Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gracious rebel:

quote:

---

Originally posted by A.Pilgrim:
I've been following this thread in the hope of finding out what the current scientific evidence is on the subject of the origin of a homosexual orientation (inborn or acquired)and I was pleased to find this article in a link from a link from a link in a previous post, which might make a contribution to the debate.


Angus

---

Isn't that what this thread is all about? I have only given it a cursory reading though, so I may have missed something.

---

Ah yes. Whoops! Sorry, I missed it.

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
As the parent of a much loved gay son, I can assure you he has always been gay - no question of choice. Looking back, I can trace his journey from the age of seven or eight and was well aware of his orientation before he came out. He had years of lonliness before he gave in - and it is so good to see him happy and fulfilled. I have no interest in what he and his partner get up to in bed any more than I have any interest in what my heterosexual children get up to. The churches' attitude to homosexuality disgusts me: one cannot help but think people who take such a close and unnecessary interest in homosexual sexual activity must have doubts about their own sexuality.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Solly, one of the great blessings in my life is a mother who has an attitude like yours. Would that every gay - heck, every human - had such loving parents!

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
As the parent of a much loved gay son, I can assure you he has always been gay - no question of choice. Looking back, I can trace his journey from the age of seven or eight and was well aware of his orientation before he came out. He had years of lonliness before he gave in - and it is so good to see him happy and fulfilled. I have no interest in what he and his partner get up to in bed any more than I have any interest in what my heterosexual children get up to. The churches' attitude to homosexuality disgusts me: one cannot help but think people who take such a close and unnecessary interest in homosexual sexual activity must have doubts about their own sexuality.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
As the parent of a much loved gay son, I can assure you he has always been gay - no question of choice. Looking back, I can trace his journey from the age of seven or eight and was well aware of his orientation before he came out. He had years of lonliness before he gave in - and it is so good to see him happy and fulfilled. I have no interest in what he and his partner get up to in bed any more than I have any interest in what my heterosexual children get up to. The churches' attitude to homosexuality disgusts me: one cannot help but think people who take such a close and unnecessary interest in homosexual sexual activity must have doubts about their own sexuality.

---

I couldn't agree more. My sons are both straight but when they were 13ish their Dad and I sat them down and made it very clear that if they were gay we would have no problems whatever.

I agree that those who worry about what others do in bed must have some problems going on. These days their excuse can not be ignorance - as it may have been in the past.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:
I couldn't agree more. My sons are both straight but when they were 13ish their Dad and I sat them down and made it very clear that if they were gay we would have no problems whatever.

I agree that those who worry about what others do in bed must have some problems going on. These days their excuse can not be ignorance - as it may have been in the past.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:
Thank you - I got a lovely new camera in July

I would imagine people who hate the thought of having gay children may have a variety of problems and fears. Loss of control? Loss of their 'picture' of how their son/daughter would turn out? Fear that they may be gay themselves? Fear that their world-view is threatened? (Some people think if they change their mind on one aspect the whole 'house of cards' will come tumbling down). The idea that grandchildren may be off the agenda? Fears that their child will be treated badly? Problems with the 'neighbours' disapproving?

I'm not sure as I have had none of these.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

I'm not sure why this is a relevant distinction. I'm also not sure that "biological" and "environmental" are mutually exclusive categories. For instance, birthmarks and freckles have environmental (i.e. non-genetic) causes, but are also biological in nature.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

I'm not sure why this is a relevant distinction. I'm also not sure that "biological" and "environmental" are mutually exclusive categories. For instance, birthmarks and freckles have environmental (i.e. non-genetic) causes, but are also biological in nature.

---

In this context biological would be something intrinsically genetic whereas environmental would be a developmental production of a trait.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soror Magna:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

I'm not sure why this is a relevant distinction. I'm also not sure that "biological" and "environmental" are mutually exclusive categories. For instance, birthmarks and freckles have environmental (i.e. non-genetic) causes, but are also biological in nature.

---

In this context biological would be something intrinsically genetic whereas environmental would be a developmental production of a trait.

