Poll: Is Sexual Orientation Nurture or Nature?

[cleverlymadeup]

No, I don't follow because what you said makes no sense in light of the argument. Just like that Essene thing last year.

actually everything i've said makes perfect sense, including the Essene thing, you just are too close minded and frankly uninformed to actually comprehend what i was saying

wrong out of all the people i know who were abused as a child, including sexually, they aren't gay or straight

in fact most of them are straight

as for sexually maturing, it's also known as hitting puberty

Not only is your first statement baffling in so many ways, it doesn't actually aggravate my last statement. I agree - it's not definitive.
And sexual maturity IS known as hitting puberty, but that's an easy definition. We are ALWAYS sexually maturing.

actually it's not, the fact that you are flip flopping your opinion is baffling and frankly shows a real lack of understandings

my statements make 100% sense

you've been arguing that being gay is caused from some form of trauma, that is factually incorrect on so many different levels it's not even funny

actually post your studies here, i'm pretty sure they are rather bad science and done even more poorly, i could prove those studies wrong without even trying

Yeah, you'd prove them wrong just like you usually do. By saying "your wrong".
Why don't we start with good old wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sex_abuse

Similarly, for a point towards the actual topic of the thread:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sex_abuse#Research_factors

and then the nitty gritty:
* Behavioral signs. Does the child display knowledge or interest in sexual acts inappropriate to his or her age, or even seductive behavior? A child might appear to avoid another person, or display unusual behavior- either being very aggressive or very passive. Older children might resort to destructive behaviors to take away the pain, such as alcohol or drug abuse, self-mutilation, or suicide attempts.

Taken from http://www.helpguide.org/mental/child_abuse_physical_emotional_sexual_neglect.htm

ok great you posted wikipedia links, HOWEVER they don't say "sexual abuse turns you gay" which has been your whole arguement

thank you for proving your own point wrong

actually you once again missed my point about it as well, you ONLY see sexual images once you start to sexually mature or in terms you'll understand when someone enters puberty

Your point is nonexistent. Entering a discussion on child abuse with me means you have to know something about it.

actually i know more about child abuse than you obviously know about it, i've got a fairly reliable source that i can certainly go ask and i'll assure you they aren't homosexual

That is bizarre that you would start with "actually wrong". LINK SOME ARTICLES. You can't say AN IDIOTIC PHRASE like "most if not all cross dressers are actually 100% straight,they aren't gay or bisexual. this has actually been proven by many studies" because it is so self contradictory it implodes on itself. Have you ever MET a cross dresser? All the cross dressing folk down at Sydney Mardi Gras (a huge gay and lesbian parade) will be shocked to find out they're all heterosexual.

hey here's one from the glaad website
http://www.glaad.org/media/guide/transfocus.php

see it actually PROVES my point

and here's another for good measure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-dressing

it doesn't say 100% however it at least says that it's not all gay guys doing it, unlike your "proof" which doesn't even mention sexual abuse making you homosexual

wrong it's plain to see that you have some very homophobic tendencies and are rather ignorant about the subject of homosexuality

As we're generalising, I'll call you an idiot. Especially when you've just said that I'm ignorant about homosexuality after you say "most if not all cross dressers are actually 100% straight,they aren't gay or bisexual. this has actually been proven by many studies". Pleaseeeeeeeeeeee.

show me one that actually contradicts that the vast majority of cross dressers are actually straight, i know several who all have families with wives and kids and have no desire to have any sexual encounters with men

i also know this from first hand knowledge, the other thing i will note is you get more chicks hitting on you when you dress up in drag

And this is where we find your BIAS towards me. Darwin doesn't contradict my theology (which version of the theory anyway?), I was using it as an ironic, hyperbolic foil. This has already been established as a tad ungracious.

actually the fact that the we are descended from apes and NOT made by god directly does contradict christian theology

there is also the fact that you use some old and very bad arguments that are totally unfounded and have been proven wrong a long time ago

Oh yeah, your debating abilities are coming flooding back to me. Blank statement and ludicrous assumption. So, what argument is "bad" and "totally unfounded" and "proven wrong a long time ago". Because right now, you think every cross dresser is MAYBE 100% straight, every abused person is 100% straight and that being interfered with as a child gives you a taste for BDSM. I think you're doing far more damage to the homosexual community accidentally than I could ever do with intent.

[/quote]


ok let's seee what's wrong about your arguments

1. sexual abuse makes you gay
2. all gays had some sort of trauma
3. you are christian yet you use Darwin's theory of evolution to prove your point
4. all gay ppl were sexually abused
4. cross dressers are gay

see i'm not stupid enough to think that being sexually abused turns you gay, as i said i've got a rather good reason for believin that

 

[McClaud]

Since shitloads of animals can be gay, including a large number of animals who are not self-aware, it's nature.

