The Issues Of The Lgbt Community

One of the strongest arguments in favor of the biological base of the homosexuality is the fact that according to the statistics every group of people, irrespectively of their nationality, social conditions and other factors includes certain percentage of gay members, approximately 6-10% (Chalabi, 2013). According to Jacques Balthazart (2011) multiple scientific twin researches prove that the changes of orientation are caused by hormonal disbalance during the prenatal period and as a result several genes of the gays are changed, also in the course of such researches the scientists found out the “region of the brain that was smaller in gay men” (Vincent, 2014).

The studies conducted used a wide array of individuals, brother-sister, brother-brother and twins. Throughout the article, majority of the focus caters to homosexual men in relation and comparison to

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) falls within societal minority groups such as low income, people of color, and disables (AHRQ, 2011). Due to their gender identity, discrimination, violence, and even denial of human rights and healthcare services is a common challenge among LGBT population. LGBT still faces many health disparities primarily related to the historic bias of healthcare professionals anti-LGBT manners even though society acceptance has been favorable. According to Ard and Makadon (n.d), “until 1973, homosexuality was listed as a disorder…, and transgender still is.” This stigma prevents healthcare professionals to openly ask questions in a non-judgmental manner related to sexual identity. On the other hand, if the patient senses that the healthcare environment is discriminating they may be reluctant to disclose important information as their sexual orientation; thus, missing important opportunities of been educated about safety and health care risks.

In conclusion, sexual prejudice has become a major concern in our community and country. It not only has affected individuals physically but also mentally as well. We have made big strides in the United States in accepting lesbians, gays, and bisexuals. This will continue to be a process as we become more educated on this topic. In this paper, I compared

Homosexuality Annotated Bibliography Adriaens, Pieter R., and Andreas De Block. “The Evolution of a Social Construction: the Case of Male Homosexuality.” Scholarly Journals, vol. 49, ser. 4, University Press, 2006, pp. 570–585.

In the twenty-four hours following the election, a surge in calls to suicide hotlines primarily from those belonging to the LGBTQ community. Trumps victory had caused thousands to suddenly fear their own futures in this country and questioned which of their rights they were going to lose in the next four years. This lead to many calling suicide hotlines for confirmation that life was worth living for and that their was always hope. Crisis lines dedicated to the LGBTQ community were specifically the ones that were most effected. The numbers of calls they were receiving were in the thousands, over doubling the average number of calls received and reaching unprecedented levels. An additional concern is that this may be causing a sudden influx trans-suicides, potentially up to ten. However, none of these cases have as of yet been confirmed, so there is a possibility that no suicides in relation to the election have occurred. Transpeople within America have a particularly precarious state in this country and the election seems likely to remove their rights in the upcoming years. Regardless, the election has increased the anxieties of countless in this country.

Early efforts to understand the range of human sexual behavior came from European doctors and scientists, including Sigmund Freud and Magnus Hirschfield (American Psychological Association, (APA), n.d). Sexuality is an important aspect of a person’s identity. Many challenges had were overcome for the LGBT population to express that part of their identity.

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.

The scientific perspective of homosexuality is whether homosexuality is caused by environmental influences or whether gay individuals are born that way. This question has been pondered byscientists for decades, but there is strong evidence to support the idea that homosexuality is an inborn characteristic. Research done on both identical and fraternal twins, show that there are higher concordance rates of gay monozygotic twins. Rathus, Nevid, and Fichner-Rathus, (2005) report that about “52% of identical (MZ) twin pairs were found to be “concordant” (in agreement) for a gay male sexual orientation, compared with 22% of fraternal (DZ) twins and only 11% of adoptive brothers” (p. 312).

The research was conducted before the start of the Gay Rights movement which has contributed to changes in data. In 1983, after the start of the Gay Rights movement, a study of 147 homosexuals was taken where 35% of the tested said that their sexual orientation was hereditary (Cameron 2). The inconsistency of data is predictable due to the change in thinking because of the Gay Rights movement. The answers from volunteers became more about the political struggle than the need for accurate scientific data. Although the elementary research did not prove that environmental situations are an underlying factor in determining sexual orientation, it did open a path for future research.

Few aspects of human behavior excite as much interest and controversy as sexual orientation. In cultures and societies today, as well as in the past, there is usually an emphasis on a specific orientation as a norm, and typically heterosexuality is perceived as such. This in turn generates a wide range of reaction to homosexuality, from its being seen as “unnatural” in moral terms, to ideas of it as threatening the stability of a culture. In recent years, however, new perspectives are emerging which strongly support that sexual orientation is by no means so easily defined, and that, when social parameters on sexual behaviors are set aside, the reality is that most people are not strictly heterosexual or homosexual. In the following,

The nature and nature of homosexuality is heavily debated. Some people believe that homosexuality is biologically determined and others believe it’s base on ones environment. This topic can be argue to be base on both nature and nurture. Studies conducted in the past decades support both the biological and environmental aspect of homosexuality.

Science is uncovered origins a lot of things over the centuries and the human created much great inventions and even explored the surface of the moon; however, one question still on everyone’s mind and science may have solved one of greatest mysteries yet which is: how did homosexuality and heterosexuality evolve? Many psychologist, biologist and scientist may agree with sexual orientation is output from a combination of biological, hormonal, environmental and emotional factors and those many factors that influence to a development of human sexual orientation. However, being homosexual or bisexual is not mentally ill or abnormal in certain ways, although sexual minority is part of social problems that makes output from misinformation or prejudicial attitude. Diversity in sexual orientation has been a subject that has been seen in different perspectives by the different people (LeVay, 2010). Today there are the homosexuals, heterosexuals and bisexuals orientated people are forming a part of our society. This paper conduct an overall study of important and strong factors and provides accurate information and explanation for those who want to better understand development of sexual orientation.

A social problem is normally a term used to describe problems with a particular area or group of people in the world. Social problems often involve problems that affect real life. It also affects how people react to certain situations. While differences in racial/ethnic prejudices have been explored extensively in past literature (e.g. Bobo and Zubrinksy’s 1996, study of differential prejudices directed toward Hispanic and Black individuals), little U.S. research has investigated how attitudes toward lesbians, gays, bisexual men, bisexual women, and male-to-female (MtF) and female-to-male (FtM) transgender (henceforth “LGBT”) may differ ( Marcus, 2015).

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.