---

What about cancer? It's intrinsically genetic, and it's acquired, sometimes by interaction with the environment.

"Genetic", "biological" and "environmental" need to be properly defined before one even tries to distinguish their effects. The only reason to try to distinguish them in this context is if someone is trying to claim that a particular environment made someone gay or lesbian, but a different environment wouldn't have. Good luck with that.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soror Magna:
Twin studies do have limitations. Just for starters, twins are not representative of the general population by the mere fact of being twins. Twins are more likely to be left-handed. Rates of multiple births vary greatly among ethnic groups. The number of twin births in some countries has increased dramatically with the use of fertility drugs and in-vitro fertilization.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

I'm not sure why this is a relevant distinction. I'm also not sure that "biological" and "environmental" are mutually exclusive categories. For instance, birthmarks and freckles have environmental (i.e. non-genetic) causes, but are also biological in nature.

---

In this context biological would be something intrinsically genetic whereas environmental would be a developmental production of a trait.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

I'm not sure why this is a relevant distinction. I'm also not sure that "biological" and "environmental" are mutually exclusive categories. For instance, birthmarks and freckles have environmental (i.e. non-genetic) causes, but are also biological in nature.

---

In this context biological would be something intrinsically genetic whereas environmental would be a developmental production of a trait.

---

Still not seeing the relevance of the distinction or why it's relevant to how Solly relates to his son.

Let's run a little gedankenexperiment for a moment, and hypothesize that there are two different types of homosexuals: genetic gays (who have a gay gene, or complex of gay genes) and environmental gays (who, I don't know, ingested a very specific ratio of lysine-to-arginine on the day their weight reached exactly 10.5 kg, irreversibly gayifying them). Would there be any reason to treat one of these groups different than the other? Is there any meaningful distinction between "born gay" and "gay from ten months onward"?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
ii) All the best research indicates that neither of these two scenarios is the reality

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
ii) All the best research indicates that neither of these two scenarios is the reality

---

I would point out that your argument seemed to have been developing this way: a genetic or an environmental (something intrinsic or something developmental) it may just be the way you have phrased it though...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by mdijon:
I don't think it does. There's lots of evidence out there, some of it good, some of it bad, but there isn't a single consistent and large body of evidence pointing in any particular direction. To say that means all the evidence points to a mixture is a bit like asking 100 people where Trumpton is, getting a mix of answers, and concluding that Trumpton is everywhere simultaneously.

One might say that it is common sense to regard complex human behaviours as likely to derive from both genes and environmental causes, but that's largely an argument from a combination of ignorance and common sense.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
The view in psychoanalysis used to be that various environmental hurdles in childhood prevented the gay man from going through the Oedipal conflict, so that he remains fixated in an identification with mother, and had not identified with his father, and a heterosexual role. (There are other versions of this).

This has been often summarized in popular thinking as having a weak father and an over-powerful/seductive mother, but it's more complicated than that.

However, I think it's considered to be bollocks by most people today in the therapy world, although there are still some analysts who have a related view to this.

Another way of looking at this, was that psychoanalysis was basically defending a patriarchal view of sexuality and gender, and in the process, pathologizing homosexuality.

Many battles have been fought over this, mostly in the direction of depathologizing.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Peter Ould

Well, yes, plus the obvious point that lots of people have absent fathers! And lots of them are not gay. I think it was a case of post-rationalization by the psychoanalytic profession; I mean that they refused to look at their own assumptions, and they actually followed very illogical lines of thought. Probably, they wanted/needed to pathologize gays, (as a kind of unconscious defence of patriarchal norms), and then found a theoretical way of doing it. Does this remind you of anybody?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
Bailey

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Peter Ould

Well, yes, plus the obvious point that lots of people have absent fathers! And lots of them are not gay. I think it was a case of post-rationalization by the psychoanalytic profession; I mean that they refused to look at their own assumptions, and they actually followed very illogical lines of thought. Probably, they wanted/needed to pathologize gays, (as a kind of unconscious defence of patriarchal norms), and then found a theoretical way of doing it. Does this remind you of anybody?