This ARG is too weak, people should stop spewing it.

Man, facts make an argument so weak.

Seriously, the argument is valid because it is proven fact. You can't just say the argument is weak because you DISAGREE with it. It's fact. Read about it. Then give me a fact that proves that it's a weak argument.

 

[Yukichin]

Oh if you are on the same level as a goat..good for you

So because animals engage in incest, my dogs hump objects and themselves all the time, it also means its natural for Humans to hump lampposts, your father, your mother, brother and sister.

Until someone shows me the genetic code for homosexuality, i still stand that it isnt natural, and even while being unnatural doesn't make it right or wrong, its left for people to judge for themselves.

The only person im inclined to believe is a true homosexual is a Lesbian (i kinda met) who doesn't believe homosexuals should have children, in her words "if it takes a Man and a Woman to actually make a child, doesn't it follow that they should be the ones to raise them, that there's actually a need for the both of them in the child's life. if not you reduce a Whole human with a phenomenal brain and thinking faculty and billions of cells into just a sperm/egg. .not nice at all and selfish too"

Animals also have sex, and nurture their children, and find ways to support them. That's perfectly natural too. If you're going to drag absolutely EVERYTHING animals do into this, then you should actually include EVERYTHING. By that logic, having sex (whether it be pleasurable or procreation) and taking care of offspring should be "wrong" as well.

 

[comet5002]

It's both. There are so many factors that could "turn" a person gay that it's impossible to make an ultimatum on which one influences more. Many people "turn" gay even though they don't want to be. I know a couple of in the closet gays who pretend to be straight, simply because they can't accept the fact that they're attracted to their own gender. This could be because of a variety of things, bullying, psychological trauma, living conditions, etc. In this case it would be nurture. However, I know people who've lived perfectly normal lives and still turn out to be gay. This could be nature.

And then the whole bi-curious thing completely throws everything out of whack. Some people choose to be gay just for the purpose of being different and gathering attention, and aren't even really gay.

There are so many factors it's almost impossible to choose between them.

 

[McClaud]

And then the whole bi-curious thing completely throws everything out of whack. Some people choose to be gay just for the purpose of being different and gathering attention, and aren't even really gay.

Once something becomes a valid lifestyle, there are always posers who want to ride the bandwagon. Nothing you can really do about them - they made a choice. May not be for the right reasons, but there are thousands of examples of people making a life decision based on the wrong reasons (such as joining a church, joining a political party, joining a charity, etc.)

 

[Gamine]

I feel sorry for this self hating lesbian. This argument is so weak. Straight single women get knocked up all the time, sometimes in a medical lab because they can't get with a man. Parents die leaving the other parent to raise the kids alone, or one parent leaves and never has anything to do with the child they left behind again (child support isn't as useful or easy to get as most people think).

Arent we the righteous one now, Self-hating huh? most of the examples you gave are out of their control, the straight woman getting knocked up, are you going to tell me it was because she was born that way?

Or better yet a child has two parents and one of them beats the shit out of the child every day or molest them. Oh and then there is the parents who are so worthless because of drugs or just not caring about the kids, that the children have to live with relatives or worse the state. This whole defense of the family argument is weak because it's based on an ideal of what the family should be and not on what eh family is in real life. I'm a social worker, I out in the world working with people from every walk of life and no one has the model family.

Yeh, yeh, we all know about those situations, you say no one has the model family because you have worked with EVERY family, Anyhoo, The model family still consists of A man,woman and children.

There isn't enough research out there to definitely say that children would be harmed in anyway by being raised by two homosexuals and what studies are out there say it is better to be raised by two homosexuals then to be raised by only one straight parent.

are you saying studies find that homosexual familys are better than single familys?

It is easy to say a kid should only be raised by a man and a women when you want to stop two gay people from doing it or to say that gay marriage is wrong because gays can't reproduce, but then you would have a hard time defending the right of someone who is straight and sterile to get married using that logic or of the rights of a single parent raising a child using this logic. The truth is you and people like you hate gays because of a religious conviction that doesn't in any way justify hatred but is so often used to.

You really know me, are you psychic?

Stop comparing "straight" people with issues to homosexuals, if homosexuals are indeed "born that way"

Gay people can raise children, i only feel sorry for the child as captioned by this story i read somewhere, a young girl used to allow her classmate get hugged by her mum, but the mum one day asked why, because after she hugged him, he would always say Thank you to the young girl "His mommy has short hair and a hard chest, so i lent you to him to make him feel nice" she said

No matter how much we twist these things, its all too clear that a man cannot take the place of a woman and vice versa, still doesn't mean the child wouldnt amount to something in life, it just gives a wholesome collective happiness, we are all too selfish these days.

