Did you choose your sexual orientation?

[Panache]

The ten people who claim to have chosen their sexual orientation in this poll (the subject of the thread) are talking bollocks.

t's not something that is chosen. It is felt.
Anyone who claims it is a choice is lying.

I have been detecting no small amount of vitriol from the fatalist department directed at us folk who believe in human agency.

Why is it so important to y'all that people not have any say in who they are? Is it because you are ashamed of who you are and don't want to take responsibility for it?

The subject of choice really should have no bearing on the controversy surrounding homosexuality. Supposing that I am right, and that everyone can exert some degree of control over who they are, why should it matter?

Setting aside the obvious absurdity of thinking that two (or three or howevermany) people loving each other is a bad thing. The real issue here is that what consenting adults voluntarily choose to do with or two each other is no one's damn business.

If it could be conclusively proven beyond a doubt that homosexuals could choose to be straight if they wanted, why should they have to?

Treating a belief in human agency to affect ones own preferences as some sort of homophobic stance implies that if homosexuality is a choice, that it is somehow an immoral one. Which is just plain stupid.

 

[Panache]

So, are you asserting that several billions of people, including yourself, were capable of being attracted to their own gender, but that they chose unconsciously to like the opposite sex?

Yes indeed. I congratulate you on your keen reading comprehension skills.

 

[Dezaad]

Yes indeed. I congratulate you on your keen reading comprehension skills.

Do you have ANY evidence for the notion that people unconsciously choose to prefer a specific gender? Any at all?

 

[misterman]

Yes indeed. I congratulate you on your keen reading comprehension skills.

So you assert that it would be relatively easy to convince pretty much everyone on the planet to be gay?

Tell me, why, even when there is enormous, crushing pressure on some people to be heterosexual, do they choose to be gay? Why do some people with absolutely no gay cultural influence and plenty of open disapproval and shame learned about homosexuality and the risk of being shunned, outcast, and unhappy "choose" to be gay anyway?

 

[Panache]

Do you have ANY evidence for the notion that people unconsciously choose to prefer a specific gender? Any at all?

Yes, as a matter of fact.

If I were snarky, I would just tell you to go back and read my posts, but as it stands, I am happy to reiterate.

A disproportionate number of people in China prefer pig intestines to pasta as compared to people in the US. If this were some innate, immutable genetic trait, one would expect those born of Chinese ancestry but raised in the US to exhibit similar preferences.

It turns out this is not the case. The obvious conclusion can be drawn that cultural differences between China and the US have led many people in China to have a preference for pig intestines, while many people in the US have been culturally conditioned to think that the very idea is disgusting, and not even want to try it.

As a counterexample, there are a few people who were raised in the US with all its biases against eating pig entrails, chose to go visit China of their own free will, decided to give pig intestines a try, and as a result now prefer pig intestines to pasta.

Similar evidence of cultural, environmental, economic, social, and biological influences, along with personal choices can be seen to affect tastes and preferences in music, movies, books, schools, cars, computers, pinball machines, friends, enemies, pogo sticks, unicycles, airplanes, restaurants, and religions.

Why the hell should sexual preferences be excluded from the list?

Furthermore, whose dumb idea was it for gender to be the sole defining attribute of a sexual preference?

Were I to try and describe my own orientation I would say that I definitely have ruberpiloverdocularbixchromosexual leanings, but I am pretty open minded and don't like to limit myself. Would you consider that orientation innate and immutable?

 

[misterman]

A disproportionate number of people in China prefer pig intestines to pasta as compared to people in the US.

Nobody said that no "preferences" are chosen, or influenced. But you just can't start with pig intestines and move to sexual desire.

 

[Panache]

So you assert that it would be relatively easy to convince pretty much everyone on the planet to be gay?

Ostensibly not. I never suggested anything of the sort. That would be like trying to convince everyone on the planet to be a libertarian. Never going to happen.

Do you believe that being libertarian wasn't my choice? That I was somehow innately, immutably born libertarian, and that there is no choice or series of choices I could ever make in my life that would allow me to ever be anything other than a libertarian?

Tell me, why, even when there is enormous, crushing pressure on some people to be heterosexual, do they choose to be gay? Why do some people with absolutely no gay cultural influence and plenty of open disapproval and shame learned about homosexuality and the risk of being shunned, outcast, and unhappy "choose" to be gay anyway?

