Homosexuality: Nature or choice

[achilles12604]

Leaving aside the free will argument for the moment, I would like to investigate the evidence for homosexuality being a result of genetics or biochemistry, or personal choice.

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is controlled by his genetics or biochemistry and must therefore be homosexual?

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is such simply by choice outside of other driving factors?

Please feel free to add to the criteria of the OP if you feel there are other options I missed.

[micatala]

My view is that most people who self-identify as homosexuals do not choose homosexuality. While at this point I will not provide citations, my reasons for this conclusion are:

1. Testimony of homosexuals. I have heard and read any number of testimonies from gays, describing how, during adolescence, they came to realize they were gay. Oftentimes they came to this conclusion after trying to deny the possibility for some time. Oftentimes these testimonies came from conservative Christians who knew full well their orientation would not be welcome within their families or their churches. I do not recall any instances where a person was 'tempted' into choosing homosexuality through sexual experimentation, although I allow there are some who may claim this has been their experience. Many of these testimonies were from people who claimed to have remained celibate well into their adulthoods.

2. A lack of any real evidence that homosexuals, in general, choose to be that way.

3. The existence of homosexual and bisexual behavior in a number of animal species.

4. Studies which at least indicate that genetic factors are at play. My view, based on the evidence I have seen, is that homosexuality is not entirely genetically determined in most cases, but that genes play a role.

5. Studies which indicate that biochemical factors may contribute to homosexuality.

[Vanguard]

Leaving aside the free will argument for the moment, I would like to investigate the evidence for homosexuality being a result of genetics or biochemistry, or personal choice.

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is controlled by his genetics or biochemistry and must therefore be homosexual?

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is such simply by choice outside of other driving factors?

Please feel free to add to the criteria of the OP if you feel there are other options I missed.

Interestingly, I believe it is pure folly to argue against the notion that genetics play a factor in helping determine the sexual orientation of an individual be it hetero- or homosexual. The bigger question for me is, as micatala has suggested in his final point, does this supposed biochemical influence found in individuals ultimately dictate what their orientation will become? Or is the very combination of biochemical "proclivities" together with the individual's social environment exposure responsible for this ulitmate determination?

[otseng]

I am in general agreement with micatala's points.

Here's my thoughts on homosexuality being caused purely genetically. If it is an inheritable trait, then I would expect homosexuality to decrease over time. If homosexuals only partner with the same sex, they could not reproduce between themselves. Since they cannot reproduce between themselves and pass the inheritable genes down, these genes would not be passed to the next generation. But homosexuality does not seem to decrease over time, but if anything, is increasing.

So there must be some other cause of homosexuality other than purely genetic.

I'm not ruling out that there can be some genetic factor, but it cannot be the sole reason.

[byofrcs]

Leaving aside the free will argument for the moment, I would like to investigate the evidence for homosexuality being a result of genetics or biochemistry, or personal choice.

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is controlled by his genetics or biochemistry and must therefore be homosexual?

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is such simply by choice outside of other driving factors?

Please feel free to add to the criteria of the OP if you feel there are other options I missed.

There are two levels to this question:

Given the intense hatred of homosexuals by, for example, Christian society I would suggest that it is unlikely to be a personal choice for many but an intrinsic part of the nature of the person.

Not just Christian society but modern Muslim society too seems to take a special delight in discrimination against homosexuals.

Like the actual sex of the person i.e. male and female, the sexual orientation appears to be hard to alter through the law.

In the end the sexual orientation has to be genetic because if a homosexual had a XX set of sex chromosomes then they would not be homosexual ! Therefore their homosexuality (a label that society gives people) is predicated on the sex genes.

Now the meta-level; when I saw the debate topic then it seemed odd and I couldn't pin down the problem. Then I thought that it would seem for some that homosexual discrimination does appear to be acceptable whereas discrimination on sex and colour of the skin is less acceptable.

I will try this with Blacks and see if it is in the nature of Blacks to be 'x' or they do have a choice. Equally, questions like this could be asked about women.

[otseng]

In the end the sexual orientation has to be genetic because if a homosexual had a XX set of sex chromosomes then they would not be homosexual ! Therefore their homosexuality (a label that society gives people) is predicated on the sex genes.

I'm not following your logic here. Could you elaborate?