---

You miss the point with your straw man. The whole point of research like this is that it *cannot* tell you what the single cause of homosexuality is. Rather, it can indicate certain things like an absent father makes you twice as likely to self-identify as homosexual (I don't know if this figure is true - I'm just creating an example). If the base probability of being homosexual is 1%, all this tells you is that those men with absent fathers still only have a 2% chance, but it's still double the rate for everyone else.

You then have to do qualitative research to answer the "why" question. It could be that the lack of a father feminises the gay man. It could be that the boy who grows up with "gay" characteristics (whatever those are) alienates his father who decides not to hang around with this "poofy" lad! It could be that absent fathers are not themselves a causal issue but are correlated with something that is.

There is a large body of psychological research data looking at parental relationships and to disregard the bits you don't like because they don't fit your paradigm is a dangerous path to take in the name of objectivity.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
Bailey

---

I know that name, but not with positive conitations...

---

Are you not into Irish cream?


--------------------
Peter Ould
www.peter-ould.net

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:
Bailey

---

I know that name, but not with positive conitations...

---

Are you not into Irish cream?

---

quote:

---

And if we could somehow discover the combination of things that "makes" someone gay? What then? If there is a genetic element, are anti-gay people going to request that genetic screening be put in place to test for this? And if a certain combination of events is seen as a trigger, so what? The only reason for knowing this would be if you wanted to provide therapy to "cure" this "flaw".

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
... Let me approach this in a different way. I am an introvert. That is undeniable. Do I care if this is due to genetics or environmental factors? Not one iota. Because being an introvert is not a "flaw". I don't think that being extrovert would be a better thing for me and I will challenge anyone who tries to give that impression. I will certainly have no time for anyone who suggests that I can be "cured" of my introvert nature, by genetic manipulation or by therapy to reverse what has caused this in me.

What I need, as an introvert, is to know who I am and to be who I am and not try to be something I am not. Nor should I let other people try and force me to be something I am not. I am an introvert. I have to learn how to work within the parameters/limitations of this aspect of my personality. In being an introvert, I am not better nor worse than an extrovert. ...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soror Magna:
I thing the reason some people are obsessed with the so-called "causes" of homosexuality is simply that they are freaked out fearful that they or someone they care about will be turned gay.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:


What I need, as an introvert, is to know who I am and to be who I am and not try to be something I am not. Nor should I let other people try and force me to be something I am not.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
As the parent of a much loved gay son, I can assure you he has always been gay - no question of choice. Looking back, I can trace his journey from the age of seven or eight and was well aware of his orientation before he came out. He had years of lonliness before he gave in - and it is so good to see him happy and fulfilled. I have no interest in what he and his partner get up to in bed any more than I have any interest in what my heterosexual children get up to. The churches' attitude to homosexuality disgusts me: one cannot help but think people who take such a close and unnecessary interest in homosexual sexual activity must have doubts about their own sexuality.

---

I don't want to in any way discount your son's experience, self-identity and your relationship with him, but is it worth us asking the question *how* do you know he was always gay? Yes, you could see things in from age 7/8 and this is a very common observation, but strictly all that means is that from that age he was evidencing behaviours and preferences associated with a homosexual orientation. However, that 7/8+ experience doesn't tell us *why* he had those behaviours then (and now). The issue of causality cannot be argued from such a basis. His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:
I had not the faintest idea or view about sex at that age - It would have been on the same plane as other adult, 'not for me' stuff, like the realtive merits of different brands of Malt Whiskey - ie, 'I just don't know what you are talking about'.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:

quote:

---

So why does my arousal at the sight/thought of men, but my lack of arousal at the sight/thought of women, not count as an 'experience'? ...

---

Ermm, it does count as an experience - albeit one that doesn't tell you very much, until tested in practice.

---

What on earth do you mean, it doesn't tell you very much? ...

