[thedoc (OP)]

Glenn Smit asked the Naked Scientists:
   At a church group meeting the question came up: Is a person born homosexual (gay) or do you become gay? There were different opinions, I would appreciate it if you could clarify.
What do you think?

[RD]

The correlation between fraternal-birth-order and sexual-orientation shows male-homosexuality can have a biological origin ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_birth_order_and_male_sexual_orientation

[smart]

I don't think there such thing as a gay gene: humans can change sex orientation at their own will. Furthermore no scientific evidences has been made to prove the existence of a gay gene. Homosexuality is not genetically acquired but rather a sexual orientation developed over time. 

[RD]

... humans can change sex orientation at their own will.

If that were true why do gay people persist with their sexual-orientation despite all the pressure* they are under to go straight ? . Given the persecution & punishment which comes with being gay, no-one would choose homosexuality.

[ * e.g. being ostracised / beaten / jailed / executed ]

[smart]

... humans can change sex orientation at their own will.

If that were true why do gay people persist with their sexual-orientation despite all the pressure* they are under to go straight ? . Given the persecution & punishment which comes with being gay, no-one would choose homosexuality.

This seem like another fight between free will and determinism; However homosexuality should not be regarded as a crime since its taking roots in the cultural heritage of mankind, not genetics.

[puppypower]

In my opinion, one will become homosexual, since newborns, babies and children do not have sex. Sex is a choice one makes in the teen years when the tools develop. Someone who likes internet porn does not have this propensity from birth, since genetics are ancient and conservative, while computers and internet are too new for this to be engraved on the DNA. Sex is one of the most pleasurable things to do and has an instinctive imperative, so the ends can often justify the means. 

It is not unusual for a male child to be more feminine or a female child to be more masculine; Tomboy. This can happen when children of the opposite sex better relate to the parents or siblings, and friends of the opposite sex. It is not also unusual for a child to pretend they are a solider, a dancer, a fireman, race car driver, etc. But as they get older, some children continue to dream, while others change with the demands of life.

If you have a nurturing environment which helps you keep a childhood dream alive, one may continue to pursue that dream into adulthood. If you have unconditional love to support a dream; mother, then unpractical dreams will linger too long. The high rate of suicide and addiction in gay men seems to suggest many are at odds with themselves. Culture has the highest acceptance of all time so this should have reversed, yet it persists. This can happen if a dream is assumed to reflect reality but is contrary to the DNA. The unconscious mind will attempt to restore natural balance with this push undermining the fantasy. There will be hole in their psyche.

For example, if a person thinks they are the best dancer and they pursue this into adulthood, due to a loving coach, but can never quite dance properly but keeps trying to satisfy the fantasy, they will become more and more depressed and subject to supplemental behavior, to make up for the gap that is forming.

If you look at homosexuality in terms of evolution, this form of sexual behavior cannot procreate. If we assume Darwin and modern evolution is correct, there is no way to pass forward homosexual genes connected to sex. This is not to say that the homosexual personality, beyond sex, cannot have a positive impact on others. That is passed forward, through the mind and not through genetics. A person with dreams can have a positive impact on others, due to their enthusiasm, but when the dream is at odds with the DNA, there is a backlash; overcompensation.

[RD]

... humans can change sex orientation at their own will

The alleged success-rate in converting people from gay to straight is very poor ...

... 3% reported changing their orientation to heterosexual ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_therapy#Changing_Sexual_Orientation:_A_Consumer.27s_Report

That self-reported 3% figure isn't necessarily the truth , it could be lower.

[evan_au]

Complex behavioral traits in humans rarely have a simple genetic answer. Most behaviors are an interaction of multiple genes (each with a small contribution) and the environment.

There are many theories about heritability of homosexual behavior, and some actually claim to have evidence to back them up.

