is homosexuality a genetic disorder?
-
Peace all,
How can homosexuality be genetic when homosexuals do not tend to have children. If a homosexual person does have a child, it must be with a member of the opposite sex, which means that they were either bisexual or they were hiding their homosexuality at the time. However, most gay people who know they are gay do not end up having kids unless it is planned and with the help of a member of the opposite sex. So, the theory goes that the more open the gay community becomes, and the less people hide their homosexuality, the rates of homosexuality should decrease since it would lead to fewer children being born of gay people. However, this is not the case. The more accepted homosexuality has become, the more gay people there are...so I vote that it is not genetic. -
Peace,
Homosexuality has to do with psychological factors. It is long story to tell here, but i don't believe it is an genetic disorder, as it has to do with accepting personality. I'm not in a mood to quote Jung on this....
-
Peace Rifat,
Maybe I wasn't clear. What I meant to say was that these are cases where some people may appear to be gay when in fact they were born with a genetic disorder. That doesn't mean that any of those genetic disorders I stated earlier is "the gay syndrome".
For example, there have been cases that a male baby who had ambiguous genitalia and was raised as a female felt the urge to be with a female. In this case, you could blame it on a medical mistake.
There are those with Turner's syndrome (females with an extra chromosome) that feel the need to be with another female. Others don't.
In other words, the genetic disorder is not a precursor for homosexuality, it is simply a very rare possiblity. There has been one fairly recent study that shows that the overwhelming majority of homosexuals do not have any of the above stated genetic disorders.
Hence, my last statement that these instances of homosexuality resulting from genetic problems are very few and far between. Not only are the genetic disorders rare, in those few cases that they do occur, the possiblity of "homosexual" behavior is rare as well. I put homosexual behavior in quotes because if a girl was born a male is it really a homosexual tendency or is it his natural instinct? Of course, it is his natural instinct. He was socialized into believing he is a girl when in fact he is not. It is very tragic to see a person go through that shock, but eventually explains alot of behavior patterns.
So again to reiterate, for the overwhelming majority of homosexuality, genetics has absolutely no role to play (as far as we know to date). Your initial question was whether genetics ever plays a role in homosexuality and the answer is certainly yes. For a fraction of the world's population it indeed plays a crucial role.
I'm very sure of this information as hormones and behavior is my field.
P.S. What is relatively common is the reconstruction of ambiguous genitalia at birth. And the rate of doctors' misjudgement of what the sex of the baby is is shockingly too high for my standards at least.
Peace -
Peace Mr Humble,
Search ''homosexuality gay'' in the forum. U will find loads of dicussion in this topic.
Peace!
-
peace "oh peaceful one/guest",
the truth is i am not very satisfied with those articles i have read, because those threads are arguing whether homosexulaity is part of islam or not, notconcernig whether it is part of "human nature". these are completely different topics, although the subject is the same. i noticed that if you took a poll saying that it is a genetic disorder, and thus those people should be accepted in society as those people who resemble physical and mental differences from the "average" human being,most people would vote that it should not be accepted in society. this may not be a big issue in the world, but it is a very serious matter in the United States... and i feel that a lot more resesarch is needed...
peace, rifat
-
Peace all,
How can homosexuality be genetic when homosexuals do not tend to have children. If a homosexual person does have a child, it must be with a member of the opposite sex, which means that they were either bisexual or they were hiding their homosexuality at the time. However, most gay people who know they are gay do not end up having kids unless it is planned and with the help of a member of the opposite sex. So, the theory goes that the more open the gay community becomes, and the less people hide their homosexuality, the rates of homosexuality should decrease since it would lead to fewer children being born of gay people. However, this is not the case. The more accepted homosexuality has become, the more gay people there are...so I vote that it is not genetic.I seek refuge in God against every arrogant one who does not believe in the Day of Reckoning
In the name of God, the Most Gracious, The Most Mrrciful
peace be upon you
awesome post. Completely agree
God bless !
-
Peace,
Jung has written a lot on this and showed it had to do with the unbalance of the soul in man and females, he wrote beautifull essays on this, i'll see if i can find a good link about it. In the mean while i can recommend Jung for everyone to read....
-
Peace folks,
Isnt it there are 3 kind of sexes which are born;
- male - sexed
- female - sexed
- gay - neutral
I see no place for homo/lesbo activity.
