ScienCentral News has a good piece up today summarizing the current scientific debate about the origins of homosexuality–and the political controversies attendant to it (I wish I could link to the full Scientific American Mind article the author is referencing, but it’s behind a subscriber wall).
The linked article correctly points out that much of today’s debate centers on the research of Columbia Psychiatrist Robert Spitzer, and his 2003 study analyzing the possibility of change in a small, committed group of ex-gay patients. It includes some great Spitzer quotes clarifying his position:
“Do gays have a choice?” — Spitzer replies, “They have a choice whether to go into therapy, about whether they adopt a gay lifestyle, whether they tell their friends and their family. They don’t have a choice as to whether their basic sexual orientation is gay or straight — that they don’t have a choice about.”
Read the whole thing. Spitzer is absolutely right, of course. One of great lies of the exgay movement is that people have a choice about who they are attracted to sexually. We all must choose our sexual behaviors, but we don’t choose our attractions. It takes a great deal of intellectually dishonesty to conflate those two distinct ideas.
The research on homosexuality has never directly shown that it isn’t a choice. All you have are the claims of most (but not all) homosexuals that they didn’t have a choice.
It’s purely a matter of individual judgment whether those claims should be accepted. Given that it is in the interest of homosexuals to claim that they have no choice, I wouldn’t blame anyone for suspecting them of lying.
ab, I disagree —
1. You dismiss a substantial number of studies that find biology playing a role in sexual orientation.
2. It is not in homosexuals’ interest to claim they have no choice. Sexual choice is irrelevant in a nation where rights not explicitly assigned to the federal government by the Constitution are supposed to be reserved to individuals and, to a limited degree, to state and local governments.
Same-sex-attracted people in the United States deserve the same rights as everyone else, not because “they can’t help themselves,” but because this is a free country, not a police state.
3. Science is not a matter of “individual judgment.” Science is a matter of empirical research.
ab,
you are pretty much alone in thinking that sexual orientation might be a choice. Even many anti-gay organizations no longer use language about “it’s a choice”. For example:
PFOX: “No one chooses same sex feelings or asks for them”. http://www.pfox.org/Downloads/PFOX%20brochure.pdf
Focus on the Family: “one knows for sure what causes homosexuality”. FOTF thinks sexual orientation is determined by environment and can be changed through therapy. https://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/homosexuality/nac/a0037025.cfm
If you are going to think that “it’s a choice” then you are going to be perceived as ignorant, and not just by gay people but also by those who seek daily to make gay people’s lives miserable.
Studies showing that biology may play a role in influencing sexual orientation don’t directly show that homosexuality isn’t a choice because it might possibly be the case that the biological influence influences people to choose homosexuality (I know Dean Hamer rejects that argument, but Simon LeVay doesn’t).
As for it not being in the interest of gays to claim that they have no choice about their sexuality, you must be joking, right? The ‘you should tolerate me because I can’t help being queer’ argument is one of the most widespread gay tactics of bullying people into accepting homosexuality. Maybe it’s a lousy and unprincipled argument, but some people seem convinced by it.
Finally, scientists have to use their own individual judgment about just what empirical research to accept. This is particularly true when the research is based on nothing more than things people choose to claim about themselves.
ab, I believe you mean that there may be a biological predisposition but someone’s behavior can prevent or re-orient a person’s sexual orientation. Is that an accurate understanding of your position?
The arguement over choice and morality is very complex. Obviously, there are many unchosen inclinations and chosen behaviors that we do not approve of as a society. I do not see how whether homosexuality is chosen or not should alter the moral considerations.
Scientists always make judgements about what to accept. Science would be a pretty poor field of study otherwise. Of course if you believe people are lying to influence agendas, how can you determine who is lying or manipulating research data? The gay person who says that they were born that way or the ex-gay who claims to now be totally heterosexually oriented would both be considered equally suspect under such a system, and so on.
Well, I meant what I wrote. Maybe there is some kind of biological influence that makes people more likely to choose to become homosexual without compelling that choice. It’s not necessarily likely, but it is not inconceivable. (That’s quite distinct from saying that maybe people choose to change their sexual orientation, which is what I gather you thought I was suggesting).
