Poll: Is Sexual Orientation Nurture or Nature?

Recommended Videos

samsprinkle

New member
Jun 29, 2008
1,091
0
0
El Taco the Rogue said:
You are who you are. Although appparently, one in 5 males are born gay, but due to a society that still disowns gays, many never discover it.
If it isn't discovered then how can you claim that one in five are really gay? oh well. Forget I said anything.
 

Lord Beautiful

New member
Aug 13, 2008
5,940
0
0
To put it simply, I think genes make you gay, straight, or some mixture thereof, and nurture influences the characteristics you find attractive in the gender(s) you are attracted to.
 

cleverlymadeup

New member
Mar 7, 2008
5,256
0
0
edinflames said:
Homosexuality has only become a 'big deal' since the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) forbade sodomy. Incidentally there is no passage in the bible that I am aware of that states homosexuality is wrong...they just don't want you doing it in the naughty place.
actually you are correct, it's no anal sex, that includes both man-man and man-woman, i'd say woman-woman but they didn't have the "tools" (pun intended) at the time the bible was written.

it's is more of a way to live in the desert than a bad thing in the eyes of god. this is because if you've ever been in the desert or at the beach you know that sand gets EVERYWHERE and with anal sex you can develop small tears and coupled with not good hygiene you get infections and death

Eldritch Warlord said:
Almost definitely nurture, I just can't conceive homosexuality evolving
actually there's a very simple reason for it a built in population control mechanism, ie if you're gay you probly won't procreate and therefore we won't overpopulate too much

as for the topic on hand, it's nature, the only time nurture comes into play is when you go into denial about your orientation or you "stop being gay". in reality you don't stop liking the type of ppl you do, you just don't pursue relationships with them in an open fashion
 

theklng

New member
May 1, 2008
1,229
0
0
my word, we had this discussion in my high school english class. let me state at once that there is no definite answer, we do not know enough from either perspective to conclude anything.

i will however say that lenient people have a higher tendency to become homo/bisexual, simply because it is in the nature of their mind.
 

Bulletinmybrain

New member
Jun 22, 2008
3,277
0
0
Bright_Raven said:
Bulletinmybrain said:
Thewolfman said:
Bulletinmybrain said:
mokes310 said:
It's nature. If Downs-syndrome, MS, Cerebal Paulsy (spelling?), physical attributes, hair/eye color are all genetic, then why can't sexual orientation be as well?
It is a state of mind is why. (You may argue the hormones and such suggest procreating.. that is the obvious part. PROCREATING.)

........... ok first of all their are certian syndromes that have the wonderful effect of STOPING PEOPLE FROM BEING ABLE TO REPRODUCE and yet they keep appearing. Maybe you skipped all of you biology classes, in which case i pity you. If there is a gene for homosexuality it would probably be a recessive gene or a common gene mutation, similar to other genetic mutations.

Secondly i would bet money that you have never really had any friends that were gay. Because if you did you might see the flaw in your arguement. Its not a state of mind. People don't just wake up one day and go "you know what i'm tired of women im gonna go sleep with dudes." or "I wanna make my parents cry and people i don't even know hate me. I KNOW!! I'll be gay!"
Lol.. You failed biology then.. I am going to use Turners syndrome for reference. It is a muck up on the part of the DNA, it has nothing to do with a disease or anything of that nature.. You just sorta end up without a second sex-linked chromosome.

That said, I never said that is was a disease.. I said it was a state of mind that you put yourself into..

What? Lol, save your pity for yourself.. I would say I am bisexual myself, not from wanting to piss off people or to stand out. I classify myself in that way because, I think I could handle a relationship on a extremely personal level with a guy..
every one has over 100 DNA mutations, that is the random mutation part of evoulution. and now that lesbians and homosexuals can have kids through artificial insemination... GAY GENES RULE! lol. i dont even know what i went by that last part...
Because that is how the human body works? o_O
 

Fronken

New member
May 10, 2008
1,120
0
0
SnowCold said:
Then why weren't there any gay people 20 hunderd years ago, when being with the same sex was unthinkable?
Uhm...you do know that homosexuality is as old as mankind itself right?, there have always been people who have been attracted to the same sex, its a part of nature, most of the animals have homosexuality within their races as well, its a well documented fact.

So saying that homosexuality is something new is just ignorant, look up the facts.