There are chances that being homo/lesbo are genetic. Since you can find this in many other animals. I have seen few times 2 males goats doing together and some of them also drink there own piss. Also I have seen these animals slaughterd, and man believe me their meat is blue and it smells aaaaaaaaaaakh!
Being a human, one can use the excuse since animals do it, we can do it OR one learns what is right from nature. Anyone think he/she feels doing it, should remember the bloody satan the whisperer.
-
Gay is not neutral. Its a disease. A asycological one. As far a genetics is concerned, to cut it short, one does not need to expose oneself to such a sick environment where perverted (or gay) gene are either get switched on or off resulting in homofaggotry. We do not want another nuclear distruction that wiped out Sodom and Gomorah!
-
We do not want another nuclear distruction that wiped out Sodom and Gomorah!
sitchin? daneken? why are you suggesting this?
The Animal Homosexuality Myth
by Luiz S?rgio SolimeoThe following article is adapted from the author's recently published book, Defending a Higher Law Why We Must Resist Same Sex "Marriage" and the Homosexual Movement.
In its effort to present homosexuality as normal, the homosexual movement turned to science in an attempt to prove three major premises
- Homosexuality is genetic or innate;
- Homosexuality is irreversible;
- Since animals engage in same-sex sexual behavior, homosexuality is natural.
Keenly aware of its inability to prove the first two premises, the homosexual movement pins its hopes on the third, animal homosexuality.
Animals Do It, So It's Natural, Right?
The reasoning behind the animal homosexuality theory can be summed up as follows
- Homosexual behavior is observable in animals.
- Animal behavior is determined by their instincts.
- Nature requires animals to follow their instincts.
- Therefore, homosexuality is in accordance with animal nature.
- Since man is also animal, homosexuality must also be in accordance with human nature.
This line of reasoning is unsustainable. If seemingly "homosexual" acts among animals are in accordance with animal nature, then parental killing of offspring and intra-species devouring are also in accordance with animal nature. Bringing man into the equation complicates things further. Are we to conclude that filicide and cannibalism are according to human nature?
In opposition to this line of reasoning, this article sustains that
- There is no "homosexual instinct" in animals,
- It is poor science to "read" human motivations and sentiments into animal behavior, and
- Irrational animal behavior is not a yardstick to determine what is morally acceptable behavior for rational man.
There Is No "Homosexual Instinct" In Animals
Anyone engaged in the most elementary animal observation is forced to conclude that animal "homosexuality," "filicide" and "cannibalism" are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Consequently, they cannot be called animal instincts. These observable exceptions to normal animal behavior result from factors beyond their instincts.
-- Clashing Stimuli and Confused Animal Instincts
To explain this abnormal behavior, the first observation must be the fact that animal instincts are not bound by the absolute determinism of the physical laws governing the mineral world. In varying degrees, all living beings can adapt to circumstances. They respond to internal or external stimuli.
Second, animal cognition is purely sensorial, limited to sound, odor, touch, taste and image. Thus, animals lack the precision and clarity of human intellectual perception. Therefore, animals frequently confuse one sensation with another or one object with another.
Third, an animal's instincts direct it towards its end and are in accordance with its nature. However, the spontaneous thrust of the instinctive impulse can suffer modifications as it runs its course. Other sensorial images, perceptions or memories can act as new stimuli affecting the animal's behavior. Moreover, the conflict between two or more instincts can sometimes modify the original impulse.
In man, when two instinctive reactions clash, the intellect determines the best course to follow, and the will then holds one instinct in check while encouraging the other. With animals that lack intellect and will, when two instinctive impulses clash, the one most favored by circumstances prevails.
At times, these internal or external stimuli affecting an animal's instinctive impulses result in cases of animal "filicide," "cannibalism" and "homosexuality."
-- Animal "Filicide" and "Cannibalism"
Sarah Hartwell explains that tomcats kill their kittens after receiving "mixed signals" from their instincts
Most female cats can switch between "play mode" and "hunt mode" in order not to harm their offspring. In tomcats this switching off of "hunt mode" may be incomplete and, when they become highly aroused through play, the "hunting" instinct comes into force and they may kill the kittens. The hunting instinct is so strong, and so hard to switch off when prey is present, that dismemberment and even eating of the kitten may ensue.... Compare the size, sound and activity of kittens with the size, sound and activity of prey. They are both small, have high-pitched voices and move with fast, erratic movements. All of these trigger hunting behavior. In the tomcat, maternal behavior cannot always override hunting behavior and he treats the kittens in exactly the same way he would treat small prey. His instincts are confused.
