Homosexuality - Choice or No? Disorder or No? (2 Viewers)

[loquasagacious]

Thanks for digging that up. Rep to you.

 

[paper cup]

Is homosexuality a disorder? If not, do you believe that sexual orientation (and/or a predisposition towards homosexuality) is determined purely or primarily by genetics? Discuss.

this issue has been blown out of proportion at times.
I don't think it's a disorder. A natural phenomenon? Homosexuality exists among animals as well as humans there was a scary doco on SBS a few years ago. But I don't think it's determined purely by genetics, or by the surrounding environment (I'm not talking about trees, I mean social, and so on) - nature or nurture?
I don't know, it's probably a mixture of both. Some people know that they're gay/bisexual at a very early age. I don't have a problem with it but some people claim they're gay/bisexual to get attention, others are actually gay/bisexual and have this impulsive need to tell everyone they meet and those type of people annoy the crap out of me. Back to point. But homosexuality is considered acceptable in western society especially the more developed nations - Netherlands and so on - and so all this coverage in the media and discussion in the general community may influence someone - say in the countries where discussion of sexuality is not as open, are there fewer homosexuals or just more closet homosexuals, is their sexuality determined by their interaction with their culture or just quashed by it?
Do I make sense?

 

[chelloveck]

No, it's an effective for of natural selection. People are allowed to be fags as long as they can't breed.

yeah if you argue that people can be exclusively gay with no hetero drives at all in terms of their biology, it kinda refutes the idea of natural selection. i mean the gay allele would be bred out within one generation.

 

[Xayma]

yeah if you argue that people can be exclusively gay with no hetero drives at all in terms of their biology, it kinda refutes the idea of natural selection. i mean the gay allele would be bred out within one generation.

Not if it's a combination of genetic factors that only predisposes them towards homosexuality (ie what turns one to homosexuality might not affect another).

 

[chelloveck]

mmmm true dat. but if one's arguing that it's totally biology (not culture at all) that renders one homosexual, then that refutes natural selection. that's probaby why there's so little biological determinists regarding this subject, hey?

 

[Xayma]

Umm there has been biological evidence towards it.

Genes which cause homosexuality in some males cause hyperhetereosexuality in women (more kiddies means it wont breed out).

Immune responses in a mother due to second plus male fetii (lol whats the plural for fetus?) which turns some males gay but it ensures the survival of more male fetii.

 

[chelloveck]

Umm there has been biological evidence towards it.

Genes which cause homosexuality in some males cause hyperhetereosexuality in women (more kiddies means it wont breed out).

Immune responses in a mother due to second plus male fetii (lol whats the plural for fetus?) which turns some males gay but it ensures the survival of more male fetii.

ok. makes sense .

 

[noneother]

Homosexuality is in the genes, study claims
By Julia Stuart
Published: 03 July 2005
Sexuality is determined well before birth and is not the result of social influences, scientists will claim this week. The authors of a new book published on Thursday say that sexual orientation is decided by a mixture of genetic factors and hormonal activity in the womb - and that homosexuality cannot be "cured".

Born Gay by Dr Glenn Wilson of the Institute of Psychiatry and Dr Qazi Rahman of the University of East London has been welcomed by gay rights activists, who say it proves there is nothing "unnatural" about homosexuality. But the book has also been criticised for suggesting that men who see themselves as bisexual should be classed as gay.

source: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article296445.ece

 

[zahid]

source: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article296445.ece

I still think thats bull.