PROOF: Gays are born gay. Your thoughts? Pass this on.

Question Living

PROOF: Gays are born gay. Your thoughts? Pass this on.

by Karl Posted June 17, 2008 23:20:20

12 answers
Read all 27 comments
+2 raves

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7456588.stm

"Dr Qazi Rahman, a lecturer in cognitive biology at Queen Mary, University of London, said that he believed that these brain differences were laid down early in foetal development. "As far as I'm concerned there is no argument any more - if you are gay, you are born gay," he said. "

Answers
Results
Recommend This

Top Comment

+2 raves kmay June 17, 2008 23:39:02

Answered: No
One opinion - we need more info like this....

Top 10 Pros and Cons on the Born Gay Debate
"Is sexual orientation determined at birth?"
http://www.borngayprocon.org/...
View thread

Sort By

Most Raves
Least Raves
Oldest
Newest

text size

Comments

Big Love March 16, 2009 23:15:53

Answered: Yes
Absolutely...
skippy November 26, 2008 07:41:31

Answered: Yes
HAHAHA I shall start my gay army now by having gay sex with women!!!lol
biprincess17 November 06, 2008 05:12:05

Answered: No
idk if this counts for me but when i turned 16 i realized i was bisexual. =]
*~Amelie~* August 29, 2008 23:08:06

Answered: Yes
It's just the way they are. It's like saying straight people are born straight- well duh. there is a 5% chance that any baby is going to be gay. i think that who we are is mostly determined from birth as well. The whole nature/nurture argument doesn't really fly with me because identical twins/triplets etc have the same genes and the same upbringing and yet they all have different personalities. Mostly, i think you are what you are and very little changes it.
Ace~Mr.Giantess~ June 29, 2008 23:38:05

Answered: No
On one poll you said you used to be bi and now you are gay. So gays aren't born gay because you're sexual orientation changed.
shirkie - "In CHRIST I trust!" June 29, 2008 01:04:09

Answered: No
First of all, any scientist with a brain in his/her head knows science cannot "prove" anything. There is always evidence to support or reject a hypothesis, never "proof." You learn this in Science 101.

Second, it has not been successfully demonstrated that one is "born gay." Regardless of the current study mentioned, the consensus of researchers in this field have concluded sexuality is determined half by genetics and half by environmental influences.

In studies of monozygotic (identical) twins (who have identical DNA), researchers found sexuality was concordant (the same) only 50% of the time. If sexuality was truly based solely on genetics, then individuals with identical DNA should have identical sexuality 100% of the time. Researchers concluded sexuality is determined 50% by genes (nature) and 50% by environmental influences (nurture). This is a classic example of the nature/nurture controversy and how both affect various aspects of our lives.

That being said, yes, brains are different... But we have no way of knowing if someone is homosexual because their brain is different or if their homosexuality altered their brain structure. Sounds silly? Well, certain physical conditions (mental illnesses, for example) have been shown (again, not "proven" but shown) to act...

First of all, any scientist with a brain in his/her head knows science cannot "prove" anything. There is always evidence to support or reject a hypothesis, never "proof." You learn this in Science 101.

Second, it has not been successfully demonstrated that one is "born gay." Regardless of the current study mentioned, the consensus of researchers in this field have concluded sexuality is determined half by genetics and half by environmental influences.

In studies of monozygotic (identical) twins (who have identical DNA), researchers found sexuality was concordant (the same) only 50% of the time. If sexuality was truly based solely on genetics, then individuals with identical DNA should have identical sexuality 100% of the time. Researchers concluded sexuality is determined 50% by genes (nature) and 50% by environmental influences (nurture). This is a classic example of the nature/nurture controversy and how both affect various aspects of our lives.

That being said, yes, brains are different... But we have no way of knowing if someone is homosexual because their brain is different or if their homosexuality altered their brain structure. Sounds silly? Well, certain physical conditions (mental illnesses, for example) have been shown (again, not "proven" but shown) to actually alter the structure of the brain. Look what years of schizophrenia do to the size of the brain's ventricles, for example. And no, I'm not equating homosexuality with mental illness, I'm just providing an example about how something physical can change brain structure.

That being said, I'm bisexual. I believe part of my sexuality is due to genetics (I have a hormone imbalance) and partly due to environment (influences of friends, family, media, societal pressures, etc.).

To say sexuality, a ridiculously complicated and powerful force of our bodies, is purely genetic OR purely due to environmental influences is attempting to make this issue simplistic and black and white. Sexuality is all about a gray area, and so are the causes behind it.
(more)
+1 raves
misterz June 21, 2008 22:46:45

Answered: Yes
Agree!
+1 raves
runningintriangles June 18, 2008 04:10:59

Answered: Yes
Finally, proof that the crazies can't dispute!
+1 raves
shirkie... to running... June 29, 2008 01:07:25

Too bad most scientists disagree with the "proof" that people are born gay. Even my textbooks from grad school cite studies indicating sexuality is due to both genetics and environmental influences.

