Theories of Homosexuality

As a society, we feed off of each other for what a proper response to something may be. As children, we first look to see our mother’s reaction after falling down; if she is calm, I should also be. We look to each other for what a definition of things should be, as well. In the 1950’s, it was generally obscene for a woman on television to show her belly button, whereas today we will show nude breasts on primetime programming. This follows the sociological theory of symbolic interactionism, where society and individual social interaction provides a subjective meaning to deviant behavior. Many social definitions change for the better, however some change for the worse. One such example was once viewed as normal, with no second thoughts given to it, but now is seen as an actual social problem affecting some groups aversely. This is the topic of homosexuality, a subject that has been on the receiving end of both accepting and discriminating cultures for thousands of years.

One theory that many psychologist and scientist are trying to prove is that homosexuality has a fundamental biological basis. Similar to most mammalian species, humans at conception are females (McKnight 22). Toward the end of the first trimester is when the babies with a “male genetic message” begin to have small doses of two hormones, chorionic gonadotropin and luteinizing hormone, which start the altering process of the gonads into testes (McKnight 22). The hormones two jobs are to control the sexual development and control their function (McKnight 22). When the brain starts to develop masculine characteristics and lose the feminine characteristics, the processes are separate and occur at different

A pattern emerges where the scholarly literature exploring this topic is largely focused on males. Reason being is that it appears that males are the sex who are predominantly homosexual in their orientation (LeVay & Baldwin, 2012). However, the sensitivity within the discourse of sexual orientation arises when it is debated upon whether one 's sexual preference is innate at birth, hence a force of nature or biology, or if it is a result of culture, nurture or environmental factors (Emmanuele et al., 2010). Furthermore, an experimental design will be proposed to further examine this topic. Comparing the three chosen studies, it is evident that a biological and endocrinological perspective does account for sexual orientation (Kraemer et al., 2006; Manning et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2008). Of the studies that currently exist on this topic, data shows that prenatal testosterone levels are indicative of sexual orientation (Kraemer et al., 2006; Manning et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2008). This paper addresses a topic that is relevant in today 's society; a topic that has, for the most part, been written off as having any scientific roots (Emmanuele et al., 2010). This paper counters that belief and in reading this essay, it will be evident that biology and endocrinology have a much stronger influence on sexual orientation than previously thought.

A different possibility is that prenatal hormone levels influence the developing fetus (Levay, 2011). According to the prenatal hormonal theory of homosexuality, some male fetuses are exposed to too little testosterone. Similarly, some female fetuses are exposed to too much testosterone. These differences, in turn, can impact sexual orientation (Mustanski, Chivers, & Bailey, 2002). Regardless, homosexuality is not caused by hormone imbalances in adulthood; the hormone levels of most gay men and lesbians are within the normal range (Banks & Gartrell, 1995).

During the 1980’s indulging in homosexual activity was considered in crime, people were imprisoned when caught doing so. But in 2003 some parts of the United States, suspended the law, and made homosexuality legal, soon European countries such as Canada, Belgium, and Netherlands passed an act which approved of homosexual weddings (Bonvillain 2006). If one digs deeper into this issue, where these debatable, one can find that it roots back from religions. Most religion disapprove of homosexuality but in religions such as Hindu, for sexuality, scriptures of homosexual activity only stated that it was normal and natural, to be attracted to the same sex (Bonvillain 2006). But in today’s society the main issue is regarding the issue of males being attracted to each other, an example of this issue is ‘Homophobia of men’. Homosexuality is considered to be a cultural construct, which apart from the ‘lesbian identities’ gave rise to the ‘gay identities’ (Herek 1986). It is common for normal men, to avoid influencing with homosexual men, as they fear what the public might think of them being judged as not ‘masculine’, where as its more normal for woman to associate with lesbians or homosexual women, as they are not being judged by the rest of the females (Herek 1986). Studies showed, that the social construction of gay identities meant that there was something psychologically wrong with that person,

In 1991, Simon LaVey published scientific findings, that suggested: “sexual orientation has a biological substrate” (par 22). According to his research, the nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH-3), is considerably smaller than those seen in heterosexual men. In 1993, a study done by Dean Harmer found if there are more gay relatives on the mother’s side than the father’s side, the X chromosome can influence a male to become straight. This gene, Xq28, was found in 33 out of 40 gay brothers, therefore influencing a future sexual orientation. However, there have been other studies shown that there is no X gene connecting the sexual orientation of males. Another issue in the scientific community is not being able to agree what homosexuality is in the first place. The search for the Xq28 gay gene assumes that homosexuality is not a default, almost like a genetic mutation for a maturing human. The assumption that something awkward happened when humans were developing in the womb. The search for the gay gene could be an excuse for the cure for homosexuals. Not only that, but parents could design their babies to not be

In one article by Marcia Malory, “Homosexuality & Choice: Are Gay People ‘Born This Way’”, she goes into multiple studies on the genetics of a gay child's parents. A study conducted in 1993 the “gay gene” matter arose when it was looked into the homosexual children's parents having a different X chromosome marker. Nonetheless genes do not control our behavior completely as does environment. The brain may also play a role in sexual preference, like the study in 1991 showing the difference in neurons and pituitary glands. Later in the 2000s more studies showed that gay men have more symmetrical hemisphere and amygdala resembles that of women's. The brain develops in the womb and continues through late adulthood. When did a fetus choose its