Simon LeVay’s willingness to consider this possibility shows that he is a rather more honest and cautious scientist than Dean Hamer. LeVay has flat out contradicted Hamer on this and other points, but they are not going to debate it or discuss their differences publicly, because obviously if they did, the man in the street would conclude you can’t believe anything they say (“Scientists disagree! So science is garbage!”).
ab — you seem very sure that it is a choice.I take you can provide some evidence for your opinion?Anything will do.
ab- actually the argument is:
I don’t give a damn whether or not you “tolerate” us. We deserve equal rights because we are human beings. Choice is irrelevant, just stop passing laws that hurt our families, stop beating us up, stop forcing kids into these ridiculous conversion camps, and learn to mind your own damn business.
And btw, if scientists disagreeing means science is garbage, then the entire history of all of science is nothing but garbage.
The ‘you should tolerate me because I can’t help being queer’ argument is one of the most widespread gay tactics of bullying people into accepting homosexuality. Maybe it’s a lousy and unprincipled argument, but some people seem convinced by it.
As opposed to the “you have to accept my heresy because I call it Christianity” practiced by many conservative “religious groups.” One of the most challenging things about being an American is having to live alongside those whose beliefs and life choices you detest. It means recognize the rights of all people to be wrong – including those who choose bigotry over rational thought.
I mean, it’s not just that we have studies showing a biological basis for homosexuality – it’s that we have studies that show nearly everything about our personalities has some genetic basis. IIRC, the Minnesota Twin Study (the best known research into twins reared together and apart) found even someone’s favorite color – their choice of job, the names they chose for their children seemed to have a genetic basis.
Even if you believe homosexuality to be a mental illness, then there still must be a biological mechanism behind it (not to mention a genetic component) – there is for every other major significant mental illness – depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder.
And how could you discount the life experiences of millions of gay people? One would have to believe in a vast conspiracy of gay people to all create false stories of our childhoods if one is to believe such information is irrelevant. In fact, one would have to believe in the basic negativity of homosexuality to even consider the possibility we are all lying or deluded about our own histories. Even more importantly – what does that mean for the veracity of the “testimonies” of “ex-gay” people?
You all seem to be assuming that I’m not gay, which is really astonishing. Did I say I wasn’t gay? Didn’t it occur to you that a gay person might think these things? No? Oh well.
I didn’t say that homosexuality was a choice, only that there is nothing to show convincingly that it isn’t. You don’t have to believe in a ‘conspiracy’ of gay people to think so.
ab- no, actually, you didn’t. And then you repeatedly referred to gays with the noninclusive pronoun “they.”
Being a troll however is most definitely a choice. There are many “ex-troll” organizations which can help you overcome trollful tendencies. Remember, you’re not really a troll. You’re a nontroll with a troll problem.
ab, I’ve never met a heterosexual that claimed they remembered making the choice to be that way. Regardless of what your orientation is are you honestly going to tell us that you chose it? If you don’t remember choosing your orientation, if it just happened to you, what makes you think its any different for any gay person?
Sometimes I think I did choose my sexual orientation. There are times when looking back on it, yes, it did seem like a choice. Really, though, I’m not sure what choice is.
Which I mention only because you ask.
ab, I presume if sometimes you think you chose your orientation it also means at sometimes you think you did not. Which is it? Can you specifically recall a time when you went through the process of actually weighing the pros and cons of each orientation and deciding, without and desire one way or another, to pick one? If you can’t recall this kind of episode maybe its you that’s lying.
That should have read “Can you specifically recall a time when you went through the process of actually weighing the pros and cons of each orientation and deciding, without ANY desire one way or another, to pick one?
And ab, if you’re not sure what choice is when it comes to sexual orientation what on earth were you doing when at the start of the thread you said research has never conclusively shown it is not a choice?
This whole argument hinges on what you mean by the phrase “to become homosexual”.
If you define this to mean engaging in sexual activities then certainly each gay person makes that choice whether or not to have sex.
If you define this to mean “identify as a gay person”, then yes there is some point at which a gay person recognizes that they are same-sex attracted and that there are societal labels that differentiate between those attracted to the same or to the opposite sex. But this is more of an acknowledgement or recognition than it is a choice. To use the term “choice” here is deliberately deceptive.
However, if by “to become homosexual” you mean to find oneself attracted emotionally and sexually to persons of the same sex, then we have to look at the evidence, such as it is.
Point One: You say that the only evidence we have refuting choice is the testimony of gay people. That is not the case. We also have the testimony of persons who counsel, study, or are involved in the lives of persons who are gay, both before and after they so identify.