In your wild youth, did you go up to girls and say "hey baby, I don't find you nearly as attractive as that other chick over there on the other side of the room, but I've decided YOU'RE the one I want to take home tonight as an interesting experiment"?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:
I had not the faintest idea or view about sex at that age - It would have been on the same plane as other adult, 'not for me' stuff, like the realtive merits of different brands of Malt Whiskey - ie, 'I just don't know what you are talking about'.

---

I imagine, in the same way that personality profiling works, there are characteristics that would make someone consider that the person they were profiling might turn out a certain way, even if the individual themselves is not aware that they may turn out to be a psychopath/arsonist/etc./etc./...

Between parents and children that link is going to be much greater (regardless of how the parent may then feel about what they perceive, try and suppress their perceptions, they perceive it).

I'm not saying that it is acurate and that what is perceived will become true, but people can exhibit behaviour that is perceived as something which may then be true...

Am I making sense?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:
Ermm, yes! Though not in so many words, of course. In fact, I was recommending to a son of a friend of mine the other day that he 'starts with the ugly ones' - easier to bed, so good experience ahead of having a proper relationship, and they'll be grateful, to boot - Everyone's a winner (I also found that I lasted longer with those I wasn't too attracted to - which is a bonus, if sort-of annoying at the same time!).

But apart from other comments already made about the distance between expectations and reality, my use of a porno mag as a teenager only provided me with the very vaguest of ideas about the reality of having an actual person to grapple with - in fact, the first time that a girl came on to me, I ran away!

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:
Ermm, yes! Though not in so many words, of course. In fact, I was recommending to a son of a friend of mine the other day that he 'starts with the ugly ones' - easier to bed, so good experience ahead of having a proper relationship, and they'll be grateful, to boot - Everyone's a winner (I also found that I lasted longer with those I wasn't too attracted to - which is a bonus, if sort-of annoying at the same time!).

But apart from other comments already made about the distance between expectations and reality, my use of a porno mag as a teenager only provided me with the very vaguest of ideas about the reality of having an actual person to grapple with - in fact, the first time that a girl came on to me, I ran away!

---

Apart from the obvious moral flaws in your statements, whilst experiementation is a natural part of learning I would not be so proud (?) of giving such advice as you have to people... if your advice had been to have their first experience with someone they had grown to care about then it would be different I guess, but your advice is advocating the use of people as mere objects for experiementation and self-gratification IMHO, not exactly the sort of society that we wish to create surely...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:
I had not the faintest idea or view about sex at that age - It would have been on the same plane as other adult, 'not for me' stuff, like the realtive merits of different brands of Malt Whiskey - ie, 'I just don't know what you are talking about'.

---

I imagine, in the same way that personality profiling works, there are characteristics that would make someone consider that the person they were profiling might turn out a certain way, even if the individual themselves is not aware that they may turn out to be a psychopath/arsonist/etc./etc./...

Between parents and children that link is going to be much greater (regardless of how the parent may then feel about what they perceive, try and suppress their perceptions, they perceive it).

I'm not saying that it is acurate and that what is perceived will become true, but people can exhibit behaviour that is perceived as something which may then be true...

Am I making sense?

---

Yes, sort of .. although we are close to the same waters here as the person who comes back from a psychic to report on how they knew about their uncle Bob - the correct stuff is remembered and held up later as evidence, and a whole heap of incorrect stuff is simply forgotten.

---

Very true, hence why I couched my statement with the phrases that I did.

The characteristics perceived were indicative of a state that may come about, whatever miriad of influences that then meant that it became reality would also have an influence (people camp as Christmas who turn out to be straight in comparison to the rather less camp (but still camp) peep who turns out gay) the characteristics that a person exhibits cannot be divorced entirely from their environmental situation - maybe the entire family is camp as christmas, it is just their natural family trait...

It all boils down to me saying, I am quite willing to believe a parent (who si best placed to recognise and interpret their child) when they say that they have an inkling about such and such... my sisters did the same with me ('Finally' was the response when I came out!)

