Is being gay a choice

Annasopra · 18-05-2012 5:00pm

seamus wrote: »

Because you don't write your sexuality on your forehead. It's assumed someone is straight unless they tell you otherwise. I'm not sure how that has any bearing on whether it's a choice?

The closest thing I can equate it to is your handedness. I imagine almost every left-hander can remember someone remarking, "Oh, you're left handed, I didn't know that".
However, I've never had someone remark on my right-handedness because it's usually assumed someone is right-handed unless they show you otherwise.

That phenomenon is called heteronormativity

floggg · 18-05-2012 5:09pm

Seriously, WTF. Coming out isn't choosing - it's making a declaration that your sexual preference runs contrary to the norm.

Coming out doesn't make you gay - coming out is telling people you are gay.

I was gay before I came out. I wasnt any more or less gay after coming out. It just so happens that other people now know im gay.

There's plenty of gays who never come out. Are they actually straight until declared otherwise their same sex attractions notwithstanding?

I could be Italian and not tell people. People might assume I was Irish and never suspect it of me. I'd still be Italian.

Aurongroove · 19-05-2012 2:18am

easy question to answer: In no way is it a choice
how do I know?

because one doesn't choose it.

Added terms & conditions:
even if, for example, it was a subconscious decision. I'm not saying it is, but let's for argument sake theorize that the subconscious mind undergoes a moment during development where it chooses once and for all wither it is going to like boys or girls (or be awkward and go for the half and half) and that only from then on is the conscious person unchangeably gay straight or bi.

well a subconscious decision is a subconscious decision.
you cannot, for example choose not to dislike the taste of something or get trigger a mood or enjoy an art-form or see anger or beauty, the decisions of the subconscious are not choices, they're decisions; of the subconscious.

"subconscious choice" is an oxymoron and doesn't exist: if something were a choice it wouldn't be subconscious.

so even if being gay were a subconscious decision, caused say by emotional scarring or neglect i.e. maybe if daddy didn't leave, or maybe if If I wasn't overly nannied as a youngster or took up a sport etc etc I'd've been straight, well factor or not in wither you wound up gay or straight it was still a matter for the subconscious and thus still isn't a choice, liking one piece of art more then another isn't a choice and so fourth. And that's before you consider the much larger possibility that homosexuality indeed isn't a subconscious decision at all but predetermined genetically and hormonally. After which you're left with nothing other then the answer that homosexuality is not a choice from any conceivable angle.

but heres another angle anyways.
Has any gay person in the history of the universe ever behaved as though being gay was a choice on any level?
Unlike changing religion for example. I know loads of people who've become athiest, changed faiths or become super devout to their or a new faith over periods of time and then continue on to lead happy fulfilled non-bottling-up-a-harrowing-emotional-timebomb lives.
Where as I can name you not one single gay person who has ever said, just before they were about to get beheaded "right, cancel the execution, I'll turn straight, and this time mean it" and then carry on and lead a normal happy straight fulfilled life.

just like the grand score keeping of wither a psychic turned out to be true or not is about 10,234,456 - 0 and wither UFO sighting were credible beyond a reasonable doubt is about 12,567,234 - 0

the score for people being happy after changing spiritual vs being happy after curing homosexuality is about 99,543,654 - 0.
and counting.

Annasopra · 19-05-2012 7:22am

Aurongroove wrote: »

but heres another angle anyways.
Has any gay person in the history of the universe ever behaved as though being gay was a choice on any level?

Yes - Cynthia Nixon (of sex and the city) declared only a few weeks ago that she is a lesbian by choice

Ozymandius2011 · 20-05-2012 12:26am

You can't choose who you are/are not attracted to.

BettyM · 20-05-2012 1:25pm

Ozymandius2011 wrote: »

You can't choose who you are/are not attracted to.

WEll, perhaps thats true for you, but you can't decide thats the case for everyone else also. There are a substantial proportion of us who are at various positions on the spectrum of sexuality which mean they do, indeed, have a choice, or an element of choice and many individuals fluctuate between being attrcated to same sex partners, and opposite sex partners.

