Register to reply

Why do lots of people think that people choose to be gay?

by Jupiter60
Tags: choose, lots, people
Share this thread:
Jupiter60
#1
Jul22-14, 12:53 PM
P: 29
It's obvious to people that people don't choose to be black, white, asian or have blond hair. Why is it not so obvious to people that people don't choose to be gay? It's it because gayness is not a visible thing? You can't look at someone and immediately know that they are gay.
Phys.Org News Partner Social sciences news on Phys.org
Violence rates can be halved in just 30 years, say leading experts
Power isn't enough: Study reveals the missing link for effective leadership
Persian Gulf states have new role to play in Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution
OmCheeto
#2
Jul22-14, 02:38 PM
PF Gold
OmCheeto's Avatar
P: 1,435
Quote Quote by Jupiter60 View Post
It's obvious to people that people don't choose to be black, white, asian or have blond hair. Why is it not so obvious to people that people don't choose to be gay? It's it because gayness is not a visible thing? You can't look at someone and immediately know that they are gay.
Choose to be gay? I believe it was most clearly explained by the cultural anthropologist Todd Goldman[1] in his two seminal works regarding phase II of the transitional phases from sexual ambiguity(I), to a misogyny/misandry phase(II), and finally to gender selective period(III).

It is the transition from phase II to phase III which confuses most people into believing that a choice was made.

These are of course generalizations, as I've met people who defy all manner of attempted classification.



[1] Actually, he was an accountant. But... meh....
Czcibor
#3
Jul24-14, 12:16 PM
P: 78
Quote Quote by Jupiter60 View Post
It's obvious to people that people don't choose to be black, white, asian or have blond hair. Why is it not so obvious to people that people don't choose to be gay? It's it because gayness is not a visible thing? You can't look at someone and immediately know that they are gay.
1) Because it fits their ideology?
2) Something inside mind - not visible in a way that would immediately prove otherwise
3) Actually, sexual orientation that's not 0 or 1, but a wide spectrum. A bisexual can be even used to prove that they are "right". (Anyway, I was personally shocked, after seeing stats how big fluctuation there is between homo- and bi- if you study the same sample after a few years. There must be plenty of evidence if you cherry pick it properly :D )

phinds
#4
Jul24-14, 12:21 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,510
Why do lots of people think that people choose to be gay?

Religious people believe all kinds of nonsense with absolutely no evidence of any kind. Believing that homosexuality is a conscious choice is just one of many such things.
DaSteelGeneral
#5
Jul24-14, 01:17 PM
P: 1
Most people can't stand people who are different from them.
This goes double for those who haven't got much schooling, like conservatives/evangelicals.
Narrow-mindedness is cured with education, on average, the more educated you are, the less bigoted you will be. Exceptions do occur, both kinds: highly educated people can be very bigoted, and non-educated people can be very broadminded.

So, these people cling bitterly to the notion that gayness is a choice to avoid having to deal with the reality and fact that gays are a natural occurring phenomenon, far more frequent that lefthandedness or red hair.
Czcibor
#6
Jul24-14, 01:29 PM
P: 78
Quote Quote by phinds View Post
Religious people believe all kinds of nonsense with absolutely no evidence of any kind. Believing that homosexuality is a conscious choice is just one of many such things.
I'd be careful with that "religious". In my country during communism, all such people who were openly homesexual, were being shown as evidence of decadence and moral corruption of capitalist West.
StatGuy2000
#7
Jul24-14, 02:17 PM
P: 614
Quote Quote by Czcibor View Post
I'd be careful with that "religious". In my country during communism, all such people who were openly homesexual, were being shown as evidence of decadence and moral corruption of capitalist West.
If you replace the word "religious people" with "religious and/or extremely ideological people" (and communism is an ideology) then phinds' comments are still valid.
Student100
#8
Jul24-14, 02:58 PM
Student100's Avatar
P: 572
There's a lot of speculation going on about theology and people’s attitudes, but very little evidence based discussion. In fact the whole question could be re-asked as "What makes anyone do anything?" We don't know why people think other people choose to be gay. I'm sure there are a myriad of reasons.

How about we just talk about what makes people gay: I read this a while back, seems like it is a possible factor in sexual preference

So after thinking about this some, is there any evidence that proves homosexuality is not a choice in some instances? There are plenty of examples of homosexualality that seem to arise for convenience or gain rather than a locked in sexual orientation at birth: Gay for pay, prison populations, ship populations, ect. Are these groups homosexuals? It would seem to me that we need to lay some actual ground work for this discussion.
KenTucker
#9
Aug1-14, 11:20 PM
P: 2
Quote Quote by Jupiter60 View Post
It's obvious to people that people don't choose to be black, white, asian or have blond hair. Why is it not so obvious to people that people don't choose to be gay? It's it because gayness is not a visible thing? You can't look at someone and immediately know that they are gay.
The number of people who think homosexuality is a choice shrinks every day. I think it's because the topic is being discussed openly. When something is kept hidden or is forbidden to be discussed, it takes on a sinister quality.

