Is homosexuality a biological construct?

[Cecilie1200]

So how many of you anti-gay people made a conscious decision to be straight one day?

Why do you assume a decision has to be conscious to be a decision? I never consciously "decided" to have Social Anxiety Disorder, but that doesn't make it a "normal" "alternate lifestyle", or any less a defect caused by environmental circumstances. And since not everyone, or even most people, in similar circumstances develop it, it's pretty clearly a reaction chosen by my subconscious that other people's subconscious minds do NOT choose.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Historically I believe that homosexuality was typically considered a social construct, in which any person had the potential to develop gay attractions if in the right situation (ex. prison inmates having gay relations due to isolation from women).

It seems like only in recent times has homosexuality been touted as a biological construct and an "identity" put on the same level as sex and race.

I'm wondering what exactly sparked all of this hubub; as there's definitely no conclusive evidence that homosexuality is "genetic" or that people are "born that way" despite activist claims.

It really all depends. If you're a woman, then homosexuality is a common sense construct. if you're a man, homosexuality is ******* retarded.

And now you're going to explain how lesbianism is "common sense", and I'm sure we're all going to be fascinated.

 

[Moonglow]

So how many of you anti-gay people made a conscious decision to be straight one day?

Why do you assume a decision has to be conscious to be a decision? I never consciously "decided" to have Social Anxiety Disorder, but that doesn't make it a "normal" "alternate lifestyle", or any less a defect caused by environmental circumstances. And since not everyone, or even most people, in similar circumstances develop it, it's pretty clearly a reaction chosen by my subconscious that other people's subconscious minds do NOT choose.

Yet you do not want to have Social Anxiety Disorder...

 

[Cecilie1200]

Historically I believe that homosexuality was typically considered a social construct, in which any person had the potential to develop gay attractions if in the right situation (ex. prison inmates having gay relations due to isolation from women).

It seems like only in recent times has homosexuality been touted as a biological construct and an "identity" put on the same level as sex and race.

I'm wondering what exactly sparked all of this hubub; as there's definitely no conclusive evidence that homosexuality is "genetic" or that people are "born that way" despite activist claims.

It really all depends. If you're a woman, then homosexuality is a common sense construct. if you're a man, homosexuality is ******* retarded.

Based on the fact that a man likes watching two women have sex, but doesn't like the thought of a man having sex with him.

Based on the principle that women are beautiful and men are.....not.

Stop being a homophobe.

I can honestly tell you that the only female characteristics I find "beautiful" are the ones that are part of me. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what men find attractive about women, physically or mentally.

Men, on the other hand . . .

 

[Moonglow]

Historically I believe that homosexuality was typically considered a social construct, in which any person had the potential to develop gay attractions if in the right situation (ex. prison inmates having gay relations due to isolation from women).

It seems like only in recent times has homosexuality been touted as a biological construct and an "identity" put on the same level as sex and race.

I'm wondering what exactly sparked all of this hubub; as there's definitely no conclusive evidence that homosexuality is "genetic" or that people are "born that way" despite activist claims.

It really all depends. If you're a woman, then homosexuality is a common sense construct. if you're a man, homosexuality is ******* retarded.

Based on the fact that a man likes watching two women have sex, but doesn't like the thought of a man having sex with him.

Based on the principle that women are beautiful and men are.....not.

Stop being a homophobe.

I can honestly tell you that the only female characteristics I find "beautiful" are the ones that are part of me. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what men find attractive about women, physically or mentally.

Men, on the other hand . . .

Attitude is a better attraction than physical attributes, bit I do love a large set of breast........

 

[Cecilie1200]

Historically I believe that homosexuality was typically considered a social construct, in which any person had the potential to develop gay attractions if in the right situation (ex. prison inmates having gay relations due to isolation from women).

It seems like only in recent times has homosexuality been touted as a biological construct and an "identity" put on the same level as sex and race.

I'm wondering what exactly sparked all of this hubub; as there's definitely no conclusive evidence that homosexuality is "genetic" or that people are "born that way" despite activist claims.

It really all depends. If you're a woman, then homosexuality is a common sense construct. if you're a man, homosexuality is ******* retarded.

Based on the fact that a man likes watching two women have sex, but doesn't like the thought of a man having sex with him.

Based on the principle that women are beautiful and men are.....not.

Stop being a homophobe.

Based on the principle of you thin women ******* is hot, and men ******* is not hot. So being a brainophobe!

Why do you insist on making this about me? It has nothing to do with me. Women are objectively beautiful. They're soft, they smell nice, they're curvy. Beautiful.

