A few minutes ago I asked the question, is being gay genetic or a choice?

Question

The overwhelming response is that is it genetic (or at least biological as one person said). So if it's not a choice, doesn't that mean that it is an abnormality that we should look for a cure too?

I think nature makes it pretty clear that sex is to be between males and females, so sex with the same sex must be an abberation, possibly one that can be fixed.

And before you start yelling "I don't need to be fixed", of course you say that because you can't know any better because of your genetic disorder.

Two comments: I found it interesting that some of you assume that I am gay (which I am not) and secondly to my comment:
"of course you say that because you can't know any better because of your genetic disorder."
I personally can't imagine being (or even wanting to be) gay and I feel sure that is because my genetic wiring is heterosexual.

The point I am trying to make is that if genetics cause homosexuality, and a very small percentage of the population has this predisposition, they are by definition abnormal. I am not trying to be cruel, just factual.

Answer 1

I am not gay, but my son is. I started seeing the signs of it when he was about 5. I always hoped that I was wrong, but he is who he is. He "came out" at age 17. This was never a choice for him. If it is a chemical imbalance in the brain, or whatever it may be, then yes, it may be "fixable" "curable" whatever. But, for right now, he has to be comfortable in his own skin. The research isn't there, and if it's still being debated whether it's a choice or biological, then it will be a long long time before anyone even will want to research it or fund the research. Maybe someday, someone will.

Answer 2

Face it man, your gay. If you want to find a 'cure' for it, seriously go ahead because I think there's plenty of guys who want to.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with finding a 'cure' for homosexuality, but I just don't think it's going to be an easy thing to do. First off, there are far more important genetic issues that need to be dealt with - sociopathy, alcoholism, anger issues, deadly disorders - these things need to be cured before people start blowing off money trying to cure gayness.

And maybe it's time to start thinking globally here. Our world is so overcrowded, and will continue to grow for many many decades. If anything, the homosexuals and people who cannot have kids are doing the world a favor, by wasting less resources, etc. Sure, it's human nature to want to have kids, but if we've grown to the point where a few of us don't want to - who cares? And it's not like these homosexuals and people who are unable to create children can't go out and adopt one or two of the millions of children around the world who are desperate for a family - not a mom and a dad - but a family that will love them and take care of them.

If you crazy folks believe that men and women are on this earth to have sex, and make babies and get married - then you need to 1) 'Fix' or take away the rights of people who physically cannot have children
2) Ban divorce.
3) Sh*t, while were at it - why don't we just take away all our free will, and the second our kids start hitting puberty, get them f*cking their opposite gender classmates and having babies ASAP.

Answer 3

I believe it's genetic, but it's not a disease, and if it was fixable, I wouldn't want to be fixed. People really shouldn't try to fix it, they should try to cure AIDS, cancer, things like that. It'd be a waste of money; I'm happy the way I am, and I'm sure a lot of other people are happy with themselves too. Let's devote our research to something worthwhile.

Also, you said, "I think nature makes it pretty clear that sex is to be between males and females." Really? Then why are there so many gay animals in nature? There are gay animals who've never sensed humans, so they couldn't have picked it up somehow. Homosexuality is natural.

Answer 4

A great follow-up question.
However, first let's address two issues. Assuming that being "gay" is determined by biology, that does not mean that it has to be genetic. The instant that fertilization occurs, genetics [inherited characteristics] is OVER. However, there are nine months of a biological environment that the fetus lives in that can have effects on how the eventual baby turns out. [The temperature of the sand in which crocodile eggs are hatching determines the sex of the the baby crocs.] A mother's diet, exposure to chemicals, stress level, changes in mother's hormonal levels, etc.] can all have effects on the fetus. Further, twins do not live in the same environment. One may get more nourishment, be in a more cramped position in the womb, get less of a blood supply, etc, than the other. "Identical twins" are often not the same height. That is not exactly a choice. One identical twin may be left handed and the other right handed. That is not a choice. The same with being gay.....

