nevermind... i posted that yesterday i think... i dunno. i've gone kinda off topic myself since then so it might as well be part of the topic now. i guess the topic should just be gays and lesbians.
Well thankfully I was never molested as a child but I have met some gay people who were. I've heard this theory before but don't put a lot of stock into it myself. It could be true but I doubt it. Most of the time when people make this connection they are trying to promote the sterotype of the predatory homosexual to fit an anti-gay agenda. If you remember the author or book, post the info.
Wow, so it's true about the toe thing! Absolutely amazing! I thought that was just one of those elementary school myths. Seriously, the scientific literature of the last five years has been pretty overwhelming in concluding that sexual orientation is biological in origin, as opposed to social or cultural. But then, I'm just a poltically correct, agenda-driven academic. edit: erased facetious pseudo-rant on the the so-called sin of sexual orientation.
I'm not too big on the idea of it being genetic as it would imply that some of us are born without any intention of continuing the species. I can also point to stuff in formative years that definitely influenced the kind of women I am attracted to.
I think your formative sexual experiences do affect your adult tastes. For example, when I was 15 we moved to Japan. Surprise, surprise, I really like the way asian women look. Oh sure, I like the way black, white, and hispanic women look, but it's a little different. It's not surprising that my wife is Japanese either. So I could understand the molestation experiences dramatically affecting those boys in the study. However, maybe the reason that psychologist was working with the gay boys in question is that they got f*cked up in the head because they were molested? It's not exactly a scientific sample we are working with here and certainly couldn't be used to prove anything. I believe it's not really so black and white as most people want to believe. Certainly our society pushes it in that direction - if you are not straight you probably are not welcome in many groups. Therefore, if you come out of the closet, society tends to push you from one monoculture to another. STRAIGHT ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| GAY Is it really that set, like a binary switch? If you started out somewhere in the middle of that spectrum, some positive/enjoyable experiences would seem likely to make you lean one way or the other. Edit (My 1000th post!) In honor of my 1000th post, I'm going to take a little liberty and pose a question to OmegaSupreme and outlaw, since they have probably thought this over a lot more than most heteros: do you believe your sexual orientation is determined by your genes, your hormones or your brain? Have you heard of any stories or science to back up your belief?
honored to be part of the 1000th, gutter snipe. genes, horomones, or brain... hmmmm... i've heard of studies, but honestly i've paid no attention to them. selective hearing i guess. you've heard them from other posts... studies of the relationship between child molestion and sexual orientation, studies of environment molding your sexual orientation, etc. i don't want to hear any of that (yeah... i know... i'm on a D&D board) because i know for a fact that no choice was given to me. i'll tell you what... what's the difference between science studying the relationship between sexual orientation... and... ... those same science studies that contradict the existence of God? does anybody need proof that or can it even be proven? i don't know. you just have to have faith that there is a God, right? i have "faith" that there is a God, but at the same time "I KNOW" that i had no choice being gay. it just is. you know, gutter snipe, scientific studies show that dentists recommend crest over colgate by a ratio of 3 to 1.
Arguing that people are gay because they were molested as kids implies that there is something intrinsically wrong with them and that they can be "corrected." As much as we love to play Freud, there's no basis to back up this conclusion. Study after study proves that homosexuality is determined genetically. Genetics determine sexual orientation, and your environment determines whether it's socially expressed. If DNA matches up just slightly differently in your mom's womb, you'd be gay. Or short. Or tall. It's just the way your genes are wired. When people say that being gay doesn't fit with "propogating the species," think about this: why are there ugly people, when statistics show that attractive people have more offspring? Why are there short people, when statistics show that taller people leave more offspring? Why are some people born sterile? Why do some people have blue eyes? Why do some go bald? Why are some people smarter? Others athletic? In short, we don't know. It's a genetic crapshoot.
Ok, if it is genes, are there any known cases of identical twins where one is straight and one is gay? Or do they all share the same orientation? There should be enough identical twins out there to provide some data. Edited: moved my research to a new post
I'd be curious about that, too. That would make a really interesting study. As was stated earlier, however, there's no "gay switch." There's not gay and straight. Sexuality, like everything else, is on a continuum. Very few of us are 100-percent heterosexual (coughJohnAshcroftcough), just as very few of us are 100-percent homosexual.
nice, b-bob. outlaw, thanks for the welcome though it's been a few months. it's your turn to answer guttersnipe's question...
After some flawed internet research: a psychologist's opinion a scientific study from 1991 a slightly biased source? Okay, all of the studies seem to agree - about 50% of identical twins versus 22% of fraternal twins have the second sibling being gay. Approximately 10% of non-twins and 10% of non-related siblings had a gay sibling. This seems to point towards a large genetic factor and a smaller environmental factor. I included the third link because it mentions something I was not aware of called penetrance. Penetrance means that even though a gene exists, it is not turned on for some (environmental) reason. This (when added to surveyed people still being in the closet) could explain the lack of 100% concurrence of sets of identical gay twins. So to answer the question of the thread, I guess now I believe the answer is mostly nature. Another interesting thing that I read is that levels of testosterone in men and women (which makes for manly women and lady-like men) has no relationship to your sexual orientation. No wonder my gaydar is so inaccurate!
I dunno honestly which is why I didn't vote in the poll. I'm not even discounting environment as a factor (although I guess it seemed that way in my reply to BGM). But I'm pretty sure it's not the sole factor as he implied. All I know is that nature or nurture, I didn't choose to be gay. Simon LeVay did a study of gay vs straight male brains and found part of the hypothalumus in the gay men were smaller. Whether that is a cause or effect of homosexuality, who knows?
Many gay men and lesbians want to "continue the species" just as many straight couples do not. It might be more difficult for us to reproduce (biologically, financially and legally) but that doesn't mean the desire to do so is not there.
Hmm, my wife and I were born without any intention of continuing the species. Having kids isn't something most people decide to do - unfortunately in most cases it just happens. IMO sex is almost purely recreational - the procreational part is a side effect. But that's a whole 'nother D & D thread. The real question, and while it seems overly simplistic to me, is this: If you believe in evolution, and homosexuality is a genetic trait, why wouldn't it have been gradually evolved out of the species? It would certainly stand to reason that fewer homosexuals would breed and raise kids than heterosexuals.
