Homosexuality:
Columnist analyzes nature versus nurture, argues that being gay comes from within
Beth Waggoner
Issue date: 10/4/06 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
I have a message for Jerry Falwell and those who agree with him: being gay is not a choice.
The fact of the matter is the roots of sexuality are not well understood. But being gay is not a conscious undertaking.
Can we say for certain that there is a gay gene? No. Can we say that child abuse invariably causes somebody to become gay? No. Can we prove that homosexuality is a sinful choice worthy of heavenly wrath? No.
There isn't one cause for how a person develops sexually any more than we can say why people develop extraverted or introverted personalities. Human experience and genetics seem to intermingle in ways that produce a wide spectrum of sexual personalities that can't ever be duplicated. Every year, new discoveries are made that delve into presumed and surprising factors for sexual development and the first six years of the new millennium haven't disappointed us.
Here is the latest plot twist: birth order may have an effect on the development of sexuality in males. The findings show that the more older brothers a male has by the same mother-regardless of whether or not they are raised together-the more likely he is to be gay. How's that for a dilemma? Is nature or nurture the underlying factor? They really don't know.
One theory is similar to when a person's immune system builds up antibodies against germs, a woman builds up resistance to each successive male pregnancy. This is based on the idea that she reacts differently to a male pregnancy because of a Y-chromosome based "antigen" and will produce hormones which contribute to the development of homosexuality in males at the lower end of the birth order spectrum.
We'll have to wait and see if that theory pans out. Our society has the most messed up sexual ideals sometimes. How is it that we can look at two males who love each other as sinful when we egg on two females who are willing to make out for attention? Because girl on girl is just hot right? Give me a break.
The fact of the matter is the roots of sexuality are not well understood. But being gay is not a conscious undertaking.
Can we say for certain that there is a gay gene? No. Can we say that child abuse invariably causes somebody to become gay? No. Can we prove that homosexuality is a sinful choice worthy of heavenly wrath? No.
There isn't one cause for how a person develops sexually any more than we can say why people develop extraverted or introverted personalities. Human experience and genetics seem to intermingle in ways that produce a wide spectrum of sexual personalities that can't ever be duplicated. Every year, new discoveries are made that delve into presumed and surprising factors for sexual development and the first six years of the new millennium haven't disappointed us.
Here is the latest plot twist: birth order may have an effect on the development of sexuality in males. The findings show that the more older brothers a male has by the same mother-regardless of whether or not they are raised together-the more likely he is to be gay. How's that for a dilemma? Is nature or nurture the underlying factor? They really don't know.
One theory is similar to when a person's immune system builds up antibodies against germs, a woman builds up resistance to each successive male pregnancy. This is based on the idea that she reacts differently to a male pregnancy because of a Y-chromosome based "antigen" and will produce hormones which contribute to the development of homosexuality in males at the lower end of the birth order spectrum.
We'll have to wait and see if that theory pans out. Our society has the most messed up sexual ideals sometimes. How is it that we can look at two males who love each other as sinful when we egg on two females who are willing to make out for attention? Because girl on girl is just hot right? Give me a break.
Be the first to comment on this story