Homosexuality In The Animal Kingdom

The critics of the biological theory say “biological explanations for homosexuality are like I-phones – a new one comes out every year” (Vincent, 2014). This idea is not unreasable as while preparation of this essay, several biological theories were found in different sources (genetic, epigenetic, prenatal, hormonal). The supporters of the moral theory consider that every gay has a choice and the reasons for change of orientation are lack of another opportunity or problems with females. Usually men who become gays had weak or absent father, particularly, have not observed a positive male role in the childhood and as the result it lead to gender identity disorder and change of

There is a 50 percent rate that a heterosexual parents become a parent accidentally.(“Pappas2”) Supporting the idea that homosexual people would obviously be further committed, since they know when they are actually ready to become parents and it is impossible they would have a child accidentally. The majority of people argues that having gay parents causes children to be bullied, but kids also get bullied whether they have homosexual parents or not. Maybe for different reasons, but nonetheless still bullying. If anything, it is a society that can make having gay parents a disadvantage. Their parents’ gender isn’t what bothers the kid, but the way that society might see it is what affects them negatively.() If everyone was more supportive of gay adoption, everything wouldn’t be as hard as is right now for these people. According to Goldberg, a psychologist at Clark University in Massachusetts, people that were raised by gay and lesbian parents”feel like their perspectives on family, on gender, and on sexuality have largely been enhanced by growing up with gay parents.” (“Pappas3”) Many people that have been raised by gay couples can agree with this because it is true. They don't judge so

Many scientists have a difficult time understanding homosexuality on the evolutionary aspect. They believe a human beings’ main purpose is reproduction, which makes the sexual relationship between two males a confusing concept for most evolutionary thinkers (McKnight 1). Evolutionary thinkers believe that the less desirable genes are removed from the system when they are not breed as often, but this cannot be said for homosexual males who have been a continuing presence in most societies over numerous generations (McKnight 1). These evolutionary thinkers, like most humans, have a need to place others into

A highly debated issue concerning homosexuality is whether sexual-orientation is biologically determined or if it is a socially learned behavior. One case study done about this topic gathered that “the homosexual desire seems in most cases to be implanted in those who develop an unusually strong attachment for one parent” (Cory 1951:67). This seems to suggest that homosexuality can be influenced by family structure or other sociological elements. On the other side of this argument, there is the belief that people are born either gay or straight. Even though there is no scientific or genetic evidence to prove this, there have been many studies done and most homosexuals interviewed take this view-point. McIntosh states, “[homosexuality] is still commonly seen as a condition characterizing certain persons in the way that birthplace or deformity might characterize them” (1968:182). To support their cause and to fight for acceptance in society, it would be beneficial to convince people that sexual orientation is biologically determined. “Research indicates that people who believe that homosexuality is a choice are more likely to condemn it than are those who believe gays and lesbians are born that way”

Not just a century ago, there was an act that was considered heresy; homosexuality, a different side of sexuality found in all recesses of history. Humans are not the only ones with evidence of homosexuality in their species, it has long been debated whether it was formed from being genetically born that way or nurtured. The long found history has been only puzzling as the two sides of the spectrum in views, and only being publicly accepted in the 1940s. In Natasha Tracy’s article “Why Are People Gay? Gay By Choice or Is Being Gay Genetic?” where she goes on to discuss the legitimacy of its authenticity in being a homosexual. From the views of being born or in fact the way humans are brought up determines their sexuality, criticizing in the end the matter of sexuality is a matter to the individual and should not be criticized in any way.

Homosexuality is at the front lines of the nature versus nurture debate. Many studies have been conducted, but a clear cause has yet to be found. Anti-homosexuals, consisting mainly of religious groups, believe that homosexuality is abnormal, unnatural, and can be changed. Because of their beliefs, homosexuality must be a learned behavior. Whether homosexuality is biological or learned behavior is still a mystery, but scientists are finding more evidence to suggest the former.

Homophobes provide numerous reasons, which they view extremely valid, to back up their hatred. “It’s not natural” – a weak argument. Biologists frequently

ProQuest Research Library [ProQuest], Homosexuality. This article argues on how homosexuality is an evolutionary social construction providing facts and evidence. This is rated as a good source because the evidence connects to the topic discussed despite the drawbacks of being a little outdated by 12 years. One quote is, “Close relatives of homosexuals would have more viable offspring as a result of their presence is undeniable”(Par. 9).

