What makes a person gay?

[Mylo]

Biology and sexual orientation is the subject of research into the role of biology in the development of human sexual orientation. No simple, single cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated. Various studies point to different, even conflicting positions, such as a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences,[1] with biological factors involving a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment,[2] or no genetic influence.[3]

End of debate then I guess? They were the first 3 sentences taken from the link Vararam posted. I think that everyone will agree that there there is no simple or single cause for sexual orientation. What seems to be in contention is the degree to which the various factors contribute towards sexual orientation.

With that said please could we restrict the debate to discussing what determines sexual orientation and not the morality of homosexuality.

But wouldn't that make the debate over?  Now it's just a matter of science rather than opinion.

[redpaw]

But wouldn't that make the debate over?  Now it's just a matter of science rather than opinion.

As of yet there is no conclusive scientific explanation, so you can still discuss any thoughts and theories and explain why you think that way (be it from personal experience or articles that you have read).

[Avan]

Debates are not a matter of 'opinion'. Opinions can be pulled out of thin air, and are by definition purely subjective statements such as "I like pie". Saying something that cannot be proved such as 'there exists an elementary particle that interacts with nothing thus cannot be detected by any means' is NOT an opinion, it is an unsubstantiated claim.

Proper debates are over various hypothesis ('educated guesses' - based on VALID evidence); not opinions (except in very specific contexts, such as debating what flavor pie to get in which certain opinions actually rightly carry weight in the conclusion), and definitely not unsubstantiated claims.

[Rocket T. Coyote]

I have a gay relative. His parents divorced. His Dad was rather distant and his Mom was a dominant influence in his upbringing. She is married to her third husband btw.

Some claim to be gay because it seems like the cool thing to do.

[Avor]

What makes a person gay?

A combonation of biology, society, and idvidual experience.

For those people who say they were "born" gay, I don't believe that. Nobody is born gay.

Then you would be somewhat mistaken, because the the state of a sexual orientation requires biological compenents that developed before birth. With out with out those certain biological predetermination, nothing could develop from the choices and other factors that cause some people to blossom.

My two cents, I think genetics puts the potential there and life experience does the rest. 

Just like that.

[Kael]

Agree with above

[Fenny the Fox]

For those people who say they were "born" gay, I don't believe that. Nobody is born gay. There's no medical test or ultrasound, etc. that can determine if a baby is gay before it is born. 

Nor do we have a test for things like schizophrenia, but we know there is a very large genetic correlation involved. Frankly, we only have genetic testing available like that for a small number of the disorders and conditions that we know are genetically linked.
A good link covering gene testing rather quickly: http://www.caregiver.org/caregiver/jsp/content_node.jsp?nodeid=403


I also point out that if we do go down the path of if sexuality is genetically influenced or now we have to take into mind that most of genetics (past very simple traits and biomechanical pathway disorders) are not that simple. Many genes also rely on other factors to create the seen phenotype - they require certain triggers or accomplices which may be chemical and /or environmental in nature. And many many genetically linked traits and the like are linked to not one gene but several!

Genetics, in reality, is rarely as simple as high school bio class makes it seem. It gets extremely complicated.

So, regardless of having a known and found genetic linkage, it could still be there. And it is highly likely that it results in a specific sexual proclivity ONLY when many conditions [environmental, chemical, etc] are met in a certain way - which is to say, it is likely not purely any one factor.

tl;dr: it is very likely that sexual orientation (straight, gay, bi, whatever) is a result of both nature and nurture - in varying degrees depending on person.

[Blackrose13]

Well from a religious standpoint, I have never read a bible that states "And he/she who loveth another man/woman shall be sent to everlasting torment." Or anything even vaugely like that. And also, while I dont worship god, if he does exist (and I am fairly ceartin he does), and he loves mankind so much, why would he punish someone for finding someone they enjoyed being with. Love is blind. How can it be sinfull to find pleasure in being with another person? As for why people become gay, I really think it is sort of a random factor. You cant tell if a baby will grow up to be gay. You dont bump into a gay guy, or a lesbian, and wake up the next morning a homosexual. I am bi, with slightly more gay leanings, but the reason I feel equal attraction for both genders, is because I was brought up taught that there is nothing wrong with that. My aunt is a firm beleiver that gays are going to hell, but both of my parents are fine with it. I have meet a couple gay people, and a lesbian or two, and there is nothing different about them then about us/you. We learn the same, can do the same things, and are exactly like you, just they like people of the same gender.

[Aakosir]

My last college class actually touched on this a little bit. The book states that religion, culture/society, genetics, nature and nurture all play part in whether or not a person will be homosexual or heterosexual. I agree with that. There are so many different factors to take in to consideration and the fact that you cannot, absolutely cannot, turn a straight person gay or gay person straight, unless they have been giving false information and lying to themselves, but that's different. If a person has been passing themself off as straight, but are not sure with their sexuality then that person never really has been straight. They just have not had the nerve or opportunity to experiment with their sexuality. And it's not so black and white, there are tons of grey areas, which would be bisexual. But I'm getting off topic.

Yes, there are many different factors which will effect a person's orientation. I believe the strongest influences are their own mind, which could also be genetics, and their family. I do not believe religion is such a large factor because I have met many gay Christians and have heard of a few gay Muslims. There is one famous Muslim lady, her name I cannot remember though. Also, I do not think culture is such a large part because I look at what is going on in Africa. Men and women are being murdered for their orientation. But there will also be those who are lying and claiming to be straight so they do not die.