[byofrcs]

In the end the sexual orientation has to be genetic because if a homosexual had a XX set of sex chromosomes then they would not be homosexual ! Therefore their homosexuality (a label that society gives people) is predicated on the sex genes.

I'm not following your logic here. Could you elaborate?

If a person sexually preferred men and they were a man (XY sex genes) then they would be labelled homosexual.

If that person had XX genes then they would be a woman and a women who prefers men would be labelled heterosexual.

Irrespective of the source of the preference, in the end the ultimate decider that cannot easily be changed is what actual sex genes they have and so the question of sexual preference cannot be disentangled from the genetic sex.

Prejudice on the grounds of sexual preference is just another aspect of the long history of prejudice on the ground of actual sex.

[Furrowed Brow]

Here's my thoughts on homosexuality being caused purely genetically. If it is an inheritable trait, then I would expect homosexuality to decrease over time. If homosexuals only partner with the same sex, they could not reproduce between themselves. Since they cannot reproduce between themselves and pass the inheritable genes down, these genes would not be passed to the next generation. But homosexuality does not seem to decrease over time, but if anything, is increasing.

If homosexuality has a genetic component, the genes or combinations of genes could be recessive. It is possible for both parent to have brown hair, whilst their offspring have ginger hair, if ginger hair is a recessive gene. In which case a larger proportion of the population could have the genes for a trait without exhibiting the trait them self; so this argument doe not really work as an argument against a genetic component.

My money is on gay genetics + gay biochemistry + nurture. So that’s a hedge bet. Though I seem to remember reading some stats that says a far higher proportion of third borns are gay, and city populations too even when migration is taken into account are more gay than the country. The first is maybe evidence for biochemistry or nurture being dominant influences, and the issue of cities could involve all three.

However, this thread seems implicitly predicated on the notion that there is a standard norm from which gay deviates. Maybe the universe is full of gay ETs that don’t bother to make contact with inhabitants Earth because deviant Earthlings are just too darn straight.

[realthinker]

I am in general agreement with micatala's points.

Here's my thoughts on homosexuality being caused purely genetically. If it is an inheritable trait, then I would expect homosexuality to decrease over time. If homosexuals only partner with the same sex, they could not reproduce between themselves. Since they cannot reproduce between themselves and pass the inheritable genes down, these genes would not be passed to the next generation. But homosexuality does not seem to decrease over time, but if anything, is increasing.

So there must be some other cause of homosexuality other than purely genetic.

I'm not ruling out that there can be some genetic factor, but it cannot be the sole reason.

It's been suggested and backed up by research that homosexuality in males is a by-product of genetic factors that increase the fertility of their mothers. The same genes that make the mothers more prolific, a genetically favorable condition, produce some percentage of offspring that are perhaps a genetic dead-end.

As an example, with distorted numerics, of course, if a mother has such genes that increase fertility by a factor of .25 offspring per generation but with perhaps .05 offspring per generation being homosexual, there's still a greater chance that her genetics are passed on. There's an extra offspring per four generations but one per 20 generations is not likely to pass on the genetic makeup. The net effect would be, I believe, an extra offspring every five generations.

[Homicidal_Cherry53]

I am in general agreement with micatala's points.

Here's my thoughts on homosexuality being caused purely genetically. If it is an inheritable trait, then I would expect homosexuality to decrease over time. If homosexuals only partner with the same sex, they could not reproduce between themselves. Since they cannot reproduce between themselves and pass the inheritable genes down, these genes would not be passed to the next generation. But homosexuality does not seem to decrease over time, but if anything, is increasing.

So there must be some other cause of homosexuality other than purely genetic.

I'm not ruling out that there can be some genetic factor, but it cannot be the sole reason.

Homosexuality could easily be a recessive gene that only shows itself if there are two recessive alleles (so if you have two heterozygous parents, there would be only a 1:4 chance of the child being homosexual but a 1:2 chance of some homosexual allele being passed down). This gives the gene at least a chance of surviving for quite some time. Add in the fact that many homosexuals did indeed reproduce because of societal pressure and it becomes entirely possible for homosexuality to be genetic and be perpetuated.

Personally, I believe genetics to be a very large factor in homosexuality, but it is possible for it to be brought on by how a child is raised. If the upbringing of a child can cause them to suppress homosexuality, then it is only logical that it can have the opposite effect on a straight child.