Homosexuality: Nature verse Nurture

One of the big questions that surrounds homosexuality is nature verse nurture; the answer itself raised even more questions including whether or not a homosexual can by choice or force turn heterosexual. I’ve tried to tease out some of the ideas behind these questions.

To begin with, I will try debunk the idea of whether or not homosexuality is natural. In essence, natural means anything that is not made by man. To avoid pedanticism I determine that birth is natural, even if it is technically made by man.
So, does a boy become gay through variables that exist from conception? Or is it imprinted on his genes, a child born with the possibility to predetermine the sexual orientation?

The human genome was mapped out, however not each gene is identified with a specific use. The complex problem is that even if gene ‘a’ is for hair and ‘b’ is for eyes, when you mix ‘a’ and ‘b’ together, they then become about something entirely non related. This makes it very hard for scientists to pin point exactly which genes do what; although one day it may be possible.
In the meantime, the alternate is the idea that is is a variable that the child (at some point from conception on wards) is exposed to. Some theories include a high level of testosterone moments after conception; while others believe it is non-chemical- rather an environmental factor such as over-mothering or lack of a male figure in the house hold.

In fact, there is many psych’s who have their own beliefs and theories. Freud, who was from the early 1900’s and founded what we now know as psych-analysis described that every child starts life with ‘polymorphously perverse’ ideals with a general inclination to homosexuality (note that the term ‘perverse’ is used without any negative connotations). He strongly believed that we start life with a blank slate and over our first few years we are moulded and shaped into what we become. Freud refused to believe that homosexuality was a biological thing:

“All human beings are capable of making a homosexual object-choice and, in fact, have made one in their unconscious…”.

The problem with this, of course, is that with the advancement of medicine and science one day Freud may be proven eternally incorrect.

With the amount of evidence and feeling that stacks up against the argument, the question of Nature v Nurture often boils down to what you personally think; feel. Unfortunately it does not give a very accurate account. I do not feel any different because I have brown hair- in fact I wouldn’t know what it would be like to have natural hair of any color so I would not recognize a change in feeling anyway.

I suppose the glaring question at this point in the argument is “does it matter”? The answer is very simply ‘no’. I say this, because ultimately it doesn’t. In a perfect society all people are equal so homosexuality should not matter. But the truth in the matter is that it does matter- in fact it matters a lot. Approximately 10-13% of the population is homosexual; and exactly how would they feel if one day science proved that their attractions to each other is merely the product of defected genes? How would you like it if you woke up one morning to the morning-news just to find out that your entire life has been based upon a mutation of your genes?

I don’t see how it can really be genetics personally. While some people are purely heterosexual, some bisexual and some homosexual (of course, generalization by exclusion of many groups)- is it different gens that do each? Rather, I believe that instead we are all the same.

I believe that when we are born we all have the chance to become whatever our lives make of us. If you are raised with no discrimination against anything; then you would have no negative feelings towards a sexual act with a man or a woman. Unfortunately society does not create such a utopia. Instead it creates an array of different possibilities. Boys who come out as gay are often segregated from their straight friends, and develop a perversion against the female genitalia- often becoming hetero-phobic. Boys who are pressured into the heterosexual life but feel homosexual tendencies often lead a ‘bisexual’ life and boys who live a heterosexual life often manifest homophobic behavior to prove a point amongst their own social circles.

So then, is it merely a personal choice? I often compare it to ice cream: I personal like chocolate ice cream, but I also like strawberry. I can have a strong feeling for both. On the same basis that a person can like more than one thing- why can’t they not like more than one gender or sex? This is an argument mainly for bisexuality.

I guess the two main questions I have left to ask would be
-if it were proven to be either a defect or a psychological condition which could be cured, should it be morally right to try to correct it? We try to correct all other medical conditions, so why should this be any different? And who would get to choose? the person, the parents, the doctor, society?
-If it is proven that it is natural, but a person could change through pure though- a mere desire so bad that they can change- should a person do it?

I suppose all these questions come at a time in my life when my confusion is at a high peak. Since I came out, I’ve followed the idea that I am bisexual (or, of late,, pansexual). I have never denied nor rejected the idea that I find females sexually attractive. Because, in all honesty, I do. In fact lately I have been thinking more about females than males; a first in a few years. Furthermore, it’s been driving me nuts! I am in a situation where because I’ve lived a gay-oritentated life over the last half decade, it is near impossible for me to live a heteronormative life.

Gay, huh?