I strongly suspect it is a bit of both, and some of neither. While genetics does likely play  a significant role, the way society structures sexuality is also important. Sometimes we forget that sexuality has been viewed differently in the past. We also assume it will be viewed the same way in the future. Because of the way we tend to break down sexuality into a gay /straight dichotomy , individuals are effectively sorted in a manner that may not reflect thier actual nature. Kinsey  argued that sexuality is a spectrum, and that most people fall somewhere in the middle. One end of the scale is 100 percent  homosexual and the other end is 100 percent heterosexual. Even if in passing, he said it was relatively common to have a "gay thought" from time to time. not that an individual would act on them.

Our society places a preimum on "straight" and we are encouraged to to act accordingly. Men, in particular, are conditioned to act tough and hide any slight trace of something less than "pure" masculinity. I suspect that if our society did not care about sexuality as it does, there would be less early conditioning and therefore less people viewing themselves as exclusively straight.

The reason we have this debate is this: Anti-gay activists decare it to be a choice, so that the individual can alter their behavior and fit into mainstream straight society - and live in a way the activists deem fit. The pro-gay activists tend to argue that it is genetics. If it is genetics then there can be no change. Also, if it is genetics then a similar moral argument against homophobia can be used as the one used agianst racism - it is not okay to hate someone for being who they were born to be.  To a certain extent, I think both sides are missing the point. We should not discriminate based sexuality - period. The "cause" of homosexuality is moot.  It does not matter if someone has a genetic predisposition or decides they enjoy the lifestyle.  It does not matter if both are in play. Depending on the individual, many factors are probably at work and trying to decipher them only highlights our society's narrow view of sexualtiy.

Chrizum said: osamanobama said: sapphi_snake said: osamanobama said: bolded: which was my whole point but, so if someone ask me what my gender is, i should respond "masculine". and if some guy wants to be a girl, but is still masculine, then he would respond "masculine" as well.  ...interesting dictionary.com gen·der 1     [jen-der]  Show IPA –noun 2. sex: the feminine gender. gender  gen·der (jÄ›n'dÉ™r)  n.  The sex of an individual, male or female, based onreproductive anatomy   though it also has your definition, but like i said, lets not get hung up on that word    Read more on this topic, as I don't think you've fully grasped the concept of gender yet. Maybe you'll learn something in College, if you decide to attend. i am going to go college. but like i said i meant "sex". but dictionary gives my definition and yours. and a link someone posted. said gender means masculine and feminine. so that indicates to me, that when asked for gender, someone should respond "masculine" or "feminine". at bolded: im soo smart, i doubt it. You're getting closer, but gender doesn't mean "masculine" or "feminine". That's a false dichotomy. Gender is the entirety of social sex, whereas sex is the biological side (which mostly ís a dichotomy, either male or female). There are thousands of genders, it's different in each culture and for each environment.

I agree completely.

I also happen to be a sociologist and historian, so I am not exactly a random sample.

Wasn't the racist argument based on the ideea that non-whites are inferior to whites, they're sub-human, therefore whites have a right to dominate them? The anti-racist argument was based on the ideea that all humans are the regarding their intellectual capacities (skin colour has no connection to intelligence) and the concept of cultural relativity (there are different cultures, but there are no superior or inferior cultures). An anti-homophobia argument, similar to the anti-racist argument, would be that homosexuality is normal, and that gays are in no way inferior ti straight people.

Yes that is pretty much what I was saying.

It's a choice and here is why. We choose who we love. There have been numerous studies on the subject, and all of them have pointed to the fact that we, as human's, choose our mate. Infact, animals do the very same thing, they choose a mate based on physical traits, which one can give them the strongest, healthies offspring to preserve their breed. There have, however, been no conclusive studies on whether being gay is genetic or not.

Anyway, if you truely believe being gay has to do with genetics, than you are basically saying being gay is a defect. Follow my logic here if, you can see through the anger you obtained while reading this post. People who have mental disorders are genetically "defective". People who have other physical oddities are genetically "defective". Now, let me clarify even further, the terms I am using, "genetically defective" and "oddities", are simply a way to convey the fact that their genetic makup is differant that the average human being. If being gay is indeed, genetic, then it is a genetic oddity. The reason for this is because it does not follow the basic human/animal genetic coding that seeks to procreate in order to preserve one's species.

In closing, let me make clear that, since I do believe being gay is a choice, no matter if I believe it is the right choice or not, it is still a choice, and I respect that people are willing to make it. Also, before anybody askes me "when did you choose to be attracted to the oposite sex" I reply that it was probably around the same age most people do, and right around the same age gay people choose to be attracted to the same sex. Lastly, Don't pass me off as homophobic, and a hater of gay people.  4 out of 7 girlfriends I had we bi-sexual, and I have a friend who's brother is gay. I have also known a boy who's parents were both women, and I have been aquanted with a gay woman. Also, I think it is horrible the way Gay people are treated, It's a choice, not a crime.   

When my less-than-tranquil email was replied to it was obvious that it was a classic case of reverse-discrimination. If anything, the idiot that did it (caused me to get banned, not replied to my email) made me see him as a sad, attention-hungry and overly sensitive homo.Dunno exactly who's involved and don't care.

I almost left VG because of this shit. It's bad enough experiencing how whites get discriminated against in South Africa (you read that right) because they used to discriminate against blacks. Now the same angry voice is rising up in the gay man (not all of you, I apologize, but do realize that people going around shouting homo-phobe gives a bad impression). I'm sick of it.

I never had anything to do with apartheid. I have black and coloured friends.

I might not have gay friends, but I've never done anything to a gay person either.

So stop discriminating against me, because you're the one with all the anger - not me.

Guess some people just can't help themselves. Bet this guy's also sad he can no longer oppress the black majority of South Africa.

A good post, well thought out. Using your examples, you state that animals choose a mate based on physical traits to help preserve the species but this is still based on physical traits that an animal is attracted to. The point of any sexuality is that you find a person of a certain gender attractive because of their physical traits. Yes, we do choose our mate (fall in love with them) but this is a single person who we wish to be with but we determin who that person is based originally on phsyical appearence.

You also assume this physical attraction that we refer to is based on genetics. It doesn't hold any weight on a view like mine where being gay isn't in genetics or choice, it's about the mindset you have. Prebuilt in to your personality and the way your mind ticks. It's the same mindset that dictates what your favourite colour is or why some people have small OCD traits. Infact if it's a defect like you say, it's a mental one. But then it's not a defect so should not be classed as one.

well...i'll say this...i dont know how you intended to use the word perverted in your original post, but it certainly comes across as a more offensive use of the word.  imo, i would agree that he can seem a tad sensitive on the topic of sexuality sometimes( a lot of people can be on subjects that are important to them personally)...but in this situation i can understand why he would ban you and why your ban was not overturned.  And this post of yours now, most definitely does nothing to sway anyones opinion that you meant to use the word in a less harsh way. 

i definitely believe you about the situation in south africa.  its not the first time ive heard how it is there and know that things like that can happen here(canada) from personal experience and the frustration that can stem from that.  but...i do not see its relevance to this discussion and i also think it was entirely innapropriate for the other user in this thread to suggest that you are a racist because of that. 

Society and upbringing play no part in it whatsoever. Because if that were true, how come homosexuality has been around for as long as mankind has, across the entire globe and each and every culture, and how come it exists among animals as well? Did their society make them so? xD