Is homosexuality a mental illness?

[Mr Skeptic]

Like a type of phobia, you mean?

[...]

First, let me say that I am no expert in any related field and don't pretend to be. This is only my uneducated opinion. Additionally, I'm sure this could be said more concisely with a better vocabulary.

 

Straight men are not afraid of homosexuals. Why would they be? The thing that makes straight men so uncomfortable about homosexuality is the possibility that either they might discover that they themselves are gay or that they might be perceived as being gay, and this is only a problem because homosexuality has developed such a major stigma since the ancient greeks.

 

Personally, I believe homosexuality has both a genetic and environmental component, and I believe the environmental factor is substantially larger. To keep it simple, I think genetics plays a role in two things. 1) a persons vulnerability to sexual feelings, urges, whatever..the level and ease with which their libido responds to stimulii. and 2) a person's mental functioning that would affect their willingness to experiment..to ignore established societal norms and try new things..--this is a personality trait that goes far beyond sexuality. Now, there are still many very horny and rebellious people out there who never practice homosexuality. Additionally, there are plenty of people with low sex drives and not particularly outgoing who become homosexuals. And lastly there are still more people who experiment with homosexuality only to discover that they're not really homosexuals. So I think genetics set the stage for homosexuality, but environmental circumstances are the trigger and the ultimate determining factor in whether a person actually becomes a permanent, full on homosexual. Maybe a person is exposed to close friends or relatives who live homosexual lifestyles and therefore that person develops a sense that it is more acceptable than someone who was not exposed to it. Maybe a person has a string of bad relationships with the opposite sex and gets bored or attempts to search for a more meaningful alternative. Maybe a woman has a traumatic experience such as a rape or molestation and feels she can no longer trust men but finds understanding and emotional relation with other women, and so lives the gay lifetyle simply to find comfort and emotional fullfilment rather than actual sexual attraction.

 

My point is that there can be all sorts of reasons a person might 'try' being gay, or actually become gay, or maybe just think they're gay..other than true sexual attraction. Now, admittedly, I say all this as a straight man who simply cannot believe (because I simply can't imagine) that a man can be SOLELY sexually attracted to other males, and not at all attracted to females. I simply don't believe it. I think if a man says that's the case, he must be in denial, or there's a pride issue..something. I don't believe that nature, even with it's occasional abnormalities, would program a member of a sexually reproductive species to instinctively choose the same sex. The same way it would not program an animal to commit suicide. The instinct to procreate must be the strongest after self-preservation. You don't see animals killing themselves for no reason. Only us, with our advanced cognitive function can choose to ignore our basic evolutionary instincts. I'm aware that homosexuality is observed in other animals, but is it really homosexuality? ..or is it something else such as domination.. or are they just really horny. I bet if you take any sexual animal that exhibits homosexual behavior (other than a human) and provide it the opportunity to mate with a suitable member of the opposite sex.. it will.

[Moontanman]

First, let me say that I am no expert in any related field and don't pretend to be. This is only my uneducated opinion. Additionally, I'm sure this could be said more concisely with a better vocabulary.

 

Straight men are not afraid of homosexuals. Why would they be? The thing that makes straight men so uncomfortable about homosexuality is the possibility that either they might discover that they themselves are gay or that they might be perceived as being gay, and this is only a problem because homosexuality has developed such a major stigma since the ancient greeks.

 

Personally, I believe homosexuality has both a genetic and environmental component, and I believe the environmental factor is substantially larger. To keep it simple, I think genetics plays a role in two things. 1) a persons vulnerability to sexual feelings, urges, whatever..the level and ease with which their libido responds to stimulii. and 2) a person's mental functioning that would affect their willingness to experiment..to ignore established societal norms and try new things..--this is a personality trait that goes far beyond sexuality. Now, there are still many very horny and rebellious people out there who never practice homosexuality. Additionally, there are plenty of people with low sex drives and not particularly outgoing who become homosexuals. And lastly there are still more people who experiment with homosexuality only to discover that they're not really homosexuals. So I think genetics set the stage for homosexuality, but environmental circumstances are the trigger and the ultimate determining factor in whether a person actually becomes a permanent, full on homosexual. Maybe a person is exposed to close friends or relatives who live homosexual lifestyles and therefore that person develops a sense that it is more acceptable than someone who was not exposed to it. Maybe a person has a string of bad relationships with the opposite sex and gets bored or attempts to search for a more meaningful alternative. Maybe a woman has a traumatic experience such as a rape or molestation and feels she can no longer trust men but finds understanding and emotional relation with other women, and so lives the gay lifetyle simply to find comfort and emotional fullfilment rather than actual sexual attraction.

