The science of becoming gay

[Motorboat Cruiser]

I saw this post on another board and thought it was brilliantly written and quite entertaining. It is the journey of one man in an attempt to "become gay" purely for the purposes of science.

I don't want to repost so here is a link if you are interested.

[innerSpaceman]

Heheh, a good read. Of particular amazement to myself was the fact that I had never thought of using "has any one of you ever tried and succeeded in becoming gay" to those who would claim that homosexuality is a choice. That's such a good one!

Of course, I've had the good fortune to have never so much as met anyone with the neanderthal brain that honestly believes homosexuality to be a choice. But, er, if I ever do meet one, I'm so gonna use the gay experiment question! It's awesome.




(btw, can you choose to become a Christian fundamentalist?)

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Heheh, a good read. Of particular amazement to myself was the fact that I had never thought of using "has any one of you ever tried and succeeded in becoming gay" to those who would claim that homosexuality is a choice. That's such a good one!

Likewise, I felt a bit foolish for not thinking of it myself.

Of course, I've had the good fortune to have never so much as met anyone with the neanderthal brain that honestly believes homosexuality to be a choice.

That is good fortune! Unfortunately, I haven't been as lucky. There are more out there than one would think.

[innerSpaceman]

Let's go find a few. I'll make the financial investment of a $1,000 wager that no fundie can go gay faster and more authentically than I can go straight.


(ok, maybe that's not a fair bet ... as I've been, well, technically bisexual ...... we'll use my boyfriend for the bet!)

[alphabassettgrrl]

I have been informed that for some folks, the fallacy of choosing gayness is important to them. They need the veneer of control.

Personally, you like who you like. If redheads turn your head, they always will. You might learn to like brunettes, but that redhead will always stand out from the crowd and you'll look at her first.

It was an interesting read, though, and I thank you.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

(btw, can you choose to become a Christian fundamentalist?)

Raises hand. I did twice. Once as a youth, was hurt by those who professed the same faith and abandoned it, then again as a young adult.

Alpha, I disagree with you analogy. I never liked redheads until I saw Nicole Kidman. Now they are my favorite by far. Tastes change.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Hmm, I don't believe homosexuality is a "choice", but I do believe it's as much a factor of environment as it is of genetics. Someone who grew up in a well adjusted environment with no significant childhood trauma is likely to not exhibit signs of depression and cannot very well say, "I'm going to choose to become a manic depressive today." However, if that same person had, say, seem a parent die in fron of them at a young age, they are far more likely to exhibit such behavior. And I don't think I'd get much argument by saying that if you could theoretically take a large sampling of different people and run their lives through those two opposite situations, you'd get a wide range of results. Some people would suffer from depression whether they suffered early trauma or not. Some people would come through unscathed by such things. But (this is the less clear-cut assumption) I'd bet that most people would be more prone to depression having suffered said trauma than having not (again, assuming the impossible experiment where an identical person lives through both versions of childhood).

[It's here in the discussion that I must put my disclaimer that I in no way liken being gay to "suffering from childhood trauma". It's simply an extreme, and well accepted, example that our total behavioral profile is most likely a product of the combination of nature and nurture]

So while I agree that the idea of someone consciously choosing to become gay is ludicrous, that hardly settles the debate of nature vs. nurture, a debate I firmly believe is unsettlable. At most, I think we'll eventually manage to prove that one can have a predisposition towards being homosexual, with the actual outcome determined in varying degrees from individual to individual by environment, with the rare exception being people who would turn out gay no matter the environment.

And while I applaud any research that brigns us closer to a better understanding of what makes us tick as humans, it worries me when the gay community hangs their hat on the notion that getting everyone to accept that being gay is hardwired is the key to gaining the equality they seek. Discussions of choice, nature, nurture, exposure to homsexual imagery, etc. all seem like easily disputed red herrings to me, because neither extreme is 100% correct. Perhaps I'm wrong, but from my vantage point, the cry should be, "Who cares how I became who I am, I should be free to be who I am no matter what."

$.02

[Ghoulish Delight]

Furthermore:

* I DO believe that, as a result of evolution, heterosexuality is the predominant predisposition. That only makes sense.

* All things being equal, I think there would be more people who become homosexual (or at least bisexual). However, since most children are exposed mostly to a heterosexual world growing up (both the natural fact that follows from the bullet above that most people a child comes in contact with are heterosexual, and the unfortunate unatural prejudice against homosexuality), it's those that are most predisposed to homosexuality who end up having that trait expressed in adulthood. Thus, I see no contradiction between my theories and the annecdotal statement often heard, "Most if not all the gay people I know say they've always known they were gay." Those in the middle, who would require some external influence to go either way, are far more likely to be influenced towards heterosexuality.

[alphabassettgrrl]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Perhaps I'm wrong, but from my vantage point, the cry should be, "Who cares how I became who I am, I should be free to be who I am no matter what."

I would definitely agree with you there. I don't think the nature/nurture debate is winnable, and in the end doesn't matter so much. I think one obstacle is that some people refuse to believe gay people are who they are. I think they have this idea that gay folks are just being rebellious, that they don't actually mean they are attracted to members of their own sex.

From what I've been able to understand, anyway. I do know that in my life, this attraction will not go away, nor would I choose it to go. This is part of me, and I like me, so I'll keep it all.

And I do like redheads. I think the analogy still holds- you added an appreciation of redheads. Somebody attractive will always be so, though we can learn to appreciate others in addition to our primary inclinations.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

...it worries me when the gay community hangs their hat on the notion that getting everyone to accept that being gay is hardwired is the key to gaining the equality they seek. Discussions of choice, nature, nurture, exposure to homsexual imagery, etc. all seem like easily disputed red herrings to me ...

Yes, in a way ... we let the Fundies set the tone of the discussion, by addressing too many of our arguments for full equality to counter the issues raised by Them.


I don't see how it could the otherwise, tho. No one else is arguing about it anymore, and so the Fundie-tailored responses are the only responses.