Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

And that's why I don't think they can. There isn't one definitive cause for homosexuality, or at least I seriously doubt there is and I don't think the community would ever be able to take a unified stand on the issue without alienating a lot of people.

I know, it seems either answer deprives someone of a strongly held belief about their own sexual identity.

One slightly off topic thing I wanted to ask, because I feel bad about it. Does anyone else find flamboyant homosexuals really, really annoying?

I do, but there are varying degrees of it that don't necessarily have anything to do with sexuality. I once knew this rather mannish yet still attractive woman. She had a very forward personality, talked way too loud for most social circumstances and just seemed to enjoy being noticed. So I'd look at flamboyant homosexuals as doing relatively the same thing. Just because they put extra gay on it doesn't make it more or less annoying to me.

I figure if hipsters get to wear hipster clothing and have hipster hair cuts, flamboyant homosexuals should get to dress outrageously and act a little outrageous.

[Max White]

Honestly, do we care so much about what somebody tells themselves as to let it get in the way of finding a scientific answer?
Let's say there is a gay person out there who holds the strong belief that it is genetics that made them who they are today, and it is found that environmental factors are the cause. That doesn't change who they are, and anything about them really, it just tells them they were wrong about their justification.
Yes, douchebags will attack gay people no matter what, but not because of any study, but rather because they are douchebags and clawing at straws to make an argument is what they do. They will no matter what, so we might as well get this issue out of the way anyway.

[Heron TSG]

One slightly off topic thing I wanted to ask, because I feel bad about it. Does anyone else find flamboyant homosexuals really, really annoying?

Only to the same extent I find flamboyant anyones annoying. That's probably just me being rather introverted myself, though.

[MaximumZero]

Extreme flamboyance is annoying no matter who does it.

[kaijyuu]

I'm far more sympathetic to "flamboyance" than most. I really don't care if they flaunt something about themselves all over the place.


Just so long as they don't start repeating themselves. In that case it's not the "one shtick" thing that bothers me rather than the "I've heard this story/thing 5 times already" that does.

[Leafsnail]

Well it would be because we have a control group, that is non-identical twins. We already have studies from them showing no correlation between sexuality.
Because we have a control group to measure against, it would be a valid test.

http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/studies.html
This seems like a fairly good source, and yes, they use that exact methodology (you could argue that being an identical twin changes your environment compared to being a fraternal twin though?).  The results aren't hugely clear, but seem to be vaguely in favour of "homosexuality is genetic".

[Heron TSG]

It is assumed that the environment in which each member of a twin pair is reared is virtually identical, as twins are identical in age, and tend to have very similar experiences during childhood (e.g. they get similar attention from their parents, attend the same schools, etc.). Therefore, any difference in the concordance rates for the trait between monozygotic and dizygotic twins must be due to the former sharing all of their genes and the latter only sharing half of their genes.

*SNRK*

Good one, that. There is a lot to be said for the influence of constant companionship, and the relationships that follow. The main uncontrolled variable in this type of study appears to be the forgetfulness of this fact. Just as in most any relationship, there are subtle (and extraordinarily unsubtle) differences.

[Leafsnail]

Why wouldn't fraternal twins have just as much "constant companionship"?

[Vector]

I don't think that, for most people, it's as simple as someone being a homosexual.  What is it to be a homosexual?  Is someone who has gay sex once a homosexual?  Is someone who is attracted to a man once a homosexual?  And if not, then why not?  And if so, then where do we draw these lines?

The "one act" policy is a lot like the "one drop" policy.

I think that sexuality in general has suffered from a surfeit of words, as has beauty.  We use these words to define, to specify, to make a phenomenon a static entity, to make an idea compartmentalized, and we ignore whatever lies on or travels across the edges.  The word creates an assumption of a certain uniformity.

There are people who prefer only men, and there are people who prefer only women, and there are many, many, many who prefer both to different degrees, or who would say "it's not about the gender, it's about the person."

So often, the assignment of a label provides a site of inquiry--"If I am this, then what on earth is that totally different thing over there?  Can it stop doing that and be more like me?" rather than moving to a person and saying "here I am--now how are you?"

Our assumption about language is that it is static, so once a word falls on you it never leaves--much as we assume that psychological conditions are static, and once they fall on you they never leave.

I don't think the way we use language is exactly just, and I think the question of "genetic or choice" is a little bit silly, and largely engineered by our assumptions about language and psychology.  We don't make this big deal about our preferences for ice cream.  It's a bit boorish to argue about taste.

[Heron TSG]

Why wouldn't fraternal twins have just as much "constant companionship"?

I never said that. I'm saying that twin studies of social matters leave out important details, whether the twins are identical or not.

[Leafsnail]

I never said that. I'm saying that twin studies of social matters leave out important details, whether the twins are identical or not.

Sure.  And what important detail are twin studies of the methodology described leaving out?  The only one I can think of is that maybe identical twins will be more amiable than fraternal twins or something, but no study's perfect and I certainly can't think of a better method.

[Max White]

Well it seems pretty simple from my point of view.
It isn't a stretch to assume that twins will be bought up the same way be it fraternal or identical, however, identical twins have the same DNA while fraternal twins differ.
As such, you look at the rate that fraternal twins have the same sexual preferences, and the rate that identical twins have the same sexual preferences.
If the rate of similarities is higher in identical twins, then sexuality is genetic.
By using fraternal twins as a control group, we have eliminated the biggest variable of how they were raised.

[Osmosis Jones]

Heh, I saw the title, and I have something to add. At uni, I've made several friends of various persuasions. One of which is an identical twin, and homo- (not bi-) sexual. His brother is hetero, and indeed has been in a happy committed relationship for several years.

This is curious because it rules out quite a few factors; identical twins arise from the same zygote and are thus genetically identical. They were carried to term in the same womb at the same time, hence many epigenetic factors (such as hormone levels, womb temperature etc.) should be identical as well. Finally, their upbringing was, as you might expect, also near identical.

Despite this, speaking to him, it wasn't a concious choice. It was definitely a something deeper that decided his choices. He was even in a hetero relationship (with, I might add, a truly stunning woman) when he came out, so you can't pin it on a rebellion against being unable to pick up a girl.

So, as for the cause... who knows? You guys can argue over that

[Max White]

Thank you! Finally somebody bringing something other than 'Well this makes people feel special, so I'm going with it!'

I would have preferred a larger sample ground than... one case. But you get what you are given.

[Funk]

if being gay is genetic then this who cares? so is male pattern baldness.