 

My point is that there can be all sorts of reasons a person might 'try' being gay, or actually become gay, or maybe just think they're gay..other than true sexual attraction. Now, admittedly, I say all this as a straight man who simply cannot believe (because I simply can't imagine) that a man can be SOLELY sexually attracted to other males, and not at all attracted to females. I simply don't believe it. I think if a man says that's the case, he must be in denial, or there's a pride issue..something. I don't believe that nature, even with it's occasional abnormalities, would program a member of a sexually reproductive species to instinctively choose the same sex. The same way it would not program an animal to commit suicide. The instinct to procreate must be the strongest after self-preservation. You don't see animals killing themselves for no reason. Only us, with our advanced cognitive function can choose to ignore our basic evolutionary instincts. I'm aware that homosexuality is observed in other animals, but is it really homosexuality? ..or is it something else such as domination.. or are they just really horny. I bet if you take any sexual animal that exhibits homosexual behavior (other than a human) and provide it the opportunity to mate with a suitable member of the opposite sex.. it will.

 

Maybe you should read this entire thread before you start making grandiose claims about what homosexuality is or is not.

[Genecks]

Try not to dismiss things so easily, Moontanman. Counter statements rather than dismissing them, or if you could, at least say what parts of the statements have been argued for and against in the thread.

 

...I say all this as a straight man who simply cannot believe (because I simply can't imagine) that a man can be SOLELY sexually attracted to other males, and not at all attracted to females...

 

You might have something valid here.

 

So, because of the psychological experiences that occur, a person would be heterosexual, even if living a homosexual life. And the reason it's impossible to be purely homosexual is due to neurological programming, thus a person has to be attracted to the opposite sex (even if he/she decides in the end to not have sex with the opposite sex). So, perhaps in a better way, you're saying that genetics and neurological development offer people the ability to be sexually attracted to both genders (everyone is born bisexual), but the members of a population will lean toward actions that increase their fitness. And the decision of which gender to mate with will come from experience with early observation of mating rituals and/or the process of which children are born.

 

Then again, it's not as if we try to get children (at an early age, such as 8) to embrace the idea of sexual activity and giving birth to other children. In some families, this occurs. There tends to be a cultural thing to it, though. It's not really meant to warp the child's mind but to help quickly mature the child for the real world.

 

Nonetheless, there are homosexuals who will never have had sex with a woman. Assume that many are adults, they could understand the idea that they will not be able to reproduce if they are not with women.

 

Perhaps calling a homosexual mentally ill would be similar to calling a felon (who continually ends up in prison) mentally ill. Both reduce their ability to reproduce. In this sense, the cause would be sociobiological. If it is truly the unconscious desire of organisms to reproduce, perhaps calling it a mental illness is too subjective.

 

Something about the biology of the organism has decreased its ability to reproduce. Perhaps a person is less/more susceptible to sociobiological programming than other people. In that case, perhaps the person is not so much mentally ill as the person has genetics that will give him/her less fitness.

 

I've often been told that homosexual men tend to have bad habits, such as drug abuse and a history of violence. Sure, heterosexuals have such bad habits, too. I'm not sure if this may relate to a deficiency in the frontal lobe, which can be responsible for a person being able to conform and/or mimic aspects of society and conduct physical actions. It could be something that occurs during development. Perhaps it's a plastic effect that occurs while growing up in the living world.

