BORN GAY or ARE WE?

[Aquilla]

Are peeps born GAY or is being GAY instigated by the way you have been brought up.

If so what about Bi-Sexuality, how can that be brought into the frame – scheme of things.

The Kinsey Reports, may indicate many reasons for being Gay or Bi- Sexual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Reports

These reports were made in the 1940s and 1950s

Are they relevant to today, are we the same people today, given that society has changed so much.

Gays most often than not have a dysfunctional family back round in common, that is an unfortunate fact, could this be the cause of being GAY or Bisexual.

Many say peeps choose to be Gay, especially some fundelmentalists in some religious beliefs.

It is amazing the lengths some of these organizations go to, to promote the choice factor as opposed to the, we have been born GAY aspect.

I do wonder why it is so important to them. ( another thread issue )

I found the following, that may give cause for thought..

Are some people born gay?
By Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard

Science is rapidly converging on the conclusion that sexual orientation is innate. It has found that homosexuals often act differently from heterosexuals in early childhood, before they have even heard of ***. A recent study by Simon LeVay, a neurobiologist at the Salk Institute, reported a difference in the hypothalamus, a part of the brain that develops at a young age, between homosexual and heterosexual men.
If true, a biological explanation is good news for homosexuals and their advocates.
Our own research has shown that male sexual orientation is substantially genetic. Over the last two years, we have studied the rates of homosexuality in identical and non-identical twin brothers of gay men, as well as adoptive brothers of gay men. Fifty-two percent of the identical twin brothers were gay, as against 22 percent of non-identical twins and 11 percent of the adoptive, genetically unrelated brothers.


In contrast, research on social factors has been fruitless. [:-)...rjw] Despite many attempts, there has been no clear demonstration that parental behavior, even a parent's homosexuality, affects children's sexual orientation. Cultures tolerant of homosexuals do not appear to raise more of them than do less permissive societies.
Homophobes sometimes justify their prejudice against homosexuals by alleging that homosexuality is contagious -- that young homosexuals become that way because of older homosexuals and that homosexuality is a social corruption. Such beliefs form the core of the organized anti-homosexual movement. If homosexuality is largely innate, this would prove that these claims are groundless.
Given these implications, it may seem surprising that the biological studies disturb many gay and lesbian advocates. Misunderstanding them, the advocates often suggest that the search for a biological cause is motivated by an assumption that homosexuality is an illness. Behavioral scientists, however, have long searched for biological underpinnings of traits such as extraversion and intelligence, which no one considers to be negative. Furthermore, a biological explanation of homosexuality simultaneously explains heterosexuality.
This leads to a more pertinent fear of gays and lesbians, that people will assume that answers to moral questions hinge on the results of scientific study. Should a benevolent view of homosexuality depend on the assumption that it is innate? Are gays and lesbians to be tolerated only if they are "born that way"?
Regardless of what causes sexual orientation, there is no plausible justification for oppressing homosexuals. Reasons that have long been offered -- that homosexuals disproportionately molest children, convert heterosexuals to homsexuality, are mentally ill, betray their country -- have been shown to be false.
But homophobia remains the one form of bigotry that respectable people can express in public. If the long-overdue national debate on homosexuality took place, the poverty of the anti-homosexual case would become readily apparent.
If scientific study of the origins of sexual orientation would not directly resolve the public issue, why do it?
First, in can inform public debate. But equally important is the value of discovery, particularly self-discovery. A gay man with a heterosexual identical twin, both of whom we studied, put it this way: "I accepted being gay years ago, so that's not why I want to know. But sexual orientation is such an important part of my life -- anyone's life -- that I'm still curious why I turned out gay and my brother straight." How could anyone not be curious?
Michael Bailey is assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University. Richard Pillard is associate professor of psychiatry at Boston University School of Medicine.

All right acknowledged with very greatful thanks

Please post your views, thoughts on this issue.
This is not a debate thread.
Please do not argue, simply post your view point.

