because it creates a stronger support for their lifestyle. Glad to see you're honest.
2006-08-09 06:01:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by DesignR 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Your logic is completely flawed. First of all you completely ignore one whole half of the population - women.
Secondly, over the past 40 years about half of all American children have been raised in single parent homes (mostly by mom). If your theory was correct thay would mean that currently the gay population of the United States would be about twice as large as it was 40 years ago and that's just not the case. NYC and San Fransisco are not indicitive of the amount of gay people nationwide. There are no more gays now than 40 years ago, it's just that now people feel more comfortable coming out.
Thirdly, you throw the word "abuse" around too freely. Are you talking about abuse by family members, your local priest? Does one incidence of abuse make you gay or does it have to go on for years?
And lastly, your theory doesn't address the many, many incidences of homosexual activity seen in the animal world.
2006-08-09 13:37:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by zippychippy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am not gay but I do have a couple close friends who are and I believe that sometimes they insist that it is genetic because they can't explain where the feelings and thoughts come from. When they can't explain it it is easy to think that it is genetically passed down and therefore the thoughts on how or why end there.
2006-08-09 13:02:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by worldtraveller356 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think that in one way you are right- all people who are gay are not gay because of genetics. On the other hand, I believe there are a percentage of those whom have a biological disposition toward it....whether they came by this through their genes is still being researched, but there is no doubt in my mind that biochemical imbalances do exist, and CAN cause a person to be inclined toward the same sex when it comes to their sexuality.
Some people are definitely a product of their environments, some of their genes, some both... Being gay is not likely to be the result of just one thing versus something else. So your thoughts and theories on this are partly right, I think, and, partly wrong.
2006-08-09 13:27:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by It's Ms. Fusion if you're Nasty! 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is concrete evidence. Check out the spring issue of Scientific American Mind. What's going to happen now that it's been proven genetic? Want to start some kind of hysteria, or genocide? What does it have to do with you? Concentrate on your girlfriend.
I think you are generalizing. If you think heterosexuals are never the victims of molestation, or having to take care of a parent, or have had possessive mothers, you live a very sheltered, uninformed existence. You need to get out more & talk to all kinds of people and some friends.
Sounds like you are preoccuppied with it. It fascinates you doesn't it? I bet you fantasize about it all the time, and make crude remarks about gay people to try and throw suspicion off of yourself, don't you? You're worried that others will see through you.
It sounds like you know very little about gay lifestyle as well as heterosexual lifestyle. As I recommended, read the spring issue of Scientific American Mind.
2006-08-09 22:04:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by mitch 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
It is genetic. What about a lesbians aunt who is a lesbian as well? Or a brother that is gay and sister that is a lesbian? What about this father who is bisexual and whose son is gay? What about the moms who are lesbian and their son and daughter are bisexual? What about family members that are still in the closet due to homophobia? You can't rely soley on theories and studies. You cannot rely on statistics that you have done that are based on gays and lesbians that you know.
No one ever asks if straight people are the way they are due to having a passive mother or distant father. No one ever asks about the straight girl that was molested by her uncle or the straight boy that was molested by his aunt. No one ever asks about the straight guy or girl that still lives at home with their mom or who were abused as children. And no one asks about their heterosexuality due to being psychological. Where are all the theories and studies there on heterosexuality to prove it is not genetic? Where is all the breakthrough evidence in that corner? How come no one thinks that being heterosexual is not genetic? I'll tell you why....BECAUSE IT IS ACCEPTED!!! Because everyone says it is and they could come up with concrete evidence to support THEMSELVES. They even have religion to back them up. And yet the GLBT community is: seen as psychological. As if the GLBT community has no idea who they are and how they feel because straight folks tell them so.
But yet there are all these questions about genetics thrown to gays, lesbians, bisexuals and trans people's way. Are you so misguided that you don't see what they are doing....allowing you to fall into the trap.
But yet "they" do studies on the queer community to throw people, like yourself, off track.
I know gays and lesbians that have not had a hard life, had a great childhood, weren't abused or molested and they are still GAYS and LESBIANS. I know bisexuals and trans people that have not had a hard life, had a great childhood, weren't abused or molested and they are still BISEXUAL and TRANS people.
Stop accepting what the straight community feeds you because you wish to assimilate to their ideal. Just because you are dealing with your own phobia about who you are and how you fit into the world doesn't mean the straight community isn't feeding you fabrications to support their heterosexuality. So until you can come up with a valid question that supports your arguement, stop feeding the straight population crap and giving the GLBT community a bad name and more phobia to deal with based on what you "think" you know.
Maybe the question you should be asking is: Why do straight people think that heterosexuality is genetic? Unless, you think you have all the answers there that support it, namely from straight people themselves.
2006-08-09 13:44:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by Victoria R 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Because it is. And the definition of solid evidence is a flexible thing, where people can accept it or not.
It is NOT necessarily genetic from the point of view, that it is not anything that is transmitted from parents to children, as few homos procreate.
But you can have subtle changes in your genes while you are being incubated, that will enhance the opposite sexes influence (hormones) within you.
And to the inevitable outpouring from the religious nuts, if there was a god and he didn't like gays, why do they still show up?
Another proof that 'he' is a phantom of weak mind's imagination awash in dogma.
And wileycoyote (below) is dead on!
2006-08-09 13:03:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Twin studies. There have been several studies of twins separated at birth and raised apart, both ending up gay about 55% of the time. Coincidence?
Could be a genetic predisposition that is not always expressed, implying an effect of environment on genetics.
2006-08-09 13:08:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Because if they can convince the world it is genetic then they can convince the world it is not a sin. If they manage to do that then they are calling God a liar. It will also justify being gay. Then gays will be able to marry, adopt, etc. I realize you are gay and may be offended by this...but it is my opinion. And I have to say, yes have to, that if you know you don't have to gay then why are you? YOu can turn your life over to Christ and be whole.
2006-08-09 13:05:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Synclair 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
You pointed out something in your description of the question.
The similarities in the ways they were raised. If being gay/lesbian were genetic, then they would have to have gay/lesbian parents or grandparents.
2006-08-09 13:05:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by kxaltli 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
It's easier to blame genetics, or God, rather than their parents OR themselves. I believe it is a choice, but I also recognize that some choices are hard to make. I STILL can't put that second plate of spaghetti down, mo matter HOW hard I try!
So for me, THAT is sin.
2006-08-09 13:12:01
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