 

If the biological definition of mental illness were to solely rely on severely decreased ability to reproduce caused by mental/neurological/emotional issues, then I assume these people would be mentally ill.

 

If this can be reduced to some neurological conformations of the brain, then it should be extremely curious as to why animals have evolved to have such characteristics and what allows such characteristics to occur. Some animals are homosexual and same-gender sex is how reproduction occurs. I'm aware of that.

 

As a note, I'm not prejudice against homosexual men. I find that their existence frees up more women for men who want them.

Edited June 25, 2010 by Genecks

[Moontanman]

Genecks, this issue has been hashed out over and over in this thread, read the entire thing and then come back and tell me i am dismissing anything.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Like a type of phobia, you mean?

 

Exactly what I mean!

[Genecks]

Definitely the issue has been hashed out throughout the past century and/or more. I was curious if persons would input other abstract ideas that may have not been mentioned or arguments I may not have read or thought of.

 

I think in general, people are stating it should not be considered a mental illness in reference the reproductive biological design. Furthermore, it could be assumed that biological design is designed to influence bisexual behavior, which sexual behavior is later narrowed by interaction in society, thus leading to sociobiological development.

[Moontanman]

Definitely the issue has been hashed out throughout the past century and/or more. I was curious if persons would input other abstract ideas that may have not been mentioned or arguments I may not have read or thought of.

 

I think in general, people are stating it should not be considered a mental illness in reference the reproductive biological design. Furthermore, it could be assumed that biological design is designed to influence bisexual behavior, which sexual behavior is later narrowed by interaction in society, thus leading to sociobiological development.

 

 

Genecks, homosexuality has been hashed to death on this forum and in this thread, I honestly see no reason to rehash it unless someone comes up with a new slant on it. Simply making the same old claims does not make them true or add to the discussion.

[...]

moontanman, yes you're right..I probably should have read the entire thread so as not to simply restate something someone had said previously. I usually would have, but I didn't feel like it at the time. As far as I'm concerned this is completely acceptable because 1) I stated at the beginning that the entire entry was my own personal opinion and, as far as I can tell, posts on this forum need not be worthy of a peer-reviewed journal. And 2) if a point of mine had already been made, well then my entry could be considered an affirmation of that point.

 

I suspect the most likely reason for your retort is not your concern for forum etiquette in general, but that you simply disagreed with my argument in part or whole. Perhaps you should read the first sentence of a post before making accusations of 'grandiose claims'..of which there were none made. I should probably go back and read the arguments you put forth to discover which parts of mine disturb you...but I don't feel like it..

[Moontanman]

moontanman, yes you're right..I probably should have read the entire thread so as not to simply restate something someone had said previously. I usually would have, but I didn't feel like it at the time. As far as I'm concerned this is completely acceptable because 1) I stated at the beginning that the entire entry was my own personal opinion and, as far as I can tell, posts on this forum need not be worthy of a peer-reviewed journal. And 2) if a point of mine had already been made, well then my entry could be considered an affirmation of that point.

 

Well then i guess you'd have no problem with me giving you my opinion of your opinion? I won't because opinions mean nothing in this forum and claims must be backed up with evidence other than my opinion.

 

I suspect the most likely reason for your retort is not your concern for forum etiquette in general, but that you simply disagreed with my argument in part or whole. Perhaps you should read the first sentence of a post before making accusations of 'grandiose claims'..of which there were none made. I should probably go back and read the arguments you put forth to discover which parts of mine disturb you...but I don't feel like it..

 

No i simply do not simply disagree with your "opinions" I back up my claims with real evidence, of course you'd have to read the thread to know that, on the other hand I have real world experience with the idea of homosexuality and the problems the false idea of it being a mental disorder or unnatural or wrong and how society deals with an defames people who do not share their majority feelings of sexuality.

 

I personally do not give a rats ass what your opinions are about homosexuals in general or personally are, all I care about is making sure people who have sexual feelings that are different than the majority are not denied their basic rights as human beings due to people who share your barbaric opinions.