So many loop holes, so many people who are afraid to "come out" and so many who are in denial or just do not know. The studies may actually get somewhere if no one judged another based simply on this.

[Ziel]

I brought this up because I also want to know. Can a homosexual man still love a woman? In the future, or even today, is sexual attraction (this kind of love) so mutual and unique that it must lead to a relationship of love, to marriage? When one is attracted to another person, is one only motivated by a subtle liking or a desire to have intercourse? Must a relationship have intercourse, or is there a difference between a sexual relationship and a non-sexual relationship (when involving couples). Will it ever be accepted in the future to separate the sexual and non-sexual parts of one's love into two different relationships, or two different processes? When our minds become less enclosed by societal traditions, will we discover and accept even more radical ideas than what we hear today?

It really all comes down to this. What is sexuality and what is love? What creative ways will we discover in the future that allow us to express the two, whether together or separated?

One theory relating to this actually surfaces very quickly if you look into the asexual community. As you suggest, this model splits the physical attraction apart from the emotional attraction. It pretty much means that if you try to describe your overall orientation, it's going to be in two parts. So you might be a heteroromantic-heterosexual (typical straight), or homoromantic-homosexual (typical gay).  In the case of asexuality, one might still be emotionally attracted to one of the two sexes. They could also be bi-romantic or aromantic (not to be confused with aromatic ).

In some sort of attempt at a segue back to the topic...
I actually identify as AA (aromantic-asexual).  I can only assume in my case that I've been this way my entire life. It almost feels like I just kinda skipped that part of my mental development or something like that. It didn't really dawn on me at the time, but looking back, I realize that when everybody at school started showing interest in dating, I just... didn't. It didn't click for me, and I've never really felt a need or desire to form relationships beyond friendship to this day.

So based off my experience, I'm left feeling like a large part of it is a born trait. Or perhaps you could call it a born pre-disposition. I do believe that environment plays a role, because it's difficult for it not to have an impact in some way or another. But I really don't think it's something that can be learned or conditioned without the person already being pre-disposed at birth.

[Avan]

[Kaira]

Ziel - it gets even more fun when the relationship is between two identity clusters (legal entities/summative minds that contain multiple dissociated identities) who both pretty much all identify as demiasexual/demisexual to fully asexual, varying by identity, and don't even acknowledge the shared body as being any of theirs, ie, being fully species-dysphoric. Our avatar-bodies are direct expressions of our identities, artistically created yet also engineered works that show and express who we are, and in that context 'what we are'; however we also acknowledge that we are actually just identities, data encoded into neural states and whatnot as well, ie, we are anchored in the reality of what we actually are.

As far as we are concerned, Love is purely something that stems from Emotional Intimacy - the capacity to completely open one's self up to another, to care for their well being and perpetuated existence as a discrete identity, and sacrifice for the sake of the others. Sexuality does not enter into it.

Quite simply, we don't need sex, the promise of sex, or even the desire for sex, in order to have our relationship. It can be used as one of many possible expressions of love, but in no way, shape or form is our relationship founded, driven by, or otherwise contingent on sex or sexuality. In fact, the very notion of "love" that is contingent on sex or sexuality to us (the Kairavan cluster at least) is both incomprehensible and repulsive. Its insincere - from our perspective, its A LIE, plain and simple. Because its not truly and completely about the other person. For the other cluster, its more painful than repulsive, but still as much a lie, because they've been hurt many times in the past by people falling in 'love' with them only to leave them when they discovered they were not going to be able to sexually love them back.

On top of that, given our identity-driven detachment from our shared bodies, our identity-genders or lack thereof may completely not align with the shared body's as well, let alone species (no alignment in any cases here - heck, our Thavdyn is a machine for crying out loud). AND EVEN THEN we have no preferences.

And although we have plans to live together, its not about sex at all, rather about being able to look out for and care for each other. Heck, um, to be entirely honest, human bodies at least for me.. especially this one (for I guess obvious reasons), are.. a little disturbing...

And... our relationship is even more atypical to those in your society, but I think I've rambled on enough for now..

[Jackie]

I have always thought that almost all of your personality has to do with life experience and upbringing, whether you are homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual, whether you are good or bad, your political views etc... if you strip it to the base, it all boils down to your experiences. For example if you are brought up in a gay household, you may be gay because it is what you are used to or you may be straight because you want to be different. Hope that made sense.

[Avan]

nope; there are a LOT of ways that personality can be influenced by genetics and chemical structure:

Look at higher functioning autism spectrum individuals, and people who are under the influence of psychoactive pharmaceuticals, if you want some examples that can be shown here - there is someone here i know rather well who can attest to psychoactive pharmaceuticals causing a lot of changes in personality

[Arashi_Calunata]

I believe it can be a mixture of all of those factors stated at the title of the thread. It's supposedly probable to be the genetics, but I don't believe that the answer will be as clear-cut as genetics or social situations or fear of the opposite sex.

It was a mystery since the first recorded case, it's a mystery now, and it will likely be a mystery in the future.

And overall, it'll likely be A) Unexplainable or B) Some mixture.

[Jackie]

As a scientist i agree with the genetics as well, but pharmaceuticals are more of an external factor.

[Avan]

Whats the significance of it being an external factor vs. an internal one?

Oh, and 'old news', but some scientists discovered some chemicals that directly control sexuality.

Not exactly [/thread], but, it does narrow it down a lot to 'what causes said chemical variation?' - genetics? external chemical exposure? not sure yet...

[Mylo]

I think its safe to say that most mental "things" (if not all) are caused by chemicals.  I mean, genetics is just code for what chemicals get used and made.