Ozymandius2011 · 20-05-2012 2:23pm

BettyM wrote: »

WEll, perhaps thats true for you, but you can't decide thats the case for everyone else also. There are a substantial proportion of us who are at various positions on the spectrum of sexuality which mean they do, indeed, have a choice, or an element of choice and many individuals fluctuate between being attrcated to same sex partners, and opposite sex partners.

But you can't choose who you want to go to bed with. What you want is an instinct. It's whether or not you act on it that's a choice. It's like how you can't choose whether you are hungry or not.

Aurongroove · 20-05-2012 2:49pm

BettyM wrote: »

WEll, perhaps thats true for you, but you can't decide thats the case for everyone else also. There are a substantial proportion of us who are at various positions on the spectrum of sexuality which mean they do, indeed, have a choice, or an element of choice and many individuals fluctuate between being attrcated to same sex partners, and opposite sex partners.

So you're saying "you can only speak for yourself" and you then continue on to speak for a "substantial proportion of us"

well how about this?;
WELL, perhaps what you posted is true for you, but you can't decide that's the case for a substantial proportion of everyone else also. There's a substantial proportion of us who are at positions on the spectrum of sexuality which means they don't, indeed, have a choice, or an element of choice and cannot fluxuate between being attracted to same sex partners and opposite sex partners.

you see?, you're argument does nothing except say "I think you're wrong about what you think everyone else thinks, now here's what I think everyone else thinks, which is what I think is right")

If one poster isn't capable of speaking for others, then neither are you.
Plus even if you point had merit, it applies only to people who are bisexual (i.e. those that do have a choice about their sexual partners). Thus it dosn't factor into a choice for people who are only attracted to same sex partners. And if there one thing I should add about bisexuality is that people need to lay off moralizing because on various accounts I've read, being bi isn't as 'sugar and rainbows' as being able to choose to be straight or gay.

BettyM · 20-05-2012 6:00pm

Aurongroove wrote: »

WELL, perhaps what you posted is true for you, but you can't decide that's the case for a substantial proportion of everyone else also. There's a substantial proportion of us who are at positions on the spectrum of sexuality which means they don't, indeed, have a choice, or an element of choice and cannot fluxuate between being attracted to same sex partners and opposite sex partners.

.

I don't decide what is the case for anyone, and it's a fact that there are substantial numbers of people who are at positions on the spectrum which means they can choose which sex they want to have sex with. And of course there are also a substantial proportion of others who feel they have no choice. Those are not my opinions, and are facts.

Aurongroove wrote: »

you see?, you're argument does nothing except say "I think you're wrong about what you think everyone else thinks, now here's what I think everyone else thinks, which is what I think is right")

If one poster isn't capable of speaking for others, then neither are you.
Plus even if you point had merit, it applies only to people who are bisexual (i.e. those that do have a choice about their sexual partners). Thus it dosn't factor into a choice for people who are only attracted to same sex partners. And if there one thing I should add about bisexuality is that people need to lay off moralizing because on various accounts I've read, being bi isn't as 'sugar and rainbows' as being able to choose to be straight or gay.

I have never spoken for anyone else and don't intend to now, and can only speak for myself.

I have no idea who the people you refer to who you think are moralising about bisexuality, although my view is that "people" are free to moralise about whatever they like when they want to do it, as I don't believe in censorship of "people". Just as you shoul;d be free to moralise about others moralising about bisexuals, so to shoule those same people be free to moralise about bisexuals, or the correct way to make tea, or anything else they feel striongly about. Just as I am free to dismiss or ignore their moralising too.

I am not intolerant about others who have different opinions, and if someone has a different opinion to me I cherish the society in which I live which tolerates that.

Aurongroove · 20-05-2012 8:56pm

not trying to be confrontational it's just your reasoning is all over the place.

I don't decide what is the case for anyone

I have never spoken for anyone else and don't intend to now

but:

There are a substantial proportion of us who are at various positions on the spectrum of sexuality(etc)

so unless by "substantial portion of us" you're referring to a substantial portion of alternative personalities you assume, then yes you are speaking for other people. i.e. "there is a substantial portion of people, myself included" the people besides yourself are the people you're speaking for.