Men are hairly, lumpy, smelly, and will poke your eye out.

Soft and curvy are not beautiful traits unless you're inclined that way. I LIKE body hair, and hard, defined muscles, and I think men smell delicious, provided they aren't covered in stale sweat. And really, NO ONE smells good that way.

And that muscle they get on the sides of their lower abdomens, just below their waistbands, curving down toward their groins . . . I'm not sure what it's called, but it makes smart women stupid.

. . . I'll be in my bunk.

 

[Moonglow]

It really all depends. If you're a woman, then homosexuality is a common sense construct. if you're a man, homosexuality is ******* retarded.

Based on the fact that a man likes watching two women have sex, but doesn't like the thought of a man having sex with him.

Based on the principle that women are beautiful and men are.....not.

Stop being a homophobe.

Based on the principle of you thin women ******* is hot, and men ******* is not hot. So being a brainophobe!

Why do you insist on making this about me? It has nothing to do with me. Women are objectively beautiful. They're soft, they smell nice, they're curvy. Beautiful.

Men are hairly, lumpy, smelly, and will poke your eye out.

Soft and curvy are not beautiful traits unless you're inclined that way. I LIKE body hair, and hard, defined muscles, and I think men smell delicious, provided they aren't covered in stale sweat. And really, NO ONE smells good that way.

And that muscle they get on the sides of their lower abdomens, just below their waistbands, curving down toward their groins . . . I'm not sure what it's called, but it makes smart women stupid.

. . . I'll be in my bunk.

Who sleeps on top?

 

[Cecilie1200]

So how many of you anti-gay people made a conscious decision to be straight one day?

Why do you assume a decision has to be conscious to be a decision? I never consciously "decided" to have Social Anxiety Disorder, but that doesn't make it a "normal" "alternate lifestyle", or any less a defect caused by environmental circumstances. And since not everyone, or even most people, in similar circumstances develop it, it's pretty clearly a reaction chosen by my subconscious that other people's subconscious minds do NOT choose.

Yet you do not want to have Social Anxiety Disorder...

It's a part of me, like my period (which, admittedly, I don't miss now that it's gone) or my need to limit my intake of refined sugar or my hearing impairment. It's not great, but I'm used to it.

Honestly, I've never seen any real indication that homosexuals WANT to be gay. They actually seem to react to it in much the same way that people with disabilities react to those: kinda touchy and defensive. Even when they're doing the Gay Pride, "here-queer-in your face" thing, they come off as trying WAY too hard.

 

[Slade3200]

Can't it be both ?

Sure. Prove it.

Why does it need to be proven?
Can you prove that you love your family?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Historically I believe that homosexuality was typically considered a social construct, in which any person had the potential to develop gay attractions if in the right situation (ex. prison inmates having gay relations due to isolation from women).

It seems like only in recent times has homosexuality been touted as a biological construct and an "identity" put on the same level as sex and race.

I'm wondering what exactly sparked all of this hubub; as there's definitely no conclusive evidence that homosexuality is "genetic" or that people are "born that way" despite activist claims.

It really all depends. If you're a woman, then homosexuality is a common sense construct. if you're a man, homosexuality is ******* retarded.

Based on the fact that a man likes watching two women have sex, but doesn't like the thought of a man having sex with him.

Based on the principle that women are beautiful and men are.....not.

Stop being a homophobe.

I can honestly tell you that the only female characteristics I find "beautiful" are the ones that are part of me. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what men find attractive about women, physically or mentally.

Men, on the other hand . . .

Attitude is a better attraction than physical attributes, bit I do love a large set of breast........

Yes, well, women are even less attractive mentally in my estimation than they are physically.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Based on the fact that a man likes watching two women have sex, but doesn't like the thought of a man having sex with him.

Based on the principle that women are beautiful and men are.....not.

Stop being a homophobe.

Based on the principle of you thin women ******* is hot, and men ******* is not hot. So being a brainophobe!

Why do you insist on making this about me? It has nothing to do with me. Women are objectively beautiful. They're soft, they smell nice, they're curvy. Beautiful.

Men are hairly, lumpy, smelly, and will poke your eye out.

Soft and curvy are not beautiful traits unless you're inclined that way. I LIKE body hair, and hard, defined muscles, and I think men smell delicious, provided they aren't covered in stale sweat. And really, NO ONE smells good that way.

And that muscle they get on the sides of their lower abdomens, just below their waistbands, curving down toward their groins . . . I'm not sure what it's called, but it makes smart women stupid.

. . . I'll be in my bunk.

Who sleeps on top?

