(Im)mutability of Same Gender Attraction

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

No, the majority of gays (and straights) don't "choose" to be gay or straight. However, there's a significant population who fall in the middle of the continuum who do choose their team, so to speak. I know several women (one a close friend) who had a lesbian phase (lengthy, and beyond just experimentation) and is now happily married to a man. I would call her legitimately bisexual. Curiously, I don't know any men who have gone from gay to straight, but I imagine that is due more to the incredible societal pressure on a man to at least try to be straight from the beginning; if they're openly gay, they've likely already tried the straight route.

Waters is likely right--there are likely a host of LDS men who are gay/bisexual and in hetero relationships. I think the church, to their credit, has certainly shifted in their advice to these men, from "fake it till you make it" to celibacy.

I don't think it is fair to say that when gay men are told to be celibate, that means that a gay RM is being told not to marry.

I think almost everyone who hears that counsel thinks it means "be celibate from gay sexual relations."

Does anyone know of an admonition where it is said young men with SSA should not marry?

[MikeWaters]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa..._Homosexuality

http://www.narth.com/

Looks to be strongly influenced by the evangelical movement.

[All-American]

Well, at least people are talking now . . .

But this is more or less what I was afraid I would see. SU would come out with guns ablaze, claiming that it's an open and shut case and that it is scientifically proven as immutable. A few chime in some news reports and some stories they've heard about gays changing orientation, at which point SU changes his tune to "virtually no dissent." All the while, nobody seems to have access to any studies on the matter on which to hang our hat, indicating to me that it's not only far from an "open and shut" case, but that there doesn't seem to be any concordance on the matter.

Originally Posted by SU

This is such an old, well trod issue, and the evidence and common sense is so overwhelmingly one sided, probably no one cares to discuss this with you. I don't care to and don't plan to beyond this.

Thanks once more for your insightful contribution. Please keep your promise and shut up.

Originally Posted by Mikewaters

Indy that's why no one has engaged him. He hasn't asked smart questions, and he has put limitations that while they say "no bickering" what they really mean is "no controversy, and non disagreement."

I wonder how you might improve the question. I asked for references to solid scientific studies on the mutability or immutability of same sex attraction instead of the tired back and forth between the same actors, arguing the same cases and coming to the same conclusions. I'm all for controversy and disagreement, but in this case, I would have preferred that the disagreement have a little more substance behind it.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by All-American

Well, at least people are talking now . . .

But this is more or less what I was afraid I would see. SU would come out with guns ablaze, claiming that it's an open and shut case and that it is scientifically proven as immutable. A few chime in some news reports and some stories they've heard about gays changing orientation, at which point SU changes his tune to "virtually no dissent." All the while, nobody seems to have access to any studies on the matter on which to hang our hat, indicating to me that it's not only far from an "open and shut" case, but that there doesn't seem to be any concordance on the matter.



Thanks once more for your insightful contribution. Please keep your promise and shut up.



I wonder how you might improve the question. I asked for references to solid scientific studies on the mutability or immutability of same sex attraction instead of the tired back and forth between the same actors, arguing the same cases and coming to the same conclusions. I'm all for controversy and disagreement, but in this case, I would have preferred that the disagreement have a little more substance behind it.

Mock wikipedia all you want, but they have a pretty good review on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology...al_orientation

[All-American]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Mock wikipedia all you want, but they have a pretty good review on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology...al_orientation

That's a great review. Thanks.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

No, the majority of gays (and straights) don't "choose" to be gay or straight. However, there's a significant population who fall in the middle of the continuum who do choose their team, so to speak. I know several women (one a close friend) who had a lesbian phase (lengthy, and beyond just experimentation) and is now happily married to a man. I would call her legitimately bisexual. Curiously, I don't know any men who have gone from gay to straight, but I imagine that is due more to the incredible societal pressure on a man to at least try to be straight from the beginning; if they're openly gay, they've likely already tried the straight route.

Waters is likely right--there are likely a host of LDS men who are gay/bisexual and in hetero relationships. I think the church, to their credit, has certainly shifted in their advice to these men, from "fake it till you make it" to celibacy.

Concerning your first paragraph, if accurate you aren't suggesting this is an argument for amending the constitution to ban gay marriage, I trust?

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Concerning your first paragraph, if accurate you aren't suggesting this is an argument for amending the constitution to ban gay marriage, I trust?

Nope. Just saying that in my opinion, some choose, most don't.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Nope. Just saying that in my opinion, some choose, most don't.

Does anybody choose their sexual feelings? That sounds very odd especially coming from a physician.

Don't you think sexual identity and "feelings" are a product of your innate inner workings and learned from the environment?

You have hormonal impulses, which when coupled with environmental factors, affect sexuality.

Example, if a guy has heterosexual urges, but lives a modest lifestyle, ignoring pornography and prostitutes or lascivious lifestyle, as opposed to the same guy who goes to strip joints, engages in whatever pleases him, don't you think his innate traits are affected by his behavior?

It makes little sense to say anybody chooses feelings, but personal workings and environmental factors probably affect homosexuality just as they affect heterosexuality.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Does anybody choose their sexual feelings? That sounds very odd especially coming from a physician.

Don't you think sexual identity and "feelings" are a product of your innate inner workings and learned from the environment?

You have hormonal impulses, which when coupled with environmental factors, affect sexuality.

Example, if a guy has heterosexual urges, but lives a modest lifestyle, ignoring pornography and prostitutes or lascivious lifestyle, as opposed to the same guy who goes to strip joints, engages in whatever pleases him, don't you think his innate traits are affected by his behavior?

It makes little sense to say anybody chooses feelings, but personal workings and environmental factors probably affect homosexuality just as they affect heterosexuality.

The issue is do they choose to be what they are. The complex of environmental and biological including genetic factors leading to sexual preference is still unknown. You're just speculating. The answer is unknown, and this isn't your field anyway. I'm not interested in any interested lay person's speculation.

But gays attest they didn't choose to be gay. This is the crux of their civil rights case and the crux of the moral issue.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

The issue is do they choose to be what they are. The complex of environmental and biological including genetic factors leading to sexual preference is still unknown. You're just speculating. The answer is unknown, and this isn't your field anyway. I'm not interested in any interested lay person's speculation.

But gays attest they didn't choose to be gay. This is the crux of their civil rights case and the crux of the moral issue.

Wherein did I speculate? I asked ER about his belief that they choose their sexual feelings. Did you even read what I wrote, or are you going exUte on me?

Seattle Ute reads a post by a Mormon on sexuality and he assumes we all assume the same things. Go read a review.

And I can agree that nobody chooses one's initial sexual feelings. They are innate, from an early period. I can remember, faintly, my first ones, and they were at a very young age before I even understood what they were. Nature puts them there. And they are enhanced or distorted by what we do. Or changed.

And basically, other than the moral right bullshit, I was agreeing with you.

Moral rights are limited.