Late-blooming lesbians: women can switch sexualities as they mature

[Tucker Case]

Just because something can change later in life doesn't mean it isn't genetic.

Proof of this: baldness.

The most common variety, Androgenic alopecia, is beleived to be caused by a genetic propensity towards certain hormone production later in life which is believed to be on the X chromosome.

At the same time, there are forms of genetically-induced alopecia which cause baldness from birth onward.

Then there is a range of genetically-induced alopecia in both of these scenarios.

Even still, there are environmentally induced alopecias which can mimic the same end results as these genetically-induced types of alopecia.


Just because there is evidence of a change for some people later in life doesn't rule out a genetic cause for that change.

Just because there is evidence that there is a change later in life for some people, doesn't mean that the root cause is the same for all people.

 

[Hicup]

What gets me is that, currently there is no biological test for ones "sexuality", only their actions, and behaviors, to the tune of someone's word on the subject. It bothers me intuitively that, those that were once homosexual, and are no longer by all measures, are deemed to be lying, or repressing ones true sexuality, or even self loathing (Which is my favorite gay slam on ex gays).

My hypothesis is that all humans are born with a predisposition towards heterosexuality, and as the influence of the environment imprints itself on the individual, we see gradual, and sometimes excessive change in ones sexuality. I see no reason not to believe this, or as of yet, I haven't seen a compelling argument against this idea?


Tim-

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

What gets me is that, currently there is no biological test for ones "sexuality", only their actions, and behaviors, to the tune of someone's word on the subject. It bothers me intuitively that, those that were once homosexual, and are no longer by all measures, are deemed to be lying, or repressing ones true sexuality, or even self loathing (Which is my favorite gay slam on ex gays).

My hypothesis is that all humans are born with a predisposition towards heterosexuality, and as the influence of the environment imprints itself on the individual, we see gradual, and sometimes excessive change in ones sexuality. I see no reason not to believe this, or as of yet, I haven't seen a compelling argument against this idea?


Tim-

I've seen plenty that contradicts your hypothesis. My hypothesis, and one that I believe is shared by researchers, is that everyone has a predisposition towards a type of sexual orientation, regardless of the type, and then environmental factors will either solidify or alter them, dependent on the situation or individual. This is not to say that I believe that sexual orientation can be altered, but rather one's inherent orientation changes.

 

[Hicup]

CC -

My hypothesis, and one that I believe is shared by researchers, is that everyone has a predisposition towards a type of sexual orientation, regardless of the type

Well, I'd like to see where this view is shared by researchers. I'd like to know exactly the details of how researchers determine a predisposition to any specific sexuality. Can you provide that data for me to review? I'm completely open to the idea I might be wrong, and I am not static on my views. As stated, I am yet to see any compelling evidence, anecdotal, or otherwise that suggest anything outside of my hypothesis. But I'm all ears if you have something.

This is not to say that I believe that sexual orientation can be altered, but rather one's inherent orientation changes.

You might want to clarify this for me as well, while you're at it. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here..

Tim-

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

CC -

Well, I'd like to see where this view is shared by researchers. I'd like to know exactly the details of how researchers determine a predisposition to any specific sexuality. Can you provide that data for me to review? I'm completely open to the idea I might be wrong, and I am not static on my views. As stated, I am yet to see any compelling evidence, anecdotal, or otherwise that suggest anything outside of my hypothesis. But I'm all ears if you have something.

Tim-

Most of the information I have seen is supposition, but it is a consensus shared by many in the fields of biology and sexuality. Since there is no definitive evidence for what causes sexual orientation, supposition is pretty much all we have.

 

[Hicup]

Two things:

1. I still question your assertion that it is consensus shared by many? What specifically is "shared", what part of your argument?
2. Give me one example of how a researcher can determine "predisposition"?

Ok, three things:

3. A supposition is meaningless if not tied to any real data. e.g.: The Sun revolves around the Earth. Up until Copernicus, this was the supposition of the day.


Tim-

 

[Your Star]

Ok, three things:

3. A supposition is meaningless if not tied to any real data. e.g.: The Sun revolves around the Earth. Up until Copernicus, this was the supposition of the day.


Tim-

You do know that this also applies to your assertion as well.

Actually there is some scientific evidence that our sexuality isn't really our choice.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Two things:

1. I still question your assertion that it is consensus shared by many? What specifically is "shared", what part of your argument?

That sexual orientation is caused by a variety of factors, including biology, genetics, homones, and environment.

2. Give me one example of how a researcher can determine "predisposition"?

I don't think I said that it CAN be determined. What I said is this is a supposition that researchers have made.

Ok, three things:

3. A supposition is meaningless if not tied to any real data. e.g.: The Sun revolves around the Earth. Up until Copernicus, this was the supposition of the day.


Tim-

Remember something else about a supposition, though. It remains valid until prove wrong. Notice I used the word "valid" rather than the word "correct". We do not know what is correct. We can only assume.