Sexuality is neither black nor white, and neither are the causes behind it.
+1 raves
running... to shirkie... June 29, 2008 16:50:27

I agree, but I strongly believe that no one would choose to be part of a group so strongly discriminated against. I know a number of homosexual individuals that, were they given the choice, they would have chosen to be straight, because no likes to be called a fag or a dyke while walking down the street.
+1 raves
shirkie... to running... June 29, 2008 17:05:00

Hey, I'm bi. I know I didn't "choose" it, but I also wasn't "born that way." I agree with science and believe that I, like all other GLBT individuals, am the way I am because of genetics and environmental influences.
+1 raves
running... to shirkie... June 30, 2008 03:21:41

Perhaps for you, but for most of the GLBT people I know, myself included. The enviroment I grew up in did nothing to support my own sexuality. I was taught any form of homosexuality was not wrong, but not allowed for me (my mum was a bit hypocritical then... still is). My point is, despite the slightly anti-gay enviroment I grew up in, I still swing more towards the gayer side of things. I really don't think enviroment effects everyone. For most people, the stronger side of things is genetic. Enviromental influences hardly shape a person's sexuality, in most situations I've heard of (friends, myself, etc).
shirkie... to running... July 01, 2008 01:21:50

Have you read the new study by the same guy that did this study that indicates sexuality in men is determined only 35% by genetics and sexuality in women is determined only 18% by genetics?

http://sodahead.com/question/...

It's interesting stuff... REALLY puts a new twist on the nature/nurture debate.
+1 raves
running... to shirkie... July 01, 2008 12:58:04

I have actually read into this study, but I still believe that a if a person were actually that strongly influenced by their enviroment, many people who identify as homosexual or otherwise, would end up different. I can't tell you the number of individuals I've met that had both family and friends before coming out that strongly disapproved of the lifestyle, yet they still ended up gay. With enough people telling you "you should be straight," and yet one still doesn't end up that way, I'm still saying it's more born into someone than something you grow into.
+1 raves
shirkie... to running... July 02, 2008 00:21:11

I can kind of understand that, I'm just not one to disagree with results of a scientific study, being in the science field myself (I was involved in a 30-years and running schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depression, other psychotic and nonpsychotic disorders study at the University of Illinois at Chicago)... So I know how rigorous the requirements are for a study to a) get funding and b) get published. It literally takes YEARS for some studies to get published because you have to submit, wait for a response, rewrite the article, wait for a response, sometimes revise again, and THEN it MIGHT be published. Journals are strict! So I have a tendency to believe this study would be accurate.

That being said, I'm seriously puzzling out how my sexuality came about since I can only attribute genetic influences as being "responsible" for 18% of my sexuality. I come from a Christian family (16% is due to family environment), and I'm not sure what kind of other environmental factors (64%) could have shaped me into a bisexual individual. VERY good food for thought.
+1 raves
shirkie... to running... June 29, 2008 01:10:04

Another thing: would you really WANT science to, say, discover a gene responsible for homosexuality? I guarantee if that ever happens, people will start looking for it via amniocentesis and aborting babies with that gene, just as they do with babies who would have Down Syndrome. There are absolutely sick, homophobic individuals out there who would rather abort a baby who could possibly turn out gay than have that child and have to face their own prejudices.
+1 raves
running... to shirkie... June 29, 2008 16:53:30

It's not so much a specific gene that they've narrowed it down to, more so brain development in the fetal stage, and how it continues to develope after birth.
+1 raves
shirkie... to running... June 29, 2008 17:07:35

Ok... Well, you're saying they supposedly can detect it "in the fetal stage" due to "brain development"? Couldn't that then be something an ultrasound would detect? Again, I bet you a million bucks sick bastards would use medical technology-- ultrasound, amnio, whatever-- to detect that in their unborn baby and if found, abort it.

Women have "the right to choose" to abort their children, for whatever reason during much of pregnancy, so unless there was some kind of law putting a clause in "... unless you want to do it because the baby might be gay," women could definitely choose to abort a gay baby. And that's just disgustingly wrong.
+1 raves
running... to shirkie... June 30, 2008 03:11:34

I'm not saying it's something you can detect in the fetal stage, but the development of the brain has already begun then. In the fetal stage, a male and female brain have no difference because they haven't developed enough. I'm simply saying brain development is pre-determined before birth. A "homosexual" brain would look no different from a heterosexual brain in the fetal stage.
+1 raves
shirkie... to running... June 30, 2008 03:13:51

Thank goodness!!! I'm against abortions altogether, but especially if you abort because you don't like what your baby's going to be.
+1 raves
running... to shirkie... June 30, 2008 03:23:07

I think I'd have to agree with you, I mean, I couldn't abort. I still believe it's a woman's choice, but it wouldn't be one for me.
+1 raves
rafferty June 18, 2008 00:10:24 (edited)

Answered: Yes
moderated...
+2 raves
kmay June 17, 2008 23:39:02

Answered: No
One opinion - we need more info like this....

Top 10 Pros and Cons on the Born Gay Debate
"Is sexual orientation determined at birth?"
http://www.borngayprocon.org/...
Karl to kmay June 18, 2008 00:16:59

The list on the website you cited provides no evidence published later than 2006. The study I refer to is 2008. Your data is out of date and has been disproved by more recent results. If you can cite me a scientific study published in 2008 that proves conclusively that gayness is NOT from birth I will be prepared to believe it but I have not yet seen anything of that sort.
+1 raves
kmay to Karl June 19, 2008 16:12:07

It's one mans opinion based on limited observations.

How does he explain people who are "BI"
+1 raves
shirkie... to kmay June 29, 2008 01:05:57

I'm bi. I maintain my sexuality (as well as the sexuality of everyone else) is partly due to genetics and partly to environmental influences.

I have a hormone imbalance (genetics) and I have experienced environmental influences from family, friends, the media, and society that have contributed to my sexuality.
+1 raves
xcassieeex June 17, 2008 23:31:11 (edited)

Answered: Yes
i dont see why it matters in the end.
theres nothing wrong with gays, whether theyre born that way or not. but if it helps people to have come to this conclusion, then good for them.