And about the poll: All nature, sure, parents can confuse you, but whatever they say you will be into one gender or the other (or both), its just how it goes, i know people from just about every possible situation, straight guy with a gay dad, homosexual guy with a biggot dad etc.., nurture is a huge part of ones personality, yes, but it doesnt have anything to do with ones sexual orientation, true that some may be chocked at a young age by such acts (alot of serial killers have had it like that), but that just sped up the proccess, gay people with gay parents would be gay even if both parents were straight, it just would've taken them a bit longer to accept it.
 

pffh

New member
Oct 10, 2008
774
0
0
I've always thought it was by nature, as in a natural way to keep the population in check
to many humans => gays are born and they can't reproduce naturally => fewer humans.
 

gmer412

New member
Feb 21, 2008
754
0
0
pffh said:
I've always thought it was by nature, as in a natural way to keep the population in check
to many humans => gays are born and they can't reproduce naturally => fewer humans.
Ahh, I support the nature side, but the problem here is that, as a species, our goal is to spread the population as far as possible. As my bio teacher put it, "the biology game".
Why would nature intentionally lose the game?
 

pffh

New member
Oct 10, 2008
774
0
0
gmer412 said:
pffh said:
I've always thought it was by nature, as in a natural way to keep the population in check
to many humans => gays are born and they can't reproduce naturally => fewer humans.
Ahh, I support the nature side, but the problem here is that, as a species, our goal is to spread the population as far as possible. As my bio teacher put it, "the biology game".
Why would nature intentionally lose the game?
Well because if there are to many of us the whole game breaks down and we all lose, so a few are sacrificed (about 1/10 I think) for the good of the species.
 

McClaud

New member
Nov 2, 2007
923
0
0
Bulletinmybrain said:
Your science fails.

... (Which I doubt at this point, seeing as all are mapped out)
Mmmmm yeah, while the human genome is mapped out, they are still determining what genes do what and when and how. They haven't perfectly mapped it out saying, "All these genes are responsible for this, and all these genes over here do this. And these genes do this."

You can check it out here: http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml

Essentially, sexual orientation has been identified as a group of biological factors in the human body, plain and simple. Whether it's a genetic trait or functional development remains to be seen - but there are biological indicators that identify with homosexual behavior.

You can't say that it's entirely a choice - the choice comes whether to suppress the urges or follow them. And some people have difficulty suppressing natural, biological functions.

All this is based on fact and research. You can check APA studies, various WHO studies and several European physiological studies. Almost all evidence points to a series of biological and mental factors that appear as the person develops. Some as early as 8 or 9 years old.



Thewolfman said:
I throughly applaud you. Seriously, being someone with gay family members its nice to hear intelligence on the nature vs nurture debate. I was actually going to type out a long similar message but i think you just summed up my arguement.
Thank you. One thing that the scientific community is trying to impress on society is that this isn't something to be afraid of. It's not a communicable or directly learned behavior. There are many complex factors involved, and to try and pinpoint any one at this time is merely a waste of time. What we can identify is the cultural, social and personal impact of homosexual behavior, and mostly, it's harmless, as it is a sexual orientation without deviant methodology.

Most people who say it's purely a nuture thing should go and read about the science behind being gay. Not just the psychological or the sociological, but the chemical and biological research. My degree required it, and I find it to be something quite interesting. Especially the cultural aspects of it.
 

GordonFawx

New member
Mar 19, 2008
57
0
0
It's preeeety much entirely natural. For the most part is about half genetic factors, half the factors present in the womb at the time of pregnancy. I never delved too deeply into -what- those factors were (never had reason to) but that's the most reasonable explanation I've come across that makes sense to me.

I admit, I'm bi, scan as straight (most of the time) and am essentially gay in terms of relationships. aka the worst bisexual ever, as well.

I think the 'effects' of homosexuality are misunderstood though; I -highly- doubt people have a the affectations naturally.
 

mkg

New member
Feb 24, 2009
315
0
0
Homosexuality is a birth defect, pure and simple. Not saying that gay people are any less capable than normal straight people or bashing or anything like that, but studies show that gay men's brains react differently to male phermones than straight men's do. If you choose to be gay, then you're an idiot seeking attention and are more than likely just bi or dumb.
 

Kogarian

New member
Feb 24, 2008
844
0
0
Shouldn't this be left up to science to decide?

Or are you asking for our personal opinions on it?

Scientifically, I think most men are gay by nature (affects of mother's womb on fetus/embrayo). Not sure at all about women.
 

gmer412

New member
Feb 21, 2008
754
0
0
pffh said:
gmer412 said:
pffh said:
I've always thought it was by nature, as in a natural way to keep the population in check
to many humans => gays are born and they can't reproduce naturally => fewer humans.
Ahh, I support the nature side, but the problem here is that, as a species, our goal is to spread the population as far as possible. As my bio teacher put it, "the biology game".
Why would nature intentionally lose the game?
Well because if there are to many of us the whole game breaks down and we all lose, so a few are sacrificed (about 1/10 I think) for the good of the species.
We can see this, but nature doesn't use logic.