4 ms·

As someone who knows nothing about this subject, if the cause doesn't appear to be genetic then what does that leave? Environmental? Something else?

m4r35n357 7y ago
What do you think causes big noses?
- NextHendrix 7y ago
  both?
- jrugk 7y ago
  Judaism?
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  I would like to say your comment is right on the nose, but it really isn't a helpful question at all.
matthewmacleod 7y ago
The title doesn’t mean “the cause is not genetic”, but rather “the cause does not appear to be a single obvious gene”. In reality there are going to be a bunch of different factors. Genetic predisposition is certainly likely to be one of them. Environmental factors too - like the hormonal environment in the womb, which I seem to remember had some correlation. Upbringing and social factors will also play an effect - a child with a strongly homophobic upbringing is less likely to explore their sexuality and end up identifying or embracing same-sex attraction.
- bayesian_horse 7y ago
  Erm. You apparently don't know a lot about homosexuality... Homosexual children having problems with homophobic parents is a pretty common theme. Also, same-sex attraction usually occurs long before any kind of "exploration", and doesn't seem to be any more controllable or malleable than heterosexuals would be able to control their attraction to the other sex.
  - acdha 7y ago
    I didn’t read that comment the same way you did: note the words around “identify” - I read that as fully cognizant of the history of persecution causing people to go by labels they knew weren’t correct but more socially acceptable.
    - bayesian_horse 7y ago
      We aren't talking about homosexual behavior but rather about homosexual attraction/orientation. So if somebody hides his homosexual orientation, that's not what the study would refer to as heterosexual orientation.
  - matthewmacleod 7y ago
    I’m pretty confident I know a decent amount about homosexuality :) At no point did I say that it was uncommon for homosexual children to have homophobic parents. That obviously happens all the time. But I think you are trying to use overly precise ideas to analyse human sexuality. It’s complex and messy and the result of many different factors. You can’t completely isolate sexual attraction from identity or social background; indeed it seems blindingly obvious to me that upbringing would have an effect on an individual’s willingness to think about, accept or acknowledge any latent same-sex attraction they experience. It can be hard for an individual who is raised to reject same-sex sexual activity as perverted or morally wrong to even consider the possibility that it’s something they might experience themselves. People ignore or reject aspects of themselves all the time. I can’t be certain, but my experience suggests that human sexuality is probably much more fluid than we generally expect as a result of long-standing social conventions. This is something that might change as same-sex relationships lose their taboo. And maybe I’m totally wrong; maybe homosexuality is just the result of a bunch of physiological changes. I find it hard to reconcile though.
    - bayesian_horse 7y ago
      Some of the most important things to know about homosexuality is that it's neither a choice, curable nor preventable. There indeed seems to be an immutable difference between those who are primarily/exclusively attracted to the same or the opposite sex. But actual behavior, affected by culture and circumstances, does make all of this more difficult. Homosexuals are often perfectly able to "function" in heterosexual intercourse, and heterosexuals in homosexual intercourse. But the study didn't ask for that, they asked for the underlying preference. They may even have used physical measurements. Yes, there are studies where the participants are exposed to different stimuli and their arousal is measured physiologically.
wolco 7y ago
It is genetic in a number people but environmental factors play a big part. More than one thing can cause it. One reason: Later children in large families are more likely to be gay but the reason might be related to the mother already being exposed to hormones with earlier children. On an evolutionary scale this might make sense that the first born are more likely not to be gay as to pass on the genes but later children population control might make more sense. Another might be hormone levels of the mother. Another might be gene related where physical changes are different Another might be gene related that increase gender fluidity which combined with society can shape sexuality But we do know there isn't a single simple gene.
bayesian_horse 7y ago
It can be compared to a dice. If you throw a dice, the outcome is determined by physical laws. But you still can't predict it, because the problem is too complex. Sexual orientation seems to be somewhat similar, in that environmental factors, akin to chance, lead to choosing one path among several.

m4r35n357 7y ago

What do you think causes big noses?

NextHendrix 7y ago
both?
jrugk 7y ago
Judaism?
bayesian_horse 7y ago
I would like to say your comment is right on the nose, but it really isn't a helpful question at all.

matthewmacleod 7y ago

The title doesn’t mean “the cause is not genetic”, but rather “the cause does not appear to be a single obvious gene”. In reality there are going to be a bunch of different factors. Genetic predisposition is certainly likely to be one of them. Environmental factors too - like the hormonal environment in the womb, which I seem to remember had some correlation. Upbringing and social factors will also play an effect - a child with a strongly homophobic upbringing is less likely to explore their sexuality and end up identifying or embracing same-sex attraction.

bayesian_horse 7y ago
Erm. You apparently don't know a lot about homosexuality... Homosexual children having problems with homophobic parents is a pretty common theme. Also, same-sex attraction usually occurs long before any kind of "exploration", and doesn't seem to be any more controllable or malleable than heterosexuals would be able to control their attraction to the other sex.
- acdha 7y ago
  I didn’t read that comment the same way you did: note the words around “identify” - I read that as fully cognizant of the history of persecution causing people to go by labels they knew weren’t correct but more socially acceptable.
  - bayesian_horse 7y ago
    We aren't talking about homosexual behavior but rather about homosexual attraction/orientation. So if somebody hides his homosexual orientation, that's not what the study would refer to as heterosexual orientation.
- matthewmacleod 7y ago
  I’m pretty confident I know a decent amount about homosexuality :) At no point did I say that it was uncommon for homosexual children to have homophobic parents. That obviously happens all the time. But I think you are trying to use overly precise ideas to analyse human sexuality. It’s complex and messy and the result of many different factors. You can’t completely isolate sexual attraction from identity or social background; indeed it seems blindingly obvious to me that upbringing would have an effect on an individual’s willingness to think about, accept or acknowledge any latent same-sex attraction they experience. It can be hard for an individual who is raised to reject same-sex sexual activity as perverted or morally wrong to even consider the possibility that it’s something they might experience themselves. People ignore or reject aspects of themselves all the time. I can’t be certain, but my experience suggests that human sexuality is probably much more fluid than we generally expect as a result of long-standing social conventions. This is something that might change as same-sex relationships lose their taboo. And maybe I’m totally wrong; maybe homosexuality is just the result of a bunch of physiological changes. I find it hard to reconcile though.
  - bayesian_horse 7y ago
    Some of the most important things to know about homosexuality is that it's neither a choice, curable nor preventable. There indeed seems to be an immutable difference between those who are primarily/exclusively attracted to the same or the opposite sex. But actual behavior, affected by culture and circumstances, does make all of this more difficult. Homosexuals are often perfectly able to "function" in heterosexual intercourse, and heterosexuals in homosexual intercourse. But the study didn't ask for that, they asked for the underlying preference. They may even have used physical measurements. Yes, there are studies where the participants are exposed to different stimuli and their arousal is measured physiologically.

wolco 7y ago

It is genetic in a number people but environmental factors play a big part. More than one thing can cause it. One reason: Later children in large families are more likely to be gay but the reason might be related to the mother already being exposed to hormones with earlier children. On an evolutionary scale this might make sense that the first born are more likely not to be gay as to pass on the genes but later children population control might make more sense. Another might be hormone levels of the mother. Another might be gene related where physical changes are different Another might be gene related that increase gender fluidity which combined with society can shape sexuality But we do know there isn't a single simple gene.

bayesian_horse 7y ago

It can be compared to a dice. If you throw a dice, the outcome is determined by physical laws. But you still can't predict it, because the problem is too complex. Sexual orientation seems to be somewhat similar, in that environmental factors, akin to chance, lead to choosing one path among several.