These people universally agree that there is no “choice” to become same-sex attracted. One could argue, I suppose, that not being gay themselves they could never truly know whether the gay person was lying. I dismiss that argument out of hand; professionals often are trained to determine the veracity of study subjects. And many people just aren’t convincing liars.
Or perhaps one might think that these people are biased and are part of a conspiracy to deny the concept of choice. However, they include many people who are adamantly anti-gay (such as Focus on the Family) who would have no incentive to make this statement unless they believed it.
Additionally, there are the testimonies of ex-gay persons all of whom (to the best of my knowledge) agree that sexual orientation or same-sex attraction is not a chosen characteristic. Since these folks are trying to “change” and are also often at the forefront of fighting against the rights of gay people, one would suppose they would have an incentive to deny choice – but yet they all agree that same-sex attraction is not chosen.
Point Two. To make the argument that gays have an incentive to lie you state “The ‘you should tolerate me because I can’t help being queer’ argument is one of the most widespread gay tactics of bullying people into accepting homosexuality.”
But you forget that the vast majority of gay people, at the point of identifying their sexual orientation are not part of any organized gay community. Most live in a world almost exclusively comprised of heterosexuals. And their first external acknowledgement of being gay is almost always to a heterosexual family member or friend.
These persons would have no incentive, desire, impulse, peer pressure, or any other motivation to support the political agenda of people they have never met and with whom they have not until this moment identified.
It simply isn’t possible to believe that a 14 year old kid who tells his best friend that he “thinks he might be gay” because he isn’t attracted to girls and that he “didn’t choose to be that way” is lying to his friend to protect the political agenda of someone 1,000 miles away whom he’s never met.
And often, especially in conservative families, states, and religious communities, these kids aren’t looking for tolerance. They want a cure.
It simply isn’t possible to believe that a kid would spend years praying for same-sex attraction to go away if it was something he had chosen.
Your argument simply doesn’t hold up.
Perhaps some tiny amount of gay people claim (to make a political point) to have chosen their orientation. But there is nothing empirical that supports the idea that sexual orientation is chosen. No study. No research. Nothing.
To believe what you claim to believe requires the rejection of testimony from a wide array of individuals, studies and research and instead basing your believe on… nothing at all.
I doubt that this is a viable discussion, so those asking me what it was like to choose my sexual orientation are probably going to be disappointed. I mean, it’s a sensitive question, isn’t it? It’s not so easy to discuss how I felt.
I could try to talk about it, but I think you might find the details rather tiresome and then wish you never asked. So perhaps I should save you a lot of trouble by not answering that question?
ab,
If you’re feeling sensitive, then by all means don’t discuss your own choices relating to your own sexual orientation.
But if you want to contribute to the conversation, you might comment on the refutation of your position.
You might consider either clarifying your position in relation to your bizarre assertion that “All you have are the claims of most (but not all) homosexuals that they didn’t have a choice”.
Conversely, you might want to admit that you were wrong.
ab, I assure you I wouldn’t find your story tiresome when it would be the first of its kind I’ve ever heard. For someone so adamantly saying there’s no proof people don’t choose to be same sex attracted it seems surprising to me you’d find it a sensitive question – unless you can’t recall a time when you had no desire one way or the other and then went though a concious act of choosing which sex to be attracted to.
At first you were talking about same sex attractions being a choice like which item on your plate you start eating first. Now when it comes to whether or not you yourself chose its clear you didn’t choose in any context of being completely free to pick. If people had no inborn leanings one way or another we’d see culture having a huge influence on the ratio of gay to straight people. Approving cultures would encourage a lot more people to choose to be gay and disapproving cultures would see a lot more people choose to be straight, neutral cultures would see a 50/50 ratio of straight to gay as either choice would be equally likely to be made.
That there aren’t huge variations in the percentage of gays across time and cultures strongly suggests people are not choosing same sex attractions in any conventional sense of choice.
A simple “yes” or “no” you should be able to manage on this sensitive question. Do you recall a specific time when you had no sexual attractions, conciously decided to become attracted to a gender and as a result of that decision you became attracted to the chosen gender?
Actually you don’t need to answer that, I think you already did and the answer is obviously “no”. Given that you didn’t choose your orientation in the conventional meaning of choice please stop suggesting anyone else has either.
ab, for someone who is sensitive about whether or not they chose their orientation you showed a great deal of insensitivity towards gays calling them bullies and liars. If you want people to be sensitive in considering how you came about your orientation show some sensitivity yourself.