I don't believe sexual orientation is a choice. I went through many, many years of being confused in a bad way, and a lot of generally bad stuff while coming to the conclusions about myself that I have right now. I would say that I'd choose to be straight just to be normal, if I could. On any given day I might say "I'd choose to be a lesbian" or "I'd choose to be straight" depending on how I'm feeling. On the one hand, I'm in a monogamous relationship with a male so it'd follow that I'd prefer to be straight in order to keep that going or whatever, but I generally find more females attractive than males, so I'd really do better as a lesbian. Before I settled on the term "bi" (Which I've found doesn't even really accurately define me but it works for now), I was a lot more comfortable with the idea of being a lesbian. I guess what I'm saying is I'd prefer to be at either end, I don't care what end, but one end, rather than somewhere in a grey area. Yes there is a lot of angst and such which comes with coming out and everything, but I know that among my group of friends and most of my family it would not be a big deal if I were a lesbian. Why do I know this? Because I already came out as one before I met my current love. Having sort of lived on both extremes of the Kinsey scale I'd say I like them both about equally. But I guess that's why most people would call me bi.

I was asked to summarize an article for my sociology class last week on the topic of "Family." I found an article on lesbian mothers--both those who were divorced (i.e. having children conceived in heterosexual marriages which broke up) and who had been impregnated via artificial insemination. About 92% of children of lesbians who were surveyed post-puberty identified as straight (although more children of lesbians had had some kind of same-sex experimentation in their lives). That would lead me to say that it's not going to be more prevalent if you have a gay parent. I think the article is fairly well-reasoned although it would be better if more research existed on the topic, but it doesn't.

I obtained the article via EBSCOHost in "Academic Search Elite." It's from a May 2000 issue of Sexual And Relationship Therapy I think...from the UK (citing both UK and US studies over the past 25-or-so years). So I can't give a direct URL but I find that most schools have access to EBSCOHost or something similar, if only in the library.

------------------
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.

- Albert Einstein

Monkey, given the percentage of people who do idnetify as other than heterosexual, a very sizeable protion of the population, it is indeed, by definntion, quite normal. And unless you are an experienced expert in psychology and can evaluate every person who is not heterosexual individually, I don't see you being in the postion to assess normalcy or a lack thereof on that level.

You certainly may have your opinion, but using phrases like "it's not normal" is neither kind nor accurate, and I do find it offensive, especially considering that I have been bisexual all of my sexual life (which I certainly wouldn't attribute solely to genetics, or even primarily to genetics, as most sex researchers also would not -- for more info on that, I'd suggest you reread parts of this thread -- but it is where my attraction goes without my willing it, all the same, just as it goes for you being heterosexual) and pay for all use of this service. You may also want to bear in mind how very many religious traditions there are in the world.

If you really want to be so adamant, the best approach may be to actually do some research so that you can clearly understand what sexual orientationm even is (because it's clear that even in regard to heterosexuality, you likely don't fully understand the concept), and also take a look at why you feel YOUR orientation is inherent, but no other orientation is. It's a bit like saying one can be born one race, but not another. because of what orientation means, something that validates one cannot invalidate another, or vice-versa. That is logically fallacious.

------------------
Heather Corinna
Editor and Founder, Scarleteen

My epitaph should read: "She worked herself into this ground."
-- Kay Bailey Hutchinson

*You deny or hide your sexuality.
*You choose to admit your sexuality.
*You choose to partake in gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered acts.
*You choose to be a crossdresser.
*You choose to be honest with yourself about your sexuality.

*You don't choose your fantasies.
*You don't choose who you're attracted to.
*You don't choose the characteristics that decide your sexuality.

As far as the counseling goes on coverting people to heterosexuals -- it may be valid. However, I wonder how many truly converted people are HAPPY with their sexuality. Are they pretending to be straight because they're coerced to be? Are they really straight??

I don't think we choose our sexuality, just as I don't choose who I'm attracted to. It just happens.
*Badger*

I may not be a pshycologist but some of this information seemed probably accurate, but some of it didn't... what do you guys think? I think the information could be outdated or biased... here i'll post some tidbits of it...

"What causes homosexual desire?

1. Homosexual experience:

-any homosexual experience in childhood, especially if it is a first sexual experience or with an adult

-any homosexual contact with an adult, particularly with a relative or authority figure (in a random survey, 5% of adult homosexuals vs 0.8% of heterosexuals reported childhood sexual involvements with elementary or secondary school teachers (5).

