Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture?

[Vault101]

The only real thing I have to contribute is that a lot of what we call 'homosexuality in nature' isn't homosexuality per se. When dogs mount another dog it's used as a dominance play.

Basically it's not so much legitimate homosexuality as it is prison rape.

And sexuality is usually entirely made up of a play between dominance and submission, maybe the roles switch often and aren't static, but dominance and submission is pretty much the basis of sex.

even if both people are willing?

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

sexuality will become regulated to a preference.

It is a preference. That's what sexuality means - sexual preference.

 

[Blestsol]

I think nurture sometimes and mostly nature.

 

[Dys]

Considering you're 500% more likely to be homosexual if anyone in your family is homosexual, I'd say mostly nature.

Really? What's that based on? My understanding was that adopted children of gay couples had no increased chance of being homosexual link.

Nature or nurture...I don't know, I'm not gay so it's pretty impossible for me to comment, and many of the gay people who voice an opinion have obvious motivation for bias. Either way, I don't see why it matters. If people want to be gay, or just are gay, they should be equally free to sleep with whoever they feel.

 

[i7omahawki]

And sexuality is usually entirely made up of a play between dominance and submission, maybe the roles switch often and aren't static, but dominance and submission is pretty much the basis of sex.

even if both people are willing?

Yes.

But a male dog that mounts another male isn't necessarily doing it because it's homosexual and feels an attraction, it's more than likely it's mounting the other dog to assert dominance.

He is having sex with a male dog, isn't much that isn't homosexual about that.

You're perhaps right that it isn't because he is strictly attracted to males or THAT male, but it IS homosexuality none the less.

As I said in my other post, I don't think there is a true straight/gay split between people, more that most people happen to prefer one or the other. Some folks dig broad shoulders, and some like small hips and big waists. Usually only one gender you find those in.

 

[Pyro Paul]

Not saying outside influence doesn't affect it, but the fact that different species has different approaches to homosexuality still means that there is a genetic disposition towards homosexuality. Homosexuality might be triggered by circumstances, but that doesn't mean it's not genetics

acctually it says quiet the opposit.
because homosexuality does not naturally occur in nature in normal circimstances, it means there is no genetic disposition towards it. All doccumented cases of homosexuality in animals that i have seen are purely because of outside influncing factors.

Case in point...
why don't you see homosexual female penguins?
if it was a genetic disposition, then you should see homosexual female penguins too...
but you don't.

 

[Sprinal]

1. hopefully is becoming less, and perhaps it is possible to avoid (though I cant speak from experience)

2. I didnt know they were THAT rare, I mean there are specific places to find potential partners

3. one plus is all the sex you want without worrying about kids

4. one negative would be..kids somwhat difficult to obtain

My point was really based on the prejudice i've seen from people I know at school as well as the prejudice that I have seen on gay people that my mother is friends with. I added the points there simply because I did not really think that I could put it in by itself.

Anyway though the Prejudice outside of major cities (outer suberbs of Sydney Aus) is still vary high.
True in major areas they probably would not be that hard to find. But it would still be about 10% in my estimates.

Well, the question isn't if being gay is a choice, but if you can be conditioned(nurtured, raised, take your pick) to be gay. Just because you weren't born with a disposition, doesn't make it less real

Ok you have an interesting point. But as I have always been brought up in a fairly neutral familly and ended up not gay. So unless someone had always been pushed to be gay I cannot see how that could be the case.

I do not believe that I am right. I just can't see any evidence to the contrary.

 

[Varya]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals
This is relevant to our interest.
So according to this, homosexual behavior with animals is primarily not a preference for same-sex sex, but could be because of lack of mates, or to show dominance. However, there are exceptions, with for example 8% of male sheep preferring sex with other males, without regard to accesses to females
So there is a president for non-environment induced homosexuals with animals, but it's rare.

 

[Verp]

I think people are getting a little confused on the Nature Vrs. Nurture argument.

Nature: It is encoded into your genome. You have no choice, it just Happens.
Nurture: Through influncing outside factors it occurs.

now for a complex argument.

it is impossible to BE homosexual in normal conditions with 'nature'. you are not born homosexual and there are no gene's, genetics, hereditary traits, or influcing factors biologically to make a person homosexual. Your body is Designed from the ground up for the sole purpouse of reproduction, to find some one of the opposit sex and procreate.

the idea of 'Homosexuality' is purely a psychological one, or 'nurture' in this case. It is some ones choice to be homosexual or not. However, it is not as simple as 'i choose to be gay' or 'i choose to be straight'... Several psychological things and trama alter your prefrences, choices, and desires so that your choice and options shift.

Instead of asking ones self 'am i gay/straight?' they may ask themselves 'Should i be happy?' in which happiness is relations with some one of the same sex. Their feelings on the matter may be so very strong that, although the choice exists, they do not see it. Instead they identify with the choice that best suits them 'i am gay/straight'.


my stand point on the thing...
It is impossible to be Homosexual.
your body is designed to procreate and the body influences the mind.