 

The reason people feel the need to be uncomfortable with homosexuals since the Greeks is due to opinions like yours being supported by pious religious people who feel the need to demonize someone who is different for any reason to make themselves feel better.

[...]

Well then i guess you'd have no problem with me giving you my opinion of your opinion? I won't because opinions mean nothing in this forum and claims must be backed up with evidence other than my opinion.

 

 

 

No i simply do not simply disagree with your "opinions" I back up my claims with real evidence, of course you'd have to read the thread to know that, on the other hand I have real world experience with the idea of homosexuality and the problems the false idea of it being a mental disorder or unnatural or wrong and how society deals with an defames people who do not share their majority feelings of sexuality.

 

I personally do not give a rats ass what your opinions are about homosexuals in general or personally are, all I care about is making sure people who have sexual feelings that are different than the majority are not denied their basic rights as human beings due to people who share your barbaric opinions.

 

The reason people feel the need to be uncomfortable with homosexuals since the Greeks is due to opinions like yours being supported by pious religious people who feel the need to demonize someone who is different for any reason to make themselves feel better.

 

 

moontanman..I can't help but find your responses a little humorous. don't you think you're being a little dramatic.. this thread is about whether homosexuality is a mental illness..and you think MY opinions are barbaric? obviously you do give a rat's ass as evidenced in your word choice. However, I didn't say a single negative thing about homosexuality..only that I don't believe it can be pure. I'm sorry if you are a homosexual or have close ties to homosexuality, and my opinion offends you.

 

For the record, I would guess that homosexuality should not be defined or classified as a mental illness. I consider it to be nothing more than a personal preference, such as a favorite type of food, or music genre..but these sorts of preferences are environmentally influenced I believe. The existence of homosexuality certainly appears to be to the immediate detriment of our survival..I say immediate because it obviously prevents procreation, but there may be an unknown, long-term benefit such as a population control as someone mentioned earlier. Nature introduces many abnormalities detrimental to reproduction, some beneficial.. They come and go. There's something to be said for the continuing occurrence of homosexuality throughout our evolution..which could be construed as evidence that it is environmentally induced, as natural selection would have compensated for a genetic origin. Again, notwithstanding an unknown, long-term benefit to reproduction. I would be curious to know how common homosexuality was prior to humans coalescing into large groups.

[Mr Skeptic]

Well, twin studies show a high correlation of homosexuality, suggesting a strong genetic component. http://www.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/

 

Ideally such a study would use identical twins raised separately, but those are very few in number. I couldn't find one, and it's rather late at night, and I don't even know if such a study has been done.

[pioneer]

The term homophobic is based on a language game manipulation. If a person was walking down a dark alley and became defensive because of a gang of street thugs, they would be called gang-o-phobic. Gang-o-phobic means secretly they want to become part of the gang and their defensive anxiety is not even real. The train of illogic doesn't even make sense when applied elsewhere, unless we were promoting gangs and trying to help with their recruitments so the data looks better.

 

How about this application of the language game; gays are homophobic-phobic. They secretly like to gay bash but are in denial. When put into perspective the language game is illogical.

 

I tend to think so called "homophobic" behavior (defensive) is as natural to that person as gay behavior is to a gay person. They are the two sides of the same coin. If you extrapolated gay to 100%, the human species would not exist for more than one generation. If all females became lesbian to 100%, guys would still do them and make babies. Mother nature, to avoid a possible path leading to extinction of the species, set up checks and balances to limit the percentage.

 

Based on the liberal language manipulation game, only one side of this survival of the species coin is considered a mental disease. However, the entire coin should be treated as an single entity, with both sides of the coin either a mental disease or not.

[nec209]

Long ago, the APA considered homosexuality a mental illness. Many people throughout the past decades considered that idea silly, and it was thrown out as a mental illness. I thought it was silly when I learned about it. However, in my studies of psychology, biology, and neuroscience, I've considered that homosexuality may indeed be a mental illness in a sense...

 

Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.A mental illness is defined if one cannot live a normal life.If one believe he can talk to ghost or talk to lamp post does not make him have a mental illness .But if he cannot go to school,work or the cops get involved it is a mental illness .