2. Family abnormality, including the following:

-a dominant, possessive, or rejecting mother

-an absent, distant, or rejecting father (I've heard rejection of the same sex parent was a factor)

-a parent with homosexual proclivities, particularly one who molests a child of the same sex

-a sibling with homosexual tendencies, particularly one who molests a brother or sister (From what i've heard.. the orientation of family doesnt matter, even if parents/guardians are homosexual)

-the lack of a religious home environment
divorce, which often leads to sexual problems for both the children and the adults

-parents who model unconventional sex roles
condoning homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle– welcoming homosexuals (e.g., co-workers, friends) into the family circle

3. Unusual sexual experience, particularly in early childhood:

-precocious or excessive masturbation (I doubt this is true...like the hairy palms =))

-exposure to pornography in childhood

-depersonalized sex (e.g., group sex, sex with animals)

-or girls, sexual interaction with adult males

4. Cultural influences:

-a visible and socially approved homosexual sub-culture that invites curiosity and encourages exploration

-pro-homosexual sex education

-openly homosexual authority figures, such as teachers (4% of Kinsey's and 4% of FRI's gays reported that their first homosexual experience was with a teacher [only 4%?, that doesn't sound like sound enough evidence])

-societal and legal toleration of homosexual acts

-depictions of homosexuality as normal and/or desirable behavior"

Any comments on this source? One reason I don't believe this source is that it says, later in the page, that sexual orientation can be changed... and according to what i've read, it cannot be.

Another source.. this has 2 points that are similar to the first source... (http://www.truthwalk.com/Q%20and%20A/homosexualcauses.html)

"Sociologists tell us that there are major commonalities in the background of those who say that they struggle with homosexual attraction. The most common experience is physical or sexual abuse. The second most common is a physically or emotionally absent father, which makes it difficult for a boy to secure his own masculinity. One of these factors is almost always present for a male struggling with homosexuality. "

Another source... which states that it could be a biological reason (http://www.kstatecollegian.com/issues/v099b/sp/n113/opn-kevyn-03.06.95.html)

"Recent research has demonstrated that the brains of men and women are different in some surprising ways. It has been suggested that women have greater connectivity between the two halves of their brain, as a result of a thicker corpus callosum -- the brain tissue that links the two halves together. It is this greater connectivity that has been suggested as the cause of greater intuitiveness and creativity in women.

This same thickening has been demonstrated to exist in the brains of gay men, suggesting that the brains of men like myself are probably more like women's brains in function than men's.

Another brain difference has been found in the hypothalamus -- a part of the brain that influences sexual behavior and sexual aggression. Males tend to have much larger cell structures in certain parts of the hypothalamus, while females tend to have smaller cell structures.

And again, studies of the hypothalami in homosexual men have found that the smaller, female-like cell structures are present.

This would seem to suggest that homosexual behavior is, in part, influenced by biology."

Another source that points to hormone levels and genetics at birth.. (http://www.narth.com/docs/pieces.html)

"The boy (for example) who one day may go on to struggle with homosexuality is born with certain features that are somewhat more common among homosexuals than in the population at large. Some of these traits might be inherited (genetic), while others might have been caused by the "intrauterine environment" (hormones). What this means is that a youngster without these traits will be somewhat less likely to become homosexual later than someone with them."

This part talks about the "rejection from same sex parent" again... this one focuses on males but the same might be true for females.. where they are rejected by their mother.

"a painful "mismatch" between what he needed and longed for and what his father offered him. Perhaps most people would agree that his father was distinctly distant and ineffective; maybe it was just that his own needs were unique enough that his father, a decent man, could never quite find the right way to relate to him. Or perhaps his father really disliked and rejected his son's sensitivity. In any event, the absence of a happy, warm, and intimate closeness with his father led to the boy's pulling away in disappointment, "defensively detaching" in order to protect himself.

...When puberty sets in, sexual urges - which can attach themselves to any object, especially in males - rise to the surface and combine with his already intense need for masculine intimacy and warmth. He begins to develop homosexual crushes. Later he recalls, "My first sexual longings were directed not at girls but at boys. I was never interested in girls." "

Ok last source... for good measure here's a religious point of view (http://www.churchesofchrist.net/authors/Mark_A_Copeland/hom/hom_04.htm) I found this evidence to be rather good tho.

"For example, recent studies done with identical twins have been offered by some as evidence that the origins of homosexuality might be in the genes. In one study, Dr. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University examined 110 pairs of identical twins who had been separated at birth and raised in different environments. He found that if one was gay there was a 52% chance the other was also. But among fraternal twins, the chance fell to 22%. Because the ratio was higher among twins who are genetically identical, this study has been referred to by many as evidence that homosexuality is genetic in origin. I even heard Dr. Dean Edell (a famous radio call-in doctor) appeal to this study in defense of homosexuality.