Whats more you're saying their positioning on this spectrum of sexuality (that the people you're speaking on behalf of are placed) allows a person to choose which sex they sleep with, and that that is a fact.
Well this isn't a fact, it's a belief. A belief of yours.
it's a fact that daffodils naturally grow in spring in the Irish climate, however, seemingly observable trends in sexual orientation aren't fact, they're beliefs.

I'm not saying this to attack you, I'm saying it to show you the issue I have with what you're appear to be communicating to me so we can carry on with the dialogue without unworkable levels of miscommunication.

Now to for the actual reply to your post:

OK then, Take a woman who calls herself "a little bit bi" let's say her name is Mary. so on the spectrum of sexual orientation shes almost all the way over at dead straight, but not quiet.

now, two questions for you.
Firstly should Mary be judged then (in the negative or otherwise) for having sex with a women if she's only a little bit Bi? let's say she's a free, single teenager, she's had one or two steady guys but she's seen a girl that caught her eye. Does her choosing or not choosing to scratch the itch have any moral significance? are there ethical reasons why she should just stick with boys becasue she can and just learn to put up with ignoring her slightly bi side, after all people have had worse crosses to bare etc?

And secondly if so, what does it matter to the subject of wither or not being gay was a choice?, i.e. if being gay was a choice what would the difference be then if it wasn't?

For example I am 100% gay and it isn't/wasn't a choice or choosing. I was as straight laced as they come and the fact that I was gay was something I choose to ignore and try to change for at least half of the 9 years I spent in the closet.
Compared to "Mary" above who's only a little bit bi, are any for the partnerships I might form with another man ethically different to the ones she might form with another woman and of so what are those ethical differences?

sorry for the long post. and also any air of aggression, when I argue about decent topics my text tend to look a little confrontational, but this is entirely accidental and due to a unrelated matter.

AckwelFoley · 21-05-2012 12:04am

Suprised this question needs to be asked, thought myself it was obvious.

Sexual orientation is not a chioce, if it were i would have choosen to marry a man, it would have been sooo much easier, but alas i enjoy the fairer sex so straight it is.

baby and crumble · 21-05-2012 12:36am

BettyM wrote: »

I don't decide what is the case for anyone, and it's a fact that there are substantial numbers of people who are at positions on the spectrum which means they can choose which sex they want to have sex with. And of course there are also a substantial proportion of others who feel they have no choice. Those are not my opinions, and are facts.

I don't think that is a 'fact'. Have you any references for those facts?

Dun · 21-05-2012 2:08am

Fergus_Nash wrote: »

You see, I asked myself that and the answer is no. But straight people don't have to come out whereas gay people do. I'm really wondering why that is.

There's a coming out process because it's not just as easy as slipping it into conversation where appropriate a lot of the time. Coming out isn't a phrase I like, I think it's just an easy phrase for a big concept. You choose who you tell, and that's a decision some people can make easily, and many others can't. I can't speak for those that are open, but it's a big deal as it can have knock on consequences on relationships with other people, even if it shouldn't. Admitting to yourself is the first stage of coming out, and if you struggle to do that, can you imagine what it's like to say it to someone else? It's not that you might think it's wrong, it's the fear of the unknown. What effect is this going to have on how people treat you?

As for the actual coming out, you are telling a selected person or group of people, not issuing a worldwide message. What I mean by that is that you're not immediately out to everybody, and you're likely continuously having to decide when or if to come out to certain people depending on the circumstances. I dont feel the need to correct my barber when I say I'm heading away with my partner and he refers to him as "the missus", but I think it's something I probably should tell my housemate. It's not an act performed once, it's something that's likely going to be repeated for your lifetime. Of course, if you knew there was universal tolerance and acceptance, then it wouldn't be the big deal it can be. If a friend, family member or work colleague suddenly started treating you differently, it might be something that some people would find very difficult to handle.