 

I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.

 

I don't think any of this has to do with genes.

[iNow]

Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.A mental illness is defined if one cannot live a normal life.If one believe he can talk to ghost or talk to lamp post does not make him have a mental illness .But if he cannot go to school,work or the cops get involved it is a mental illness .

 

I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.

 

I don't think any of this has to do with genes.

Think whatever the hell you want. You're painfully mistaken. You equate homosexuality with "talking to a ghost" and "talking to a lamp post?" You think it's a fetish simply because folks are attracted to different people than you are attracted to? You think individuals only have sex with the same gender if they are super horny and can't get any from a member of the opposite sex?

 

A mental illness? Is being black or hispanic a "mental illness" also?

 

 

Truth Wins Out - Commentary: The APA Says "No Evidence" In Support of Ex-Gay Therapy

 

It was encouraging to see the APA question the ex-gay tactic of teaching vulnerable clients to live in a fantasy world. Groups like Exodus and the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), regularly encourage clients to say they have converted, even though they are still gay. The idea is that by proclaiming a false heterosexual identity in advance of any legitimate change, the desired transformation will eventually come.

 

This idea is equivalent to me wanting to play professional basketball, so I begin to identify as a member of the New York Knicks. Never mind that I am too short, too old and not good enough to make the roster. If I embrace this surreal existence long enough, I will one-day be dunking the ball under the bright lights of Madison Square Garden.

 

It is imperative that clients are honest about who they are and not prodded to make claims that are not true. Such a gap between fantasy and reality, according to the APA report, can create “cognitive dissonance” and does not resolve “identity conflicts.”

 

 

Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation

 

The task force conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed journal literature on sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) and concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful and involve some risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates.

 

Even though the research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, regardless of sexual orientation identity, the task force concluded that the population that undergoes SOCE tends to have strongly conservative religious views that lead them to seek to change their sexual orientation.

 

Thus, the appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for those who seek SOCE involves therapist acceptance, support, and understanding of clients and the facilitation of clients’ active coping, social support, and identity exploration and development, without imposing a specific sexual orientation identity outcome.

 

 

 

 

 

Sweet Jebus, man... How is it almost 2011 and we're still battling such deep and profound ignorance? The mind boggles.

 

 

 

The Real Story on Gay Genes | Sex & Gender | DISCOVER Magazine

 

Whether or not a gay gene, a set of gay genes, or some other biological mechanism is ever found, one thing is clear: The environment a child grows up in has nothing to do with what makes most gay men gay. Two of the most convincing studies have proved conclusively that sexual orientation in men has a genetic cause.

 

<...>

 

Bocklandt is quick to point out that most likely there is no single “gay gene”—no single switch for sexual orientation. Instead, there are probably a handful of genes that work in ways as yet unexplained.

 

<...>

 

He thinks it is likely that perhaps 5 to 15 genes explain sexual orientation in most people.

 

 

 

A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation -- Hamer et al. 261 (5119): 321 -- Science

 

The role of genetics in male sexual orientation was investigated by pedigree and linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men. Increased rates of same-sex orientation were found in the maternal uncles and male cousins of these subjects, but not in their fathers or paternal relatives, suggesting the possibility of sex-linked transmission in a portion of the population. DNA linkage analysis of a selected group of 40 families in which there were two gay brothers and no indication of nonmaternal transmission revealed a correlation between homosexual orientation and the inheritance of polymorphic markers on the X chromosome in approximately 64 percent of the sib-pairs tested. The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0 (P = 10(-5), indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.

 

 

Evidence for maternally inherited factors favouring male homosexuality and promoting female fecundity - Royal Society Proceedings B

 

The Darwinian paradox of male homosexuality in humans is examined, i.e. if male homosexuality has a genetic component and homosexuals reproduce less than heterosexuals, then why is this trait maintained in the population? In a sample of 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men and their relatives (a total of over 4600 individuals), we found that female maternal relatives of homosexuals have higher fecundity than female maternal relatives of heterosexuals and that this difference is not found in female paternal relatives. The study confirms previous reports, in particular that homosexuals have more maternal than paternal male homosexual relatives, that homosexual males are more often later-born than first–born and that they have more older brothers than older sisters. We discuss the findings and their implications for current research on male homosexuality.