It's a quote from "Firefly". I actually have a huge, fluffy bed that will sleep two adults, a kid, a dog, and a cat comfortably. As a parent, I have reason to know this.

 

[Slade3200]

So how many of you anti-gay people made a conscious decision to be straight one day?

Why do you assume a decision has to be conscious to be a decision? I never consciously "decided" to have Social Anxiety Disorder, but that doesn't make it a "normal" "alternate lifestyle", or any less a defect caused by environmental circumstances. And since not everyone, or even most people, in similar circumstances develop it, it's pretty clearly a reaction chosen by my subconscious that other people's subconscious minds do NOT choose.

Yet you do not want to have Social Anxiety Disorder...

It's a part of me, like my period (which, admittedly, I don't miss now that it's gone) or my need to limit my intake of refined sugar or my hearing impairment. It's not great, but I'm used to it.

Honestly, I've never seen any real indication that homosexuals WANT to be gay. They actually seem to react to it in much the same way that people with disabilities react to those: kinda touchy and defensive. Even when they're doing the Gay Pride, "here-queer-in your face" thing, they come off as trying WAY too hard.

Well yeah, wouldn't you have a chip on your shoulder if you had to rally and fight for equal rights, were constantly being judged, and had to justify who you are to people who don't "get it" and scream that it is wrong and abnormal

 

[Cecilie1200]

I've had discussions with many homosexuals over the years and they all have one thing in common, they have an alternative view of the world and have a contrary way of thinking. Like who says the square peg goes into the square hole? Sexuality is a manifestation of who we are as people. Some power mad freak is going to act out in the bedroom. A wall flower will be passive, etc. Homosexuality is just a manifestation of going against the grain way of thinking.

So no, it isn't something you are predestined to at birth. It's your environment and how you deal with it as an individual. No one is predestined to be a power freak or wallflower.

Just FYI, hard-charging control freaks in regular life make up the bulk of the clientele for professional dominatrices.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Obviously it's a natural process. There have always been a percentage of people born this way and there always will be. We don't understand why that is the case, it's purpose, or through what process it develops. It exists in every culture on every continent throughout time.

Social constucts dictate the level of acceptance in a given society but never drive who becomes gay. In more open societies in different time periods, gay people go about their lives relatively unfettered by others. During these times the world has not seen a significant increase in the amount of people identifying as homosexual. More may feel free to be out and open about it but their numbers aren't growing like you would expect if homosexuality were simply a societal construct.

On the flip side, when society does not support homosexuals and even persecutes them, we see that they still exist. If it were choice, why would someone risk being stoned or thrown from a roof for it? Obviously they don't. It's just who they are by nature.

That's like saying because there have always been schizophrenics, that must mean there's nothing wrong with it.

And as it happens, social constructs often DO dictate who identifies in one way or another, just as it dictates who will act on violent or criminal impulses in many cases. In a society that actually puts a certain amount of onus on the individual to be responsible for his own actions, those who can suppress urges that go against societal mores will usually do so. In a permissive society, fewer people feel any need to restrain whatever whim crosses their mind. And believe it or not, it IS possible to convince oneself that one is gay. Not saying that's the case with all of them, but it does happen.

The law of supply and demand applies to everything about human society.

 

[Slade3200]

Obviously it's a natural process. There have always been a percentage of people born this way and there always will be. We don't understand why that is the case, it's purpose, or through what process it develops. It exists in every culture on every continent throughout time.

Social constucts dictate the level of acceptance in a given society but never drive who becomes gay. In more open societies in different time periods, gay people go about their lives relatively unfettered by others. During these times the world has not seen a significant increase in the amount of people identifying as homosexual. More may feel free to be out and open about it but their numbers aren't growing like you would expect if homosexuality were simply a societal construct.

On the flip side, when society does not support homosexuals and even persecutes them, we see that they still exist. If it were choice, why would someone risk being stoned or thrown from a roof for it? Obviously they don't. It's just who they are by nature.

That's like saying because there have always been schizophrenics, that must mean there's nothing wrong with it.

And as it happens, social constructs often DO dictate who identifies in one way or another, just as it dictates who will act on violent or criminal impulses in many cases. In a society that actually puts a certain amount of onus on the individual to be responsible for his own actions, those who can suppress urges that go against societal mores will usually do so. In a permissive society, fewer people feel any need to restrain whatever whim crosses their mind. And believe it or not, it IS possible to convince oneself that one is gay. Not saying that's the case with all of them, but it does happen.

The law of supply and demand applies to everything about human society.

