Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Just what is the strength of the "born this way" argument?

  1. Top | #1
    New Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Goiânia
    Posts
    48
    Rep Power
    19

    Just what is the strength of the "born this way" argument?

    I was wondering what is the general opinion on the "born this way" argument. How important are biological factors when it comes to homosexuality?

    In my opinion, I think genetics count for 10-15% only, and other enviromental factors for the rest. People who think there is more influence from biology have to consider, in my opinion, what it seems to be the best case against the BTW argument, which is the "My Genes My Do It" by Neil Whitehead, and their online website. He reviewed and continues to review almost all studies on the issue and finds fatal flaws with most of them, and he also presents a good case for social factors such as parenting and other learned behavior.

    He has not received any relevant criticism so far.

  2. Top | #2
    Fair dinkum thinkum bilby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
    Posts
    22,026
    Archived
    10,477
    Total Posts
    32,503
    Rep Power
    85
    Quote Originally Posted by Dekusta View Post
    ...He has not received any relevant criticism so far.
    That cannot possibly be true, and your stating it is good hard evidence that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.


    That said, the whole question is based on a false premise. People are not attracted to genders; they are attracted to individuals. The proportion of completely homosexual or completely heterosexual humans is tiny. Sexuality is a spectrum - and is of no practical importance - either you fancy someone or you don't; and they either fancy you too, or they don't.

    Why does anyone who is not involved in, or wishing to be involved in, any relationship care a jot who is doing what with whom? Discussions of other people's sexuality are rude, uncivilised and unnecessary.

    The causes of people's sexual preferences are irrelevant to their practice. You might as well ask if liking cheese is caused by genes or environment.

  3. Top | #3
    Veteran Member dystopian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Posts
    2,065
    Archived
    2,067
    Total Posts
    4,132
    Rep Power
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    That said, the whole question is based on a false premise. People are not attracted to genders; they are attracted to individuals.
    What if they're attracted to groups? This is some bullshit anti-orgy bias going on here!

  4. Top | #4
    New Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Goiânia
    Posts
    48
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by bilby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dekusta View Post
    ...He has not received any relevant criticism so far.
    That cannot possibly be true, and your stating it is good hard evidence that you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
    But it is true. He has not received any relevant criticism, in the sense that nobody has come to engage his arguments. This is science. We care to discuss about whether sexual attraction to children is a pathology or not, but somehow we can't discuss about what causes a person to feel attracted to their same sex because that is uncivilized. If science shows that homosexuality is caused by some parenting issue, than pro-LGBT people have to stop using the born this way argument. If science shows that it is a pathology, then people will have to swallow that it is a pathology.

    That is what the discussion is about. Calling science uncivilized is the same as calling a tree immoral. It can't truly make any sense.

    Scientists and others who agree that homosexuality has some biological cause have ignored Dr. Whitehead (including APA) and that is uncivilized: state something without considering the arguments against it. Try to appeal to any kind of emotion is useless and possibly ridiculous.

  5. Top | #5
    Veteran Member seyorni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,247
    Archived
    3,176
    Total Posts
    4,423
    Rep Power
    39
    No-one is proposing a gay gene except sensationalistic news media. Most behaviors, drives, &c are multifactoral, nor are identical twins entirely identical.

  6. Top | #6
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,651
    Archived
    3,383
    Total Posts
    7,034
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by seyorni View Post
    No-one is proposing a gay gene except sensationalistic news media. Most behaviors, drives, &c are multifactoral, nor are identical twins entirely identical.
    Are there numerous cases of identical twins having opposite gender identities or sexual preferences? That would be supporting evidence for your claim.

    If the proportion of homosexuality across the globe was equal to the proportion of homosexuality in one of two identical twins, then there is no correlation to genetics. So... what are the statistics telling us?

  7. Top | #7
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,802
    Archived
    4,797
    Total Posts
    8,599
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by seyorni View Post
    No-one is proposing a gay gene except sensationalistic news media. Most behaviors, drives, &c are multifactoral, nor are identical twins entirely identical.
    "Born this way" != "gay gene". Environmental influence does not begin at birth.

  8. Top | #8
    Contributor repoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    6,632
    Archived
    2,280
    Total Posts
    8,912
    Rep Power
    74
    No, environmental influence starts at conception on even sometime 1 or 2 generations earlier if you account for epigenetic switches.

  9. Top | #9
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Oregon's westernmost
    Posts
    11,879
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    30,092
    Rep Power
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Dekusta View Post
    I was wondering what is the general opinion on the "born this way" argument. How important are biological factors when it comes to homosexuality?

    In my opinion, I think genetics count for 10-15% only, and other enviromental factors for the rest. People who think there is more influence from biology have to consider, in my opinion, what it seems to be the best case against the BTW argument, which is the "My Genes My Do It" by Neil Whitehead, and their online website. He reviewed and continues to review almost all studies on the issue and finds fatal flaws with most of them, and he also presents a good case for social factors such as parenting and other learned behavior.

    He has not received any relevant criticism so far.
    When one starts a scientific thread with "in my opinion" one must expect political discourse. Let me suggest a bit of evidence upon which we can rev up a debate. I'm thinking the article I posted has many slaps in the face for Whitehead and for who your claim that a social factor basis best explains the data.

    "Born gay? The psychobiology of human sexual orientation" http://speciosawandira.com/wp-conten...rientation.pdf

    Sexual orientation is fundamental to evolution and shifts from the species-typical pattern of heterosexualitymay represent biological variations.The growth of scientific knowledge concerning the biology ofsexual orientation during the past decade has been considerable.Sexual orientation is characterised by abipolar distribution and is related to fraternal birth order in males.In females, its distribution is morevariable; females being less prone towards exclusive homosexuality.In both sexes homosexuality isstrongly associated with childhood gender nonconformity.Genetic evidence suggests a heritable componentand putative gene loci on the X chromosome.Homosexuality may have evolved to promote same sexaffiliation through a conserved neurodevelopmental mechanism.Recent findings suggest this mechanisminvolves atypical neurohormonal differentiation of the brain.Key areas for future research include theneurobiological basis of preferred sexual targets and correlates of female homosexuality
    The bold suggests if genetic it is very complex. The sentence after suggests to me a throw back to something like imprinting.

    Obviously the main reason for this article is its references. Enjoy.

  10. Top | #10
    Elder Contributor Keith&Co.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Far Western Mass
    Posts
    17,468
    Archived
    24,500
    Total Posts
    41,968
    Rep Power
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Dekusta View Post
    I was wondering what is the general opinion on the "born this way" argument. How important are biological factors when it comes to homosexuality?
    That would depend on what you're trying to accomplish by making the argument, wouldn't it?

    If people are born gay, then it would make no sense for God to send them to Hell for something they can't control. If gay is entirely a choice, then the blame is entirely on the individual for being icky.

    To me, it makes about as much sense as discriminating based on hair color, which has influences of genetic, environmental and choice basis. And whether she's naturally blonde, sun-bleached or a bottle-blonde, it's really none of my business.

    So, to me, the BTW argument is about as strong as 'who gives a shit and why?'

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 292
    Last Post: 03-22-2019, 01:33 AM
  2. Replies: 45
    Last Post: 11-14-2016, 09:44 PM
  3. FAUX Noise; Mixing Equal Portions Of "Stud" & "Bubblehead"
    By Medicine Man in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-13-2016, 08:42 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-24-2015, 04:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •