Homophobia, nature or nurture?

[Intoscience]

19 hours ago, iNow said:

Eight Republican lawmakers introduced a bill yesterday proposing a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in Iowa

Yes, and this is ridiculous also. Why ban gay marriage?? makes no sense! If persons choose to commit to a contractual agreement and spend their lives together in matrimony, why should their sex or gender have anything to do with it?  

Going back to the OP, I was talking about this topic with a bunch of friends and asked whether they believed sexual orientation was nature or nurture. Interestingly the views were quite divided and it raised plenty of food for thought within the group.  

[zapatos]

5 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Interestingly the views were quite divided and it raised plenty of food for thought within the group.  

Just curious, but was there a characteristic common among friends that lined up with their thoughts on nature/nurture? For example, religion, politics, education, etc.?

[iNow]

There is ambiguity in source of our own sexual preferences, but homophobia regarding the preferences and practices of others is decidedly not genetic. 

8 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Why ban gay marriage?

Because their local religious leader(s) said that God said it's bad. Because it makes Jesus cry or something. End program. 

[CharonY]

12 hours ago, iNow said:

There is ambiguity in source of our own sexual preferences, but homophobia regarding the preferences and practices of others is decidedly not genetic. 

I  think what folks have not realized is that our knowledge in functional genomics has turned the entire nurture vs nature debate on its head.

In the past, there was often a kind of genetics first assumption, in which certain traits conditions etc. where often assumed to be genetic. If for example a certain ethnic group showed something different, genetics was a plausible explanation.

This was also a reason why GWAS were eagerly anticipated and were hoped to reveal the basis for many diseases, conditions and traits.

This has fizzled out somewhat, and our improved understanding of functional genetics (and its dynamics) played a big role in explaining why that is the case. Realistically and increasingly folks would actually provide more stringent evidence of a genetic basis (after all, we finally can do that) before claiming a strong genetic basis.

At minimum, the basic assumption should realistically be both, with a bit more bias on the nurture side, when it comes to dynamic behaviour.

[Intoscience]

16 hours ago, zapatos said:

Just curious, but was there a characteristic common among friends that lined up with their thoughts on nature/nurture? For example, religion, politics, education, etc.?

I can't say i noticed but its an interesting thought. I can say that the older persons in the group expressed a slight bias towards nature, whilst the younger appeared more open to the idea of nurture. 

14 hours ago, iNow said:

There is ambiguity in source of our own sexual preferences, but homophobia regarding the preferences and practices of others is decidedly not genetic. 

Because their local religious leader(s) said that God said it's bad. Because it makes Jesus cry or something. End program. 

That (my bold) did make me chuckle, I was sipping on my morning coffee while reading it and spat half out all over my pc key board.

I was watching a documentary following the lives of teenage Mormons who were heading off to missionary college. One teenage lad even after years of in doctrine, decided to abandon the religion because he wanted to peruse gay relationships. His sister did continue on to the missionary college though she did find some of the expectations difficult, especially so when in social groups from other religious/culture backgrounds .To be fair to the parents they were very accepting (at least on the face of it) of their son's decision. I wonder though if the fact that their daughter was willing to continue on, helped with this acceptance. 

Personally though I never understood why some religions or cultures were and continue to be unaccepting of gay relationships. People should be free to love whom ever they like, and not feel persecuted or discriminated for it.   

Edited March 3, 2023 by Intoscience
spelling

[paulsutton]

On 1/24/2023 at 8:47 AM, exchemist said:

I suspect distaste for homosexuality is inborn in many of us. Given that we have a drive to be attracted to the opposite sex, we find the idea of sex with someone of the same sex a big turn-off. Consequently we may find the idea of a sexual approach from somebody of our own sex rather disturbing. If that is homophobia, then I am a homophobe. 

It seems to me that the blanket term "homophobia" is thrown around too easily. One needs to draw a distinction between personal sexual taste and the attempts by some to condemn different (minority) tastes in others. It is the latter that society should refrain from.  

"sexual approach from somebody of our own sex rather disturbing"

Could this also be possibly construed as sexual harassment,   so if you make a complaint then  I don't think a counter accusation of homophobia would work. 

This is why people need to be taught to respect each other and peoples personal space.

 

[exchemist]

47 minutes ago, paulsutton said:

"sexual approach from somebody of our own sex rather disturbing"

Could this also be possibly construed as sexual harassment,   so if you make a complaint then  I don't think a counter accusation of homophobia would work. 

This is why people need to be taught to respect each other and peoples personal space.

 

No I didn't mean anything to do with harassment.  I just meant a normal, civilised, - if unwelcome in this instance -  sexual approach.  

[paulsutton]

On 3/3/2023 at 7:30 AM, Intoscience said:

I can't say i noticed but its an interesting thought. I can say that the older persons in the group expressed a slight bias towards nature, whilst the younger appeared more open to the idea of nurture. 

That (my bold) did make me chuckle, I was sipping on my morning coffee while reading it and spat half out all over my pc key board.

I was watching a documentary following the lives of teenage Mormons who were heading off to missionary college. One teenage lad even after years of in doctrine, decided to abandon the religion because he wanted to peruse gay relationships. His sister did continue on to the missionary college though she did find some of the expectations difficult, especially so when in social groups from other religious/culture backgrounds .To be fair to the parents they were very accepting (at least on the face of it) of their son's decision. I wonder though if the fact that their daughter was willing to continue on, helped with this acceptance. 

Personally though I never understood why some religions or cultures were and continue to be unaccepting of gay relationships. People should be free to love whom ever they like, and not feel persecuted or discriminated for it.   

One of the 10 commandments says something like Thou shalt not love another man,"   which could be interpreted as banning homosexual relationships,  on the other hand it could be telling a woman that once you love one man, you can't love another at the same time.

[swansont]

12 minutes ago, paulsutton said:

One of the 10 commandments says something like Thou shalt not love another man,"   which could be interpreted as banning homosexual relationships,  on the other hand it could be telling a woman that once you love one man, you can't love another at the same time.

That would be nurture, then, right? If you have to be told not to do something you might be inclined to do otherwise…

[paulsutton]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

That would be nurture, then, right? If you have to be told not to do something you might be inclined to do otherwise…

I guess so,   Religion seems to be also using fear to ensure people comply.

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by paulsutton

[exchemist]

45 minutes ago, paulsutton said:

One of the 10 commandments says something like Thou shalt not love another man,"   which could be interpreted as banning homosexual relationships,  on the other hand it could be telling a woman that once you love one man, you can't love another at the same time.

None of the 10 commandments says anything like that. There is one forbidding adultery, and another saying thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife.  It was a very patriarchal society and tended to be written very much from a man's perspective.  The decalogue is written out in the table at the foot of this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments 

Edited April 28, 2023 by exchemist

[swansont]

2 hours ago, exchemist said:

None of the 10 commandments says anything like that.

Good point - it’s in Leviticus, which forbids a whole craptonne of things that are ignored.

[iNow]

Another hallucinating LLM

[Gian]

On 1/24/2023 at 6:07 PM, swansont said:

Homophobia is a fear. Not just a lack of attraction towards those of the same sex, but fear of those who are gay, and/or (especially) that you might be gay. That sounds like learned behavior.

 

Well I used to read that phobias (eg arachnophobia claustrophobia etc) were socially constructed. But now I'm reading stuff that phobias may be inborn

On 1/24/2023 at 9:47 AM, exchemist said:

Exactly. But my problem with the term "homophobia" is that it may be closer to my own personal discomfort at the prospect of a sexual advance from another man than it is to any inability by some to respect the sexual preferences of others. So what we stigmatise in society as homophobia is actually not that, whereas a feeling of personal discomfort or distaste, which could perhaps be described as a mild kind of "phobia" (though overstating it), is a natural thing and not reprehensible at all!     

So is homophobia (along with arachnophobia etc) inborn or isn't it?

[exchemist]

46 minutes ago, Gian said:

Well I used to read that phobias (eg arachnophobia claustrophobia etc) were socially constructed. But now I'm reading stuff that phobias may be inborn

So is homophobia (along with arachnophobia etc) inborn or isn't it?

This is begging the question.

[iNow]

6 hours ago, Gian said:

I used to read that phobias (eg arachnophobia claustrophobia etc) were socially constructed. But now I'm reading stuff that phobias may be inborn

Not everything you read on the internet is true. 

That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. 

[Gian]

On 3/2/2023 at 5:09 PM, iNow said:

There is ambiguity in source of our own sexual preferences, but homophobia regarding the preferences and practices of others is decidedly not genetic. 