Regarding animal cannibalism, the Iran Nature and Wildlife Magazine notes
Cannibalism is most common among lower vertebrates and invertebrates, often due to a predatory animal mistaking one of its own kind for prey. But it also occurs among birds and mammals, especially when food is scarce.
-- Animals Lack the Means to Express Their Affective States
To stimuli and clashing instincts, however, we must add another factor In expressing its affective states, an animal is radically inferior to man.
Since animals lack reason, their means of expressing their affective states (fear, pleasure, pain, desire, etc.) are limited. Animals lack the rich resources at man's disposal to express his sentiments. Man can adapt his way of talking, writing, gazing, gesturing in untold ways. Animals cannot. Consequently, animals often express their affective states ambiguously. They "borrow," so to speak, the manifestations of the instinct of reproduction to manifest the instincts of dominance, aggressiveness, fear, gregariousness and so on.
-- Explaining Seemingly "Homosexual" Animal Behavior
Bonobos are a typical example of this "borrowing." These primates from the chimpanzee family engage in seemingly sexual behavior to express acceptance and other affective states. Thus, Frans B. M. de Waal, who spent hundreds of hours observing and filming bonobos, says
There are two reasons to believe sexual activity is the bonobo's answer to avoiding conflict.
First, anything, not just food, that arouses the interest of more than one bonobo at a time tends to result in sexual contact. If two bonobos approach a cardboard box thrown into their enclosure, they will briefly mount each other before playing with the box. Such situations lead to squabbles in most other species. But bonobos are quite tolerant, perhaps because they use sex to divert attention and to diffuse tension.
Second, bonobo sex often occurs in aggressive contexts totally unrelated to food. A jealous male might chase another away from a female, after which the two males reunite and engage in scrotal rubbing. Or after a female hits a juvenile, the latter's mother may lunge at the aggressor, an action that is immediately followed by genital rubbing between the two adults.
Like bonobos, other animals will mount another of the same sex and engage in seemingly "homosexual" behavior, although their motivation may differ. Dogs, for example, usually do so to express dominance. Cesar Ades, ethologist and professor of psychology at the University of S?o Paulo, Brazil, explains, "When two males mate, what is present is a demonstration of power, not sex."
Jacque Lynn Schultz, ASPCA Animal Sciences Director of Special Projects, explains further
Usually, an un-neutered male dog will mount another male dog as a display of social dominance--in other words, as a way of letting the other dog know who's boss. While not as frequent, a female dog may mount for the same reason.
Dogs will also mount one another because of the vehemence of their purely chemical reaction to the smell of an estrus female
Not surprisingly, the smell of a female dog in heat can instigate a frenzy of mounting behaviors. Even other females who are not in heat will mount those who are. Males will mount males who have just been with estrus females if they still bear their scent.... And males who catch wind of the estrus odor may mount the first thing (or unlucky person) they come into contact with.
Other animals engage in seemingly "homosexual" behavior because they fail to identify the other sex properly. The lower the species in the animal kingdom, the more tenuous and difficult to detect are the differences between sexes, leading to more frequent confusion.
-- "Homosexual" Animals Do Not Exist
In 1996, homosexual scientist Simon LeVay admitted that the evidence pointed to isolated acts, not to homosexuality
Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity.
Despite the "homosexual" appearances of some animal behavior, this behavior does not stem from a "homosexual" instinct that is part of animal nature. Dr. Antonio Pardo, Professor of Bioethics at the University of Navarre, Spain, explains
Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals.... For reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed towards an individual of the opposite sex. Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such. Nevertheless, the interaction of other instincts (particularly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual. Such behavior cannot be equated with an animal homosexuality. All it means is that animal sexual behavior encompasses aspects beyond that of reproduction.
It Is Unscientific To "Read" Human Motivation
And Sentiment Into Animal BehaviorLike many animal rights activists, homosexual activists often "read" human motivation and sentiment into animal behavior. While this anthropopathic approach enjoys full citizenship in the realms of art, literature, and mythology it makes for poor science. Dr. Charles Socarides of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) observes
The term homosexuality should be limited to the human species, for in animals the investigator can ascertain only motor behavior. As soon as he interprets the animal's motivation he is applying human psychodynamics--a risky, if not foolhardy scientific approach.