 

[Gamine]

Oh if you are on the same level as a goat..good for you

So because animals engage in incest, my dogs hump objects and themselves all the time, it also means its natural for Humans to hump lampposts, your father, your mother, brother and sister.

Until someone shows me the genetic code for homosexuality, i still stand that it isnt natural, and even while being unnatural doesn't make it right or wrong, its left for people to judge for themselves.

The only person im inclined to believe is a true homosexual is a Lesbian (i kinda met) who doesn't believe homosexuals should have children, in her words "if it takes a Man and a Woman to actually make a child, doesn't it follow that they should be the ones to raise them, that there's actually a need for the both of them in the child's life. if not you reduce a Whole human with a phenomenal brain and thinking faculty and billions of cells into just a sperm/egg. .not nice at all and selfish too"

Animals also have sex, and nurture their children, and find ways to support them. That's perfectly natural too. If you're going to drag absolutely EVERYTHING animals do into this, then you should actually include EVERYTHING. By that logic, having sex (whether it be pleasurable or procreation) and taking care of offspring should be "wrong" as well.

ok, Lets take EVERYTHING, then it will all be dandy in our "Animal" kingdom

 

[Ramthundar]

No matter how much we twist these things, its all too clear that a man cannot take the place of a woman and vice versa,

Actually, that's mostly what being gay is--a man taking the place of a woman.

Wouldn't the more important issue be whether the parents are of the same orientation as the child? In other words, if a kid is gay, wouldn't it be better to be raised by two gay men/if the kid is lesbian to be raised by two lesbian women than either to be raised by a straight couple consisting of a man and a woman? Isn't the best set of parents the parents that model a proper adult domestic relationship, in which case, homosexual children are best off with homosexual parents of the same gender?

Well, yes, but only if the kid was adopted or something. Or he was in foster care. But as long as a gay/lesbian child is born to a straight couple, and is still loved and raised as their child, then it's perfectly ok for him/her to stay with them.

 

[Gamine]

No matter how much we twist these things, its all too clear that a man cannot take the place of a woman and vice versa,

Actually, that's mostly what being gay is--a man taking the place of a woman.

Wouldn't the more important issue be whether the parents are of the same orientation as the child? In other words, if a kid is gay, wouldn't it be better to be raised by two gay men/if the kid is lesbian to be raised by two lesbian women than either to be raised by a straight couple consisting of a man and a woman? Isn't the best set of parents the parents that model a proper adult domestic relationship, in which case, homosexual children are best off with homosexual parents of the same gender?

So how do i detect if my child is gay/straight?
if this cant be detected from birth,Oh my goddess! what will i do!!
atleast i didnt wake up one morning and realize oh my gosh im black!

 

[epaulet]

No matter how much we twist these things, its all too clear that a man cannot take the place of a woman and vice versa,

Actually, that's mostly what being gay is--a man taking the place of a woman.

Wouldn't the more important issue be whether the parents are of the same orientation as the child? In other words, if a kid is gay, wouldn't it be better to be raised by two gay men/if the kid is lesbian to be raised by two lesbian women than either to be raised by a straight couple consisting of a man and a woman? Isn't the best set of parents the parents that model a proper adult domestic relationship, in which case, homosexual children are best off with homosexual parents of the same gender?

Well you can't tell if a child is gay from that early on...

Also I don't really see your argument. As long as the parents having provide a comfortable environment for the child and teach the child how to be happy and successful in the world, it should be fine. Love between a man and a woman is basically the same as love between two of the same sex... the only difference is anatomy.

 

[Grand_Poohbah]

I personally believe it's a choice and not something that someone has to do.

 

[epaulet]

I personally believe it's a choice and not something that someone has to do.

Given the choice, I would not choose to be gay. Saying it's a choice is like saying that one day you just chose to be straight. When that's not true. One day you just start noticing the opposite sex more... meanwhile gay people notice the same sex more instead. You don't have to believe me but just making sure you at least hear it from a first hand perspective from at least one gay person in case you haven't. Or in this case read it I suppose.

Now as to WHY that is, I don't know. It was apparent to me that I was different pretty early on... second grade I think. It would have been much easier to accept the truth if I had known why though. Perhaps one day we'll find the cause of homosexuality, heterosexuality, and everything in between and it won't be such a terrible experience for the millions of people who constantly struggle with it. Hiding yourself not only to everyone else, but hiding the truth from yourself because you simply cannot accept it, is one of the toughest things to cope with. Also knowing you may never find happiness in this society because you know it will be taboo to be with the one you love, is even tougher. Would be nice to at least know why we have to go through it.