The next study was conducted by Michael G. Dupree et al. in the year of 2003,  where they studied to see if the gene, Aromatase cytochrome P450 (CYP19), affected sexual orientation during development since it changes the levels of androgens and estrogens. Studies have shown that developing male brains are sexually altered by the hormones secreted by the fetal testes (DuPree et al., 2003). The ratio Androgen to estrogen plays an important role when it comes to developing the masculinization of the fetal brain (DuPree et al., 2003). The results of the study indicated that CYP19 did play a role in developing sexual orientation since it plays a key role in the sexual differentiation in the brain. They found more traces of CYP19 mRNA in homosexual

Also, there was a similar difference between the heterosexual men and the heterosexual women, and there was no significant difference in the volume of INAH3 between the heterosexual men who died of AIDS and those who died of other causes. This data supports that the INAH3 is actually affected by sexual orientation but not with sex. However, it cannot determine whether the size of the INAH3 in an individual is the cause or consequence of that individual's sexual orientation, and this is one of the limitation. The study of the volume of the INAH3 nuclei doesn't infer cause and effect, but only shows correlation. Moreover, the sample size of women and men who died due to AIDS is small, so it doesn't prove whether or not the role of the HIV infection may play cause the volume of INAH3 nuclei larger or smaller. Overall, human sexuality is a complex behaviour, meaning determining it by a singular nucleus in the brain is too simplistic. Nonetheless, his study opens up biological research and understand the abnormal behaviour, and it allows us to consider changing attitudes about lifestyle

Queer theory looks at the kinds of social structures and social constructs which define our ideas about sexuality as an act and sexuality as identity. As an academic field, queer theory examines how notions of hetero/homosexuality have historically being defined and how various cultures as well as periods have enforced ideas about what kinds of sexuality are normal and immoral.

Other studies conducted suggest that homosexuality might be base on difference in the brain structure of homosexual and heterosexual males. In 1991, Simon LeVay, a researcher at salks institute for biological studies in San Diego, found that an area of the brain called INAH-3 was larger in heterosexual men as in homosexual men [6]. INAH-3 is a small cell cluster in the hypothalamus that is involve regulating male sex behavior. LeVay’s finding provided clues that prove that sexual attraction to some extent might be biological. Other studies following levay’s study suggest that homosexuality might be base on genetic. It is believe that “gay gene” is passed from mother tho son.

The world has come very far with all the dramatic changes we have faced over the years. Wouldn’t you agree? As much change as the world has been through there are still numerous social problems that still exist in society today. Amongst those numerous social problems, sexual orientation and inequality stand out to me. Research from biology, psychology, and sociology is where our understanding of sexual orientation comes from. There are two hypothetical theories researchers have discovered examining the biological basis toward sexual orientation. One concept is the neurohormonal theory, biologist contend that homosexuality is caused by abnormal sex hormone levels in utero. The alternative theory is based on behavioral genetics, determining the source and magnitude of genetic impact on sexual orientation. This theory suggested the concept that gay men were genetically female. Later this theory was proven to be false. Homosexuality was considered as a pathology or mental illness. Not every psychologists agreed with that perspective. A researcher by the name of Havelock Ellis stated that homosexuality was congenital and for that reason it could not be considered as a disease. Sigmund Freud another theorist had the concept that everyone is born bisexual and that either homosexuality or heterosexuality is developed through social and personal experience. Ellis and Freud both concurred that homosexuality was not a mental illness. Despite these researchers’ opinions in 1973,

Dr. LeVay did a research and study about the brain to figure out the cause and the differences in the sexual orientation of the different people (LeVay &Valente, 2006). The main focus of his study was the brain of the homosexual and heterosexual individuals. Dr. LeVey’s research was

It has long been debated where our sexual orientation comes from, particularly whether its biological or social forces driving these behaviors. In regards to homosexuality and bisexuals, some have argued that it may be a choice that these individuals are making.(Levay 2012: 41)Some have even said it is a mental disorder that one can recover from, but there is plenty of data that says otherwise.(Levay 2012: 41)(Levay 2012: 65) I believe diverse sexual orientations develop in humans due to sex hormones during fetal life, gene influences, and other effects such as birth order influences. I’ve come to this conclusion based on the narrative provided via Dr. Simon LeVay’s book Gay Straight, and the Reason Why, and the research that has been compiled showing strong influences from a multitude or reasons. I will also be looking at a research paper by Francesca Iemmola and Andrea Camperio Ciani, who looked into genetic factors influencing sexual orientation in men. It is clear there are gender differences between men and women, and this is probably one of the strongest indicators that hormones can affect the outcome of variations in gender traits.

The realization of the homosexuality in the modern western world as a cultural, sexual and a social category has been a result of complex power relations that surround sexuality and gender. The acceptance of homosexuality in the society has met its fair share of resistance and skepticism. The view that homosexuality can be in the same league as heterosexual has led it to be viewed as a normal behavioral and moral standard (Gallagher & Baker, 2006). Inasmuch as the skeptics may not want to accept the existence of homosexuality studies show that the habit is rampant today with many gay people coming out in the open. Of interest is the political acceptance of homosexuality with passing gay rights so that it can be recognized by law. This move has given homosexuals the ability to engage in legal entities like marriage (Gallagher & Baker, 2006).