You think there would be one reason for everyone? One motive to rule them all? Pick any combination of the following:

1)Rebellion against what is expected of them - This I can seriously relate to. its pretty damn liberating to defy the box that your environment tries to force you into and exert some control over your own life.

2)Attention/Exploration - Half the girls at my middle school were vegan lesbian wiccans for a while when it was cool, and then magically became omnivorous straight agnostics once they got to college. A few of them stayed vegan. A few of them stayed lesbian. A couple of them stayed wiccan.

3)Opportunity - As an example, take a nerdy, unpopular guy in high school where girls treat him like crap, and introduce a handsome charming gay guy who everyone likes and actually treats him like a human being. Predispositions be damned, plenty of people would "discover" their latent homosexuality in that situation and plenty of others.

4)Masochism - Hopefully it isn't commonplace, but some people are addicted to self pity, and go out of their way to deliberately put themselves in positions that most would find hard to understand.

This is by no means a comprehensive list. I am sure there are plenty of reason to defy social convention and risk the disapproval of society by choosing to be gay.

Indulge me for a moment by playing along with my assertion that we can exert control over our preferences. You may think that it was silly of them to choose to be gay when it comes with so much stigma, but do you think it was an immoral choice? Do you think it was even the wrong choice for them? I don't.

 

[Zinc Route]

I hate when people refer to it as a "lifestyle"

People that are gay can have completely different lifestyles from one another. Saying its a lifestyle choice makes it sounds faddish and elective

**** That's a very good point . Can the term aberration be used in that context then??? It's not as Draconian as it sounds.

 

[Panache]

Nobody said that no "preferences" are chosen, or influenced. But you just can't start with pig intestines and move to sexual desire.

Pig intestines are a collection of protons neutrons and electrons floating through space.

Pasta is a collection of protons neutrons and electrons floating through space.

Penises are a collection of protons neutrons and electrons floating through space.

There is no reason for the rules that govern how we like our protons neutrons and electrons to be arranged before putting them in our mouth to differ from one to the other unless there is some fundamental distinction between the two that would require a different set of rules.

If such a distinction exists as you claim, then the burden of proof is upon you to demonstrate not only that there is a fundamental distinction, but that this distinctions requires a different set of rules.

As it stands, I have claimed that there are a number of factors which affect how we like our particles arranged, and that one of those factors is the choices we make. I have backed this claim up with pig intestines, and insofar as that goes the claim has yet to be challenged.

If a difference exists between one preference and the other, please feel free to prove it.

 

[Dezaad]

Yes, as a matter of fact.

If I were snarky, I would just tell you to go back and read my posts, but as it stands, I am happy to reiterate.

A disproportionate number of people in China prefer pig intestines to pasta as compared to people in the US. If this were some innate, immutable genetic trait, one would expect those born of Chinese ancestry but raised in the US to exhibit similar preferences.

It turns out this is not the case. The obvious conclusion can be drawn that cultural differences between China and the US have led many people in China to have a preference for pig intestines, while many people in the US have been culturally conditioned to think that the very idea is disgusting, and not even want to try it.

As a counterexample, there are a few people who were raised in the US with all its biases against eating pig entrails, chose to go visit China of their own free will, decided to give pig intestines a try, and as a result now prefer pig intestines to pasta.

Similar evidence of cultural, environmental, economic, social, and biological influences, along with personal choices can be seen to affect tastes and preferences in music, movies, books, schools, cars, computers, pinball machines, friends, enemies, pogo sticks, unicycles, airplanes, restaurants, and religions.

Why the hell should sexual preferences be excluded from the list?

Furthermore, whose dumb idea was it for gender to be the sole defining attribute of a sexual preference?

Were I to try and describe my own orientation I would say that I definitely have ruberpiloverdocularbixchromosexual leanings, but I am pretty open minded and don't like to limit myself. Would you consider that orientation innate and immutable?

I don't consider any of this to be evidence. It is argumentation, mostly by trying to demonstrate analogy, without any evidence that the analogies are applicable. There is plenty of evidence, anecdotal, biological and clinical, that sexual orientation is established before individuals make such choices.

I don't even see you offering anecdotal evidence that you yourself chose your sexual gender preference, only the possibility that you might have.

 

[Panache]

I don't consider any of this to be evidence. It is argumentation, mostly by trying to demonstrate analogy, without any evidence that the analogies are applicable. There is plenty of evidence, anecdotal, biological and clinical, that sexual orientation is established before individuals make such choices.

So present it.

I don't even see you offering anecdotal evidence that you yourself chose your sexual gender preference, only the possibility that you might have.