Thank You.
Aquilla (Andy)

[Marius De Romanus]

I personally can't see the "born gay" argument. Because if there is a gene that makes you gay then surely it would die out, simply because those with the gene would have no inclination to reproduce. Therefore how would that particular gene have a chance to multiply through evolution?

It is my belief that being gay is a choice, but not necessarily a concious choice, it could be subconcious when you are very young, maybe something innocuous like your favourite characters on TV or the people that came round to your house. That's not to say that if you want a straight child then only invite straight people to see your child, because what I mean is that if your male child prefers male company at that stage then it might end up gay, because lets face it all people go soft over babies if they like them in the same way a female might prefer the adult females and that sticks in the subconcious and manifests itself in your sexuality.

In truth though sexuality is a relatively recent phenomenon, the ancient Greeks for example saw beauty in all people male or female, that was true of rennaisance Europe as well. There was nothing of sexuality then, religously you were only allowed intercourse for reproduction, but those who sinned did so with either male or female, it was just whoever you fancied at the time.

[The Voice]

Originally Posted by Marius De Romanus

I personally can't see the "born gay" argument. Because if there is a gene that makes you gay then surely it would die out, simply because those with the gene would have no inclination to reproduce. Therefore how would that particular gene have a chance to multiply through evolution?

That would only make sense if all societies have always accepted same-sex relationships, which historically they have not. Most gay people have tried to live straight lives to avoid ostracization and outright persecution. And yes, that life includes having children.

Personally I don't know if homosexuality is genetic, but I do believe it's biological (yes, I'm going to use my infamous vegetable analogy again) ...

I love brussel sprouts. Most people in my family don't. In fact most of them like beets, which I can't stand.

Is this genetic? Unlikely. After all, we're related and therefore we should all like the same things, right? Ahh, so I must have "chosen" to like brussel sprouts, and "chosen" to dislike beets. Well, um ... no. I can't "choose" to like beets (or liver, or asparagus, or several other awful foods), nor can I reasonably expect those deviants in my family to see the light and embrace brussel sprouts, even if their eternal souls were at stake.

The responses to my thread "At what age did you suspect you might be gay/bi?" turned out to be very insightful. I knew I liked males from a very young age--long before I knew what sex was or what gay even meant. I'm not saying I was "born gay" (I don't believe babies are "born" with a sexual preference either way) but I was certainly "predisposed" to be attracted to the male gender.

Most respondents seem to have "discovered" they were gay/bi soon after they hit puberty. What does this mean? Were they influenced by those around them? Were those urges there all along on a subconscious level? I really don't know.

A few others only realized they liked the same gender after they had an "experience." To me, this suggests they made a type of "choice," since if that experience had not happened, they would probably be straight. Then again perhaps any experience, however trivial, might have yielded the same result.

My point is it's not black-and-white, where the only options are genetics vs. choice. Much like a computer, it depends on the wiring. Subtle connections here or disconnections there can cause lights to start going on and off in a variety of different ways.

[toby]

To be honest in my opinion, I dont think anyone is born gay I think that as we grow and learn about one another things happen in a way no one can really explain.

Its like ya can be attracted to the opposite *** but find out later putting it bluntley that same *** relationships is better sexually and in all other ways.

Then ya can just grow up loving the same *** without trying the oppossite ***, but hey dont knock anything till ya try it lol.love tobes xxxxxxxx

[Gabriel]

Originally Posted by The Voice

That would only make sense if all societies have always accepted same-sex relationships, which historically they have not. Most gay people have tried to live straight lives to avoid ostracization and outright persecution. And yes, that life includes having children.

Personally I don't know if homosexuality is genetic, but I do believe it's biological (yes, I'm going to use my infamous vegetable analogy again) ...

I love brussel sprouts. Most people in my family don't. In fact most of them like beets, which I can't stand.

Is this genetic? Unlikely. After all, we're related and therefore we should all like the same things, right? Ahh, so I must have "chosen" to like brussel sprouts, and "chosen" to dislike beets. Well, um ... no. I can't "choose" to like beets (or liver, or asparagus, or several other awful foods), nor can I reasonably expect those deviants in my family to see the light and embrace brussel sprouts, even if their eternal souls were at stake.