 

 

A genetic study of male sexual orientation

 

Homosexual male probands with monozygotic cotwins, dizygotic cotwins, or adoptive brothers were recruited using homophile publications. Sexual orientation of relatives was assessed either by asking relatives directly, or when this was impossible, asking the probands. Of the relatives whose sexual orientation could be rated, 52% (29/56) of monozygotic cotwins, 22% (12/54) of dizygotic cotwins, and 11% (6/57) of adoptive brothers were homosexual. Heritabilities were substantial under a wide range of assumptions about the population base rate of homosexuality and ascertainment bias.

 

 

http://www.springerlink.com/content/k7w03624953x255l/

 

We examined data from a large cohort of homosexual and heterosexual females and males concerning their siblings' sexual orientations. As in previous studies, both male and female homosexuality were familial. Homosexual females had an excess of homosexual brothers compared to heteroxual subjects, thus providing evidence that similar familial factors influence both male and female homosexuality. Furthermore, despite the large sample size, homosexual females and males did not differ significantly from each other in their proportions of either homosexual sisters or homosexual brothers. Thus, results were most consistent with the possibility that similar familial factors influence male and female sexual orientation.

 

We also examined whether some parental influences comprised shared environmental effects on sexual orientation. Scales attempting to measure such influences failed to distinguish subjects with homosexual siblings from subjects with only heterosexual siblings and, thus, did not appear to measure shared environmental determinants of sexual orientation.

 

 

Or here: http://tigger.uic.edu/~bmustans/Mustanski_etal_2005.pdf

 

Or here: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13674-evolution-myths-natural-selection-cannot-explain-homosexuality.html

 

 

 

Seriously, people, it's not some either/or, black/white, binary state:

 

 

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/sexual-orientation-gender-4329.htm

 

Each of us has a biological sex — whether we are female, male, or intersex. Our gender is our biological, social, and legal status as men or women. And sexual orientation is the term used to describe whether a person feels sexual desire for people of the other gender, same gender, or both genders.

 

Each of us has a gender and gender identity. Our gender identity is our deepest feelings about our gender. We express our gender identity in the way that we act masculine, feminine, neither, or both. Some of us are transgender — which means that our biological sex and our gender identity do not match up.

 

Each of us also has a sexual orientation. You may be bisexual, gay, lesbian or straight. Or you may be “questioning” — unsure about your sexual orientation.

 

The more you understand biological sex, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation, the more you may understand yourself and how you relate to other people. Because sex and gender are so complex, you may have many questions. You may wonder about your own sexual orientation or gender identity, or you may wonder about someone you know. You may have questions about how society views sex and gender — including homophobia, sexism, and transphobia.

 

 

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

 

"Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects.

 

While emphasizing the continuity of the gradations between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual histories, it has seemed desirable to develop some sort of classification which could be based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or response in each history... An individual may be assigned a position on this scale, for each period in his life.... A seven-point scale comes nearer to showing the many gradations that actually exist." (Kinsey, et al. (1948). pp. 639, 656)

 

 

Edited July 29, 2010 by iNow

[Sayonara]

Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.

Quite a lot of contemporary research flatly contradicts your opinion.

 

A mental illness is defined if one cannot live a normal life.

No it isn't. That definition would include groups such as the blind, the deaf, paraplegics, etc.

If you are going to try and argue by definition, make some effort to get the definition right.

 

I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.

That sounds like it has come from someone who doesn't have a lot of sexual experience, to be quite frank.

Not that it really matters since anecdote and opinion aren't scientifically persuasive even with the weight of personal experience added on top.

 

I don't think any of this has to do with genes.

Fail. Sorry.

[nec209]

Well I think alot of things like homosexuality or fetish is a learnt behavior or a trauma experience and has nothing to do with genes.

