Is being straight or gay genetic and fixed?

Feb 2019
57
Planet Earth
The modern Western perception is that sexuality must be something fixed and biological. But this is a rather new idea. I have been reading a book about Western-Soviet alliances during WW2 and came across this eccentric British ambassador:

"Like many upper class Britons of his generation, Clark Kerr did not subscribe to a strict hetero- homosexual binarism. He had sexual relations with both men and women, although he evidently preferred men."

As far as upper class Britons are concerned someone like Oscar Wilde comes to my mind. He had relations with both women and men, preferring young men. Today he is seen as a Gay writer. Our modern view is more narrow. This is why I am not 100 % convinced homosexuality is hereditary.
 

Lord Oda Nobunaga

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
5,634
Ontario, Canada
The modern Western perception is that sexuality must be something fixed and biological. But this is a rather new idea. I have been reading a book about Western-Soviet alliances during WW2 and came across this eccentric British ambassador:

"Like many upper class Britons of his generation, Clark Kerr did not subscribe to a strict hetero- homosexual binarism. He had sexual relations with both men and women, although he evidently preferred men."

As far as upper class Britons are concerned someone like Oscar Wilde comes to my mind. He had relations with both women and men, preferring young men. Today he is seen as a Gay writer. Our modern view is more narrow. This is why I am not 100 % convinced homosexuality is hereditary.
Yes but this was before the discovery of DNA and what not.
It is undoubtedly Biological. The question is to what extent it is fixed.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,798
USA
Yes but this was before the discovery of DNA and what not.
It is undoubtedly Biological. The question is to what extent it is fixed.
"undoubtedly biological"

In your own words, without googling it, what does biological mean to you.

So what was biological about the Ancient Thebans? Ancient Persians? Modern Pashtun? Sambia people?

There are men out there who have had fine sex lives with women but prefer being with men, so they commit to men and call themselves gay. But they have no problems achieving an erection and having orgasms with women. Describe the biological factor involved. What is the biological factor of those repulsed by the opposite sex? Repulsed by the same sex?

Describe the biological factor that allowed young women in the 90s onward to start experimenting heavily with bisexuality. Explain how the biology changed since the 1980s and before when such behavior was taboo. They went from straight to bisexual, what changed?

What about pedophiles? Is that biological or psychological?

How about individuals with other sexual fetishes? Is a foot fetish is biological? BDSM? Scat or water sports? At what point is it biological and when is psychological, and what is the determining factor?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nina Beria

Lord Oda Nobunaga

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
5,634
Ontario, Canada
"undoubtedly biological"

In your own words, without googling it, what does biological mean to you.

So what was biological about the Ancient Thebans? Ancient Persians? Modern Pashtun? Sambia people?

There are men out there who have had fine sex lives with women but prefer being with men, so they commit to men and call themselves gay. But they have no problems achieving an erection and having orgasms with women. Describe the biological factor involved. What is the biological factor of those repulsed by the opposite sex? Repulsed by the same sex?

Describe the biological factor that allowed young women in the 90s onward to start experimenting heavily with bisexuality. Explain how the biology changed since the 1980s and before when such behavior was taboo. They went from straight to bisexual, what changed?

What about pedophiles? Is that biological or psychological?

How about individuals with other sexual fetishes? Is a foot fetish is biological? BDSM? Scat or water sports? At what point is it biological and when is psychological, and what is the determining factor?
Everything is biological. There is literally a biological basis for everything. Your eyes, hands, legs etc etc are all determined by biology.

So how many times do we need to keep having the same argument? This is the third time now?
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,798
USA
Everything is biological. There is literally a biological basis for everything. Your eyes, hands, legs etc etc are all determined by biology.

So how many times do we need to keep having the same argument? This is the third time now?
I'll keep bringing it up every single time you post in this thread when you blatantly misconstrue what biology means, and how it differs from psychology, sociology, etc. While you love using the term for a catch-all of every single thing in existence in the universe, nobody else in the world agrees with you which is why there actually is a field of study called biology. And definitions, which include: "a branch of knowledge that deals with living organisms and vital processes"
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,798
USA
No one agrees with me that organic life is distinguished by Biology?
No one besides little children would agree with you that biology encompasses every aspect of every discussion about everything that has matter. There is a distinct difference in the fields of biology from say psychology or sociology. You disagree, solely because you lost an argument. You started out this ridiculous thread pressing the DNA aspect as a cause, even on this page "es but this was before the discovery of DNA and what not." As soon as someone asks about other aspects that fly in the face of "its genetic" suddenly you alter the definition of biology to encompass everything.