You haven't been listening then. I have chosen, and continue to choose, to be ruberpiloverdocularbixchromosexual, but I might change my mind later.:2wave:

 

[misterman]

Do you believe that being libertarian wasn't my choice? That I was somehow innately, immutably born libertarian, and that there is no choice or series of choices I could ever make in my life that would allow me to ever be anything other than a libertarian?

Of course not. Nobody said there are no choices. But some things aren't choices.

1)Rebellion against what is expected of them - This I can seriously relate to. its pretty damn liberating to defy the box that your environment tries to force you into and exert some control over your own life.

You can rebel by choosing to have sex with someone. You can't choose to LIKE having sex with someone.

2)Attention/Exploration - Half the girls at my middle school were vegan lesbian wiccans for a while when it was cool, and then magically became omnivorous straight agnostics once they got to college. A few of them stayed vegan. A few of them stayed lesbian. A couple of them stayed wiccan.

You can get attention by choosing to have sex with someone. You can't choose to LIKE having sex with someone.

3)Opportunity - As an example, take a nerdy, unpopular guy in high school where girls treat him like crap, and introduce a handsome charming gay guy who everyone likes and actually treats him like a human being. Predispositions be damned, plenty of people would "discover" their latent homosexuality in that situation and plenty of others.

You can take advantage of opportunity by choosing to have sex with someone. You can't choose to LIKE having sex with someone.

4)Masochism - Hopefully it isn't commonplace, but some people are addicted to self pity, and go out of their way to deliberately put themselves in positions that most would find hard to understand.

You can engage in masochism by choosing to have sex with someone. You can't choose to LIKE having sex with someone.

This is by no means a comprehensive list. I am sure there are plenty of reason to defy social convention and risk the disapproval of society by choosing to be gay.

You can choose to engage in gay behavior. That's not the same thing as choosing to "be" gay.

Indulge me for a moment by playing along with my assertion that we can exert control over our preferences. You may think that it was silly of them to choose to be gay when it comes with so much stigma, but do you think it was an immoral choice? Do you think it was even the wrong choice for them? I don't.

Didn't say it was wrong or immoral. Just doesn't support your argument.

 

[Panache]

Of course not. Nobody said there are no choices. But some things aren't choices.

But it is an aspect of who I am, just like my sexual orientation. I am a ruberpiloverdocularbixchromosexual libertarian. Why is you think that I chose the latter part of my nature but not the former?

You can rebel by choosing to have sex with someone. You can't choose to LIKE having sex with someone.

You can rebel by choosing to be something that you are not expected to be. If you choose to have sex with someone, liking it is one of the possible consequences of that choice. If you don't choose to have sex with them, it is not.

You can get attention by choosing to have sex with someone. You can't choose to LIKE having sex with someone.

Your choices about who you have sex with can influence who you LIKE to have sex with. Just like your choices about what to eat can influence what you LIKE to eat.

You can take advantage of opportunity by choosing to have sex with someone. You can't choose to LIKE having sex with someone.

If your first attempts at romance with the opposite sex lead only to pain, and your first positive romantic experience is with someone of the same sex, you don't think that will colour your preference even a little bit? Seriously?

Are you that isolated from the world around you that you make no connections at all between the connotations of your early experiences and your preferences later in life?

You can choose to engage in gay behavior. That's not the same thing as choosing to "be" gay.

If being gay is what you want more than anything in the world, and you consistently choose to engage in gay behavior and you make an effort to analyze why your perceptions of the world have led you to the preferences that you hold, and discipline your mind to perceive the world differently, then you can effect a genuine change in any aspect of your character.

Didn't say it was wrong or immoral. Just doesn't support your argument.

Why do you suppose so many people find my position so vitriolically contentious for attributing to people the agency to make a choice that is perfectly reasonable to make?

 

[CriticalThought]

In all honesty, I hate being gay.

Often when I've read or seen a good heterosexual romance, and I begin to feel sad that the whole marriage to a good woman with two and half kids is not very likely. Sure, I could move to Canada and marry some guy up there and maybe even adopt some kids but that all feels manufactured compared to the joy that heterosexuals get to feel out of naturally crafting their family.

I even spoke to my family about my thoughts of joining the military at some point and one of their main concerns was I would not fair well there because they don't exactly take kindly to gays.

Even thinking about gay sex bugs me at times like these because it seems so disjointed compared to heterosexual sex. There has always been something I have found beautiful in the act of heterosexuals making love and something inherently ugly when homosexuals do it.

