Do you still think that sexual orientation is biologically determined?

There is no evidence that sexual orientation is biologically determined. In fact, there is evidence that disproves it. They are called twins. Since identical twins experience the same hormone bath in the womb and the same DNA, when one twin is gay, both should be gay 100% of the time. But both are gay less than 15% of the time (11% for men; 14% for women). In fact, non-identical twins are twice as likely to both be gay as identical twins, which can only be explained by environmental factors, not DNA. At best, sexual orientation may be biologically influenced. But clearly, the major cause of same-sex attraction is social in nature. It is nurture, not nature that is the primary cause of sexual orientation. And sexual orientation is not something that is fixed and unchanging, but changes over time.

And now, there is a report released showing that 49% of young people in the United Kingdom say they are not 100% heterosexual, but experience degrees of same-sex attraction. And what’s really interesting is seeing how this compares across other age categories:

Either there is something in the water that is causing biological changes in younger people, or one’s sexual orientation is influenced by social factors. Surely it’s the latter. As homosexuality has become more acceptable, more people are open to same-sex attraction and exploring same-sex experiences. That’s not to say that all same-sex attraction is culturally influenced. There are other sociological factors as well. One thing is clear, however, and that is that the “born this way” meme needs to die. It’s unscientific. Same-sex attraction (particularly the exclusive form) may feel like it is part and parcel of one’s identity, but those desires are not caused by biology or anything prior to one’s birth. The causes of same-sex attraction are primarily (if not exclusively) social in nature.

See also:

Randy Says:

August 31, 2015 at 3:42 am

Jason,

You said: “There is no evidence that sexual orientation is biologically determined. In fact, there is evidence that disproves it.”

Then you went on to cite reports that indicate sexual orientation is influenced rather than dominated by biology.

Ok, so are you admitting that sexual orientation is at least partially influenced by biology? If so, then you are admitting what is really quite obvious to most.

Gay people often, not always, but often, look different, sound different, etc. And those differences are very often evident at very early ages – long before they have been influenced much by environment. It seems obvious that something about those people is genetically different.

Your point seems to be that God would not usually make a person gay – it is a bad choice, a sin, not biologically determined. Then you seem to say, well, it usually is not biologically determined.

And, incidentally, your reports seem hand picked. Are there not other studies that would indicate quite different results? If you intend to be fair, you should cite those reports that do not fit your opinion.

Randy

LikeLike

August 31, 2015 at 4:30 am

You said that identical twins are each gay about 15% of time, then you went on to say that “non-identical twins are twice as likely to both be gay as identical twins,….”

If that is true, then the non identical twins are each gay about 30% of the time.

According to this article in the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/07/15/what-percentage-of-the-u-s-population-is-gay-lesbian-or-bisexual/

only 1.7% of Americans consider themselves gay.

So, in a random drawing of two unrelated Americans, if the first drawn is gay, then the second would be gay about 1.7% of the time.

Therefore, according to the sources you cite, identical twins are about 8 or 9 times more likely to be each be gay than the general population and non-identical twins are about 17 times more likely to each be gay as the general population.

Sounds like a very strong biological component, doesn’t it?

All this reminds me of the expression about lies and statistics.

Since I always give you advice, here is some more: Don’t form a conclusion and then look for evidence. Look at the evidence and then reach a conclusion. 🙂

jasondulle Says:

September 1, 2015 at 2:12 am

Randy,

I am open to the possibility that there is a biological component to same-sex attraction, but with two caveats: 1) There is no solid evidence in favor of this proposition; 2) At best it would be a contributing factor, not a determinative factor in actual same-sex attraction.

As for the study I cite, it’s the largest and most comprehensive study on gay twins.

As for the math, the claim is not that 11% of male twins and 14% of female identical twins are gay, but that in the case of identical twins, when at least one twin is gay, the other twin is also gay in only 11% of cases (for males). So out of 1,000 sets of identical twins, we would expect to find that ~20 involved a scenario where at least one twin was gay. Of those 20 pairs of twins, we would expect find 2 pairs of twins that were both gay.

Jason

SonofMan Says:

September 1, 2015 at 10:20 am

Jason,
your theory is that if sexual orientation was biological all identical twins should be 100% one way or the other. Do you suppose that same theory is applicable to left handedness and right handedness? Left eyed or right eyed? ears? brain hemispheres?

January 30, 2015:
Are your twins right handed or left handed? Or perhaps, one of each? Twins have played an important role in scientific research of the handedness issue, although in many ways they muddle the mystery more than resolve it.
Handy Facts
• Less than 10% of the population is left handed.
• There are about 50% more left handed males than females.
• 20% of all identical twin pairs have one right handed twin and one left handed.

Strange customs and beliefs are associated with left handedness in cultures around the world and throughout history. Unfortunately, in most cases, left handedness is linked with sinister or dubious characteristics. For example, an ancient Iroquois legend describes the creation of the world by a set of twins. The right handed twin created landscapes, plants and natural creatures. The left handed twin created snakes, thorns and storms!

See full source article:

http://multiples.about.com/cs/funfacts/a/aatwinhand.htm

September 3, 2015 at 4:50 am

I understood the math. The study I cited is from the Center of Disease Control, and also considered very authoritative.

The CDC says 1.6 percent of the American population is gay, thus, the chance of any two random persons both being gay would be .016 x .016 = .000256. About 2.56 persons out of 10,000. Your source, which I admit, surely also seems authoritative, says 2 out of 1000 sets of identical twins would be gay. Thus, identical twins have 10 times the chance of sharing that trait as two random persons. I am not saying 10 times as many identical twins will be gay as 2 random persons, only that if the first identical twin is gay, his twin is 10 times more likely to be gay than is the person born in a different city with different parents. Regarding non identical twins, your study seems to indicate the ratio is even greater.

The very curious part about your study, though, is that twice as many non identical twins are both gay as identical twins. That fact may indicate that genetics, does play a role. Possibly homosexuality is sometimes caused by a particular gene (or pattern of genes.) that does not lend to the dividing process that causes twins. It could be true that particular gene or pattern of genes somehow interferes with the dividing process and those who are genetically predisposed to be gay are not as likely to be identical twins.

Maybe, just maybe, there is a third component to all this. We seem to agree that the body (genetics) plays a role (or you say maybe plays a role) and that the mind (environment) plays a role. Maybe the soul also plays a role. Maybe, and this is only a maybe, maybe Bruce Jenner is right and his soul is a woman inside a man’s body.

The move to normalize incest | Theo-sophical Ruminations Says:

April 14, 2016 at 12:05 am

[…] incest as morally benign as well. Many Americans falsely believe that “same-sex attraction” is biologically determined (which is why, in large part, they have come to accept homosex), and are likely to reason that […]

Thinking to Believe