Why Are People Gay?

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

It was not until the twelfth century that homosexuality started to be condemned. This condemnation proved to live through then until now. Due to the fact that America incorporated these early views into its early laws, even the most bland of today's sex acts were seen as unlawful (“Homosexuality and Mental Health”). Since then, these laws have changed, however, there is still a primarily negative connotation on homosexuals when coming from a church or legal standpoint concerning the masses of America.

It is a fair assumption to say that America is approaching a new age in understanding and accepting the many variations of human sexual orientation. More same-sex couples have fostered children than ever before in our nation 's history. Institutions such as military and professional sports have (slowly but surely) began to accept openly gay members. Most importantly, a recent amendment to the Marriage Act of 1961 now defines marriage as a union of two people; an amendment which removed the prohibition of same-sex marriages. These landmarks in the progression of social awareness surrounding sexual orientation are derivative of scientific findings disputing the "choice" theory. As outlined in Simon LeVay 's book, Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why, the result of someone 's sexual orientation "emerges from the prenatal sexual differentiation of the brain" (LeVay 2011: 271) What LeVay means in this context is, "whether a person ends up gay or straight depends in large part on how this process of biological differentiation goes forward, with the lead actors being genes, sex hormones, and the brain systems" (LeVay 2011: 271). Much research, proven and theoretical, has been done on the concept of what makes people gay. Many factors surrounding socialization in regards to sexual orientation have undergone extensive scientific scrutiny (LeVay 2011: 77). Although there is evidence that suggests social and environmental elements play a role in sexual orientation, it is

Association (APA) classified homosexuality as a mental disorder. This led queer individuals, such as George, to constrain their true identity from the rest of society in fear of social rejection and the failure to be accepted. Some therapists employed therapy to "cure" male homosexuality during the 1950s and 1960s. The methods in these therapies involved showing patients pictures of naked men while punishing them, such as giving electric shocks (as seen in the image below). Once the patients could no longer handle the pain, therapists showed them pictures of naked women. As Neel Burton stated, “Needless to say, these cruel and degrading methods proved entirely ineffective.” The failure for these individuals to follow the gender standards would

Homosexuality has long been seen as a mental illness or disease in the past and though the times have changed, and it is no longer considered an mental illness, there are still many that agree that it is either a sin or unnatural. There have been efforts to try to convert sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual, some of these efforts are known as conversion therapy. Conversion therapy, or also known as reparative therapy or gay therapy, has brought up moral debates and has since become a controversy in the United States and other countries. Some, most being conservative Christians, still see the need to "cure" homosexuality, while mainstream practitioners see conversion therapy as harmful and unethical.

The methodology of the article involved a comprehensive review of the extant literature on the subject, as well as a review of data and articles authored by individuals on both the ex-gay side (those who support conversion therapy) and the camp of people who oppose conversion therapy. The article begins with a long overview of the discourse surrounding both conversion therapy and homosexuality in the United States, beginning with the declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973. Through a review of all of the data, the two authors then

there is no conclusive evidence that ‘reparative therapy’ is beneficial to patients. Although success rates for these therapies range from 11% (complete change in females) to 37% (complete change in males (Spitzer, 2003), it is unclear if participants were homosexual or bisexual prior to starting therapy in many of these studies. Additionally, “success” in therapy has been defined in various ways – from complete conversion to heterosexual desires and behavior to continued homosexual attraction in the context of celibacy (Spitzer, 2003; Yarhouse,

Corvino’s article “Why Shouldn’t Tommy and Jim Have Sex?” discusses the defense for homosexuality, claiming that there is nothing wrong with it. Someone who is homosexual is someone who is sexually attracted to members of their own gender and partakes in romantic relationships with them. The ancestries of same-sex attraction aren’t completely understood, and many who are involved with such feelings didn’t choose them or want them. Despite much debate over the naturality of homosexuality, scientists have remained unable to locate a genetic cause for homosexuality. While genetic factors may have a role in sexual attraction, it is an exaggeration to claim genes to cause homosexual behaviors. For example, twins share the same genes but do not

Homosexuality is a word that immediately invokes ideas of sexual attraction for me, and not just because it has the word ‘sex’ written inside of it. It has been defined to me countless times, from queer studies to the field of psychology, as being the desire for sexual interests or relations with someone of the same sex. All immediate branching identities of homosexuality, such as gay and lesbian, almost automatically receive this same sexual definition. The history of the word pressures the sexualized connotation, having originally been used to identify a mental disorder based solely in the

Being asked if the writer believes homosexuality is nature or nurture, biologically, all living things were meant to reproduce. In order to reproduce, opposite reproductive parts must come together. Take a look at humans: a male and female are needed in order to create a child. An egg and a sperm are the key components of reproducing. It is impossible for a male and a male, or a female and a female to have sexual intercourse and create a child. Advances in technology may allow it to happen in the future, but as for now, it is impossible. Naturally, a male and female

One global issue that impacts the world is origins of sexual identity. People being born gay or it being a choice is a frequently asked question. Although there is no solid evidence of gay biological genes, it is highly uncommon for someone to choose their sexual orientation. This topic is important to me because I am a part of the LGBT community and GSA. I stand up for our rights and dislike the judgement towards the LGBT community. People are born gay, it cannot be changed through any type of therapy or religious camp, and people shouldn’t be judge by it.

This essay will critically evaluate the statement that gay is innate, by firstly looking into the issue of what innateness is, before discussing it relationship with current research into homosexuality.

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.

Many people now believe the reporting of many popular newspapers and magazines report of the "discovery" of a link between a certain gene and homosexuality, but hasn't it been considered a choice for such a long time? Is homosexuality a choice rather than genetic? To answer this question we'll start off by revealing some myths of homosexuality. The next part will explain the difference between a behavioral trait and a genetic trait. Finally I'll end be unveiling the truth behind the "homosexual gene."

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.