Why homosexuality is not genetic

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 07:40 PM
link   
To start out, I want to say that I am not a Christian, or even religious for that matter, so spare me that attack.

Anyways, My mom's best friend has identical twin sons. One is gay, one is not. That to me says that being gay has nothing to do with genetics, as these two people have the EXACT same genes. Instead, perhaps it is a psychological reaction to experiences or a traumatic event.

Any way, this kind of cements it as far as I am concerned, and to be honest, I was always of the opinion that being gay was a genetic condition.

[edit on 2-12-2005 by John bull 1]




posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Well, I can't really understand how it can be genetic, since if it was, it wouldn't matter because homosexuals can't reproduce in the first place.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 07:52 PM
link   
There is a genetic factor, but that's not the only factor. Here's what I found regarding twin studies:



  • 52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were likewise homosexual
  • 22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
  • 11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual

Worldpolicy.org



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Let's start this out by saying that I am a Christian, and I don't think it is genetic, either; sospare me whatever silly attack that could be composed from whatever.


I do not see this as proof, one way or another. First, one isolated case makes nothing more than an isolated incident. Anotehr point, is that one of them could be in denial, or yet in the closet.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 07:55 PM
link   
dj, the stats mean little. 100% of the "gays" are men; that doesn't mean all men are "gays". What I am saying is, stats play little part in science. They are pretty useful in politics and sociology, though, and anyone can play with them.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Well, my friends who ARE twins are BOTH gay. I guess that means it IS genetic?

As with your example, mine proves nothing either.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TenaciousGuy
Well, I can't really understand how it can be genetic, since if it was, it wouldn't matter because homosexuals can't reproduce in the first place.


Untrue [ please deny ignorance ]. Some people conform to society's expectations and live the heterosexual life - getting married and having a family. Later in life they figure out, or otherwise decide, that they are homosexual. Thus homosexuals can reproduce.

Disclaimer : I am non-christian and a heterosexual male with a homosexual brother ( he knew this when he about was 16 or 17 ).

- McGrude

Edited for spelling errors



[edit on 2005/11/15 by McGrude]

[edit on 2005/11/15 by McGrude]



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Homosexuality is not genetic. How do you explain ex-gays who are now completely straight and some of whom are happily married?

If it were truly genetic (determined by genes like any physical characteristic), you wouldn't be able to change it.

Thing of it is, the gay-rights bunch is basing their whole argument on a non-existent genetic factor. It's genetic, they say, ergo they should be free to practice homosexuality because it's normal.

The genetic thing has been debunked, which basically knocks down their house of cards. The "scientist" who researched this and said it's genetic is gay himself--go figure!

Go check out NARTH. They have some really good information out there.

Sometimes I wonder if, for example, NAMBLA will swear up and down there's a pedophilia gene....



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   
The fact that ancient civilizations, such as Greece, socially embraced homosexuality, and most all males under such Greek social influence had homosexual experiences, from Socrates to Alexander the Great, should tell us something. I wouldn't at all be surprised if all human beings are born with the capacity to be bisexual, and then are shaped psychologically into who they are sexually throughout their childhood/adolescence. Amongst other mammals, at least, bisexuality seems to be fairly common. And if any of you have taken any psychology, you'd know how much of an influence society and certain personal events can have on our behaviors, even without us realizing it. Maybe partly genetics, but most likely psychology (nurture rather than nature) plays a very large part in it either way.

[edit on 15-11-2005 by bsbray11]



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   
acutally they don't have the excat same genese just becuase they are twins.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
People who argue the gene or choice theory are so far off base it isn't funny. It doesn't matter.

People have a right to choose to live the life they want to. It is not a crime to be gay. If they want to be gay, good for them. i won't judge them or cast my asperations upon them. I wish them happiness in all the choices they make in their lives.

Matter of fact, they have a constitutional right to life, liberty and happiness. The only ones that want to deprive them of that ar the homophobic weirdo's who can't keep their noses in their own bedrooms.