Ethologist Cesar Ades explains the difference between human and animal sexual relations
Human beings have sex one way, while animals have it another. Human sex is a question of preference where one chooses the most attractive person to have pleasure. This is not true with animals. For them, it is a question of mating and reproduction. There is no physical or psychological pleasure....The smell is decisive when a female is in heat, she emits a scent, known as pheromone. This scent attracts the attention of the male, and makes him want to mate. This is sexual intercourse between animals. It is the law of nature.
Even biologist Bruce Bagemihl, whose book Biological Exuberance Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity was cited by the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association in their amici curiae brief in Lawrence v. Texas and is touted as proof that homosexuality is natural among animals, is careful to include a caveat
Any account of homosexuality and transgender animals is also necessarily an account of human interpretations of these phenomena....We are in the dark about the internal experience of the animal participants as a result, the biases and limitations of the human observer--in both the gathering and interpretation of data--come to the forefront in this situation.....With people we can often speak directly to individuals (or read written accounts)....With animals in contrast, we can often directly observe their sexual (and allied) behaviors, but can only infer or interpret their meanings and motivations."
Dr. Bagemihl's interpretation, however, throughout his 750-page book unabashedly favors the animal homosexuality theory. Its pages are filled with descriptions of animal acts that would have a homosexual connotation in human beings. Dr. Bagemihl does not prove, however, that these acts have the same meaning for animals. He simply gives them a homosexual interpretation. Not surprisingly, his book was published by Stonewall Inn Editions, "an imprint of St. Martin's Press devoted to gay and lesbian interest books."
Irrational Animal Behavior Is No Blueprint For Rational Man
Some researchers studying animal "homosexual" behavior extrapolate from the realm of science into that of philosophy and morality. These scholars reason from the premise that if animals do it, it is according to their nature and thus is good for them. If it is natural and good for animals, they continue, it is also natural and morally good for man. However, the definition of man's nature belongs not to the realm of zoology or biology, but philosophy, and the determination of what is morally good for man pertains to ethics.
Dr. Marlene Zuk, professor of biology at the University of California at Riverside, for example, states
Sexuality is a lot broader term than people want to think. You have this idea that the animal kingdom is strict, old-fashioned Roman Catholic, that they have sex to procreate. ... Sexual expression means more than making babies. Why are we surprised? People are animals.
Simon LeVay entertains the hope that the understanding of animal "homosexuality" will help change societal mores and religious beliefs about homosexuality. He states
It seems possible that the study of sexual behavior in animals, especially in non-human primates, will contribute to the liberalization of religious attitudes toward homosexual activity and other forms of nonprocreative sex. Specifically, these studies challenge one particular sense of the dogma that homosexual behavior is "against nature" the notion that it is unique to those creatures who, by tasting the fruit of the tree of knowledge, have alone become morally culpable.
Other researchers feel compelled to point out the impropriety of transposing animal behavior to man. Although very favorable to the homosexual interpretation of animal behavior, Paul L. Vasey, of the University of Lethbridge in Canada, nevertheless cautions
For some people, what animals do is a yardstick of what is and isn't natural. They make a leap from saying if it's natural, it's morally and ethically desirable. Infanticide is widespread in the animal kingdom. To jump from that to say it is desirable makes no sense. We shouldn't be using animals to craft moral and social policies for the kinds of human societies we want to live in. Animals don't take care of the elderly. I don't particularly think that should be a platform for closing down nursing homes.
The animal kingdom is no place for man to seek a blueprint for human morality. That blueprint, as bioethicist Bruto Maria Bruti notes, must be sought in man himself
It is a frequent error for people to contrast human and animal behaviors, as if the two were homogenous. .... The laws ruling human behavior are of a different nature and they should be sought where God inscribed them, namely, in human nature.
The fact that man has a body and sensitive life in common with animals does not mean he is strictly an animal. Nor does it mean that he is a half-animal. Man's rationality pervades the wholeness of his nature so that his sensations, instincts and impulses are not purely animal but have that seal of rationality which characterizes them as human.
Thus, man is characterized not by what he has in common with animals, but by what differentiates him from them. This differentiation is fundamental, not accidental. Man is a rational animal. Man's rationality is what makes human nature unique and fundamentally distinct from animal nature.
