really just attached as something we can identify those ideas with though.. but it's reached a point of segregation and discrimination but the world will take too long to see the changes we all long for.

I still don't believe one can be born this way. If that were so, then there will be no way we would be able to understand it as it will probably be some higher conscious shit as of why our true selves seek the sexual preferences it does.

Otherwise a choice due to what you've seen in life and grown to enjoy only makes sense as to why one would desire a certain sex or the other.

 

[MoreAlkaloidsPLZ]

The answer is yes. It is genetic. Also it is environmental. People are born with a libido. Prepubescent children with no exposure to homosexual influence can feel a strong attraction to the same sex. Also the libido like any other part of the human psyche is programmable. We are the most adaptive species on the planet and capable of experiencing a very wide array when it comes to states of consciousness. This goes for sexual attraction as much as it does eating habits. So in my humble opinion, the answer to your question is yes.

 

[Clitnhawk]

Choice IMO. Childhood influences and overall life experience gives you your perception and allows you to understand what you enjoy in this world.

Being born gay makes no sense. Was I born to like cheese? Can you show me the physical indicator in our bodies that make us gay? If you can then show me the one that makes me like cheese.
All my friends tell me I'm wrong. Share your views guys. I'm all ears.

You are wrong, mostly. If being gay was simply a choice, then a lot more men will be gay because women are a pain in the ass. Think of it... want a blowjob, easy - just ask a buddy, he'll help you out.

As more than one gay friend has told me "Why would I choose to be gay and deal with the insults, bigotry, loss of family and friends!?" Gay is not a lifestyle. Bring a raver *IS* a life-style. Not all rave chicks are lesbians, but some are. Same with country-western types. Yeah, there are gay "cowboys".

Taste in food changes... what I eat as an adult, is not the same when I was a teen or a child. So equating food to sexual orientation doesn't work.
Now there is "fluid sexuality" in which its kind of a form of bisexuality. A gay man has sex with a woman to try it out for a while, but he thinks of men. = still gay. There are lesbians who DO date or have sex with men... a rare while. So its not 100% pure lesbian, is it.

I meet my wife to be, while she was looking to pick up chicks. She is bi, mostly for girls. She has been attracted to girls since around age 10. She still dresses like a cute lesbian and girls are attracted to her.

I have many friends who are gay, I go to gay clubs, I've meet girls or taken dates to gay clubs. Why? Good music and dance floor with strong drinks. Gay people come in all sizes and colors. Most gay people look like... well, people. Their feelings are like... well, same as anyone else. Some are cool, some are assholes, some are religious, some like rock, some like Bach. Some are hot, some are ugly, some can be your best friend, some may want kiss you. etc, etc.

Do you have to THINK about wanting a relationship or sex with women? I got a million naked/porn photos and videos on my computers of chicks... I don't have to WORK at being straight.

If *YOU* have to work on your sexual orientation, then you're lying to yourself. Many gay men marry women, because its the thing to do or hoping it will cure them... but they look at and fantasy about men, means they are gay. This happened a lot in the OLD days or in countries where being gay can get you killed.

 

[Clitnhawk]

I still don't believe one can be born this way. If that were so, then there will be no way we would be able to understand it as it will probably be some higher conscious shit as of why our true selves seek the sexual preferences it does.
Otherwise a choice due to what you've seen in life and grown to enjoy only makes sense as to why one would desire a certain sex or the other.

What you believe and what is real are two different things. If you believe the Earth is flat - fine, but its not. There is sexual preference, which is not the same are orientation. I have a thing for Asian girls, doesn't mean I don't date/have sex with non Asians.

Babies are not born with a clean slate. I'm pretty much sure you're not a parent. When my baby was born early and stayed in a hospital for 2 months. He wasn't like the other babies. They all had different cries, they looked different, etc.
My son was born with a personality, but there isn't much a newborn can do. But yes, at 2.5lbs, HE did some things HIS way. He wasn't playdough.

We can teach our children HOW to live, life values, how to survive and give them love. Just as adults can do some self-adjustments. But you can't fix personality and other traits. My son and wife eat things *I* will never eat. I don't like it. (Hmm, maybe your food analogy works in some way)... Even as a young child, we let him try all kinds of food to see what he likes and doesn't like.

While I would prefer my son to not be gay, I would have no choice in that matter and would love him just the same. He's still in diapers and I'm not concerned with such things.

 

[augustaB]

I personally think that we are all born bisexual and that social conditioning, family stress factors and experience feed back into that until a lot of people try to argue that they are straight.

 

[Clitnhawk]

There has been research done on identical twins in which one is gay, the other is not. They grew up in the same household, etc.

I'd say there are more bisexuals and homosexuals out there that don't see themselves that way, you get the term "homo-flexible".

 

[Colonel Contin]

Studies cited in wiki:

"A 2010 study of all adult twins in Sweden (more than 7,600 twins) found that same-sex behavior was explained by both heritable factors and individual-specific environmental sources.