Did Freud deal with biology because he dealt with human brains? No, different subject.
Is this forum dedicated to the study of biology, because history is written by humans, who are made from organic life? No, history is history and its not biology.

And I'm 99% you actually are aware of the difference in definitions and usage. You just can't discuss them online. Because as soon as you have to contemplate how Ancient Greek pederasty and homosexuality had anything to do with DNA, or why Girls Gone Wild is biological, suddenly you have to shift, redirect, and avert. Otherwise your talking points don't make any sense.
 

Lord Oda Nobunaga

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
5,634
Ontario, Canada
No one besides little children would agree with you that biology encompasses every aspect of every discussion about everything that has matter. There is a distinct difference in the fields of biology from say psychology or sociology. You disagree, solely because you lost an argument. You started out this ridiculous thread pressing the DNA aspect as a cause, even on this page "es but this was before the discovery of DNA and what not." As soon as someone asks about other aspects that fly in the face of "its genetic" suddenly you alter the definition of biology to encompass everything.

Did Freud deal with biology because he dealt with human brains? No, different subject.
Is this forum dedicated to the study of biology, because history is written by humans, who are made from organic life? No, history is history and its not biology.

And I'm 99% you actually are aware of the difference in definitions and usage. You just can't discuss them online. Because as soon as you have to contemplate how Ancient Greek pederasty and homosexuality had anything to do with DNA, or why Girls Gone Wild is biological, suddenly you have to shift, redirect, and avert. Otherwise your talking points don't make any sense.
Freud is a joke. Most of these psychologists were, especially the European ones which were insane.

Psychology is an incomplete field specifically because it doesn't take the Brain into consideration as a physical organ.

Lost an argument? Are you kidding? Go back and read all of my responses to you. For instance you were the one who claimed that 23andme is unreliable because of an unrelated issue. 23andme only provided the DNA samples, they didn't actually conduct the study.

If I am being honest your stance on this issue is outdated. By at least a decade if not more.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,798
USA
Freud is a joke. Most of these psychologists were, especially the European ones which were insane.

Psychology is an incomplete field specifically because it doesn't take the Brain into consideration as a physical organ.

Lost an argument? Are you kidding? Go back and read all of my responses to you. For instance you were the one who claimed that 23andme is unreliable because of an unrelated issue. 23andme only provided the DNA samples, they didn't actually conduct the study.

If I am being honest your stance on this issue is outdated. By at least a decade if not more.
LOL, I'm sorry my stance isn't up to date with latest talking points. I'm still wondering how Ancient Greek homosexuality was biological, or any of the other dozen or so past and present examples I've asked you to address but that you have avoided like the plague. Feel free to use your most up to date talking points to explain that. Maybe you can find a 23andme sourced study. Or else you can go ask others on Quora or something to give you better talking points after "everything is biological" stops working.

Also, so you get your propaganda straight, I suggested that using 23andme data as a scientific source for a study is like using David Irving as a historic source for a historical paper on the Holocaust.
 

Lord Oda Nobunaga

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
5,634
Ontario, Canada
LOL, I'm sorry my stance isn't up to date with latest talking points. I'm still wondering how Ancient Greek homosexuality was biological, or any of the other dozen or so past and present examples I've asked you to address but that you have avoided like the plague. Feel free to use your most up to date talking points to explain that. Maybe you can find a 23andme sourced study. Or else you can go ask others on Quora or something to give you better talking points after "everything is biological" stops working.

Also, so you get your propaganda straight, I suggested that using 23andme data as a scientific source for a study is like using David Irving as a historic source for a historical paper on the Holocaust.
Not latest talking points, latest research.
How wouldn't they be biological? Why can't it be? Where is the contradiction as opposed to current homosexuality?

Which has nothing to do with the actual study. As I already explained your perception of the study is not consistent with what the study actually entails. After this one you can bet there will be a lot more. Which is why this argument is so awkward. That eventually another study will come out and then another, etc etc.