 

Quite a lot of contemporary research flatly contradicts your opinion.

 

At one type this was a theory going around.I don't think doctors really understand but learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience was a theory going around.I'm not sure if doctors really understand now what cause it.

 

I also think some things like homosexuality or fetish may be frustration a person has that has a high sex drive and cannot have sex or person that is horny but cannot have sex or look at porn may start to bridge into other things to fulfill the desire.

 

That sounds like it has come from someone who doesn't have a lot of sexual experience, to be quite frank.

Not that it really matters since anecdote and opinion aren't scientifically persuasive even with the weight of personal experience added on top.

 

Telll that to your psychiatrist next type you go in and say you are gay or have a fetish.Even if you are not gay or have a fetish.I dare you !!!

Edited July 30, 2010 by nec209

[Sayonara]

At one type this was a theory going around.I don't think doctors really understand but learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience was a theory going around.I'm not sure if doctors really understand now what cause it.

 

 

 

Telll that your psychiatrist next type you go in and say you are gay or have a fetish.Even if you are not gay or have a fetish.

Maybe you should look at the research (the material provided by iNow would be a good start) then re-evaluate your position.

 

Telll that your psychiatrist next type you go in and say you are gay or have a fetish.Even if you are not gay or have a fetish.I dare you !!!

I strongly suspect that were any psychiatrist even remotely interested, they would agree.

[nec209]

Maybe you should look at the research (the material provided by iNow would be a good start) then re-evaluate your position.

Well research on what?

 

I strongly suspect that were any psychiatrist even remotely interested, they would agree.

 

What?

Edited July 30, 2010 by nec209

[Sayonara]

Well research on what?

The surfeit of research on the causes and mechanisms of sexuality.

 

What?

Sigh.

[nec209]

The surfeit of research on the causes and mechanisms of sexuality.

 

 

Sigh.

 

That has nothing to do with fetish or frustration when it comes to sex.Well he is going on and on and on that homosexuality is genes

[Sayonara]

That has nothing to do with fetish or frustration when it comes to sex.Well he is going on and on and on that homosexuality is genes

You can't separate out homosexuality from sexuality. The former is just one particular expression of the latter.

[nec209]

You can't separate out homosexuality from sexuality. The former is just one particular expression of the latter.

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean ? Are you saying homosexuality or fetish is genes has all sexuality is genes ? What about all the differnet types of fetish is that genes .

 

Is that what you and iNow are saying? When did psychiatrist no longer say learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience ? Do wikipedia search or check a youtube search psychiatrist say they think not proven yet learnt behavior ,trauma experience ,exposure or experience ?

 

Has that change now? Are psychiatrist closer to proven of what cause it now than just theory ?

Edited July 30, 2010 by nec209

[Mr Skeptic]

I don't think any of this has to do with genes.

 

So is this just not thinking or is there some other explanation you have for the extremely high correlation between genes and homosexuality? Or is yours an "I don't believe research" kind of position?

[Sayonara]

I'm sorry nec209, but you will have to clarify your post before I can answer it.

I am not sure I understand the sentences.

[J.R.H.]

So then (pink_trike) you are saying homosexuality is a choice, and not a biologically driven need?

 

 

There is a difference between desire and behaviour - the answer is choice.

 

All of the points you made come down to choice.

 

 

I personally don't believe it is a "choice". I used to think it was, but after lengthy discussions with gay people (for the record I myself am not)

 

but to them it was a desire. Something deep seeded, something that they felt and not something that they chose.

 

Now of course performing the act (behaviour) is a choice to some degree.

 

However the initial attraction was not.

 

 

It's also worthy of note that primates and humans are the only creatures which mate for pleasure...(and there are no recorded incidences of primates performing homosexual acts) which means it is a condition only (in nature) isolated to humans - which tells me that other factors need to be considered...

 

 

The main issue is that "feelings" can never be explained with logic, and as science tries to break everything into logical data - I dont feel science will ever have the answer to this one, and certainly not a quackdom like psychology.

 

Thats right on... i completely agree with that. thank you.