Poll: Is homosexuality genetic?
- Thread starter JokerCrowe
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That's pretty much it.Foggy_Fishburne said:
My sister and I were raised essentially the exact same way (I was raised a little stricter, but it was by no means earth-shatteringly different), and both went to the same school, played sports, etc, however by age 10, I knew I wanted to impress the girls more than I wanted to giggle at boys. *shrug*
Actually... being left-handed is genetic.Marq said:
Back on topic, homosexuality is not genetic. It is a social "issue" (lack of a better word)... Something that you learn out of society in a subconcient level that later leads to it. That is why is was more prevalent in other cultures, where it was more common and not a tabu.
magnuslion said:
You're both lying.Xanadeas said:
You can't decide to like or dislike things, they're not conscious decisions. You can decide to avoid carrots, much in the same manner you can decide to avoid that girl in school that everyone knows is just trouble, you can decide to pretend you hate her guts, but at the end of the day, whether you like her or not is out of your control. Your only real option is whether to pursue that or not.
There seems to be 2 major opinions on the matter. its important to note that in both of the scientifically valid theories, Homosexuality is not a choice. Also, discovering the truth should not be a threat to gay rights. I have faith that the truth can only support gay rights activism.
The first theory is that Homosexuality is a matter of womb chemistry. Certain chemical balances in the womb wire the brain for sexuality. Part of the supporting evidence for this is that boys born later in birth order trend towards being gay, in theory because of antibodies that change in the mothers womb as she has more children. This would explain the consistent frequency of homosexuals over time, and its resistance to genetic factors: It's simply not genetic.
The second major theory is that the Gene (Or far more accurately, collection of genes) for homosexuality has multiple effects on an individual. The same gene that brings about homosexuality in males causes females to be more fertile. As such, the "Gay gene" does serve to propagate itself on the genetic level, just not on the level of some of the organisms. This is consistent with the Dawkins view of evolution presented in "The Selfish Gene"
I would post sources, but I have to go back to work. Forgive my laziness.
Personally, I was always a womb condition supporter. However, excluding the fact that there's no supported evidence behind female homosexuality in its theory, the gene theory has looked more and more reasonable. Its an interesting academic debate that gets muddied far too often by personal agendas.
The first theory is that Homosexuality is a matter of womb chemistry. Certain chemical balances in the womb wire the brain for sexuality. Part of the supporting evidence for this is that boys born later in birth order trend towards being gay, in theory because of antibodies that change in the mothers womb as she has more children. This would explain the consistent frequency of homosexuals over time, and its resistance to genetic factors: It's simply not genetic.
The second major theory is that the Gene (Or far more accurately, collection of genes) for homosexuality has multiple effects on an individual. The same gene that brings about homosexuality in males causes females to be more fertile. As such, the "Gay gene" does serve to propagate itself on the genetic level, just not on the level of some of the organisms. This is consistent with the Dawkins view of evolution presented in "The Selfish Gene"
I would post sources, but I have to go back to work. Forgive my laziness.
Personally, I was always a womb condition supporter. However, excluding the fact that there's no supported evidence behind female homosexuality in its theory, the gene theory has looked more and more reasonable. Its an interesting academic debate that gets muddied far too often by personal agendas.
Last I checked artificial insemination still exists.bluepilot said:
It's not an excuse or an apology, it's just the way it is. I don't get why people think it's a choice.magnuslion said:
OT: I don't know if it's genetic, but it's not something you have control over.
Well as homosexuality prevents reproduction which is one of our strongest impulses right up there with eat food and breath air I highly doubt we have a genetic trait that leads to our extinction.
Also as homosexuals rarely have off spring i fail to see how this genetic trait wouldn't of been removed from the gene pool the basic principle of evolution is "survival of the fittest" only genetic mutations that grant advantages over others without them continue in the genetic line and as homosexuality practically prevents children i fail to see how such a trait could of survived the evolutionary path.
Its not genetic and its not predetermined, Its to do with psychological effects of your up bringing, young children are very psychologically vulnerable that's why scientists recommend reading to young children and playing them classical music to improve their intelligence. Im not saying its a choice but its certainly nurture rather than nature.
Also as homosexuals rarely have off spring i fail to see how this genetic trait wouldn't of been removed from the gene pool the basic principle of evolution is "survival of the fittest" only genetic mutations that grant advantages over others without them continue in the genetic line and as homosexuality practically prevents children i fail to see how such a trait could of survived the evolutionary path.
Its not genetic and its not predetermined, Its to do with psychological effects of your up bringing, young children are very psychologically vulnerable that's why scientists recommend reading to young children and playing them classical music to improve their intelligence. Im not saying its a choice but its certainly nurture rather than nature.
Does it really matter, gay people get on with your lives, just don't try and turn people, straight people stop bothering the gay people!
20 years ago, it was really a bad thing to be gay. Even today no everybody accept it, and there was way less people that were claiming to be gay. It is because there was gay ? of course not, just that there was more closeted gays.lucaf said:
It,s not a choice, at least not a counscious one (but genetic, hormonals or uncousious choice still make that i didnt decide one day, fully counsicous of what i was doing : hey, i'll make out with girls for now on...). But gays have one choice. they choose to live it, or not. if they choose to not live it, they will very likely do like if they were heterosexual, get married and have children (and it does happen quite often... usually around 40 they quit their wifes and get a boyfriend instead...) and the genetic material could be pass on like that if it is indeed genetic.
plus there's the religious people who try to cure gays, usually with something that is really close to a mindwash... then they make them married and have children. if it's genetic, it's transmited like that as well...
personally, i would say that there some genetic factor, but it's not 100% genetic...