It's probably obvious that it's not something I enjoy doing, but fortunately I've not yet had a bad experience. I'm 33 and still coming out, very slowly, at my own pace, as and when I feel necessary and comfortable. But I think that's as valid a choice as those that burst out

BettyM · 21-05-2012 1:23pm

baby and crumble wrote: »

I don't think that is a 'fact'. Have you any references for those facts?

I am sort of taken aback that you appear not to have heard of the sexual spectrum, or that others here seem to think their own anecdotal experience means that everyone else must have had the same experience and appear at the same place on the spectrum.

If it's facts you want, I remember reading a meta analysis of Kinsey reports which concluded that between 4-17% of adult males are primarily same sex attracted. That does not say that between 4-17% are "exclusively" same sex attracted, and nor does it imply that between 96-83% of adult males are exclsuively opposite sex attracted.

For some of the 4-17% we can guess that some are exclusively same sex attracted, and others are primarily same sex attracted and which suggests that ther are significany numbers, both in the 4-17% who are primarily same sex attracted and in the 96-83% who are either 50;50 bisexual, or primarily opposite sex attracted, who are attracted to both same sex and opposite sex partners and have an element of choise about whether they choose to have sex with a same sex partner, or an opposite sex partner.

BettyM · 21-05-2012 1:26pm

AckwelFoley wrote: »

Suprised this question needs to be asked, thought myself it was obvious.

Sexual orientation is not a chioce, if it were i would have choosen to marry a man, it would have been sooo much easier, but alas i enjoy the fairer sex so straight it is.

What you seem to be saying is that it's not a choice for you, although you can't make that choice for anyone else. As my above post shows and as Kinsey demonstrated, not everyone is the same and not everyone is sexually attracted to either same sex or opposite sex in the same proportion. There is a huge spectrum of sexual preferences.

Aurongroove · 21-05-2012 1:59pm

Betty, you don't seem to be able to tell the difference between you're own thoughts and objective thought.
i.e. You're accidentally assuming your point of view is right becasue you know it's right.

What you seem to be saying is that it's not a choice for you, although you can't make that choice for anyone else.

and neither can you, however then you post:

As my above post shows and as Kinsey demonstrated

your post didn't show, your post was you drawing conclusions that in a random bunch of people arranged into same sex and opposite sex attraction there are likely to be some bisexuals. This conclusion is your own conclusions and is not logically relevant to the statistic you used (which is only one of a number of issues).

OldNotWIse · 21-05-2012 2:15pm

mango salsa wrote: »

Yes - Cynthia Nixon (of sex and the city) declared only a few weeks ago that she is a lesbian by choice

That's that then

Aurongroove · 21-05-2012 2:17pm

BettyM · 21-05-2012 2:18pm

Aurongroove wrote: »

Betty, you don't seem to be able to tell the difference between you're own thoughts and objective thought.
i.e. You're accidentally assuming your point of view is right becasue you know it's right.

and neither can you, however then you post:

your post didn't show, your post was you drawing conclusions that in a random bunch of people arranged into same sex and opposite sex attraction there are likely to be some bisexuals. This conclusion is your own conclusions and is not logically relevant to the statistic you used (which is only one of a number of issues).

A kinsey meta analysis is not my thought, but the results of extensive research into the question over many years.

Babybuff · 21-05-2012 2:18pm

go educate yourselves

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-sex-education-show/4od#3235760

Babybuff · 21-05-2012 2:44pm

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

Biology and sexual orientation is the subject of research into the role of biology in the development of human sexual orientation. No simple, single cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated. Various studies point to different, even conflicting positions, such as a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences,[1]

A number of twin studies have attempted to compare the relative importance of genetics and environment in the causation of sexual orientation.
Overall, the environment shared by twins (including familial and societal attitudes) explained 0–17% of the choice of sexual partner, genetic factors 18–39% and the unique environment 61–66%. The individual's unique environment includes, for example, circumstances during pregnancy and childbirth, physical and psychological trauma (e.g., accidents, violence, and disease), peer groups (other than those shared with a twin), and sexual experiences. [...] In men, genetic effects explained .34–.39 of the variance, the shared environment .00, and the individual-specific environment .61–.66 of the variance. Corresponding estimates among women were .18–.19 for genetic factors, .16–.17 for shared environmental, and .64–.66 for unique environmental factors.

