Determinates of Sexuality

[NovaKart]

I don't think either of you understood the above posts.

 

[kiwitt]

Well the personal anecdote above certainly implied it was "a choice". The person in question had a bad experience with some men and then decided to try women and liked it better. That is certainly not a "biologically driven" decision. i.e. genes.

Had she had a good experience with a man who connected to her better, she may not have tried women. Relationships are based on making a connection to the right person, be that a man or a woman.

I'd say 99% of what a person chooses to do in life is down to (excuse the pun), the choices he or she makes and not what they started of with when they were born.

 

[NovaKart]

That has to do with people who are bisexual, not completely homo or heterosexual.

 

[LucyDuke]

Well the personal anecdote above certainly implied it was "a choice". The person in question had a bad experience with some men and then decided to try women and liked it better. That is certainly not a "biologically driven" decision. i.e. genes.

Had she had a good experience with a man who connected to her better, she may not have tried women. Relationships are based on making a connection to the right person, be that a man or a woman.

No, that's not what happened at all, and that conclusion doesn't follow from that interpretation anyway.

 

[kiwitt]

No, that's not what happened at all, and that conclusion doesn't follow from that interpretation anyway.

... well she did say ...

... and I didn't like them. I didn't like them and it wasn't pleasurable at all.

... sounds like emotions to me.

We're talking about our "desires" are we not, which are emotions, and as far as I know emotions are controlled by the mind. How you act on these emotions is the choices you make. i.e. your mind is doing that.

The argument here is that sexuality is biologically determined and not a choice a person makes. - "Determinates of Sexuality" - Why I am probably strongly opposed to the suggestion it is "gene-based", is people can make choices how to live and accept a lifestyle they feel comfortable with. There are countless examples of people overcoming what their "genes" have given them.

Don't get me wrong, how a person chooses to live, is a freedom I would fight for, as I value freedom above all else, just don't tell me they are doing it because of their "genes", people have shown to be stronger.

 

[Narz]

... well she did say ... ... sounds like emotions to me.

I'm not sure I'd call sexual pleasure an emotion at least not one I've had much success controlling.

Maybe Lucy's friend wanted to be straight & probably was subjected to thousands of hours of heterosexual mass-media portraying hetero relationships in a positive light (or at least normalizing them) so she felt emotionally driven to give them a try but then realized her irrepressible sexual orientation was towards women. Just my 3rd hand interpretation.

 

[civ_king]

... well she did say ... ... sounds like emotions to me.

We're talking about our "desires" are we not, which are emotions, and as far as I know emotions are controlled by the mind. How you act on these emotions is the choices you make. i.e. your mind is doing that.

The argument here is that sexuality is biologically determined and not a choice a person makes. - "Determinates of Sexuality" - Why I am probably strongly opposed to the suggestion it is "gene-based", is people can make choices how to live and accept a lifestyle they feel comfortable with. There are countless examples of people overcoming what their "genes" have given them.

Don't get me wrong, how a person chooses to live, is a freedom I would fight for, as I value freedom above all else, just don't tell me they are doing it because of their "genes", people have shown to be stronger.

I could possibly have sex with a woman, but I sincerely doubt I would find it pleasurable because I'm gay. I don't hate women and I could probably have a really great friendship with one, but that doesn't change the fact that I find the concept of me engaging in intercourse with a woman repugnant.

I am planning on living celibately BTW.

 

[Ayatollah So]

My difficulty comes in that I am a liberal / progressive supporter of gay rights and other supporters of gay rights generally reject the notion that sexuality is anything but a biological mandate. To complicate matters, many people who oppose equality for homosexuals seem to subscribe to the notion that sexuality is determined, at least in part, by one’s environment and choices.
[...]
Is it easier to push for and advance gay rights if sexuality is viewed as a biological attribute?

Oh, for goodness sake! Take Matlock's advice:
stick with the truth - it's easier to remember.

You're right to be skeptical of bio-determinism. But it doesn't matter so much whether you're right or wrong, you've still got to call it as you see it. Don't start engaging in a coverup. It's a bad idea, even if you never get caught. Human rights have to be defended for matters of choice, or for environmentally determined traits, just as much as biologically determined ones.

Why the hell should it matter where "the gay" comes from, consenting adults still have the right to privacy in their bedrooms. The world needs to grow up.

 

[Dreadnought]

Oh, for goodness sake! Take Matlock's advice:
stick with the truth - it's easier to remember.

You're right to be skeptical of bio-determinism. But it doesn't matter so much whether you're right or wrong, you've still got to call it as you see it. Don't start engaging in a coverup. It's a bad idea, even if you never get caught. Human rights have to be defended for matters of choice, or for environmentally determined traits, just as much as biologically determined ones.