Biometric modeling revealed that, in men, genetic effects explained .34–.39 of the variance [of sexual orientation], the shared environment .00, and the individual-specific environment .61–.66 of the variance. Corresponding estimates among women were .18–.19 for genetic factors, .16–.17 for shared environmental, and .64–.66 for unique environmental factors. Although wide confidence intervals suggest cautious interpretation, the results are consistent with moderate, primarily genetic, familial effects, and moderate to large effects of the nonshared environment (social and biological) on same-sex sexual behavior.


​

There is a mechanism which might account for monozygotic twins being discordant for homosexuality... Dichorionic twins potentially have different hormonal environments because they receive maternal blood from separate placenta, and this could result in different levels of brain masculinisation."

These studies link sexual discordance in identical twins to 'biological' factors that aren't strictly genetic (hormonal and developmental). The 'environmental' factors mentioned in the italicized portion of the article refer to a mix of things, some biological, some psychological/social.

Makes sense that hormonal development would have as great (or greater) an impact on sexuality as genetics. If there were a 'gay gene', it wouldn't exactly jive with Darwinian 'fitness'.

So... by that logic it stands to reason that the hormonal make-up responsible for determining our sex preference is pretty much hard-wired by the time we're born. But that sexuality isn't manifest until adolescence and continues to develop through early adulthood... so... that begs the question, if you drastically altered a child's hormone levels as their sexuality was emerging, could it have a significant impact on their sex preference?.. If so, that means there might be a cure for 'gay' (or 'straight' for that matter).

I for one prefer to believe that we each have a soul, and it's are either a 'straight soul' or a 'gay soul'. So you're not just born gay or straight, but you're conceived that way, and so on and for forth off into eternity. [edit: nobody here likes my jokes, so I don't know why I even bother]

 

[dopemaster]

Some people are not always gay or straight. I don't think it is that black and white for everyone.

I have some gay and bi family members. One is a set of identical twins. One is gay and one is straight. So that case is rather cut and dry. They were raised the same but it is very clear that one is straight and one is gay. Now the gay one was disowned by his father and even on the man's deathbed he refused to speak to one of his son's. Both men were raised the same and well they were very much the same other than their sexuality.

Another family member of mine is bi and I am rather close to her. She prefers women but she wants a family and a house and all that stuff so she will marry a man. So there is a bit of social norms pushing her to be straight yet she is willing to forego her true sexual passions for other things in life.

Myself I always knew I was straight. There was no questioning my sexuality. I know what I fancy and that is that.

I have a friend who is gay but he dates women often to show people that he is not gay but yet he is gay. He will have brief and very public relationships with women and than quietly live his real sexuality in relative secrecy. I would say that is cowardly but I honestly think that someone would kill him if they were to catch him with a man.

I think some people fancy one sex more than the other yet fancy both sex's to a certain degree. People in prison sometimes resort to gay sex even though they were always straight due to the need to intimacy and sexual gratification. So under that unusual circumstances unusual changes happen.

So ask yourself if all the men or women were to disapear of the planet would you lead a sexless life from then on?

So I would say for the most part it is nature but nuture comes into play. Often times people will choose to be straight just because the have to.

Buggery was a crime punishable by death not that long ago. So if you were gay it might be better to just live a straight life other than cease to exist.

Sometimes gay men would become priests as priests did not have sex. These men were often god fearing so it was ok to have homosexual urges but not to act upon them. That is the general christian concenscious.

But I do no think anyone wakes up one day and chooses to be a homosexual. That is some straight up right wing propaganda imho. I think the very idea of homosexuality as a choice is of political orgin. It really comes down to the heavy duty christian voting block. The people that hold signs that say "god hates fags", well they vote.

So you do have to weigh in many factors. But I think no one has a right to say some one else chose to be a homosexual.

I look at it like this. If someone was to tell me I could not fancy women, well I would never accept that and no matter what the cost I would never change my mind on that, so who am I to tell someone else who they can fancy and who they can't? So I say live and let live.

I do have a different view on gay couple adoption and well I do feel that a child would be teased for having two mothers or two fathers. I just do not think it would be fair to the child. Now if it was a child of one the couple's own making then I think the matter is different. That is just my personal opinion and that is all about the child's well being and nothing to do with anything else. Often I do think gay marraige is pushed so it can be a stepping stone to gay adoption.

I don't care if gay people get married but if the purpose is so they can adopt a child, I do not think that is right. That is just MY opinion and well I am not the law so I really can't hold it against someone. I understand the desire to raise children and well I am sure it would be hard to be a homosexual and wish to adopt and I suppose it is not up to me to decide but I do have the right to vote and I do have the right to an opinion.

So I have no problem with gay people getting married if it is just because they love each other. I feel that is just the making a union more official and special and everyone has a right to be with who they love. I just question when it is for ulterior motives. Straight people get married for ulterior motives too, so it is not about gay or straight. I suppose subjecting a child to ridicule is something I would not like to see happen.

But back to the subject, there is no scientific evidence as to how homosexuality happens and it happens with animals even but I have overwhelming evidence in my mind that it is not a choice. Just because we do not know how something happens does not mean we can just say it happened a certain way.