I may be missing something here, but the reason why identical twins are such fascinating subjects of scientific study is because they ARE alike genetically. Therefore, if homosexuality is solely genetic in origin, then if one twin is gay, you would expect the chances of the other twin being gay to be 100%! The fact that only 52% of those who were identical in genetic makeup to their homosexual twin were gay themselves would strongly confirm that genetics alone does not make one homosexual! "

Wow that's a loooong post.. i'm hope i'm not considered spamming.. i just like to research i guess. I've always been told to look at different points of view and that information can always be biased. The main points that were common the sources were:

1) Early sexual experience
2) Rejection of same-sex parent
3) Society, religion, education, and uprising
4) Hormone levels at birth and early development (this was also stated as a possible reason in a Biology video i watched, along with brain shape)
5) Brain shape/size (like gay men have similiar brains to females)
6) Genetics

So yeah i hope that helps... *phew* that was a lot of work.. just note that not all of these sources are 100% correct.. which is why i tried to get varying sources...

So basically from what i've read, sexuality is caused in part by genes, hormone levels at birth, and brain size. But these are only part of it, other causes are rejection of the same sex parent, early sexual situations, and how the child was brought up, society and religions... environmental factors, etc..

Comments?

[This message has been edited by MagicPatrick (edited 04-12-2004).]

EDIT: Ooops! I just realized that I messed up! I followed a link to this post.. and I didn't know it was a thread in the "Read Only Archive" until I posted! Sorry about that! =/ Please delete my post if you don't want it here... sorry about that! I'd delete my post myself.. but you might want to keep it *shrug* because of all the information in it. Yeah so.. sorry about that I'm make sure not to do that again!

quote:

---

I think the information could be outdated or biased...

---

I'd say so, yeah.

The stuff about "rejection of the same sex parent" (or other emotional disturbances) causing homsexuality has been discredited long ago.

And the idea that "lack of a religious home environment" causes homosexuality gives you an idea of where this stuff is coming from.

This sort of stuff is produced by organizations, usually with a religious agenda, who think that homosexuality should be "cured". The reason why you've found various sites making similar points is that they're associated - part of a small group of mostly Christian-fundamentalist groups trying to turn back the clock and treat homosexuality as a "sickness".

It's regarded as bogus and dangerous by mainstream psychologists and psychiatrists, and has been officially condemned by the American Psychological Association and other professional groups (after decades of research showing that homosexuality is not a mental illness and can't be "cured" by therapy).

quote:

---

for good measure here's a religious point of view

---

Actually, apart from http://www.kstatecollegian.com/issues/v099b/sp/n113/opn-kevyn-03.06.95.html , all the sites you've referred to are either specifically Christian fundamentalist sites, or strongly associated with the fundamentalist movement (like NARTH).

Check out their home pages. "Truthwalk" makes it clear that it's presenting "a bi-monthly commentary on contemporary issues from a Christian perspective. " The "Family Research Institute" has a bizarro rant about the horrors of gay marriage and "homosexual rape and murder of children", which it seems to think is going on all the time.

If you're trying to evaluate information, it's usually a good idea to look at the rest of the website in question so you can see what their agenda is.

quote:

---

I've always been told to look at different points of view and that information can always be biased.

---

Indeed. So you might want to check out some sources with a different point of view, e.g. http://www.apa.org/pubinfo/answers.html , and http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/justthefacts.html - which was developed and endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counselling Association, and the American Psychological Association, among others.

At the moment, nobody knows exactly what causes homosexuality - or heterosexuality, or bisexuality, for that matter. It looks like genetics may be one part of the story about sexual orientation, but not the whole story.

Oh has it? I'm sorry... maybe i haven't read about that. I just saw "rejection of the same sex parent" in a lot of sources so i thought it might be a factor.

"And the idea that "lack of a religious home environment" causes homosexuality gives you an idea of where this stuff is coming from."

Yeah i figured that made the first source biased, that and it said homosexuality could be cured :P

"Actually, apart from http://www.kstatecollegian.com/issues/v099b/sp/n113/opn-kevyn-03.06.95.html , all the sites you've referred to are either specifically Christian fundamentalist sites, or strongly associated with the fundamentalist movement (like NARTH)."

Hehe oops :P? I just picked most of the most popular sites i've found on google, i guess most of them came up religious.

Perhaps i was being too lazy with my research and I didnt look at the philosophy BEHIND the source.. i just grabbed a bunch of sources sorry :P

So if you want to do research on the net, it's a smart idea to check where information is coming from, who it's coming from, what their credentials are, what their agenda is, if there's any guarantee of its reliability, and so on.

Uh... i get enough "penis enlargement" stuff in my email X_x... i hate it lol...

Yeah i was being to hasty and just posting sources without looking very well at the source itself :P I figured some of them were biased but some of them didn't seem to be... :P I guess i can only really trust the American Phycologic Association and related "Associations" who actually know their stuff...

------------------
Milke, with an L, Mrs BD to you, RATS, TMNTP, MF, CWCD, WAOTA