I agree with this statement... Well said. I believe from what we have seen through history with the oppression of homosexuality we have reached a point where the majority of Americans have decided that it is In The best interest of our society to accept it as a personal choice and or lifestyle that every American is entitled to. Inclusion of homosexuals along with various races and religions is part of the principles of liberty and freedom that many people personally identify with and in which they identify their country with.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Obviously it's a natural process. There have always been a percentage of people born this way and there always will be. We don't understand why that is the case, it's purpose, or through what process it develops. It exists in every culture on every continent throughout time.

Social constucts dictate the level of acceptance in a given society but never drive who becomes gay. In more open societies in different time periods, gay people go about their lives relatively unfettered by others. During these times the world has not seen a significant increase in the amount of people identifying as homosexual. More may feel free to be out and open about it but their numbers aren't growing like you would expect if homosexuality were simply a societal construct.

On the flip side, when society does not support homosexuals and even persecutes them, we see that they still exist. If it were choice, why would someone risk being stoned or thrown from a roof for it? Obviously they don't. It's just who they are by nature.

That's like saying because there have always been schizophrenics, that must mean there's nothing wrong with it.

And as it happens, social constructs often DO dictate who identifies in one way or another, just as it dictates who will act on violent or criminal impulses in many cases. In a society that actually puts a certain amount of onus on the individual to be responsible for his own actions, those who can suppress urges that go against societal mores will usually do so. In a permissive society, fewer people feel any need to restrain whatever whim crosses their mind. And believe it or not, it IS possible to convince oneself that one is gay. Not saying that's the case with all of them, but it does happen.

The law of supply and demand applies to everything about human society.

No it's not. Gay folks can no more choose who they're attracted to than you can.
Tell me, when did you choose to be straight?
Do you believe that you could be coerced into a homosexual relationship and enjoy it?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Obviously it's a natural process. There have always been a percentage of people born this way and there always will be. We don't understand why that is the case, it's purpose, or through what process it develops. It exists in every culture on every continent throughout time.

Social constucts dictate the level of acceptance in a given society but never drive who becomes gay. In more open societies in different time periods, gay people go about their lives relatively unfettered by others. During these times the world has not seen a significant increase in the amount of people identifying as homosexual. More may feel free to be out and open about it but their numbers aren't growing like you would expect if homosexuality were simply a societal construct.

On the flip side, when society does not support homosexuals and even persecutes them, we see that they still exist. If it were choice, why would someone risk being stoned or thrown from a roof for it? Obviously they don't. It's just who they are by nature.

That's like saying because there have always been schizophrenics, that must mean there's nothing wrong with it.

And as it happens, social constructs often DO dictate who identifies in one way or another, just as it dictates who will act on violent or criminal impulses in many cases. In a society that actually puts a certain amount of onus on the individual to be responsible for his own actions, those who can suppress urges that go against societal mores will usually do so. In a permissive society, fewer people feel any need to restrain whatever whim crosses their mind. And believe it or not, it IS possible to convince oneself that one is gay. Not saying that's the case with all of them, but it does happen.

The law of supply and demand applies to everything about human society.

No it's not. Gay folks can no more choose who they're attracted to than you can.
Tell me, when did you choose to be straight?
Do you believe that you could be coerced into a homosexual relationship and enjoy it?

What makes you so sure I can't choose who I'm attracted to? Do you really think you HAVE to have so little control over your own mind, and merely exist in a state of helplessness before your all-powerful subconscious?

Also, did you miss the post about "who says a choice has to be conscious to be a choice"? Or were you just in such a rush to kneejerk out your favorite "Gotcha!" talking point that you couldn't be bothered?

You might want to consider that you know jack shit about me or my personal life before you rush in with your "Aha!" argument attempts. But for the record, any psychiatrist will tell you it IS completely possible to be coerced into a relationship that you would not have freely chosen and still derive some enjoyment from it. Hell, people get into toxic relationships all the time. Do you really think they're hating every second of it, and getting no pleasure from it at all? Doesn't make it any less bad for them.

 

[Slade3200]

Obviously it's a natural process. There have always been a percentage of people born this way and there always will be. We don't understand why that is the case, it's purpose, or through what process it develops. It exists in every culture on every continent throughout time.

Social constucts dictate the level of acceptance in a given society but never drive who becomes gay. In more open societies in different time periods, gay people go about their lives relatively unfettered by others. During these times the world has not seen a significant increase in the amount of people identifying as homosexual. More may feel free to be out and open about it but their numbers aren't growing like you would expect if homosexuality were simply a societal construct.

On the flip side, when society does not support homosexuals and even persecutes them, we see that they still exist. If it were choice, why would someone risk being stoned or thrown from a roof for it? Obviously they don't. It's just who they are by nature.