 

[Colonel Contin]

I think some people fancy one sex more than the other yet fancy both sex's to a certain degree. People in prison sometimes resort to gay sex even though they were always straight due to the need to intimacy and sexual gratification. So under that unusual circumstances unusual changes happen.

So ask yourself if all the men or women were to disapear of the planet would you lead a sexless life from then on?

I wonder if this goes back to the question of the kinsey scale (ie. do people fall back on the inkling of same-sex tendency when their preference is compromised?). There are probably people in prison that have never thought of same-sex-sex as an appealing option, not for any moral affliction, but because they are simply that indifferent sexually to other members of their gender. My hunch, though, is that desperate times would have most people at least considering it.

As far as how this weighs on the nature vs. nurture debate... I firmly believe that we are wired for massive versitility in the face of countless possible amalgams of circumstance and any speculation regarding what an individual is 'capable of' is useless conjecture. I have surprised myself many times without being pushed to my limit... I can only imagine what type of behavior a really trying scenario might produce. 'Nature' may give us inclinations by which we abide in a stress-free environment, but I think 'nurture', pushed to its limits, usually wins out.

But back to the subject, there is no scientific evidence as to how homosexuality happens and it happens with animals even but I have overwhelming evidence in my mind that it is not a choice. Just because we do not know how something happens does not mean we can just say it happened a certain way.

There is plenty of scientific speculation and some sound theory, but, as you've pointed out, no real evidence. I was tossing that out there as an elaboration of the post above mine, but I don't really buy any of that shit. Truth is, there is something magical about sexuality, and it's so intensely personal that attempting to explain it in scientific terms undermines its essence... like postulating that 'self' is a manufactured concept living among synapses that, with careful mathematics, can be mapped and reduced to cold mechanism. That sort of shit might be true, but I know what I feel, and I'd rather swallow a bullet than entertain such a frigid distillation

 

[What 23]

I'm not sure I have a "choice" in much of anything. Sometimes I think I do.

I imagine that it's possible that different things might influence whether a person is gay or straight or whatever. Pre-natal hormone exposure. Even cosmetics/perfumes. A mother's body that doesn't recycle or break down estrogens fast enough. I really have no idea.

I've read that certain perfumes can cause a higher incidence of feminized males... Smaller testicals. I'm not sure.

Not so say any of the above makes one gay, or whatever. Just that lots of things, subtly effect us.

To me, being gay is not exactly normal. People can get upset if they want about that, but I consider it a failure. These people have fully functional more or less sexual organs and they have virtually no, or no desire at all to have sex with the opposite sex. In the case of a male, their ejaculate contains billions of sperm cells which are released when they climax- that "oh God" moment. But in their case... Nothing. Worthless. Only selfish, hedonistic pleasure, and a waste of a valuable resource (not that one couldnt argue the same for condoms).

But, maybe there is something more.

But to me, it seems pointless.

It's not a big deal, though. As long as enough healthy people continue the human race. Which we don't seem to have a problem with, except White people (and Japanese, and maybe some others), which are falling behind in this fuckfest and their countries are being overrrun or trending to be by outsiders, and are being encouraged to mix themselves away or else Nazis.
And femininism can be seen as an issue there. Depopulating wouldn't be an issue, and feminism more or less (but I do believe there are trends in gender roles that are normal)... Things would stabilize. But the economic systems (and greed) are unsustainable and encourage great inequality between and within countries. Globalism, capitalism, or whatever. And encourage mass immigration from poor, even if resource rich countries, into wealthier countries. It is quite unconscious, and lacking foresight. Basically the white mans system- or system that has been with them/culminated so greatly around them, is about to bite him/them in the ass. Heritage destroyed. And shamed away. It is really natural for the head to bite the tail, though. If it were a unique "successful" imperialistic North American Indian that colonized the world and exported their language and culture, the same would happen to them.

Oh... But about failure. God uses failure.

Anyway. I'm not sure we can say anyone truly has a choice. There are more arguments against it than for it. But... I think it is good for us to believe we have one. I think we might have one. At the very tip. Maybe like the symbolism of the Great Pyramid. No capstone. That is the choice. But there is a lot there...

 

[Colonel Contin]

contemporary sexuality is ALL selfish, hedonistic pleasure. If it's not, you aren't doing it right.

Complaining about wasted sperm is silly. The average household produces roughly 3 children, so out of the billions of sperm produced in a lifetime, the straight man utilizes 3. By your logic, gay sperm donors may be less hedonistic than straight non-sperm donors, so long as their donations are adequately utilized. More often than not, conception is the by-product of hedonistic behavior - the survival of our species thrives on our hedonism. Besides, the urge to reproduce and bask in the glory of your supreme contribution to human evolution is arguably the most hedonistic inclination imaginable.

Anyway, perhaps homosexuality is counter-intuitive from a Darwinian perspective, but this is certainly not your concern (more food for your babies if the gays don't breed).

And please elaborate on your theory regarding Nazis, feminism, and depopulation. I have a burning desire to hear this.