To consider man strictly as an animal is to deny his rationality and, therefore, his free will. Likewise, to consider animals as if they were human is to attribute to them a non-existent rationality.
From Science To Mythology
Dr. Bagemihl's Biological Exuberance research displays his fundamental dissatisfaction with science and enthusiasm for aboriginal mythology
Western science has a lot to learn from aboriginal cultures about systems of gender and sexuality...
To Western science, homosexuality (both animal and human) is an anomaly, an unexpected behavior that above all requires some sort of "explanation" or "cause" or "rationale." In contrast, to many indigenous cultures around the world, homosexuality and transgender are a routine and expected occurrence in both the human and animal worlds...
Most Native American tribes formally recognize--and honor--human homosexuality and transgender in the role of the 'two-spirit' person (sometimes formerly known as berdache). The 'two-spirit' is a sacred man or woman who mixes gender categories by wearing clothes of opposite or both sexes .... And often engaging in same -sex relations. ... In many Native American cultures, certain animals are also symbolically associated with two-spiritedness, often in the form of creation myths and origin legends relating to the first or "supernatural" two-spirit(s)....A Zuni creation story relates how the first two spirits--creatures that were neither male nor female, yet both at the same time--were the twelve offspring of a mythical brother-sister pair. Some of these creatures were human, but one was a bat and another an old buck Deer.
Dr. Bagemihl applies this androgynous myth, so widespread in today's homosexual movement, to the animal kingdom with the help of Indian and aboriginal mythology. He invites the West to embrace "a new paradigm"
Ultimately, the synthesis of scientific views represented by Biological Exuberance brings us full circle--back to the way of looking at the world that is in accordance with some of the most ancient indigenous conceptions of animal (and human) sexual and gender variability. This perspective dissolves binary oppositions....Biological Exuberance is...a worldview that is at once primordial and futuristic, in which gender is kaleidoscopic, sexualities are multiple, and the categories of male and female are fluid and transmutable.
Conclusion
In summary, the homosexual movement's attempt to establish that homosexuality is in accordance with human nature, by proving its animal homosexuality theory, is based more on mythological beliefs and erroneous philosophical tenets than on science.
Luiz S?rgio Solimeo joined the Brazilian Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) in 1959. As a researcher and writer, he specializes in philosophical and theological topics and has several published works. Mr. Solimeo has been in the United States assisting the American TFP since 1999.
-
In this article, Mr. Solimeo develops a section of Chapter 11, "Answering the Movement's Scientific Arguments," of the new book Defending A Higher Law Why We Must Resist Same-Sex "Marriage" and the Homosexual Movement (Spring Grove, Penn. The American TFP, 2004) -- ISBN 1-877905-33-X -- 232 pages -- paperback -- $14.95 (s/h included) -- To order, call toll-free (866) 661-0272.
The expression homosexual movement is used to designate a vast network of organizations, pressure groups, intellectuals and activists who strive to impose changes in laws, customs, morals and mentalities, so that homosexuality is not only tolerated but also accepted as good and normal. Hence, movement activists pressure society to legalize both the practice and the public manifestations of homosexuality, such as same-sex "marriage," while relentlessly assailing those who defend traditional morals.
For a brief overview of the evidence debunking the "it is in the genes" and the irreversibility of same-sex orientation theories see the TFP's flyer "Not Genetic! Not Irreversible! Not Natural!" www.tfp.org/tfc/boston_scientific.pdf.
Cf. Simon LeVay, Queer Science The Use and Abuse of Research into Homosexuality (Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press, 1996). Bruce Bagemihl, Biological Exuberance Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity (New York St. Martin's Press, 1999).
Cf. R?gis Jolivet, Trait? de Philosophie, (Lyon-Paris Emmanuel Vitte, ?diteur, 1950), Vol. 2, pp. 306-396.
Sarah Hartwell, Cats that kill kittens, at http//www.messybeast.com/kill_kit.htm (Our emphasis.)
"Cannibalism in Animals." (Our emphasis.)
Frans B. M. de Waal, "Bonobo Sex and Society," Scientific American, Mar. 1995, pp. 82-88, www.songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html. (Our emphasis.)
"Cachorro Gay?" Focinhos Online, www2.uol.com.br/focinhos/petsnodiva/index.shtml.
