Is There a Biological Basis for Homosexuality?

[nagarjuna]

Fairly self-explanatory. This is not strictly a nature vs. nurture debate, or even gay-gene vs. non-gay-gene. Just whether (and to what degree) biology plays a role in the homosexual (or heterosexual) orientation of a person. As opposed to upbringing or some other factor.

And please please please let's debate about FACTS, and not opinions or moral attitudes. Near as I can tell, the other threads that even touched on homosexuality were closed, so maybe we can demonstrate our maturity in the face of an emotionally charged issue? That would be loverly. :)

[appleofmyeye]

I know my Dad is asexual and it is likely my brother is asexual. But that is more based on their Asbergers. I do think it is passed through DNA, I have no real basis though. But if the body is seen incapable of producing children, the body alters. If that produces the 'gay gene' then so be it. That is only my theory though *shrug*.

[Rafael Domination]

Uh-oh, Zomb's going to shut this thread...

[Shaun]

I'm keeping this thread open so long as the discussions remain civil. Anyone who immediately takes this into a "homosexuality is a sin" spin will find themselves at the pointy end of my moderating stick.


Now, to biological basis:
What is known for a fact is that homosexuality exists not just in humans, but in other species as well for various reasons that sometimes have to do with simple animals instincts to screw and sometimes for the pleasure. Humans, however, have a wider range of sexual behaviors than most animals because we are one of the few (and yes, there are other animals like that) that can have sex for reasons other than procreation. I think any argument that we should base our distinctions on what is "normal" human sexual behavior on procreation is seriously missing the point.

Now, do I think there is a biological basis that makes homosexuality part of the biological human? Yes. We've uncovered the gene that is connected to transsexuality, making that condition not something anyone can actualy go "oh, you're just being stupid," since it now has a basis in biology and can, theoretically speaking, be tested for. I suspect that gene is somehow related to the gay gene considering its relative proximity to issues of gender orientation, which plays a crucial role in homosexual identity.
I don't know for certain whether such evidence has actually been found, although there was some talk about it some time ago and it seems odd that the person that supposedly found the genetic link hasn't been flamed all over the Internet.

But considering the Earth and the persistence of homosexuality throughout human history, I suspect there is more to homosexuality than just "choice." If it were only a choice I think there would be fewer people willing to subject themselves to the discrimination and hatred that comes with the territory...particularly since they were often killed upon detection in certain parts of the world in the not-so-distant past.

[nagarjuna]

We've uncovered the gene that is connected to transsexuality, making that condition not something anyone can actualy go "oh, you're just being stupid," since it now has a basis in biology and can, theoretically speaking, be tested for. I suspect that gene is somehow related to the gay gene considering its relative proximity to issues of gender orientation, which plays a crucial role in homosexual identity.

First, could you cite a source? That's really interesting, I hadn't heard it before.

Second, gender orientation CAN be (but often isn't) related to sexual attraction. Gay man may have feminine characteristics, but needn't. Likewise, true transexuals are often heterosexual, homosexual, or a variety of other things. So I think it might be difficult to establish a connection here. But there IS evidence of a homosexuality gene on the male chromosome. There's also speculation that there isn't a gay gene but that there are genes for male-attraction genes and female-attraction genes. That makes sense to me--it would explain male homosexuality in much the same way we can explain why men have nip nips.

I don't know for certain whether such evidence has actually been found, although there was some talk about it some time ago and it seems odd that the person that supposedly found the genetic link hasn't been flamed all over the Internet.

Let me show you a link about how the biological profiles of homsexuality and left-handedness are almost identical sometime. :P It hasn't gotten better coverage because it would force us to change a number of our attitudes.

[Shaun]

Here is the link to the genetic link for transsexuality. Discovered by the Aussies, which is interesting.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7689007.stm

[Zombified]

Uh-oh, Zomb's going to shut this thread...

Oh, how my Clint Eastwood "Kill every thread that pisses me off" phase has gained infamy.
:P

No.
I won't close this down.
I intend to lay down my moderating powers for a long, long time.

Besides, this thread is laid out much better than the others.

And Shaunwise can take care of the people who start spewing bullshit, not me.

Throwing in what I have read though, Homosexuality IS in our human DNA. When someone is gay, it is because they possess what is called "The gay gene".

But I could be mistaken on the actual name of the gene...

[Shaun]

That and gay people have existed almost as long as humanity has, so it seems somewhat ridiculous to think they just "chose" to do it.

[nagarjuna]

Here is the link to the genetic link for transsexuality. Discovered by the Aussies, which is interesting.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7689007.stm

Krikey! That's awesome. "Increasingly, biological factors are being implicated in gender identity." Tell it!