One theory is that the mothers and sisters of a homosexual man have more children, which compensates for one man who has fewer children.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

I vaguely recall one reported case that did seem to be traceable to a single gene. Some mosquitoes in the lab were found to have a gene mutation that caused a change in protein folding at a certain temperature. Since mosquitoes take on the external temperature, raising the temperature above a threshold caused mosquitoes carrying this gene to switch their attention to a different pheromone, and back when the temperature was reduced. Effectively, they became temperature-dependent homosexuals. (Unfortunately, I can't find a reference to the report, which makes me suspect my recollection...)

[evan_au]

I still can't find the discussion on mosquitoes, but here is a single-gene trigger in fruit-flies, also in pheromone processing:
http://www.livescience.com/2094-homosexuality-turned-fruit-flies.html

Unlike insects, humans can consciously override most behaviors (at least temporarily).
- Conscious decisions are influenced by role models, education, church groups, logic, fashion, fame and fortune, among many other environmental factors.
- These same environmental factors influence us unconsciously, as do genetic factors.
- Pheromones, if they are active in humans, probably operate below the conscious level

So I suspect that sexual orientation in humans will be less genetically clear-cut than in insects.

[puppypower]

Sexuality is an instinctive imperative. An instinctive imperative is an unconscious impulse needed for the survival of the individual and/or the species. Eating food is also an instinctive imperative. An instinctive imperative is analogous to an energy curve, where this is an activation energy, and then a slide down the curve toward lower energy; satisfaction.



If I was brought up in a particular culture, I will learn, from a child, to like and even prefer my own ethnic foods. My cultural training will set conditions to help me satisfy the needs of the instinctive imperative of eating. The culture provides the training and the practice so I can generate the activation energy and slide own the energy curve toward satisfaction.

I may argue my strong desire for my ethnic food is genetic, because this food has been prepared for a thousand years and all my ancestors ate this food. They bred in this food eating behavior, resulting in my liking this food. Others will argue that any baby from one culture could have brought up into another culture and conditioned to like this food, even without that food gene.

As a closer analogy, the vegetarian will not eat meat. Meat will not generate the active energy therefore it cannot satisfy the imperative. Is this due to a veggie gene? Or is this due to wealthy cultures having an unnatural access to foods from around the world, where even summer food can be obtained in winter. This allows one to make such choices.

If you lived in a cold rugged climate and would only eat veggies, you would starve in the winter, since little veggie food is available. If you can buy fresh tomatoes from another hemisphere, at the market, you can sustain all winter long and never cause the imperative to take matters into its own hands. On the other hand, if you were stuck in the snow, starving for veggies which are not there, the need to eat will cause meat to look good. In the graph above, an instinctive imperative can catalyze its own activation energy, so the ends will justify the means, even if this is in conflict with the choice of the ego.

If you look at modern male prisons, the unavailability of females results in many of the men engaging in homosexual behavior. This is the vegetarian in the winter, away from the grocery store, with the instinctive imperative active. The instinct can override the normal bias of the ego and provide its own activation energy. The ends will justify the means, since the ends is survival.

When it comes to the DNA and its extrapolation into the body, the combined affect is like a team, with a good team more than the sum of its parts. A sports team can be composed of a group of average players, but as a team they can gel to become champions. Once you are a champion, which is more than the sum of the parts, this  to the average members of the team, will making them all stronger beaming with  pride.
 
In terms of the body, the DNA is the coach and the cells are the team. With humans this can add to more than the sum of its parts. The champion affect stemming from the team is the inner self, which is the center of the unconscious mind. As the champion this can feedback to the team and the DNA. In terms of instinctive imperatives, the activation energy is the energy difference between the champion and the team, with the champion given freedom to choose many paths. But if there is a blockage, so the team starts to decline, then the coach or DNA will act as a capacitance; genetic, change the team to restore the champion.

[yellowcat]

Sex is a choice one makes in the teen years when the tools develop.

Not true, a persons sex is biological not a choice they can make.