Jacque Lynn Schultz, "Getting Over the Hump," ASPCA Animal Watch, Summer 2002, www.petfinder.org/journalindex.cgi?path=/public/animalbehavior/dogs/1.2.36.txt&template. (Our emphasis.)
Ibid. (Our emphasis.)
LeVay, p. 207.
Antonio Pardo, "Aspectos m?dicos de la homosexualidad," Nuestro Tiempo, Jul.-Aug. 1995, pp. 82-89.
"Exploding the Myth of Constitutional Homosexuality," National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/exploding.html. (Our emphasis.)
"Cachorro Gay?"
Bagemihl, p. 2. (Our emphasis.)
Dinitia Smith, "Love That Dare Not Squeak Its Name," The New York Times, Feb. 7, 2004. (Our emphasis.)
LeVay, p. 209.
Quoted by Dinitia Smith, "Love That Dare Not Squeak Its Name."
Bruto Maria Bruti, Domande e risposte sul problema dell'omosessualit?, www.paginecattoliche.it/domande-_omosessualita.htm. (Our emphasis.)
"Man is correctly defined as a rational animal; animal refers to the proximate genus; rational refers to the specific differentiation." Joannes di Napoli, Manuale Philosophiae (Turin, Italy Marietti Editori, 1961), Vol. 2, p. 165.
Bagemihl, p. 5.
Ibid., p. 215.
Ibid., p. 216.
"The final chapter of part 1, 'A New Paradigm Biological Exuberance,' calls for a radical rethinking of the way we view the natural world. This revisioning begins with an exploration of another, alternative set of human interpretations traditional beliefs about animal homosexuality/transgender in indigenous cultures." Ibid., p. 5.
Ibid., p. 262.
-
peace free-thinkers,
at my school, we were having a discussion about homosexuals. i told my teacher why is "gay/straight" so common these days? did gay people exist in the past? my teacher was unable to respond to the first question but she responeded the second one.
could someone, scientifically explain to me th fact that "people don't choose to be gay, it is a genetic disorder"
if we can arrive with a solid conclusion, then we shall decide by using the "given laws" in the quran to determine if homosexuality is accepted by allah or not...
salam alaikum.
i m quoting from http//members.aol.com/masadi/homos.htm_________________________________________________________-
II)THE PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
It was clearly recognized by experts who were objective and unprejudiced, that psychologically speaking homosexuality is an abnormal behavior. However large scale lobbying by homosexuals and certain psychologists brought in biases into this scientific field of inquiry and hence the truth got masked and the results are stated below
"Before 1973 the DSM listed
homosexuality as a sexual disorder. Protests by gay activist groups and many psychotherapists
eventually led to its elimination from the manual as a sexual disorder per se, but the DSM did retain a category called "ego dystotic homosexuality- the feeling of extreme distress over one's homosexual preference". DSM III R has dropped even this category, and the issue of homosexuality is no longer mentioned (Comer 480).""Until the early 1970's the U.S psychiatric establishment classified homosexuality as a
mental illness, but that designation was dropped amid increased political activity and efforts by
homosexuals to be seen as individuals exercising different sexual preferences rather than aberrant personalities (Encyclopedia Britannica, vol 6, 31)."Homosexuality is proven to be a learned behavior according to experiments with clinical
cases of intersexuality. At puberty, the individuals in question were "generally attracted to the sex opposite to their sex of rearing This suggests that sexual orientation is primarily established in post natal experiences (Encyclopedia Britannica, vol 27, 247)There has however been great debate concerning the nature versus nurture question concerning homosexuality
i)Brain Difference The most recent one seems to indicate a certain difference in certain parts of the brains of homosexual people. What has however not been resolved is whether such difference in the brains was the cause or the effect of homosexual behavior. Further many people in the sample studied had Aids and Aids in its later stages affects the brain. Therefore no strong conclusions can scientifically be drawn from such a study.
ii)Hormonal Differences when hormones are artificially altered in female animal's bodies
it makes them behave more like males even showing mating preference for members of the same sex. (Britannica, vol 27 ,248-249).The same source however, also narrates that changing the hormone level postnatally does not mean that sexual preference for partners will change. The only thing that will change will be
the arousal level.Therefore, based on the above, I believe I can justifiably conclude that abnormal sexual preference even when it becomes "normal" to a particular individual due to abnormal circumstances like the above, can be controlled. If every male took his sexual desires towards every attractive female to their conclusion, you can well imagine the galloping rate of rapes in this or any other society. Just because certain individuals experience sexual desires towards members of the same sex, because something went wrong somewhere, does not at all mean that they should engage in homosexual behavior or that their behavior be accepted without question or search for a solution.
iii) The Gay Gene Even though many "political" efforts have been made by gays to attribute sexual orientation to the infamous "gay gene," nothing conclusive has been found. The study that is cited has fallen our of favor due to the biased nature of the sample and its taking into account only gay men and not lesbians.