 

[Hicup]

Your Star -

You do know that this also applies to your assertion as well

Of course I know this. It's a hypothesis. By the way, your Youtube video caused an error.

That sexual orientation is caused by a variety of factors, including biology, genetics, homones, and environment

Well, this pretty much covers them all. It could be true, but if it is true, the next logical question would be; What separates these factors in terms of influence, meaning, if most people are straight, then what, if any of these factors, carries the important catalyst in forming ones sexuality that isn't following the predominantly heterosexual variety? "Square one anyone".

I don't think I said that it CAN be determined. What I said is this is a supposition that researchers have made

A claim that something is predetermined, requires a priori, or posteriori knowledge. Meaning, it comes from something. What is this something these researchers are using to "suppose" it is true?

Remember something else about a supposition, though. It remains valid until prove wrong. Notice I used the word "valid" rather than the word "correct". We do not know what is correct. We can only assume.

No argument there, however, then the same applies to my assertion then. Would you agree it is valid?


Tim-

 

[Your Star]

Your Star -

Of course I know this. It's a hypothesis. By the way, your Youtube video caused an error.

Tim-

Are you sure? It works fine for me.

 

[Hicup]

Worked that time. Nothing new there, but thanks for the link. The main theme is that because animals do it, then it must be normal, or natural is the term used. I have but one criticism... well two.

1. Most people claim that homosexuality isn't just about sex, but about love, and romance, and all sorts of emotions. How do researchers determine the motivations of these animals? Isn't it more than just sex? Is the act of same sex, sexual intercourse, enough to determine what is a homosexual?

2. The bonding of male, and female animals is similar to close human friendships. What do the researchers say about this?

Your Star, you claim that the question is settled science. I contend that it is anything but.


Tim-

 

[Your Star]

Worked that time. Nothing new there, but thanks for the link. The main theme is that because animals do it, then it must be normal, or natural is the term used. I have but one criticism... well two.

1. Most people claim that homosexuality isn't just about sex, but about love, and romance, and all sorts of emotions. How do researchers determine the motivations of these animals? Isn't it more than just sex? Is the act of same sex, sexual intercourse, enough to determine what is a homosexual?

2. The bonding of male, and female animals is similar to close human friendships. What do the researchers say about this?

Your Star, you claim that the question is settled science. I contend that it is anything but.


Tim-

It isn't that animals do it, so it must be natural. Yeah thats a piece of evidence but not the whole pie. The twin thing, and the multiple male births, it's nothing definitive, but it clearly shows that it is not all about choice. Also us humans are way more complex than any animal so you would expect our sexual relationships with each other to be equally more complicated.
Also would you say that no matter if it is a choice or not, it does not effect that homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals?

 

[Hicup]

Also would you say that no matter if it is a choice or not, it does not effect that homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals?

There is no moral argument against adult homosexuality, and a homosexual's right to practice without infringement from anyone else. I'm not making that argument. IN-fact, I'm not really trying to argue at all. When I see threads such as these that purport to make a claim that isn't true, or at the very least, unverifiable, then I say so, lest rumors spread, and things become what they are, by way of fiat.


Tim-

 

[Your Star]

There is no moral argument against adult homosexuality, and a homosexual's right to practice without infringement from anyone else. I'm not making that argument. IN-fact, I'm not really trying to argue at all. When I see threads such as these that purport to make a claim that isn't true, or at the very least, unverifiable, then I say so, lest rumors spread, and things become what they are, by way of fiat.


Tim-

So you support gay marriage?

If so kudos.

 

[Hicup]

So you support gay marriage?

If so kudos.

Irrelevant to this conversation. However, no I don't support gay marriage. It contradicts my view of the best form of binding/bonding that society should support. But regardless of that, my complete view on homosexuality in sum, is based on the answer to the question of cause. My opinion changes dramatically on gay marriage, if the cause is biological. That is where the end of the argument, currently comes. There is no answer to this question incontrovertibly, so here we sit, both with our own "faith: on the matter.


Tim-

 

[Your Star]

Irrelevant to this conversation. However, no I don't support gay marriage. It contradicts my view of the best form of binding/bonding that society should support. But regardless of that, my complete view on homosexuality in sum, is based on the answer to the question of cause. My opinion changes dramatically on gay marriage, if the cause is biological. That is where the end of the argument, currently comes. There is no answer to this question incontrovertibly, so here we sit, both with our own "faith: on the matter.


Tim-

So you don't support giving LGBT people all the rights that heterosexual people have then?
Also there is more evidence for it being biological than for it being just a simple choice.
I've always liked asking people this question, did you choose to be straight?

 

[lizzie]

The admittedly small number of late-blooming lesbians I know started out in hetero marriages that were either dysfunctional or emotionally very dissatisfying, and they ended up in lesbian relationships based more on the emotional bond than the sexuality aspects of it.