Its not wrong to be gay or lesbian. For the record i'm neither, just someone who believes in minding my own damn business.

Love and light my friends,

Wupy



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 09:23 PM
link   
I cant rule out the genetic factor here either. My theory is it is kind of like how we all like different things such as music, movies, and other such things. Except in some cases men can just prefer men, and women prefer women. I too am a Christian Conservative but I believe gays should have rights, they are human too ya know. And I cant just turn and discriminate against my fellow man gay or not.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrwupy
People who argue the gene or choice theory are so far off base it isn't funny. It doesn't matter.

People have a right to choose to live the life they want to. It is not a crime to be gay. If they want to be gay, good for them. i won't judge them or cast my asperations upon them. I wish them happiness in all the choices they make in their lives.


I fundamentally agree with you there wupy, but just for the record, I'd like to point out it's mainly the gay advocacy groups that push a genetic basis theory for homosexuality.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
There is a genetic factor, but that's not the only factor. Here's what I found regarding twin studies:



  • 52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were likewise homosexual
  • 22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
  • 11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual

Worldpolicy.org




I AGREE COMPLETELY, djohnsto77. Essentially, what we are dancing around here is the Nature vs. Nurture debate. Genes are an amazingly interesting phenomena, and they are the only reason why humans and other animals are able to reproduce with such high fidelity (accuracy). With that said, nobody really knows the extent to which genes encode our mannerisms, personalities, quirks and/or SEXUAL ORIENTATIONS. We do know that the different alleles for each gene encode for a variety of phenotypic traits, those that are easily distinguished by the eye, i.e. hair color, eye color, attached earlobes, etc. However, in my experience as an undergrad in biochemistry and molecular genetics, and in light of the fact that genes encode for many thousands of protein and RNA complexes which carry out the almost countless steps in cell respiration and metabolism, I would almost wager that homosexuality is a characteristic written into our genomes, and exposed moreso through our environments. The above statistics, if indeed collected accurately, are quite a piece of evidence in the support of genetic homesexuality.

Interestingly, I have been wondering what will happen to the sociopolitical climate of this country if and/or when the sequence of the homosexuality gene has been elucidated. It will put the Gay Rights Movement in the same exact boat as the Civil Rights Movement.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Something I've been thinking about lately is why people turn out the way they do, gay, criminal, whatever...

First off I think ALL Human are potentionaly gay or criminal or saints etc....
It takes an outside influence to bring out (or visa versa) those traits IMO.
(You'd be surprised how many "staight" people have tried same gender sex out of curiosity, Winston Churchill for one said he enjoyed it and would do it again.)

So maybe it comes from the need for attention as children? We search for attention as children and we'll take attention positive or negative. If a child acts good and gets no attention they will soon learn to act bad, IF that gets them the attention they crave.

And look how much of an attention seaking society we've become. Everybody acts like they are on stage and everybody else is the audience.

I've had a few Gay friends and they are some of the biggest attention whores I've ever known (not a put down, Gays would agree with me).
So maybe they had a bigger desire for attention in early childhood than most, and so were more effected by it or the lack of.
For example, the male child gets more attention from Dad and Mom is distant, so the child grows up feeling more comfortable with men.

Even at a very young age, we are learning sexuality and gender roles that effect us our entier lives.

Not sure if that rambling makes sense but just some ideas?

BTW AmericanMadMan (no miss type lol) I don't agree that your twins prove it's not genetic, there are exceptions to every rule.
I think it IS genetic because I believe we are ALL geneticaly wired to be Gay. I'm sure that will not sit well with your testosterone though


[edit on 15/11/2005 by ANOK]



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 11:05 PM
link   
That's what I was trying to get at, Anok. Your example of a child growing up more comfortable with men was the kind of example I had in mind, though in daily life the number of different kinds of experiences that result in those kinds of personality 'shifts', if you will, is probably insanely numerous. They probably revolve around the same basic problems, though, like, as you said, attention, or it could be affection or even food or basic safety needs theoretically, and I'm thinking along the lines of Maslow's theories, but I agree it's likely mostly a matter of how someone is brought up rather than how they are born. And I should say that this doesn't necessarily make being gay some kind of psychological problem, because that's not what I mean at all. I don't see it as much different than someone's favorite color, or dislike for asparagus, etc.