It is impossible to be Hetrosexual.
Your mind finds sexual attraction in any features regardless of sex.

we are all varying degrees of Bi-sexual.

This doesn't hold up I'm afraid, since homosexuality is a common occurrence in nature. I can't leave a source, but I'm pretty certain I've read they have proven that homosexuality is in fact genetic.
Of course, being homosexual doesn't allow for you genes to survive evolution, but there is quite a possibility that the same gene that can cause you to become homosexual is beneficial in another way. So having the gene is beneficial, however only a few will actually become homosexual, when the gene is dominant. Not saying I know what that benefit is, just that there is a possibility.

acctually incorrect, homosexuality in nature is never by design of biology. It only happens due to influncing outside factors which force it to happen. some species of female Frogs, for instance, only adopt homosexual tendencies when a lack of males exist in the population. Penguins, probably the most famous Homosexual coupling in nature, Again only occur when there is lack of one sex over the other.

in almost every single case of homosexuality in nature that you can find you'll see that it Only occurs because of outside influence. i have yet to see one case where an animal of any type actively searches out a same sex relationship when these outside influences don't exist.

This is a very old view concerning homosexuality in the animal kingdom -- it has since been refuted by several observations of homosexuality occurring in hundreds of species across the globe without any particular outside influence.

 

[ericthered88]

If we accept evolution as true, which many people do, then it can't possibly be nature. Natural selection would have weeded out any genes that produced homosexuality long ago, if any such genes ever existed which has never been proven. As one post stated, even fairly strict Christians and the like sometimes have children who end up homosexual, and I'm sure that gay couples who adopt children have some that turn out straight, so it's not necessarily nurture either.

Since it definitely isn't nature, and nurture plays a somewhat limited role, it can only be concluded that, whether influenced by external factors or not, homosexuality is a choice.

 

[Varya]

1. hopefully is becoming less, and perhaps it is possible to avoid (though I cant speak from experience)

2. I didnt know they were THAT rare, I mean there are specific places to find potential partners

3. one plus is all the sex you want without worrying about kids

4. one negative would be..kids somwhat difficult to obtain

My point was really based on the prejudice i've seen from people I know at school as well as the prejudice that I have seen on gay people that my mother is friends with. I added the points there simply because I did not really think that I could put it in by itself.

Anyway though the Prejudice outside of major cities (outer suberbs of Sydney Aus) is still vary high.
True in major areas they probably would not be that hard to find. But it would still be about 10% in my estimates.

Well, the question isn't if being gay is a choice, but if you can be conditioned(nurtured, raised, take your pick) to be gay. Just because you weren't born with a disposition, doesn't make it less real

Ok you have an interesting point. But as I have always been brought up in a fairly neutral familly and ended up not gay. So unless someone had always been pushed to be gay I cannot see how that could be the case.

I do not believe that I am right. I just can't see any evidence to the contrary.

Well, if it's environmental, it probably still means that people with "genetic disposition" towards homosexuality runs a larger chance. And Being "raised gay" is also probably not the way to "trigger" homosexuality. The factors might be subtle things that affects our subconscious.

 

[Pyro Paul]

I think people are getting a little confused on the Nature Vrs. Nurture argument.

Nature: It is encoded into your genome. You have no choice, it just Happens.
Nurture: Through influncing outside factors it occurs.

now for a complex argument.

it is impossible to BE homosexual in normal conditions with 'nature'. you are not born homosexual and there are no gene's, genetics, hereditary traits, or influcing factors biologically to make a person homosexual. Your body is Designed from the ground up for the sole purpouse of reproduction, to find some one of the opposit sex and procreate.

the idea of 'Homosexuality' is purely a psychological one, or 'nurture' in this case. It is some ones choice to be homosexual or not. However, it is not as simple as 'i choose to be gay' or 'i choose to be straight'... Several psychological things and trama alter your prefrences, choices, and desires so that your choice and options shift.

Instead of asking ones self 'am i gay/straight?' they may ask themselves 'Should i be happy?' in which happiness is relations with some one of the same sex. Their feelings on the matter may be so very strong that, although the choice exists, they do not see it. Instead they identify with the choice that best suits them 'i am gay/straight'.


my stand point on the thing...
It is impossible to be Homosexual.
your body is designed to procreate and the body influences the mind.

It is impossible to be Hetrosexual.
Your mind finds sexual attraction in any features regardless of sex.

we are all varying degrees of Bi-sexual.

This doesn't hold up I'm afraid, since homosexuality is a common occurrence in nature. I can't leave a source, but I'm pretty certain I've read they have proven that homosexuality is in fact genetic.
Of course, being homosexual doesn't allow for you genes to survive evolution, but there is quite a possibility that the same gene that can cause you to become homosexual is beneficial in another way. So having the gene is beneficial, however only a few will actually become homosexual, when the gene is dominant. Not saying I know what that benefit is, just that there is a possibility.

acctually incorrect, homosexuality in nature is never by design of biology. It only happens due to influncing outside factors which force it to happen. some species of female Frogs, for instance, only adopt homosexual tendencies when a lack of males exist in the population. Penguins, probably the most famous Homosexual coupling in nature, Again only occur when there is lack of one sex over the other.

in almost every single case of homosexuality in nature that you can find you'll see that it Only occurs because of outside influence. i have yet to see one case where an animal of any type actively searches out a same sex relationship when these outside influences don't exist.

