[Blame]

Free will and choice?

I believe in them because it make it so much easier to hate anybody whose genetics, upbringing and environment result in actions I don't particularly care for. 

Seriously though, I ain't gay, or a drunk. That's because I'm not attracted to blokes and don't enjoy being drunk. It's my choice not to bang my head against a brick wall too. So if genetics doesn't have its part why am I different?

[Earthchild]

Is being gay genetic?  We don't know, from a science perspective, at present, as far as I'm aware.  If it was, would one gene be responsible for it?   I'm inclined to think that something that appears to be a substantial aspect of someone's core drive and where we don't just have either gay or straight people - there appears to be a huge continuum between gay and straight, with various forms of bisexuality etc - wouldn't just be as a result of one single gene.  Many human traits, including eye colour, for example, appear to be the result of several genes, producing a heritable characteristic. 

Say it had a genetic basis - it might not be exclusively of genetic cause.   There may be environmental influencers that could be connected to its manifestation, when specific genetic profiles exist.    Those environmental influences may be something like the birth order, mothers' hormonal levels in the womb or experiences that people have as they develop, before or after birth.  Maybe all humans have the same abilities to have all sexual orientations, though only those experiencing certain conditions get the rarer ones.  Humans are different from most animals in that they have a consciousness that allows them some self-awareness and understanding.  Many animals act more impulsively, without prior recognition or consideration of the potential effects of their actions.  We do know that homosexuality occurs naturally, as other animal species demonstrate it.  If it was a behaviour that some species typically didn't socially tolerate, for example by punishing or hurting individuals who engaged in it, then many animals would learn to be inhibited from pursuing such behaviour - a bit of a Pavlovian response.   Human cultures have varied in their acceptance of gay behaviour, with many now accepting same sex marriages, for example.  In the past, lack of tolerance was likely to have inhibited people from having the relationships that they would have liked. 

So we probably don't know its cause(s).   We're perhaps just mere beginners in our understanding of our brains too, as well as personality.   There are some fundamental aspects of personality, such as openness to experience which appear to have genetic elements underpinning them.  I use openness to experience as an example, as possibly someone who is more open to experience could be considered as the sort of person who might stray from a more traditional course of behavioural pursuit of desire.   Overall it appears that our genetic origins for personality traits has some evidence behind it - but what may be valid for core personality traits (such as the Big 5 personality traits), may not be relevant for sexual orientation.

In the end, does understanding the causes for things that aren't pathological, matter as much as ensuring that we all live healthy and satisfying lives?  My general regard is that the latter is more important.  People will always be different to each other, that's part of the beauty of us all - we're unique. 

[exothermic]

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

I couldn't disagree more. The study in which that conclusion was drawn from comes with an admission from the authors that the results were likely affected by selection bias. It doesn't belong in a peer-reviewed journal.

Nonetheless, the notion that homosexuality is genetically-originated is laughable at best, and will never be scientifically-validated.... ever.

[exothermic]

Is being gay genetic?  We don't know, from a science perspective, at present, as far as I'm aware.

Will never happen. Homosexuality is a preference.

Just like animals, humans must procreate to exist.

Homosexuals can't procreate.

There's no way science will ever identify a genetic link. It simply does not exist.

[exothermic]

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.

You nailed it in the first sentence.

That alone is inarguable.

[exothermic]

they don't have a choice about their orientation

They make the choice during sexual development. Sexual preference isn't predetermined.

[exothermic]

they don't have a choice about their orientation : it's biological

Tell that to my gay neighbor who was once married to a man and had 3 kids.

Examples similar in context are utterly endless.




~

[exothermic]

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.

There is no validated scientific evidence for the "heritability of homosexual behavior", and there never will be. Sexual preferences have nothing to do with genetics.

[exothermic]

I vaguely recall one reported case that did seem to be traceable to a single gene. 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...)

It wouldn't matter if you found the link or not. A genetic mutation initiated by altering insect thermoregulation in a laboratory wouldn't validate anything relating to the notion that sexual preference is genetically-linked.

[exothermic]

here is a single-gene trigger in fruit-flies, also in pheromone processing:
http://www.livescience.com/2094-homosexuality-turned-fruit-flies.html

Humans don't have a CG6070 gene which governs male courtship behavior, so how exactly does this relate to the topic in question?

[jeffreyH]

For a wonman that conceives boys the more that are born the more likely that they will be homosexual. I am not sure about girls as I have not seen any data. In the case of boys this is similar in nature to the mother developing an alergic syndrome that affects feotal development. Other factors include the mixture of hormones and what proportions they are at certain periods of development. I came across the information a few years ago now so I don't have references to hand.

[exothermic]

In the case of boys this is similar in nature to the mother developing an alergic syndrome that affects feotal development. Other factors include the mixture of hormones and what proportions they are at certain periods of development. I came across the information a few years ago now so I don't have references to hand.

You're stating these things as fact.... yet you provide no references?

lol

[jeffreyH]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_birth_order_and_male_sexual_orientation

[jeffreyH]

And

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/jun/16/neuroscience.psychology

I can find more if you require.

[exothermic]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_birth_order_and_male_sexual_orientation

The study in which that conclusion was drawn from comes with an admission from the authors that the results were likely affected by selection bias. It doesn't belong in a peer-reviewed journal.

[exothermic]

And

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/jun/16/neuroscience.psychology

None of the research by Savic and Lindström was based on the fetal and/or neonatal brain. Neuroimaging data of an adult brain does nothing to support your position.

[exothermic]

I can find more if you require.

Oh please do.

[puppypower]

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

Another way to explain this is, most young parents, when planning their family, would like to have a boy and a girl. One of each sex gives parents the full parent experience. If parents, also plan to have a limited family, due to economics, but have only boys, they may fixate on the next and maybe last child being a girl. They will want a girl. This fixation can extend to after birth, with the child consciously or unconsciously, taught to play the role of girl.

In the older days, when parents would have large families of 6-8 or more children, there was always next time. But if economics means you can only see yourself affording 2 children, the clock can runs out faster for the dream of biological symmetry in your children, so choice will take over to make this symmetry. 

Children are impressionable, with conditioning from before age of 4, able to alter their entire life. One can look at child development as a function of a wide range of human adult problems to see how easy programming can alter small children.

[jeffreyH]

None of the links I posted suggested a genetic link but that during development of the feotus there are factors which determine variables such as finger length and brain structure. You appear to be fixated on the answer you believe to be true without following ALL the references supplied. Cherry picking is not scientific. Supply references that back up your position. "rotfl" back atcha.

[exothermic]

None of the links I posted suggested a genetic link but that during development of the feotus there are factors which determine variables such as finger length and brain structure. You appear to be fixated on the answer you believe to be true without following ALL the references supplied. Cherry picking is not scientific.

Are you serious? I already read/commented on both of the links you provided.

Once again, none of the research is based on embryonic or postnatal development. Neuroimaging data of an adult brain does nothing to support your position.

None of those "factors" influence sexual preference in fetal or neonatal development.... because there is no sexual preference during fetal or neonatal development!

~