Reasonable people, who are thankfully the majority, can see that very few people would choose a lifestyle that invites persecution and danger. Being social animals, we want friendship and camaraderie, especially from our families.
phinds
#10
Aug3-14, 08:06 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,510
Quote Quote by Czcibor View Post
I'd be careful with that "religious". In my country during communism, all such people who were openly homesexual, were being shown as evidence of decadence and moral corruption of capitalist West.
I did not LIMIT such inanity to religious people. As StatGuy2000 correctly pointed out, any group that substitutes belief for fact is subject to this kind of nonsense.
Ryan_m_b
#11
Aug4-14, 09:09 AM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,490
Quote Quote by Student100 View Post
So after thinking about this some, is there any evidence that proves homosexuality is not a choice in some instances? There are plenty of examples of homosexualality that seem to arise for convenience or gain rather than a locked in sexual orientation at birth: Gay for pay, prison populations, ship populations, ect. Are these groups homosexuals? It would seem to me that we need to lay some actual ground work for this discussion.
You are confusing homosexual behaviour with homosexuality. One is a sexual orientation and identity, the other is not. In sociology and epidemiology people who engage in homosexual behaviour but are not themselves homosexual are referred to as men who have sex with men.
Student100
#12
Aug5-14, 07:24 PM
Student100's Avatar
P: 572
Quote Quote by Ryan_m_b View Post
You are confusing homosexual behaviour with homosexuality. One is a sexual orientation and identity, the other is not. In sociology and epidemiology people who engage in homosexual behaviour but are not themselves homosexual are referred to as men who have sex with men.
Thanks Ryan, I didn't know there was distinction.

Anyway, another question:

Here is the huffpost piece on this: Here

If sexual preference can be altered, then people who support gay rights can’t rely on the argument that gay people should be protected from discrimination because gay people have no choice but to be gay – an argument that seems like an apology for homosexuality, as if homosexuality is a disease for which there is no cure.

There is an element of homophobia in that argument– the implication that gay people would become straight, if only they could. Supporting gay marriage becomes equivalent to supporting the construction of wheelchair ramps. The “gays can’t help being that way” approach is reminiscent of the old view of homosexuality as a psychiatric illness.

In a blog post for Slate, J. Bryan Lowder comments on Cynthia Nixon’s claim that her lesbianism is a choice. Lowder agrees with Nixon that blaming biology “cedes a great deal of control to bigoted people.”

You don’t have to defend a controversial action by arguing that you have no control over your behavior. In fact, when we you do so, you reinforce the belief that your behavior is undesirable.

Nobody has to prove that biology forces them to vote for a particular political party, practice a certain religion or follow a particular diet.

Just as gay people who are happy as they are should not be forced to change their sexual orientation, gay people who want to be straight should have the right to change if they can – and the correct word is “change” – not “cure”.

In his blog post, Lowder states, “Many critics will argue that appealing to biology is the only way to protect against the attacks of the religious right.”
So does the "we don't choose to be gay" line really help or hinder gay rights?
zoobyshoe
#13
Aug5-14, 11:48 PM
zoobyshoe's Avatar
P: 5,641
Quote Quote by Ryan_m_b View Post
In sociology and epidemiology people who engage in homosexual behaviour but are not themselves homosexual are referred to as men who have sex with men.
I think you read that wrong. According to that article, the MSM term is meant to cover any man who has sex with other men, for whatever reason. This would include any gay men who are sexually active with other men. It would not include gay men who are not sexually active with other men. It's a label for the behavior as opposed to the emotional/psychological predisposition.
Ryan_m_b
#14
Aug6-14, 01:50 AM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,490
Quote Quote by zoobyshoe View Post
I think you read that wrong. According to that article, the MSM term is meant to cover any man who has sex with other men, for whatever reason. This would include any gay men who are sexually active with other men. It would not include gay men who are not sexually active with other men. It's a label for the behavior as opposed to the emotional/psychological predisposition.
I worded it poorly, gay men can also be refered to as MSM if sexually active. My main point was that there is a difference between behaviour and orientation.
Ryan_m_b
#15
Aug6-14, 03:36 AM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,490
Quote Quote by Student100 View Post
Thanks Ryan, I didn't know there was distinction.

Anyway, another question:

Here is the huffpost piece on this: Here



So does the "we don't choose to be gay" line really help or hinder gay rights?
I disagree with a lot of this article. Sexuality isn't a choice and the recognition of that has helped the gay rights movement. You can choose to try and live differently sure, and for some people that might work (potentially because sexuality isn't trinary [hetero/bi/homo] like is usually thought but a spectrum) but that doesn't change the fact you develop with the sexuality you have without conscious effort.

As for posing some hypothetical where science can alter sexuality, that impacts in no way on LGBT rights and culture now.
zoobyshoe
#16
Aug6-14, 11:15 AM
zoobyshoe's Avatar
P: 5,641
Quote Quote by Ryan_m_b View Post
I worded it poorly, gay men can also be refered to as MSM if sexually active. My main point was that there is a difference between behaviour and orientation.
The distinction is important, but my expectation would be that the majority of MSM would self identify as gay.
Darryl
#17
Sep10-14, 09:14 AM
P: 109
To say that people think others choose to be gay, would imply that everyone makes that choice and some choose gay and others do not.
I am not gay, but I did not choose to be not gay, So I would assume people who are gay did not make any 'choice' either.
If it does not matter to you, and you want to address it, you have to ask yourself why you want to make that division?
It is like I simply cannot understand race discrimination, there is only one race of humans, the human race.

It is simply beyond me (and I don't think I am that stupid) that people want to use physical attributes to promote their own agendas and ideals.
its like gay marriage, are they forcing you to marry into the same sex? I don't think so, so what really does it have to do with you, or your morals or ethics,


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Why do lots of people think time isn't real? General Physics 11
Lots of people read this, but no one helped. Introductory Physics Homework 6
Interacting with people after lots of math General Math 7
Happy Birthday, lots of people 11 General Discussion 12
Lots of new people here. General Discussion 11