1)From psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover, M.D.
"Like all complex behavioral and mental states, homosexuality is...neither exclusively biological nor exclusively psychological, but results from an as-yet-difficult-to-quantitate mixture of genetic factors, intrauterine influences...postnatal environment (such as parent, sibling and cultural behavior), and a complex series of repeatedly reinforced choices occurring at critical phases of development."
--J. Satinover, M.D., Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (1996). Grand Rapids, MI Baker Books.
- William Byne, a psychiatrist with a doctorate in biology, and Bruce Parsons (1993) carefully analyzed all the major biological studies of homosexuality. They found none that definitively supported a biological theory of causation. --W. Byne and B. Parsons, "Human Sexual Orientation The Biologic Theories Reappraised."
Archives of General Psychiatry 50, no.3.)
3)Psychiatrists Friedman and Downey state that "a biopsychosocial model" best fits our knowledge of causation, with various combinations of temperament and environmental events leading to homosexuality. They say
"Despite recent neurobiological findings suggesting homosexuality is genetically-biologically determined, credible evidence is lacking for a biological model of homosexuality."
--R. Friedman, M.D. and J. Downey, M.D., Journal of Neuropsychiatry, vol. 5, No. 2, Spring l993.
4)From sociologist Steven Goldberg, Ph.D.
"Virtually all of the evidence argues against there being a determinative physiological causal factor and I know of no researcher who believes that such a determinative factor exists...such factors play a predisposing, not a determinative role...I know of no one in the field who argues that homosexuality can be explained without reference to environmental factors."
I would like to add as a conclusion. If we take the arrow of implication backwards, some people have a predisposition to alcohol, that doesn't mean that they should abuse alcohol and that no therapy is effective.
5)An article on genes and behavior in Science magazine says
"...the interaction of genes and environment is much more complicated than the simple "violence genes" and intelligence genes" touted in the popular press. Indeed, renewed appreciation of environmental factors is one of the chief effects of the increased belief in genetics' effects on behavior. The same data that show the effects of genes also point to the enormous influence of non-genetic factors."
--C. Mann, "Genes and behavior," Science 2641687 (1994), pp. 1686-1689.
For more information on the "gene" factor this site (from which the above 5 quotes are taken )is helpful
http//www.narth.com/docs/bornway.html
-
Peace,
Homosexuality is a psychological unbalance. It has nothing to do with genetics. A person can have an unbalance in his/hormones that will increase the psychological unbalance. The article saladin posted is a good one. I also recommend people to read what Jung said about this.
-
Peace all
I wasn't posing that there is a 'gay gene' per se, but there are abnormalities that occur at the time of fetal development that lead to ambgiuous genitalia and other physical and hormonal abnormalities that CAN be attributed later in life as homosexuality, when in reality it isn't.
Peace
-
I wonder how arnoldyasin can be so confident that homosexuality has nothing to do with genes and is the result of hormonal imbalance. There is no evidence that supports this claim that homosexuality is the result of hormonal imbalances. HAd scientists known that, it would have been easy to convert gays to staraight guys through hormonal therapy.
I believe homosexuality is the result of BOTH genetics & the environment which interact with each other in complex ways.
And Ichepren's post may seem impressive but it is actually a bit childish & demonstrates unfamiliarity with genetics.
Ichepren faild to consider that gay guys can also be born of lesbian mothers. Many scientists have noticed that homosexuality seems to run in families. One more important thing which many people do not know is that its NOT necessary that if you do not have any genetic disorder, you do not have that gene. You MAY have it....but its just that it did not get expressed because it COULD have been RECESSIVE and NOT DOMINANT gene. Genetic disorders seems to run in families but it does not necessarily get EXPRESSED in all children or in the present generation. A little knowledge of genetics will help you understand better what I'm saying. Ichepren's line of reasoning is therefore flawed. It could be that your mother or father could be carrying a certain gene but you did not inherit it BUT the next generation may inherit it. This is how genetic traits work & are transmitted. Also if we accept what Ichepren says, it would then follow that the fathers of all homosexual children are gays or bisexuals which is quite ridiculous! Homosexual men or women are NOT just born directly from homosexual mothers or fathers. There is no data to support this claim. Had that been the case, homosexuality would have been a very simple issue, which it clearly is NOT.I'm not saying here that homosexuality is fully genetic nor am I trying to justify it. I'm just pointing out what I consider are flaws in this kind of thinking.