I sometimes fantasize about being heterosexual and hitting on women and acting all traditionally masculine. Then reality sets in and I realize I have never felt any sort of romantic attraction towards women. There just seems to be those times when I wish I could wave a magic wand and I could be normal. I sometimes even think, would it be that dishonest or selfish to a woman if I married her and had kids with her even though I would probably never feel that way about her? It's not like I couldn't force myself to have sex with a woman. Is it so wrong of me to want what is so desirable in society as marriage and a family?

And then there are times I wish I could wave a magic wand and I wouldn't feel that internalized stigma and that I could find a relationship with a man that would be just as fulfilling as any heterosexual relationship. But then reality sets in again and I realize that gay men are usually just looking for sex, and even if I could find one who wasn't, it seems unlikely I could find one who would share with me the level of intimacy and affection that I desire so much more than sex and which is so readily apparent in so many heterosexual relationships but for which I have yet to see in any homosexual relationships. I unfortunately read stories, comics, and manga which illustrates the prefect gay romances, which could never occur in reality and I often feel I am looking for something that simply does not and will not ever exist.

I stake so much of my self esteem of the progression of societal approval towards gay marriage because on some level I believe it will solve my own feelings and every recent loss has been like a dagger to my heart and a boost to my own insecurities.

I don't know if I ever chose to be the way I am, but I do know that there have been many times I would have chosen to be normal. In my more desperate moments, I have little doubt that I would go as far as to deceive myself in order to feel normal. I often feel ashamed that I am not proud to be gay, and that it is hard for me to publicly call myself gay. Perhaps celibacy will just have to be the option for me and in time that loneliness and desire for the perfect relationship will go away. I've always hated the idea of dying alone, but it doesn't seem like I have many options given that I can't see myself ever loving a man in the way a man can love a woman.

 

[Panache]

But then reality sets in again and I realize that gay men are usually just looking for sex, and even if I could find one who wasn't, it seems unlikely I could find one who would share with me the level of intimacy and affection that I desire so much more than sex and which is so readily apparent in so many heterosexual relationships but for which I have yet to see in any homosexual relationships.

Sounds like a case of the grass being greener on the other side. Most hetero men are also just looking for sex and many women struggle with similar fears of never meeting the kind of guy they are looking for.

I would tell you that eventually perseverance prevails, and they eventually find the man of their dreams, but I don't think most of them do. Life is like that sometimes.

I don't know if I ever chose to be the way I am, but I do know that there have been many times I would have chosen to be normal. In my more desperate moments, I have little doubt that I would go as far as to deceive myself in order to feel normal.

Do you wish you were heterosexual now?

 

[CriticalThought]

Do you wish you were heterosexual now?

It would make life considerably easier.

 

[Antagony]

Can you give me any reason not to think that everyone else is similarly bisexual and simply haven't chosen to broaden their own horizons?

Because, as teenagers, when the hormones first start kicking in, many people experiment with their sexuality--or at least think about it--but most soon realise what really turns them on and what doesn't. For most, it isn't a matter of choosing, it's a matter of getting to know what triggers desire in them.

Whose to say that that predisposition was even genetic in origin? I grew up with a mom and dad. All my friends had moms and dads. My society casually assumed heterosexuality to be normal.

There is strong evidence emerging that chemical conditions in the womb are one of--if not "the"--biggest factor in determining a boy's sexuality (I don't know if the same applies to girls). Go on YouTube and search "the making of me John Barrowman" to see a documentary which explores different explanations for what makes people gay. It mentions a study which revealed that the more older brothers a boy has, the greater the probability he will become gay, and significantly so! This suggests mothers either have a diminishing amount of something which tends to make boys heterosexual, or an increasing amount of something which tends to make them homosexual. Whatever it is, the statistics do seem to discredit the notion that it is a conscious choice.

I agree with all but the last part, which I have emphasized in bold.

As far as I can tell, very few people evaluate their anything and make a conscious decision about what they prefer. Could you please explain to me the conscious decision making process you went through when you sat down and weight the pros and cons of your preference in music? Or food? Did you ever sit down and say "Gee, it would be way more advantageous for me to prefer earth tones over pastels"?

I have yet to hear a compelling reason to believe that sexual preference is fundamentally different from any other preference, which clearly culture, environment, experience and personal choices help shape.