This is a very old view concerning homosexuality in the animal kingdom -- it has since been refuted by several observations of homosexuality occurring in hundreds of species across the globe without any particular outside influence.

acctually it is not.
I only know of 1 species which homosexuality occurs due to lack of outside influence.

Sheep.
and it is hard to really build an argument off of that considering the amount of selective breeding and genetic alteration that has occured with sheep.

No where else in the animal kingdom has there been observations of prolonged Homosexual prefered behavior occuring. every example of homosexuality behavior seen is either 'Mocking' seen in younger more inexperienced members of the species (see homosexual behavior in komodo dragons) or due to other factors such as a lack of the opposit sex(see Penguins).

 

[DanDanikov]

It is a preference. That's what sexuality means - sexual preference.

I disagree. For many people it becomes something they consider core to their identity. It isn't something they choose, it's something they are assigned (whether by genes or by upbringing) and they have a right not to be questioned on it. Consider the appropriateness of questioning someone's taste in music, or perhaps why they smoke, over questioning someone's sexuality.

The problem right now is that there's still a huge fight for it to be 'ok' to be anything different, let alone allow for change, and I think that's partly responsible for this important self-identification, rather than just having certain preferences. I suspect this is common to most divisive issues.

 

[Varya]

Not saying outside influence doesn't affect it, but the fact that different species has different approaches to homosexuality still means that there is a genetic disposition towards homosexuality. Homosexuality might be triggered by circumstances, but that doesn't mean it's not genetics

acctually it says quiet the opposit.
because homosexuality does not naturally occur in nature in normal circimstances, it means there is no genetic disposition towards it. All doccumented cases of homosexuality in animals that i have seen are purely because of outside influncing factors.

Case in point...
why don't you see homosexual female penguins?
if it was a genetic disposition, then you should see homosexual female penguins too...
but you don't.

If it was purely environmental, all different cases of homosexuality would be unique. If penguins during certain conditions become homosexual, those conditions are determined by genes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals
This article states that there are some cases of animals being born homosexuals, sheeps are the most notable examples.
Also elephants often form homosexual relationships, even though they do not form heterosexual relationships

 

[Vault101]

If we accept evolution as true, which many people do, then it can't possibly be nature. Natural selection would have weeded out any genes that produced homosexuality long ago, if any such genes ever existed which has never been proven. As one post stated, even fairly strict Christians and the like sometimes have children who end up homosexual, and I'm sure that gay couples who adopt children have some that turn out straight, so it's not necessarily nurture either.

Since it definitely isn't nature, and nurture plays a somewhat limited role, it can only be concluded that, whether influenced by external factors or not, homosexuality is a choice.

regardless of weather its nature or nurture I dont think "choice" is the right thing to call it, "choice" implys that the person has decided that that is what they WANT even if they could swing the other way

and that hardly seems the case with this, people "realise" they are gay, they dont "choose: to be gay regardless of where it somes from, and many go through alot of pain trying to deny it, if it were a choice there would be no such pain

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

It is a preference. That's what sexuality means - sexual preference.

I disagree. For many people it becomes something they consider core to their identity. It isn't something they choose, it's something they are assigned (whether by genes or by upbringing) and they have a right not to be questioned on it. Consider the appropriateness of questioning someone's taste in music, or perhaps why they smoke, over questioning someone's sexuality.

The problem right now is that there's still a huge fight for it to be 'ok' to be anything different, let alone allow for change, and I think that's partly responsible for this important self-identification, rather than just having certain preferences. I suspect this is common to most divisive issues.

I wasn't suggesting it was a choice. Homosexuals prefer the same sex - they don't choose to, but they do.

I myself am pansexual, so preference isn't a problem for me XD

 

[teebeeohh]

mostly nature but of course your upbringing also plays a role. If your very first role models keep hammering into your skull that homosexuality is bad for 20 years you are more likely repress and deny any feeling you may have.
On the other hand i also know a guy who decided to exclusively go for men at age 16 just to freak out everyone who shared a locker room with him.

 

[Snowy Rainbow]

If we accept evolution as true, which many people do, then it can't possibly be nature. Natural selection would have weeded out any genes that produced homosexuality long ago, if any such genes ever existed which has never been proven

By that ludicrous logic, there wouldn't be anyone born without genitals -- they are unable to procreate and couldn't pass that gene on.

Fact: mutations occur.

 

[icaritos]

A lot of studies seem to indicate that there is no specific gene that controls homosexuality. Instead it seems that hormonal releases by the mother during the development of the fetus may be responsible for our sexuality. This means that hormonal imbalances during pregnancy may be primary cause for homosexual tendencies. So not genetic, but still something a person is born as.