Being gay is a state you are born in, says indirect research

I didn't mean to be rude but still i wonder what is wrong with both words after all?

Anyway, i think if you are gay suppressing it would cause a lot of internal struggle and unhappy moments. I think you just go with your feelings, follow your heart and you will see what makes you alive.

Thanks, and that is exactly what I decided.
It's not my fault, not my choice, so it won't be my problem either.
And in the end, a lot of people are born in much more complicated positions than being gay, what is everyone whining about anyways.


It's like Gandalfs quote from LOTR, you can not choose what situation you end up in, you can only choose to make the best of the situation you ARE in.

Yes, i agree, imagine this - people would stop blaming each other and themselves and just be as they are. End of internal struggle and wasted energy and emotions. Of course we would follow some rules to avoid chaos in society but i think just opposite may happen, since most of the violence and crime is created as a result of internal tension.

If more people lived that way it could spread so wide it could end a lot of conflicts and even war.

A while back I read a study which of course, I can't find again, that stated that while monitoring the brain function of gay, lesbian and heterosexual people they noticed that when they were exposed to sexually arousing pictures the lesbian's brains and heterosexual males responded to the same type of stimulus. The gay men and heterosexual females brains responded to once again the same stimulus. However, when the pictures were reversed the same brain activity did not occur. To me this indicates that sexual preference is something you are born with similar to being born with blue or brown eyes and isn't anything that the individual can control.

You are what you are. People should just accept each other for the unique and wonderful person we are. Could some one please explain to me why I should care what sexual orientation another is? I have gay, lesbian and heterosexual friend and you know not one of them is better then another. Just my thoughts on the subject.

Good thread, Jakko, very interesting.

Originally posted by Jakko
I know that on ATS many people still believe that being gay is a choice or lifestyle, and not a state someone is born in. This ignorance results in opinions that may have been different if these ATSers would know how "being gay" really works.
With this thread I just hope to take some ignorance away, or at least start debate in which the truth can be persued.

I don't know if I totally agree with this statement. I'm sure that there is some percentage of people who choose the gay lifestyle for whatever reason, even though they might have just as easily chosen a heterosexual lifestyle. You may say that these people are not really gay, but I say, why not?

Regarding the identical twin situation, I believe that it is very possible that the twins could very well have been "treated" differently inside the womb. Some of it is the mother's doing, some of it may be the other twin. It is commonplace in many animal species (eagles, for example) for one youngster to kill the weaker one, as a means of ensuring survival. Maybe some of that goes on subconciously in the womb; it's possible.

Anyway, I do not believe that both twins get an equal 50-50 split of all nutrients, hormones, and everything else from the mother. This could account for differences in development, including immunity to certain diseases.

There are some sets of identical twins where the two people do not have identical physical characteristics. Bone structure, etc., differences is more evident in some sets of twins than in others.

So, to me, the real question is, how do you define "environmental"?

Exactly, JSOBecky, it could mean anything. "Environmental" is a pretty broad term. And I agree with you, I don't believe ID twins share everything 50-50. In fact, a very frequent occurrence is where one twin subsumes the other, and hence there is only one child born. I guess there's sibling rivalry even in the womb.

Originally posted by jsobecky
I don't know if I totally agree with this statement. I'm sure that there is some percentage of people who choose the gay lifestyle for whatever reason, even though they might have just as easily chosen a heterosexual lifestyle. You may say that these people are not really gay, but I say, why not?

Because being gay has nothing to do with any kind of lifestyle, it's just the orientation.
When you talk about the gay lifestyle, what lifestyle is that?
A lifestyle of having sex with partners of the same gender?
In that cayse anyone, straight, gay or bisexual, can go with the gay lifestyle, but that does not actually make them gay.

This besides the fact that having sex with people of a gender you don't feel attracted to is not something people in general prefer, unless they get paid for it in some way or another.

Yes, to me "lifestyle" means having same-gender sex, at least in this case.

I do believe there are people to whom sex is not a driving force in their lives, and it is more or less a choice they made because of circumstance or convenience. They are more or less "sexually apathetic". They still get counted in the censuses that measure those things, though.

What about Bisexuals? How about gays who have "seen the light" and become straight? I really dont buy this steady.. To many holes in it.

Originally posted by semperfoo
What about Bisexuals? How about gays who have "seen the light" and become straight? I really dont buy this steady.. To many holes in it.

Many believe everyone to be on a sliding scale between gay and straight. Meaning that strictly speaking sex with either gender turns everyone on, just not in the same way for everyone.
Looking at it like this, bisexual people are in the middle of this scale, and gay and straight people are at different ends of this scale.
People "turning gay" have often been on the gay side of this scale their entire life, they just never realized they were gay because of the way they were brought up, and because of them also (more or less) being turned on my the different gender.

My experience agrees with the research

I am straight, not gay. I am, however, a bit of a fetishist. My fetish is harmless, not very extreme and I can get by sexually without it, but sex is a lot more fun when I indulge it, so I do so whenever I can.

The thing is, I became aware of my fetish the very first time I saw a manifestation of the attribute that excites me. Believe it or not, I was four years old at the time. It was my first experience of sexual arousal.