 

[Baby Tea]

And this is where we find your BIAS towards me. Darwin doesn't contradict my theology (which version of the theory anyway?), I was using it as an ironic, hyperbolic foil. This has already been established as a tad ungracious.

actually the fact that the we are descended from apes and NOT made by god directly does contradict christian theology

I'm just going to jump in quickly to make one point.
The theory of evolution doesn't say we come from apes. We share a 'common ancestor', but we don't actually directly come from monkeys, according to evolution.
So you've got that wrong.

Secondly, and briefly: Regardless of whether God used or didn't use Evolution, that has no bearing on the theology and core fundamentals of Christian theology. If you say it does, that merely shows you don't know much about Christian theology.

I'm only pointing out those two points, you and Max can feel free to continue arguing.

On topic: I voted, and I think I posted too, but I might as well again so that this post isn't totally derailing.

I'm inclined to believe that homosexuality is a mostly 'nature' thing. A chemical imbalance, the brain not properly switching genders in the womb (Since all brains start as 'female' during development), or even the possibility of the 'gay gene'. I suppose that some people could become gay through a predominately 'nurture' method, but I'd wager that those are few and far between.

 

[Grand_Poohbah]

I personally believe it's a choice and not something that someone has to do.

Given the choice, I would not choose to be gay. Saying it's a choice is like saying that one day you just chose to be straight. When that's not true. One day you just start noticing the opposite sex more... meanwhile gay people notice the same sex more instead. You don't have to believe me but just making sure you at least hear it from a first hand perspective from at least one gay person in case you haven't. Or in this case read it I suppose.

Now as to WHY that is, I don't know. It was apparent to me that I was different pretty early on... second grade I think. It would have been much easier to accept the truth if I had known why though. Perhaps one day we'll find the cause of homosexuality, heterosexuality, and everything in between and it won't be such a terrible experience for the millions of people who constantly struggle with it. Hiding yourself not only to everyone else, but hiding the truth from yourself because you simply cannot accept it, is one of the toughest things to cope with. Also knowing you may never find happiness in this society because you know it will be taboo to be with the one you love, is even tougher. Would be nice to at least know why we have to go through it.

Thanks for not jumping for my throat. Hearing a first person account definitely makes it more believable.

 

[Lazzi]

I would have to say none of those choices. Its rather complex.

While nature and nurture both play roles in the development of sexuality, the ratio of which is more predomenet is rather random (At least from person to person).

While there are certain genetic combenations that may make a person lean to one sexuality more than the other, they arnt deffinate. These genetic trait more gear toward masculinity or femininity.

Its how the geneticly presidposed psyce takes all the information its given and deals with it. Its may choose to rebel agianst socitys expectaion or agianst what its behavior is stero typical catagorized as.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyways I have issues beliving that any one is purly one of the two extreme sexualities. I belive that every one has the emotional compasity to be bisexual, Im not stating that they act on it simply becuase the have to compasity to do so but that it is none the less possible.

Homosexuality is actully rather rampant in avian and mammalian species. Both groups have formed the ability to make complex emotions which allow them to go beyond and restrain them selves form acting implusivly on primal urges. Obviously to a limited extent up comparitevly more than how reptiels act.

Besides human are stange and complex, the rules of natureal and normal dont work so well with us. We have afforeded the ability to be stange illogical and excentric.

 

[Sigmastrain]

while i thank you on the input on the Bonobos, alex (i didnt know that) I did research on the subject. as its stated before, scientists believe it to be a form a greeting, so i dont think that would count.

The way i see it, its a choice as far as humans go. Nuture all the way, something or some choice was made, even if on a subconcious level, to be gay. Just because its a choice doesnt mean you make it knowingly.

It could have been something in the enviorment they grew up in that made them choose or they made the choice knowing full well, but what i think it is, is a choice, plain and simple.

Scientists have mapped a chromosomes before, and if my knowledge of it all stands correct, they were in the process of mapping genes. If they found a gay gene by now, im sure they would have mentioned it. While they may still be in the process, at this time to my knowledge, they havent found it, and until it is scientifically proven. I will see it as a choice, not genetics.

(and i know i cant spell..oh well)

 

[okogamashii]

mostly nature, and a little nurture

 

[okogamashii]

It's nature, I don't question it because I myself came to the conclusion that I'm indifferent/asexual

...don't you mean "bisexual"? Asexual means that you reproduce by yourself, like by budding or spores or something.