 

[Hicup]

Your Star -

So you don't support giving LGBT people all the rights that heterosexual people have then?

They have them already, less the marriage thingy. Except in MA, and a few other civil union places. I support being a homosexual if one wishes to be one.

Also there is more evidence for it being biological than for it being just a simple choice

No one said it was a "simple" choice. Besides, I'd argue that your claim isn't accurate. In fact, I'd say that there isn't any biological evidence that is conclusive enough to draw that conclusion.

I've always liked asking people this question, did you choose to be straight?

In some ways the answer is yes! I had other options available to me, but I chose to stick with what seems observably consistent with nature; rather, NOT the exception.

Tim-

 

[Hicup]

No one answered my initial entry into this thread. Here it is again for your review.
Hic -

"What gets me is that, currently there is no biological test for ones "sexuality", only their actions, and behaviors, to the tune of someone's word on the subject. It bothers me intuitively that, those that were once homosexual, and are no longer by all measures, are deemed to be lying, or repressing ones true sexuality, or even self loathing (Which is my favorite gay slam on ex gays)."

So.. Why is that?


Tim-

 

[Your Star]

Your Star -

They have them already, less the marriage thingy. Except in MA, and a few other civil union places. I support being a homosexual if one wishes to be one.



No one said it was a "simple" choice. Besides, I'd argue that your claim isn't accurate. In fact, I'd say that there isn't any biological evidence that is conclusive enough to draw that conclusion.



In some ways the answer is yes! I had other options available to me, but I chose to stick with what seems observably consistent with nature; rather, NOT the exception.

Tim-

Well that marriage thing is a pretty big deal. There is no logical reason for the government to deny them that just based on their sexuality.

I'm just saying that there is more evidence that it isn't a choice than not. The fact that if one twin is gay than the other one is also 70% of the time is more evidence than the choice crowd have.

So you would say that you are equally attracted to men as you are to women? But you chose not to act on your homosexual attractions?

 

[Goshin]

No one answered my initial entry into this thread. Here it is again for your review.
Hic -

So.. Why is that?


Tim-

Tim, there's this huge self-fulfilling prophesy thing used to cover that: "Well, if they successfully changed from homo to het, they weren't REALLY homosexually oriented, or else they were just ACTING homo and reverted to their true orientation."

They (those who insist homo is inborn and unchangeable) also do the reverse for het's that change to homo. "They discovered their true orientation after years of denial", or some such thing.

The fact is that the ONLY measure we have of someone's "orientation" is to look at their behavior. Observing behavior, we find that:

Some are hetero for life and never seem to vary from it.
Some are homo for life and never seem to vary from it.
Some change from one to the other at some point in their life. Some change more than once.
Some swing freely from one to the other, or mix both at the same time, and never seem to care about
the question of their "orientation".

No gay gene has been found. No physiological difference, present at birth, has been found to be the difference between het and homo.

Based on available evidence, attempting to claim with certainty that orientation is inborn and unchangeable is simply ridiculous. There is too little evidence of this, and too much evidence to the contrary. Attempting to attribute homosexual behavior to any one cause is probably oversimplifying... and there are gay people who agree with that statement.

 

[Andalublue]

Based on available evidence, attempting to claim with certainty that orientation is inborn and unchangeable is simply ridiculous. There is too little evidence of this, and too much evidence to the contrary. Attempting to attribute homosexual behavior to any one cause is probably oversimplifying... and there are gay people who agree with that statement.

Yup, happy, unapologetic, life-long homosexual and I agree with that statement. I don't believe in a 'gay gene' and I don't believe sexual orientation is immutable, nor is it programmable any more than other personality traits. It may have a genetic element, but that certainly hasn't been proven yet. To claim sexual orientation is inborn is as speculative as it is to claim that it is merely a matter of personal, conscious choice. The two positions are simply not empirically sustainable.

 

[justabubba]

No one answered my initial entry into this thread. Here it is again for your review.
Hic -

So.. Why is that?


Tim-

as a 57 year old lesbian trapped in a man's body, i have no idea about the answer you are seeking
and i have been attracted to women all my life, so i am not a late bloomer

 

[roguenuke]

as a 57 year old lesbian trapped in a man's body, i have no idea about the answer you are seeking
and i have been attracted to women all my life, so i am not a late bloomer

I hear guys say this all the time, but I actually have a brother who is this. He really does feel like a woman trapped in a man's body, but he also is attracted to women.

 

[Andalublue]

I hear guys say this all the time, but I actually have a brother who is this. He really does feel like a woman trapped in a man's body, but he also is attracted to women.

Just spent time on holiday with a guy who used to be a woman but who now has a male partner. Was a woman, now a man. Was straight, now gay. He seemed pretty cool with his situation, but clearly neither gender nor orientation are immutable. These things tend only to bother those who believe that because they consider their own sexual identity to be unchanging, so should everyone else's be too. Makes no sense and leads to a lot of hate.