Why the hell should it matter where "the gay" comes from, consenting adults still have the right to privacy in their bedrooms. The world needs to grow up.

Freedom of choice is probably one of the worst freedoms, unless the entire population consists of rational, wise individuals. Giving people a choice means that some people will go to either end of the spectrum just because they are given an opportunity to, rather than for notable reasons.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

I think everybody can be gay. For instance, if suddenly all women vanished, gay sex would be the way to go. We see this in Afghanistan, where gay sex is used to circumvent the "no sex outside of marriage" dogma, in ancient Greek fathers would "teach" their sons to have sex, prisons have been mentioned as an example of how this actually happens, too. Of course not everyone has gay sex when being in prison, but they also have still woman to at least desire and they are still members of a larger society where it is mainly about having sex with the other sex.

Maybe there are people who are so deeply revolved by having sex with the same gender (and not just by culture), that they wouldn't ever. But then, there are also asexuals, so that is not surprising. The point is - this is rather the exception than the norm IMO to not have the basic capacity to enjoy intimacy with the same gender.

However, as is obvious, hetero is still the way more common and natural way to go. So this is what is being done (fostered by different social and culture phenomenas). But in times of material surplus and where traditional social bounds are not necessary to have a life, sexuality more and more is determined by desire only, so no surprise a more wider perspective of it is again assumed by people.

And saying this, I also agree that the polarity of sexuality is a myth. I don't think of my self as gay, I don't feel aroused when seeing other males or when touching them. But I think if for whatever reasons I focused on being attracted to males and trying this or that out, I could.

Also, by this I don't mean to support the "choice"-explanation. I think one can choose to explore parts of one's sexuality which have not surfaced so far, but at the same time, in other cases those parts will force their way to the surface while others which usually do don't.

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

I think everybody can be gay. For instance, if suddenly all women vanished, gay sex would be the way to go. We see this in Afghanistan, where gay sex is used to circumvent the "no sex outside of marriage" dogma, in ancient Greek fathers would "teach" their sons to have sex, prisons have been mentioned as an example of how this actually happens, too. Of course not everyone has gay sex when being in prison, but they also have still woman to at least desire and they are still members of a larger society where it is mainly about having sex with the other sex.

Maybe there are people who are so deeply revolved by having sex with the same gender (and not just by culture), that they wouldn't ever. But then, there are also asexuals, so that is not surprising. The point is - this is rather the exception than the norm IMO to not have the basic capacity to enjoy intimacy with the same gender.

However, as is obvious, hetero is still the way more common and natural way to go. So this is what is being done (fostered by different social and culture phenomenas). But in times of material surplus and where traditional social bounds are not necessary to have a life, sexuality more and more is determined by desire only, so no surprise a more wider perspective of it is again assumed by people.

And saying this, I also agree that the polarity of sexuality is a myth. I don't think of my self as gay, I don't feel aroused when seeing other males or when touching them. But I think if for whatever reasons I focused on being attracted to males and trying this or that out, I could.

Also, by this I don't mean to support the "choice"-explanation. I think one can choose to explore parts of one's sexuality which have not surfaced so far, but at the same time, in other cases those parts will force their way to the surface while others which usually do don't.

Interesting take. But I couldn't see myself having sex with a man. Ick. And I'm not sure that's cultural conditioning because I do have other attractions that are inappropriate/socially acceptable. A specific example would be Jennifer Garner. She's married, so anything between me and her would be wrong, but I'm still attracted to her. I just wouldn't act on it if I had the opportunity because it would be hurting other people (her husband and children).

Doing a dude, on the other hand, has absolutely no appeal to me. There wouldn't even be temptation.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Your main point seems to be that it feels so natural and strong to you how you don't want to have sex with men that this can not be only because of cultural conditioning.
I partially agree and disagree.

We know that experiences and thoughts our brain has will also alter our metabolism, our biology. Essentially, our mind is just a part of our biology, continuously interacting with it. This mechanism is obviously supposed to make us more adaptable.
We are adaptable to stay alive and pass on our genes. Now what is essential to the later? Sex. So it seems unlikely sexual attraction is not a subject to this interaction.

From this I draw the hypothesis that the biological part of sexuality - hormones, different body functions, which will make a sexual attraction feel ultimately real and natural - is more flexible than we give it credit for.
When you say that you are so uninterested in having gay sex that you can't attribute it to cultural conditioning, I say you partially right, because it is also due to biological conditioning as a consequence of cultural conditioning - and which just as cultural conditioning is reversible, if you wanted to.

Let me quickly add that this goes together with genes and a strong natural tendency to rather dig the other gender and stuff. I am only highlighting my own input.

I of course don't actually know if that is true or just me having a wrong hunch. It makes sense to me at least