[smart]

Not true, a persons sex is biological not a choice they can make.

I disagree. Homosexuality is not genetic. It is a choice made by free will and sexual orientation.

[RD]

... Homosexuality is not genetic. It is a choice made by free will ...

Is paraphilia also "a choice made by free will" ? : why would anyone choose bizarre/dangerous/impractical/illegal sexual-activities ? . Answer: they don't have a choice about their orientation : it's biological, ( but not necessarily genetic ).

[smart]

Is paraphilia also "a choice made by free will" ? : why would anyone choose bizarre/dangerous/impractical/illegal sexual-activities ? . Answer: they don't have a choice about their orientation : it's biological, ( but not necessarily genetic ).

There's nothing biological in homosexuality; It is a sexual orientation driven by nature.

[RD]

There's nothing biological in homosexuality; It is a sexual orientation driven by nature.

Are you saying nature isn't biological. If biology doesn't determine the nature of living things, then what does ?

bi·o·log·i·cal
adj.
1. Of, relating to, caused by, or affecting life or living organisms

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/biological

[smart]

Are you saying nature isn't biological. If biology doesn't determine the nature of living things, then what does ?

No. Homosexuality isn't natural therefore it is not biological. Evolution didn't create gay attraction, it is a choice to select sexual preferences.

[RD]

... Homosexuality isn't natural ...

Homosexuality is not the norm, but it occurs in nature, therefore it is natural.

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

Maybe you should stick to your specialist subject, or even better take your business elsewhere.

[smart]

Homosexuality is not the norm, but it occurs in nature, therefore it is natural.

Homosexual animals cannot reproduce, therefore evolution could not have created homosexuality. 

Maybe you should stick to your specialist subject, or even better take your business elsewhere.

LOL. I guess your anti-cannabis campaign is profoundly uneducated but who cares. Thanks for your comments.  []

[Blame]

Can't imagine that it doesn't have a genetic element. Certainly plenty of potential social advantages for bi-sexuality. Both single sex bonding and non-violent dominance/submission. Given a genetic advantage for that then surely some are going to find their own sex more fun.

Very much doubt that there is a gay gene but a complex of genes that result in an adventurous atitued towards life choice sounds likely. Being gay is a life choice and no more reprehensible than being owned by cats or living for football. Hmm so are the same genes in Man U supporters? Best maybe not to ask them....
 

[puppypower]

Another way to look at homosexuality is to do a gene count. If one is born as a biological male, for example, there are a large number of genes connected to their primary and secondary sexuality characteristics of a biological male. If we assume homosexuality is also genetic how many genes does this choice take? What is the selective advantage of using a couple of genes, to override ten times as many genes? 

An analogy is like the body of the cow is all set up, by a large number of genes to eat grain and grass. The cow decides it only want to eat fish and eggs. How does this choice benefit natural selection so it can persist? There is no natural selective advantage to override a long term natural design, in favor for something that is not biologically coordinated. 

Many people question the current theory of evolution due to its exemption clauses when it comes to social issues.

Homosexuality comes from the operating system of the brain, and not from the genetics. Consciousness is more than the sum of its genetic parts, allowing us free will and choice. Consciousness is like the team being more than the sum of the players. The inner self, which is the center of our unconscious mind is connected to our DNA. It maximizes what we have biologically. The ego is connected to free will and choice; conscious mind. Choices that appear innate, but which depart from the dominance of genes do not come from the inner self, but rather come from firmware somewhere in the middle. Off center will create a compulsiveness instead of the calmness of the natural animal.

Drug and alcohol addiction falls under the same category. One can become addicted to where the behavior appears almost instinctive, even though the majority of the genes are not geared to support this. This is not from the inner self. Someone addicted to a new designer drug does not have special genes that evolved before the drug itself. This is connected to consciousness being more the sum of tis generic parts, allowing choice and free will to appear, that can move behavior, off center.