Twin studies have received a number of criticisms including self-selection bias where homosexuals with gay siblings are more likely to volunteer for studies. Nonetheless, it is possible to conclude that, given the difference in sexuality in so many sets of identical twins, sexual orientation cannot be purely caused by genetics.[9]

Biological theories of etiology of sexual orientation
Early fixation hypothesis
Imprinting/critical period
Exotic becomes erotic

baby and crumble · 21-05-2012 10:27pm

BettyM wrote: »

I am sort of taken aback that you appear not to have heard of the sexual spectrum, or that others here seem to think their own anecdotal experience means that everyone else must have had the same experience and appear at the same place on the spectrum.

If it's facts you want, I remember reading a meta analysis of Kinsey reports which concluded that between 4-17% of adult males are primarily same sex attracted. That does not say that between 4-17% are "exclusively" same sex attracted, and nor does it imply that between 96-83% of adult males are exclsuively opposite sex attracted.

For some of the 4-17% we can guess that some are exclusively same sex attracted, and others are primarily same sex attracted and which suggests that ther are significany numbers, both in the 4-17% who are primarily same sex attracted and in the 96-83% who are either 50;50 bisexual, or primarily opposite sex attracted, who are attracted to both same sex and opposite sex partners and have an element of choise about whether they choose to have sex with a same sex partner, or an opposite sex partner.

I am well aware of Kinseys studies, and of the theory of sexual fluidity and the spectrum. However, my point was that you write as if people can control who they are attracted to at any point in time. Yes, for many people the possibility of attraction to members of either sex is there, but that does not mean to say that they can choose who they are attracted to. Saying "they can choose who to have sex with", well of course in a healthy relationship/ life everyone can choose who to have sex with, but as we all know, sexuality is not simply about genital contact, at all. There may be some people who identify as pansexual, or bisexual who decide for whatever reason that they don't want to have sex with/ enter into relationships with members of either gender, although the potential is there. That is a choice they make, I grant you that, but the initial attraction can't be controlled. Kinseys studies don't lend credence to any of the claims you make

Silvics · 22-05-2012 12:43am

Not a choice-it just is.

whattotdo · 22-05-2012 11:43pm

Everyone is entitled to their opinion about whether it's a choice or not.I have to say though as I've done before why would one choose to be gay(there's nothing wrong with been gay) with the discrimination we face.I have a great talent for soccer but my team 'mates' bullied me so much I had to give up that hobby because amongst numerous things they wouldn't share a communal shower with me because in their eyes been gay equates to been a pervert,can't walk down the street hand in hand with my partner for fear of been attacked,oh yeah,I chose to be gay...

:rolleyes:

Caiseoipe19 · 23-05-2012 3:24am

whattotdo wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their opinion about whether it's a choice or not.I have to say though as I've done before why would one choose to be gay(there's nothing wrong with been gay) with the discrimination we face.I have a great talent for soccer but my team 'mates' bullied me so much I had to give up that hobby because amongst numerous things they wouldn't share a communal shower with me because in their eyes been gay equates to been a pervert,can't walk down the street hand in hand with my partner for fear of been attacked,oh yeah,I chose to be gay...:rolleyes:

Just wondering, before you came out did you get on well with them and think you had a fairly close bond as a team? Are these guys you've known for a long time?

Just so that my post isn't completely off topic I should probably finally give my opinion on this instead of lurking. In response to the question "Is being gay a choice", I don't believe it is. Regarding the question in the OP which is much different to the title question, I have no idea whether or not sexuality is predetermined. I would guess that it is, but that's only a guess as I have no deep knowledge or understanding of how the brain works/psychology/genetics etc. etc. Nothing worse than someone acting as if they know what they're talking about when they don't.