Homosexuality has been around for centuries, maybe even since the beginning of human existence. Many individuals question why some people are gay and why others are not. Those that question humanity ask what exactly makes a person become attracted to the same sex and whether or not it is nature or nurture. There are three points to argue that homosexuality is natural and not by choice. Hormonal changes during pregnancy can alter the unborn child’s sexual preference even before delivery. Some professionals believe brain physicality also has a role to play in homosexuality. With a look even further into the brain, DNA was also found to potentially play a factor in sexual orientation due to the alteration in epi-markers which result in homosexuality.

A homosexual couple gets in an argument on the bus loudly for all the passengers to hear. Hearing the argument, one man on the bus approaches another making the quotation, “It makes me wonder how I would react if my own son was gay? Also, what if I were born that way?” This comment of being born that way is derived from a pro-homosexual standpoint, “They are born that way; therefore it’s natural and good” (Corvino, 1997, p. 139). Research has suggested that people may be born with certain predispositions, but that is not to say whether you should or should not act upon them. There is a great deal of debate whether homosexuals choose to be that way or if they are born that way. It is hard for individuals to control their feelings and it is hard to control which activities people find appealing. What people can control is how they act upon these feelings. Overall, determining the cause of homosexual feelings still will not determine whether it is moral to act upon them or not (Corvino, 1997, p.

In a scientific investigation on human homosexuality, there is an ongoing debate over the claim, “being gay is innate.” The debate is raised due to the unequal sense of the term, innate, in scientific discourse. As well as undetermined scientific evidence on how being gay arises. To understand why, and to lead us on to some of the scientific researches done around this, we will firstly evaluate the meaning of innateness. Then pick out a particular component out of those meanings and critically examine two main studies to conclude with the most plausible view on this unsettled debate.

Since the United States Supreme Court ruled marriages of gay individuals to be legal in all states in June 2015, some segments of society, including individuals, business and churches, continue to discriminate against gay citizens. Many of these discriminatory opinions and actions are based on individual religious beliefs. Many people feel homosexuality is a choice of lifestyle, whereas others feel that biological factors determine a person’s sexual orientation. Homosexuals want the same legal rights as heterosexuals. In addition, if it can be proven that individuals are born gay, then society’s attitude could be favorably altered. Poll data indicates that more and more people believe individuals are born gay (See Table 1). Gays would suffer less discrimination if their sexual orientation can be attributed to genetics and biology. Those who oppose homosexuality would feel their condemnation justified if it can be proven the gay lifestyle is a matter of choice. The sociopolitical implications resulting from further definitive research would be of enormous importance; however, years of research have failed to provide a definite origin of sexual orientation. Much more research is needed to close this knowledge gap.

If homosexuality was more socially acceptable, there wouldn’t be a reason to provide evidence that the act if being “gay” is genetic. In this society, being homosexual has been shunned by the public, leading to scientists trying to find a reason “they” are different. There is now a term for revealing homosexuality called, “coming out of the closet”. A study estimates that 40% of gay youth leave home due to family

If the argument of homosexual animals is not convincing enough, one must also consider the possibility of genetics. There is research suggesting that certain genetic markers on the x-chromosome are associated with homosexuality: “Using genetic mapping, the team found that a set of five genetic markers at the tip of the long arm of the X chromosome were identical in 33 of 40 pairs of homosexual brothers” (Journal Watch). This does not positively conclude that a person will be gay if he or she has these markers, but it does suggest that there are genetic factors at play rather than sexuality being merely a choice. Much of this research was done in 1993, and: “The same year, a study of twins found a significantly higher correlation of sexual orientation between identical as opposed to fraternal twins” (Bernstein 34). Two people with the same genetic makeup are more likely to both be gay or both be straight than two people with similar but not quite identical genetics.

The question of what causes some people to be sexually attracted to members of their own gender generates many different answers. In recent years, startling new research (Barinaga, 1993, p.17) has indicated that homosexuality is possibly inherited and determined by biological differences in Brain structure and genes. This study raises an interesting question: If homosexuality is hereditary, is there any basis for societal discrimination against something innate? If it is nature, it is good. If it is good, it should be accepted. A genetic component in sexual orientation would send a message to homosexuals and the society that homosexuality is not a fault, and not the fault of anyone other than nature. Gays and lesbians are born in nature, just like some people who are inherited left-handed gene from their parents.