My experience suggests to me that my fetish was pre-wired, ready to manifest at the first opportunity. And if that was the case with me, I imagine it is probably the case with everybody else too -- gay or straight.

This gives me grounds for believing that gay people are probably gay from birth or very soon after.

Anyone else remember feeling sexy as a toddler?

uhh nope... cant say im in the same boat as you.. Gay at birth? lets see. Two twins, ones gay one isnt? Still believe in that gay at birth thing?

Originally posted by Astyanax
My experience agrees with the research

I am straight, not gay. I am, however, a bit of a fetishist. My fetish is harmless, not very extreme and I can get by sexually without it, but sex is a lot more fun when I indulge it, so I do so whenever I can.

The thing is, I became aware of my fetish the very first time I saw a manifestation of the attribute that excites me. Believe it or not, I was four years old at the time. It was my first experience of sexual arousal.

My experience suggests to me that my fetish was pre-wired, ready to manifest at the first opportunity. And if that was the case with me, I imagine it is probably the case with everybody else too -- gay or straight.

This gives me grounds for believing that gay people are probably gay from birth or very soon after.

Anyone else remember feeling sexy as a toddler?

Astyanax, I was so glad to see your post. I was a therapist for many years. One thing I noticed is that with my clients, any time they brought up a sexual issue, as you yourself did, the client felt that they had "always been this way". Whether it was a fetish, sexual orientation or some other sexual proclivity, that's what they themselves always felt. It finally led me to conclude that most likely all our sexual proclivities, including orientation is hard-wired in us from at least birth, if not before.
I have no study to back this up, it's just personal observation. I don't usually mention it, for fear that people won't believe me. But, once more, your statements confirm my suspicions. THanks for that confirmation.

Wired to disbelieve in being wired

My pleasure, forestlady.

Originally posted by forestlady
Whether it was a fetish, sexual orientation or some other sexual proclivity, that's what they themselves always felt. It finally led me to conclude that most likely all our sexual proclivities, including orientation is hard-wired in us from at least birth, if not before.

Further confirmation of this is suggested by all the straight, plain-vanilla types who, being hard-wired that way from birth, find it impossible or even offensive to conceive that others may be wired differently.

By the way, semperfoo, the fact that there are pairs of identical twins of whom only one twin is gay means nothing. One (or even a small flock) of swallows doesn't make a summer. The data from twin studies clearly supports rather than contradicts the theory that sexual orientation is to some extent genetically determined. If one of a pair of identical twins is gay, the other is considerably more likely to be gay than, not just any random member of the population, but even a fraternal twin. The latter argues strongly for a genetic element.

Twin Study Results

* 52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were likewise homosexual
* 22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
* 11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual

-- J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard, “A genetic study of male sexual orientation,”
Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 48:1089-1096, December 1991.

[edit on 23-5-2007 by Astyanax]

Hard proof that they are born gay, now while I will agree that most people are SHEEP, I would hardly declare some freaks of nature to be anything more than freaks of nature. Stop with all the gays have no rights crap too please, they have all the rights that everyone else has and to those that they avail themselves too. if you want to play in the Democracy of America you have to play by their rules. What I find most disturbing about much of this is the stance that the church is lead by a belief to their ends, but you insinuate some other means to the ends for the other side, as if they don''t already have their mind made up too. Don't be ridiculous.

Last thing, SHOW ME THE MONKEY MAN, until then you have NO EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION, other than a theory. And last I cheked a theroy was not proof of anything.. Why do snails of today look and are identical to snail fossils that are thousands of years old? Evolution skipped some species?

Hatred of God is no reason to start throwing out words that have meaning like, EVIDENCE, PROOF, and BIAS. If you have no EVIDENCE I think that is PROOF of your BIAS.

Originally posted by Astyanax
Wired to disbelieve in being wired

My pleasure, forestlady.

Originally posted by forestlady
Whether it was a fetish, sexual orientation or some other sexual proclivity, that's what they themselves always felt. It finally led me to conclude that most likely all our sexual proclivities, including orientation is hard-wired in us from at least birth, if not before.

Further confirmation of this is suggested by all the straight, plain-vanilla types who, being hard-wired that way from birth, find it impossible or even offensive to conceive that others may be wired differently.

By the way, semperfoo, the fact that there are pairs of identical twins of whom only one twin is gay means nothing. One (or even a small flock) of swallows doesn't make a summer. The data from twin studies clearly supports rather than contradicts the theory that sexual orientation is to some extent genetically determined. If one of a pair of identical twins is gay, the other is considerably more likely to be gay than, not just any random member of the population, but even a fraternal twin. The latter argues strongly for a genetic element.

Twin Study Results

* 52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were likewise homosexual
* 22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
* 11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual

-- J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard, “A genetic study of male sexual orientation,”
Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 48:1089-1096, December 1991.

[edit on 23-5-2007 by Astyanax]

Exactly Astanyax, that is what my studies have confirmed, that ID twins are more likely to be both gay, at least more than the average and as far as I know, more than any other group. In fact, there are many studies that confirm this.