Silvics · 23-05-2012 8:56am

Definitely a genetic thing. A frined of mine comes from a family of five kids, four boys and a girl. Three of the boys are gay and left handed, the other two are straight and right handed.
If a guy has a gay uncle on his mother's side, chances are high that some of the male children of his mother's sisters are gay .
My best friend in college, one day after finals asked the question"are you gay or bi?"-his reasoning was that he picked up on a number of small things and put 2+2 together. He was incredibly comfortable with me and his own sexuality(STRAIGHT) but wanted to know more about the whole gay thing. He even admitted being able to marvel at the beauty of some men, musing on the genetics that gave some men a great jaw line and stunning good looks. As a straight guy he had never been interested in men, just girls and women, the mirror of my own attraction to men.
Excluding abuse and any other factors that may sexualize at a young age a child, my observations say that being gay is as natural as eye colour or height.

whattotdo · 23-05-2012 9:47am

Cygnus wrote: »

Just wondering, before you came out did you get on well with them and think you had a fairly close bond as a team? Are these guys you've known for a long time?

I was always 'out' and they were homophobic from the start,no I just knew them for short time when I moved to a new area for work reasons.I quit the team,some might say don't let the bigots win but its impossible to be playing a team game with people you don't respect.I have two older brothers who are gay and are not 'out' in their work places but are at home.They should be out in both settings because now they are constantly worried will someone 'out' them and it's a huge burden on their shoulders.This is Ireland,very small country, as in,everyone knows everyone else,in time someone from their work will somehow come into contact with someone from home.

whattotdo · 23-05-2012 9:53am

Silvics wrote: »

Definitely a genetic thing. A frined of mine comes from a family of five kids, four boys and a girl. Three of the boys are gay and left handed, the other two are straight and right handed.
If a guy has a gay uncle on his mother's side, chances are high that some of the male children of his mother's sisters are gay .

Yeah,same with my uncle.I'm no expert on genetics but I have a good friend who works in a closely related area.He said that genes can 'skip' up to three different generations so even if my parent's generation hadn't gay gene,one before could of had etc.
I also believe that my sibling(straight sister) may have 'gay' gene and will carry on to her off spring.Same for straight people,hair colour,nose shape etc.

BettyM · 16-06-2012 12:17pm

Silvics wrote: »

Definitely a genetic thing. A frined of mine comes from a family of five kids, four boys and a girl. Three of the boys are gay and left handed, the other two are straight and right handed.
If a guy has a gay uncle on his mother's side, chances are high that some of the male children of his mother's sisters are gay .
My best friend in college, one day after finals asked the question"are you gay or bi?"-his reasoning was that he picked up on a number of small things and put 2+2 together. He was incredibly comfortable with me and his own sexuality(STRAIGHT) but wanted to know more about the whole gay thing. He even admitted being able to marvel at the beauty of some men, musing on the genetics that gave some men a great jaw line and stunning good looks. As a straight guy he had never been interested in men, just girls and women, the mirror of my own attraction to men.
Excluding abuse and any other factors that may sexualize at a young age a child, my observations say that being gay is as natural as eye colour or height.

As you are in college, persumably you know the difference between anecdote and evidence.

BettyM · 16-06-2012 12:20pm

whattotdo wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their opinion about whether it's a choice or not.I have to say though as I've done before why would one choose to be gay(there's nothing wrong with been gay) with the discrimination we face.I have a great talent for soccer but my team 'mates' bullied me so much I had to give up that hobby because amongst numerous things they wouldn't share a communal shower with me because in their eyes been gay equates to been a pervert,can't walk down the street hand in hand with my partner for fear of been attacked,oh yeah,I chose to be gay...:rolleyes:

The great thing about free speech is we don't need to be told we are entitled to our opinions, as we already know we are. .

If it were me, I'd not want to socialise or be with people who think that to be predominantly same sex attracted equated to being a pervert, as it suggests such people have either little intelligence or are bigots, or both. So Rejoice you no longer have to spend your time with such people!

Is being gay a choice

Comments