The responses to my thread "At what age did you suspect you might be gay/bi?" turned out to be very insightful. I knew I liked males from a very young age--long before I knew what sex was or what gay even meant. I'm not saying I was "born gay" (I don't believe babies are "born" with a sexual preference either way) but I was certainly "predisposed" to be attracted to the male gender.

Most respondents seem to have "discovered" they were gay/bi soon after they hit puberty. What does this mean? Were they influenced by those around them? Were those urges there all along on a subconscious level? I really don't know.

A few others only realized they liked the same gender after they had an "experience." To me, this suggests they made a type of "choice," since if that experience had not happened, they would probably be straight. Then again perhaps any experience, however trivial, might have yielded the same result.

My point is it's not black-and-white, where the only options are genetics vs. choice. Much like a computer, it depends on the wiring. Subtle connections here or disconnections there can cause lights to start going on and off in a variety of different ways.

You can choose to like different tastes. Most people do not like the taste of beer the first time they try it. Everyone I've ever had this conversation with agreed beer is more of an acquired taste. You drink it enough and you tend to like it.

Foods are generally the same way. Some foods I did not like before, but kept eating, I grew to like. I didn't exactly 'choose' at any point to like them. I just chose to eat them. I do not think homosexuality is the same way. You don't decide at some point to be gay and then do homosexual acts until you're comfortable with it.

I think many people today, especially teens, choose to be bisexual at some point and kinda grow into it after awhile though. Especially teenage girls.

While we've always had primitive sexual instincts; sexuality always seemed to be more influenced by society.

[The Voice]

Originally Posted by Gabriel

You can choose to like different tastes. Most people do not like the taste of beer the first time they try it. Everyone I've ever had this conversation with agreed beer is more of an acquired taste. You drink it enough and you tend to like it.

Foods are generally the same way. Some foods I did not like before, but kept eating, I grew to like. I didn't exactly 'choose' at any point to like them. I just chose to eat them. I do not think homosexuality is the same way. You don't decide at some point to be gay and then do homosexual acts until you're comfortable with it.

I think many people today, especially teens, choose to be bisexual at some point and kinda grow into it after awhile though. Especially teenage girls.

While we've always had primitive sexual instincts; sexuality always seemed to be more influenced by society.

I suppose in some ways a person can "choose to like" certain things as long as there's sufficient motivation for it--people adapt to the taste of beer because they like the buzz they get, and gay people have historically adapted to the opposite gender out of social fears or a desire to have children--but this still doesn't negate the innate likes and dislikes that people have. Making yourself like something isn't the same thing as really liking it. In fact, I wouldn't even describe it as a "like." It's more like "putting up with it because ... (insert reason here)."

Although I do agree that bisexuality seems to be fashionable for young people these days. I don't know if teen girls are more prone to it than teen boys but it wouldn't surprise me since the same society that frowns on gay relationships between males tends to views two girls together as being hot or sexy.

[twinkle toez]

I don't have anything but my own opinion on this... I think people are born gay . ok ty

[Who]

i think we are born gay...but i dont think it is genetic.

if it was genetic a defined pattern would have developed, and all genes have been identified and coded...so they more then likely would have found the 'gay gene' by now if it existed.

personally i think it is caused by a hormone reflux during pregnancy. our hormones affect who we are attracted to. and homosexuality is a primitive attraction...not a concious choice.

and marius...youre clearly uneducated or just plain blind.

There were an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 gay and lesbian biological parents in 1976.
In 1990, an estimated 6 to 14 million children have a gay or lesbian parent.
Between 8 and 10 million children are being raised in a gay and lesbian households.

http://adoption.about.com/od/gaylesb...gayparents.htm

[Cat]

So if as some say people are born gay why do gay men then go on to have relationships with females and vice versa?

[FredOnToast]

Originally Posted by ΩcatΩ

So if as some say people are born gay why do gay men then go on to have relationships with females and vice versa?

Cos it's the natural male instinct to spread your "seed" as it were.

So you pass on your genes.