2. Pardon me, but your comment is off base when you say that "....you can't know any better because of your genetic disorder."
You are making the false assumption that gay people are forced to think a certain way. There is absolutely no evidence of that and you are not being kind to suggest so. Do straight people all think a certain way about everything? Gay people differ in the food they like, the movies they like, their politics, their religions, and also in what they think about the origins of being gay.

Put another way: confront the logic of a person, not the person.

Finallly, to your most interesting question. Is being gay a problem that should be fixed? A problem to whom?

When you say that "it is clear that sex is to be between males and females, are you referring to reproduction? If so, should it be mandatory? If not, they what is the problem with people being gay. Who gets defined as abnormal when it comes to not producing children. Not priests who have no children. Not couples who choose not to have children. Not individuals who choose never to marry? Just gay people. They make us nervous. So this issue is not about the ability to have children. [I won't even bring up the issue of overpopulaton being caused by straight sex.]

So when you say "it is clear that sex is to be between males and females," do you mean, their genitals fit. A penis goes into a vagina? That is certainly true for reproduction to occur [artificial insemination aside] but there is a WHOLE lot of sex going on that is not unprotected penile/vaginal intercourse, not "normal" sex that is clearly "to be." People use condoms. Straight people have anal sex. Oral sex is real popular. Masturbation even more popular. Group sex is not uncommon. And, of course, homosexual behavior is quite common and if "common/frequent" is your definition of what "is to be" then gay
behavior is perhaps "meant to be."

However, assuming that being gay is biologically determined and despite the above-noted points that reproduction is not the primary goal of most heterosexual behavior, would it be OK to look into the science of the biology of homosexuality and come up with methods to offer gay people who wanted to be straight.
[Of course, I assume that in a free society, you would be willing to offer the treatment to a straight person who wanted to be gay.]

Many many gay people indicate that they are quite happy to be gay. Maybe they're lying. I don't know. Some have certainly said that if they had a choice, they would rather be straight. But, how much of the wish to not be gay is a product of the tremendous social rejection/harm/humiliation that is common in our society. If there were no stigma about being gay, maybe very few indeed of them would choose to take the "treatment" in order to be straight.

It would probably be nice to be able offer people the opportunity to be straight or gay [with the treatment]. I prefer that we get rid of all the bias, prejudice, discrimination, and violence against gay people and then the "choice" [by biological methods] will be choice and not a desire to escape being a victim of society's prejudices.

Answer 5

Who the hell would choose to be gay with all the homophobia around? Not to mention it's not a disease/disorder since the American Psychological Association repealed that years ago. I don't have a disorder, for the person who said it has to do with hormone abnormalities, I should think being born gender non-specific counts as an abnormality with which one would have a tough time with, liking the same sex is far from comparable.

Answer 6

There are a lot of characteristics people are born with which are outside the "norm" which pose no problem and need no cure. For example: being left handed, having red hair, having a high IQ. Technically all of those things are "abberations", however if the abberation causes no harm then why would it need a "cure"?

Answer 7

how can it be genetic. For all of those who believe in evolution your are contradicting your self's by saying that it is genetic. The human race was designed to mate and populate and being gay would not allow for population. The world would not exist. Name one animal on this plant that mates with the same sex. I can't think of any.

That is why i believe it is a choice to be gay.

Answer 8

No, it's not a genetic disorder. It's a choice, based on life experience. 4 example, if a child is repeatedly raped by a family member or acquaintance of the same or opposite sex, then, he/she may turn homo.

Answer 9

People do say that people choose to be gay.

However, research done a while back showed that there was infact a thing called "The gay gene".
There is no absolute proof, but it is looking likily that it does exist.

But take into consideration that some people can be bi-sexual and this has no explination that I know of.

http://hometown.aol.com/gaygene/index.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/325979.stm
http://hea.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/5/3/373

Answer 10

I know that there's a certain type of guy that I like. Always taller & bigger than me. Nice smile & eyes. Needs a wicked sense of humor. So I do agree that we are genetically inclined to go for a certain type, but I don't think it has to do with a gene that can be removed. I think it has more to do with instinct. Like when a bird knows how to fly north & then south. I think in people the instinct is just there & sends them in the sexual direction they are inclined to go to.