That's like saying because there have always been schizophrenics, that must mean there's nothing wrong with it.

And as it happens, social constructs often DO dictate who identifies in one way or another, just as it dictates who will act on violent or criminal impulses in many cases. In a society that actually puts a certain amount of onus on the individual to be responsible for his own actions, those who can suppress urges that go against societal mores will usually do so. In a permissive society, fewer people feel any need to restrain whatever whim crosses their mind. And believe it or not, it IS possible to convince oneself that one is gay. Not saying that's the case with all of them, but it does happen.

The law of supply and demand applies to everything about human society.

No it's not. Gay folks can no more choose who they're attracted to than you can.
Tell me, when did you choose to be straight?
Do you believe that you could be coerced into a homosexual relationship and enjoy it?

I've seen enough evidence to believe it goes both ways. I know gay people that tried for years to be straight and were scared to death to come out and live the lifestyle that they felt the most natural with.

We also see evidence in our prison system where when left with no other options inmates resort to homosexual activities for pleasure and satisfaction. I think that's part of our animal instincts and more a product of choice due to desperation

Similar to taste and appetite. When presented with many options we find ourselves very picky about what we eat and what tastes good. I can assure you things would be very different should that same person be stranded in the woods and starving. A rat would probably be the best tasting thing they had in their life if they were hungry enough.

 

[Iceweasel]

I've had discussions with many homosexuals over the years and they all have one thing in common, they have an alternative view of the world and have a contrary way of thinking. Like who says the square peg goes into the square hole? Sexuality is a manifestation of who we are as people. Some power mad freak is going to act out in the bedroom. A wall flower will be passive, etc. Homosexuality is just a manifestation of going against the grain way of thinking.

So no, it isn't something you are predestined to at birth. It's your environment and how you deal with it as an individual. No one is predestined to be a power freak or wallflower.

Just FYI, hard-charging control freaks in regular life make up the bulk of the clientele for professional dominatrices.

I wouldn't know, I hope they pay well.

 

[Seawytch]

Obviously it's a natural process. There have always been a percentage of people born this way and there always will be. We don't understand why that is the case, it's purpose, or through what process it develops. It exists in every culture on every continent throughout time.

Social constucts dictate the level of acceptance in a given society but never drive who becomes gay. In more open societies in different time periods, gay people go about their lives relatively unfettered by others. During these times the world has not seen a significant increase in the amount of people identifying as homosexual. More may feel free to be out and open about it but their numbers aren't growing like you would expect if homosexuality were simply a societal construct.

On the flip side, when society does not support homosexuals and even persecutes them, we see that they still exist. If it were choice, why would someone risk being stoned or thrown from a roof for it? Obviously they don't. It's just who they are by nature.

That's like saying because there have always been schizophrenics, that must mean there's nothing wrong with it.

And as it happens, social constructs often DO dictate who identifies in one way or another, just as it dictates who will act on violent or criminal impulses in many cases. In a society that actually puts a certain amount of onus on the individual to be responsible for his own actions, those who can suppress urges that go against societal mores will usually do so. In a permissive society, fewer people feel any need to restrain whatever whim crosses their mind. And believe it or not, it IS possible to convince oneself that one is gay. Not saying that's the case with all of them, but it does happen.

The law of supply and demand applies to everything about human society.

No it's not. Gay folks can no more choose who they're attracted to than you can.
Tell me, when did you choose to be straight?
Do you believe that you could be coerced into a homosexual relationship and enjoy it?

What makes you so sure I can't choose who I'm attracted to? Do you really think you HAVE to have so little control over your own mind, and merely exist in a state of helplessness before your all-powerful subconscious?

Also, did you miss the post about "who says a choice has to be conscious to be a choice"? Or were you just in such a rush to kneejerk out your favorite "Gotcha!" talking point that you couldn't be bothered?

You might want to consider that you know jack shit about me or my personal life before you rush in with your "Aha!" argument attempts. But for the record, any psychiatrist will tell you it IS completely possible to be coerced into a relationship that you would not have freely chosen and still derive some enjoyment from it. Hell, people get into toxic relationships all the time. Do you really think they're hating every second of it, and getting no pleasure from it at all? Doesn't make it any less bad for them.

What does any of that have to do with who you're attracted to? Gay people have been playing it straight for centuries so of course you can make the best of a bad situation. Talk to gay people that came out later in life, after being married and having children. They will tell you that they loved their former spouses and derived pleasure from being with them. Guess what? They're still gay and always were.

Maybe sexuality is simply more fluid than our puritanical roots allow it to be.