Because their local religious leader(s) said that God said it's bad. Because it makes Jesus cry or something. End program. 

I don't recall Jesus saying anything whatsoever about homosexuality. 

But to get back to why I started this topic, are phobias (arachnophobia, homophobia, claustrophobia etc) nature or nurture?

On 1/24/2023 at 9:37 AM, Markus Hanke said:

Well put +1

I think it is a crucially important life skill to - in some situations - be able to respect things that we don’t personally like. This isn’t always easy, since we generally tend to equate our own preferences, views, beliefs and opinions with some notion of “truth” about the world. It takes a certain amount of introspective awareness to recognise this dynamic and suspend it, if and when necessary; sadly, not everyone is able to do this.

Well yes, but my question is not about whether it is morally right or wrong to be homophobic, but whether phobias (arachnophobia, homophobia etc) are inborn or not. 

I always used to think phobias were socially constructed, but now I'm reading stuff which says they may be inbuilt

[Steve81]

32 minutes ago, Gian said:

I don't recall Jesus saying anything whatsoever about homosexuality. 

But to get back to why I started this topic, are phobias (arachnophobia, homophobia, claustrophobia etc) nature or nurture?

Well yes, but my question is not about whether it is morally right or wrong to be homophobic, but whether phobias (arachnophobia, homophobia etc) are inborn or not. 

I always used to think phobias were socially constructed, but now I'm reading stuff which says they may be inbuilt

Fear itself, along with disgust, are inbuilt. Fear of those different from us, i.e., homosexuals, is likely instinctive. Other phobias may be instinctive as well, whereas others can be due to experience.

Edited August 30, 2023 by Steve81

[Genady]

48 minutes ago, Gian said:

whether phobias (arachnophobia, homophobia etc) are inborn or not

I think that such a distinction is undefined. Can you clarify what you mean by "inborn or not"?

50 minutes ago, Gian said:

my question is not about whether it is morally right or wrong to be homophobic

Then why it's in the Ethics forum?

[Gian]

1 hour ago, Genady said:

I think that such a distinction is undefined. Can you clarify what you mean by "inborn or not"?

Then why it's in the Ethics forum?

Well because homophobia seems to be an ethical issue, although perhaps I should have put it in one of the Science sections.

I read of an experiment once where newborn kittens were found to have a fear of heights, implying It's something they're born with.  I just wondered if it's true of homophobia

 

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Gian said:

I always used to think phobias were socially constructed, but now I'm reading stuff which says they may be inbuilt

Not everything you read on the internet is true

16 minutes ago, Gian said:

I read of an experiment once where newborn kittens were found to have a fear of heights, implying It's something they're born with. 

What similarities do you see between fear of snakes and fear of who those snakes happen to love and find sexually appealing?

[Genady]

18 minutes ago, Gian said:

I read of an experiment once where newborn kittens were found to have a fear of heights

How did they (the observers) know that they observed a fear of heights and not something else? Especially, it is strange because cats do not fear heights.

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Gian said:

I'm reading stuff which says they may be inbuilt

You appear to be experiencing a comprehension problem. 
 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-our-tendency-to-experi/#:~:text=The specific form that fear,has a clear genetic component.

Quote

The specific form that fear takes / phobia with specific associations, such as snakes, fear of pain, or of heights or closed spaces is almost entirely associated with individual environmental experiences. But the tendency to develop fearful or anxious responses to the environment in general has a clear genetic component.

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by iNow
bolded for convenience

[Gian]

22 hours ago, Genady said:

How did they (the observers) know that they observed a fear of heights and not something else? Especially, it is strange because cats do not fear heights.

What they did was something like this. They put the kittens on a walkway (catwalk!) which had 2 thick black lines painted along its length.

Then there was a gap several feet deep with the lines running down it, so the kittens could clearly see the lines appearing to go downwards.

But the gap was covered in transparent Perspex, so the kittens could have walked across it. But they all shied away from the gap, so evidently they had an inborn sense that heights are dangerous because they could fall

 

[Genady]

3 minutes ago, Gian said:

so evidently they had an inborn sense that heights are dangerous because they could fall

I think it's bad science. One can make a lot of other guesses on why they avoided the gap. For example, they knew that it is easier to stay on a flat surface.