[edit on 15-11-2005 by bsbray11]



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Yes bsbray I believe that also about it being no diff to the colour you like.

But also no diff than someone who grows up a criminal or a sports fanatic or a geek or a christian.
All products of the influences on a child, the time when we absorb most of our traits that play out in our adult lives.



posted on Nov, 16 2005 @ 03:12 AM
link   
Hmmm... Where to begin. (For the record I am gay myself.)

The "one twin is gay one is not" doesn't prove a thing. As xander68 used the example that he/she knows gay twins which "proves" the opposite - if it proved anything.

I don't know why homosexuality can NOT be genetic? The "homosexuals can't reproduce" arguement doesn't mean anything either. If it is genetic, then it can be a sleeping gene. Let's try this:
G
l \
S N
l l \ \
G S N N
l \ \
S G N

And so on.

Where G is a gay gene, S a sleeping gay gene and N a "normal person".
This means that the gay gene can be carried over to the next generation and even one after that without a gay person, and then a child is born with an active gay gene. That would explain why there is usually more than one homosexual person in a family where homosexuality occurs.

I'm not saying that homosexuality is genetic - how would I know if the best scientists can't even figure it out.

BUT I do know it's not a choice. Why in his right mind would someone "choose" to be frowned upon by society? Why would anyone choose NOT to live a normal life, marry a beautiful girl, and have a family of his own? (And vice versa for lesbians.) When a person realise he (or she) is gay, the difficult part is accepting it. That's the only choice you can make. Accepting who you are and make the best of what was handed to you, or NOT accepting it, and going against "your nature". I can just imagine how frustratred, sad and miserable a homosexual person must be, trying to force a heterosexual life upon himself. That's the choice. Making yourself happy and accpeting yourself. Or making society happy by being acceptible for them.

And the father/mother giving more attention theory doesn't work either. I come from a (more or less) normal family. Well, compared to the Osbournes. Anyway, I got very little attention from my dad - due to the hours he worked. So technically I should be more comfortable with females. You can argue that I am now seeking for the love I didn't get from my dad from other men. But my dad loved me lots compared to other heterosexuals' dads. I was attracted to guys for as long as I can remember. Just as much as a heterosexual guy was attracted to girls for as long as he can remember. That's just the way it is.

Maybe this whole thing has two sides. Maybe some cases are nature/genetics. maybe others are nurture. The "attention"/"dad's love" seekers.

***Shrug*** I really don't know.



posted on Nov, 16 2005 @ 03:22 AM
link   
belive 2% of homosexuals have some sort of genetic "dissorder", and for the rest, its all in your/his/their heads.



posted on Nov, 16 2005 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

I think it IS genetic because I believe we are ALL geneticaly wired to be Gay. [edit on 15/11/2005 by ANOK]



im curious as to how you came to that conclusion... when a basic instinct of any animal is to propegate its own species.. and if we are wired to be gay then we wouldnt reproduce. i don't think that theory can fly. i think the idea of a recessive gene might fit the bill more.

Yes sex is great, but its primary and really only natural purpose is for reproduction. We as humans turned it into a recreational activity, hence gay sexual relations wouldnt be a natural order for life.

i'm not saying I am against gay people, i believe in the right to do whatever the hell you want as far as that goes, but it is most definitely against the natural instincts of life. if you buy into this idea then being gay wouldnt come from genetics but rather a conscious choice.

i think perhaps looking at other species would be very helpful in figuring this out.. anyone have studies of any gay animals? i know someone mentioned earlier that many species exhibit bisexual tendencies.





new topics
 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join