Well all I can say is that most people seem to be adamant that it is different... and considerably so. But explaining why to someone whose experience is not the same is difficult, to say the least. It's like trying to explain what a particular colour looks like to someone who's colour-blind.

 

[Panache]

Because, as teenagers, when the hormones first start kicking in, many people experiment with their sexuality--or at least think about it--but most soon decide what really turns them on and what doesn't.

There. I fixed it for you.

There is strong evidence emerging that chemical conditions in the womb are one of--if not "the"--biggest factor in determining a boy's sexuality

I don't recall ever saying that there were no biological factors. Quite the contrary, I have specifically included biology as one of the factors that contribute not only to sexual preferences, but to all preferences. It may well be (and probably is) the biggest factor for many people.

Show me the strong evidence that suggests that chemical conditions in the womb are the only factor in determining a boy's sexuality.

Whatever it is, the statistics do seem to discredit the notion that it is a conscious choice.

I also don't recall ever specifying that the choice be conscious. In fact, I believe I have expressed more than once my opinion that most people make many choices that they put no thought into at all.

Well all I can say is that most people seem to be adamant that it is different...

If most people seemed to be adamant that homosexuality was a mental illness, would that make them right?

Speaking of how adamant people are, what is your theory on why people are so emotionally attached to the idea that sexuality is something you have no control over? It seems to me that they seem to somehow connect the idea that homosexuality is ok to the idea that it "isn't their fault." Which seems a bit silly to me.

Do you think I am way off base here? Why else would it be such a charged subject?

 

[Panache]

It would make life considerably easier.

That wasn't really the question. Challenging existences are often more rewarding. Not having to deal with tenants and mortgages would make my life easier, but not having the funds to do the things I want to do wouldn't be worth having an easier life.

I can't imagine wanting to be different with regards to any aspect of my life, and being so convinced of my own impotence to affect a change in myself that I wouldn't even try.

I don't think wanting your life to be easier is actually the same as wanting to be straight though.

I think in your position I would try to make my life easier by examining why I staked so much of my self esteem of the progression of societal approval towards anything instead of staking it on my own successes.

In my opinion that would be way more beneficial than changing your orientation.

 

[misterman]

In my opinion that would be way more beneficial than changing your orientation.

Oh, give it a rest. You don't just decide to like girls instead of guys or vice versa. It's lunacy.

 

[Panache]

Oh, give it a rest. You don't just decide to like girls instead of guys or vice versa. It's lunacy.

I never suggested he should.

 

[misterman]

I never suggested he should.

You suggested that it's possible.

 

[Antagony]

There. I fixed it for you.

Hmm, as I'm sure you're aware, the sentence you omitted--"For most, it isn't a matter of choosing, it's a matter of getting to know what triggers desire in them."--was the point I was making; with "For most" being the key qualifier. Clearly that was not your experience, but I am confident the vast majority of people would attest to what I am saying.

I don't recall ever saying that there were no biological factors. Quite the contrary, I have specifically included biology as one of the factors that contribute not only to sexual preferences, but to all preferences. It may well be (and probably is) the biggest factor for many people.

Show me the strong evidence that suggests that chemical conditions in the womb are the only factor in determining a boy's sexuality.

And I don't recall ever saying that it was the only factor.

I also don't recall ever specifying that the choice be conscious. In fact, I believe I have expressed more than once my opinion that most people make many choices that they put no thought into at all.

Then it's really a semantic issue. While choices can be made subconsciously, it is generally accepted that they are described as such. The words "choose" and "choice" on their own generally imply conscious decisions.

If most people seemed to be adamant that homosexuality was a mental illness, would that make them right?

Speaking of how adamant people are, what is your theory on why people are so emotionally attached to the idea that sexuality is something you have no control over? It seems to me that they seem to somehow connect the idea that homosexuality is ok to the idea that it "isn't their fault." Which seems a bit silly to me.

Do you think I am way off base here? Why else would it be such a charged subject?

Unsurprisingly, I think you are way off base. For a start, the adamancy I referred to was based on related personal experiences rather than opinions, such as you described. Secondly, I don't think it is an emotional attachment so much as it is simply a strong sense of knowing oneself. The strong emotions come in when people like you--who has admitted to not experiencing things the same way--try to tell other people that their self-impressions are mistaken.

 

[Panache]

You suggested that it's possible.

Do you find the idea that something is possible offensive?

 

[misterman]

Do you find the idea that something is possible offensive?

No. Lots of things are possible. Other things aren't. I find it disturbing when people claim that impossible things are possible.