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:
I had not the faintest idea or view about sex at that age - It would have been on the same plane as other adult, 'not for me' stuff, like the realtive merits of different brands of Malt Whiskey - ie, 'I just don't know what you are talking about'.

---

I imagine, in the same way that personality profiling works, there are characteristics that would make someone consider that the person they were profiling might turn out a certain way, even if the individual themselves is not aware that they may turn out to be a psychopath/arsonist/etc./etc./...

Between parents and children that link is going to be much greater (regardless of how the parent may then feel about what they perceive, try and suppress their perceptions, they perceive it).

I'm not saying that it is acurate and that what is perceived will become true, but people can exhibit behaviour that is perceived as something which may then be true...

Am I making sense?

---

Yes, sort of .. although we are close to the same waters here as the person who comes back from a psychic to report on how they knew about their uncle Bob - the correct stuff is remembered and held up later as evidence, and a whole heap of incorrect stuff is simply forgotten.

---

Very true, hence why I couched my statement with the phrases that I did.

The characteristics perceived were indicative of a state that may come about, whatever miriad of influences that then meant that it became reality would also have an influence (people camp as Christmas who turn out to be straight in comparison to the rather less camp (but still camp) peep who turns out gay) the characteristics that a person exhibits cannot be divorced entirely from their environmental situation - maybe the entire family is camp as christmas, it is just their natural family trait...

It all boils down to me saying, I am quite willing to believe a parent (who si best placed to recognise and interpret their child) when they say that they have an inkling about such and such... my sisters did the same with me ('Finally' was the response when I came out!)

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:
Ermm, yes! Though not in so many words, of course. In fact, I was recommending to a son of a friend of mine the other day that he 'starts with the ugly ones' - easier to bed, so good experience ahead of having a proper relationship, and they'll be grateful, to boot - Everyone's a winner (I also found that I lasted longer with those I wasn't too attracted to - which is a bonus, if sort-of annoying at the same time!).

But apart from other comments already made about the distance between expectations and reality, my use of a porno mag as a teenager only provided me with the very vaguest of ideas about the reality of having an actual person to grapple with - in fact, the first time that a girl came on to me, I ran away!

---

Apart from the obvious moral flaws in your statements, whilst experiementation is a natural part of learning I would not be so proud (?) of giving such advice as you have to people... if your advice had been to have their first experience with someone they had grown to care about then it would be different I guess, but your advice is advocating the use of people as mere objects for experiementation and self-gratification IMHO, not exactly the sort of society that we wish to create surely...

---

No, you're right, it's appalling on a moral level, but it just happened to be the only way that I could find of losing my shyness with girls I was really attracted to.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by glockenspiel:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Ould:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solly:
As the parent of a much loved gay son, I can assure you he has always been gay - no question of choice. Looking back, I can trace his journey from the age of seven or eight and was well aware of his orientation before he came out. He had years of lonliness before he gave in - and it is so good to see him happy and fulfilled. I have no interest in what he and his partner get up to in bed any more than I have any interest in what my heterosexual children get up to. The churches' attitude to homosexuality disgusts me: one cannot help but think people who take such a close and unnecessary interest in homosexual sexual activity must have doubts about their own sexuality.

---

I don't want to in any way discount your son's experience, self-identity and your relationship with him, but is it worth us asking the question *how* do you know he was always gay? Yes, you could see things in from age 7/8 and this is a very common observation, but strictly all that means is that from that age he was evidencing behaviours and preferences associated with a homosexual orientation. However, that 7/8+ experience doesn't tell us *why* he had those behaviours then (and now). The issue of causality cannot be argued from such a basis. His homosexuality could by biologically based but it might also be environmentally based at an earlier point then the 7/8 years old milestone you refer to (or a mix of biology / environment).

---

Could someone enlighten me as to what those associated behaviours would be, in the case of a 7 or 8 year old ... I had not the faintest idea or view about sex at that age - It would have been on the same plane as other adult, 'not for me' stuff, like the realtive merits of different brands of Malt Whiskey - ie, 'I just don't know what you are talking about'.

---