Ignorant Pondering re; Sexual Orientation

[Masato]

Hey all

Has any scientist or group ever claimed to have found any physical evidence for sexual orientation? ie; is there a 'gay gene'?

If not, consider this hypothesis;

What if humans are born withOUT a concrete sexual preference, and one's sexual orientation is defined/developed according to our first/early significant sexual experience(s)?

Or another way to say is that our sexual orientation is not ACTIVATED at birth/for the first part of our lives, and that whatever conditions under which it awakens is what determines its tendencies; our first turn ons, like it or not, may shape us for life. (if your first turn on is as a result of a voluptuous woman for example, you will likely be attracted to bigger women, etc etc.)

Under such a theory, there would be little to no homosexuality/trans stuff in say a mennonite/amish community, as exposure to any such ideas simply would not be in their reality. If a culture is all or mostly 'straight', it would tend to breed more straight people than not, while if a culture is very open and promoting of gay activity, it would tend to breed more gay population.

This idea would give a lot more credence to CT ideas of a supposed 'gay agenda': - if homosexual images and media are more prevalent in society, the chances that that early crucial 'activation' experience is of a homosexual nature become much higher.

This theory would also suggest that victims of pedophilia are more likely to become pedophiles themselves; as even though their first experience may have been unpleasant/traumatic, it nevertheless was the experience that may have 'activated' their sex drive and defined it as such. Further, if a young person is exposed to extreme or confusing stimuli, they will likely result in having an extreme or confusing sexual orientation (trans/kinky etc)

They say we don't choose our sexual preference... but this doesn't necessarily mean its determined genetically at birth.

Has anyone heard this theory before?

Is there any scientific facts or research into the matter that would contradict this?

[Som-Pong]

As a guy who fucks ladyboys I find this thread intriguing.
For me it's behaviour that triggers sexuality, like AntiD constantly posting like a portal, makes me kind of feel like entering that Swamp Rat. I reckon sexuality is pretty much fluid, otherwise you ain't getting people fucking sheep and shit like that.

[Daglord]

nurture > nature imho.

[Som-Pong]

;pends on who is nurturing you mate. That's the thing; it all DEPENDS.

[Canuckster]

[Daglord]

;pends on who is nurturing you mate. That's the thing; it all DEPENDS.

exactly. I think that is what masato is trying to say.

imo, it is more dependent on our environmental variables than any genes or hereditary factors.

[Benwahwah]

This is an interesting read on the subject. It isn't definitive, by the scientists own admission, but it indicates that there could be something on the genome level.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/largest-ever-study-into-the-gay-gene-erodes-the-notion-that-sexual-orientation-is-a-choice-9875855.html

[Megaterio Llamas]

Thing is, you could be wearing DEPENDS in middle age if you stray too far from normal sexual practice.

[Canuckster]

I think the argument needs to be made that while orientation can indeed be influenced by outside stimulus, ie rape, molestation, divorce and traumatic emotional events, when left to a normal course of events, a normal family life with no serious issues, the vast majority of people would be the gender they are born. That being said, humans are VERY easily manipulated in all manner of ways, sexual orientation notwithstanding.

[Vutulaki-san]

Thing is, you could be wearing DEPENDS in middle age if you stray too far from normal sexual practice.

This man speaks with some authority here.