Sorry, just excited. :P

[Andy]

That and gay people have existed almost as long as humanity has, so it seems somewhat ridiculous to think they just "chose" to do it.
I think that, like in the case of alcoholism, people's choices can be greatly affected by their genes. But as far as genes are concerned, they do not unconditionally force someone to adopt one way of life over another.

There are genes which may make people much more prone to drink alcohol to excess, but there are plenty of stories of people whose will have overridden it. Likewise, I read stories about ex-gays (and vice-versa), and how they changed their lives.

[nagarjuna]

I think that, like in the case of alcoholism, people's choices can be greatly affected by their genes. But as far as genes are concerned, they do not unconditionally force someone to adopt one way of life over another.

The difference is that homosexuality is a sexual orientation, and not a behavior. You can be homosexual and live a straight lifestyle, and vice versa.

There are genes which may make people much more prone to drink alcohol to excess, but there are plenty of stories of people whose will have overridden it. Likewise, I read stories about ex-gays (and vice-versa), and how they changed their lives.

They changed their behaviors, but it is very questionable whether they were actually changed into "heterosexuals." Back in the day, when being left-handed was considered morally reprehensible, left-handed people were forced to write with their right hands. But I don't think anyone today would think of them as "ex-left-handed," because, of course, handedness is a biological trait.

[Shaun]

I think that, like in the case of alcoholism, people's choices can be greatly affected by their genes. But as far as genes are concerned, they do not unconditionally force someone to adopt one way of life over another.

There are genes which may make people much more prone to drink alcohol to excess, but there are plenty of stories of people whose will have overridden it. Likewise, I read stories about ex-gays (and vice-versa), and how they changed their lives.

No, but to compare it to alcoholism is to make the connecting between homosexuality and a disease. There's a massive difference between being gay and drinking excessive amounts of alcohol.

And it should be noted that the people you are talking of who become ex-gays: the suicide rate of people who go through the processes to do such things is astronomically high. The reason is that they become involved in programs that tell them they are abominations because they like the same sex (usually from a religious standpoint) and inevitably they can't take it. The number of people who back out of this "change" is also high. Some people can be changed, but I think we have to be extremely careful with pushing for this. If someone is gay, so be it. If that makes them happy, then it shouldn't be any of our business and we shouldn't impose laws that prevent them from acting out who they are.
This is another problem I have with many religious groups who create these support organizations under the guise of helping, when what they often are doing is contributing to the psychological damage already inflicted upon homosexuals by society.
Granted, not all people who say they are gay are actually gay. I suspect there are many who are simply acting that way to become accepted or some such. I've known folks who pretended to be gay and I think that's more a disservice to people who honestly are not attracted to women than anything else.

[Andy]

No, but to compare it to alcoholism is to make the connecting between homosexuality and a disease. There's a massive difference between being gay and drinking excessive amounts of alcohol.
Of course that's beside the point, as the influence was my point.

And it should be noted that the people you are talking of who become ex-gays: the suicide rate of people who go through the processes to do such things is astronomically high. The reason is that they become involved in programs that tell them they are abominations because they like the same sex (usually from a religious standpoint) and inevitably they can't take it.
Oh, that's so typical of you. :sarcasm: Seems the problem here are the program's tactics, not the actual decision change.

I'd say more, but I've never seen Shaun back down from a debate. Ever. Except when bribery was involved. :P

[Shaun]

Oh, that's so typical of you. :sarcasm: Seems the problem here are the program's tactics, not the actual decision change.

I'd say more, but I've never seen Shaun back down from a debate. Ever. Except when bribery was involved. :P

Yes, the problem is the tactics. For someone that is already frakking confused, depressed, lost, and generally terrified of how their family, friends, and the world will perceive them, to be told by people they trust to make good decisions that what feels natural to them is nothing more than a disease (not talking alcoholism, but turn-you-straight programs) is psychologically damaging. That's why there is a high level of suicides amongst those who make the choice to try to change. They feel hopeless, because for people who are truly and honestly homosexual, changing them to be straight doesn't work. That pressure and the realization that no matter what they do, they will have those urges is enough to make them willing to kill themselves to end the torment of being an abomination.

[nagarjuna]

Yes, the problem is the tactics. For someone that is already frakking confused, depressed, lost, and generally terrified of how their family, friends, and the world will perceive them, to be told by people they trust to make good decisions that what feels natural to them is nothing more than a disease (not talking alcoholism, but turn-you-straight programs) is psychologically damaging. That's why there is a high level of suicides amongst those who make the choice to try to change. They feel hopeless, because for people who are truly and honestly homosexual, changing them to be straight doesn't work. That pressure and the realization that no matter what they do, they will have those urges is enough to make them willing to kill themselves to end the torment of being an abomination.

All very interesting. But unrelated to the question at hand. :D

[Shaun]

All very interesting. But unrelated to the question at hand. :D

I know. I was responding to Andy. I already answered the question at hand :P.