God bless
-
I wonder how arnoldyasin can be so confident that homosexuality has nothing to do with genes and is the result of hormonal imbalance. There is no evidence that supports this claim that homosexuality is the result of hormonal imbalances.
Exactly the same thing can be said about you in Arnold Yasin's stead, where is the slightest shred of evidence to support homosexuality's genetic causes?
HAd scientists known that, it would have been easy to convert gays to staraight guys through hormonal therapy.
Had Scientists known that it had genetic causes then it would be easy to convert gay guys to straight guys through gene therapy! rotfl
Many scientists have noticed that homosexuality seems to run in families.
How on Earth have 'many scientists' managed to find this out? I doubt any society on this planet in the last 1000 years has been accepting of homosexuals, western society has been a little more comfortable with it for the last 20, so how on Earth have they managed to root out which parent, grandparent and uncle has been gay?
Perhaps if you really want to support your point of view you should bring forth all this research from these 'Many scientists' instead of patronising people and making the very same weak comments that you are incorrectly accusing others of using on this thread.
There is no proof of the gay gene, Period.
-
Peace all,
It seems like the homosexuality is a mystery because if it's not the genes and not the hormones and it cannot be a trend or a suddenly lust for the opposite gender so what is IT???
It must be something in the brain because it's there all signals will go through.
But a question is, this phenomene is of very old origin maybe even before the people of Lut. But still we see homosexuality as something new and undiscovered. wonder why?
Can it be due to the forbidden stamp both the Bible and Quran declares?
I think some kind of homosexuality lays down in all of us, but the one who cannot control it will begin to practise it on a daily matter.
I can take myself for an example, I can feel attractive to another woman sometimes and I can start having dirty thoughts but then I will wake up and pardon myself.
I think this is very common and not so many talk about it. But this is of course bisexuality and that must be more common than pure homosexuality yeahPeace Maria
-
Hi there,
What puzzles me, is that homosexuality is associated with behavior that has nothing do with the act of having sex with the same gender.
For example, if a guy behaves in a feminine way... He's gay.
If he's got good taste in interior and design...He's gay.
If he understands women...He's gay.
If he is gentle and not 'too' masculine...He's gay.
If his clothes are clean, and he is concerned with hygiene...He's gay.
If he's close to his mother...He's gay.
If a guy shows that he too has feelings...He is DEFINITLY gay!What the..?
Why is this so?
I really really want to come in touch with my feminine side, develop a good taste in design and interior, understand women(assuming it's possible), be gentle and not overly masculine, be dressed in clean clothes and stay hygiene aware, be close to mother, and have feelings, WITHOUT being gay!
Is that possible?
Sorry for going off-topic. peace
Nadeem
-
Hi there,
What puzzles me, is that homosexuality is associated with behavior that has nothing do with the act of having sex with the same gender.
For example, if a guy behaves in a feminine way... He's gay.
If he's got good taste in interior and design...He's gay.
If he understands women...He's gay.
If he is gentle and not 'too' masculine...He's gay.
If his clothes are clean, and he is concerned with hygiene...He's gay.
If he's close to his mother...He's gay.
If a guy shows that he too has feelings...He is DEFINITLY gay!What the..?
Why is this so?
I really really want to come in touch with my feminine side, develop a good taste in design and interior, understand women(assuming it's possible), be gentle and not overly masculine, be dressed in clean clothes and stay hygiene aware, be close to mother, and have feelings, WITHOUT being gay!
Is that possible?
Sorry for going off-topic. peace
Nadeem
And there's also the fact that some actual gays are not overtly feminine.
It's more of a fear of 'losing masculinity'. I've read that in cultures, women do not need to prove their femininity, but men are expected to prove their masculinity. Whether it be from killing a lion in the ancient days or earning enough money to waste it on an extravagant sports car today.