Seeing as how large an issue this was during the election, and how the results turned out; I think it's safe to say that there's a large amount of understanding about the issue, from both sides.
I'd like for this topic to serve as an open forum towards helping people understand what exactly it is that causes homosexuality and what homosexuals have to face because of it.
Although fear of homosexuals is quite understandable, I find it depressing just the lack of compassion there is in people willing to understand the issue. Even though it's easy to deride the lack of compassion in people for been hellbent against homosexuals, coming to terms with such an issue without a deep examination of it can be difficult. I figure it's best to start practicing what you preach.
-----------
Just to let you know where I'm coming from: I'm personally not homosexual... in fact was fairly homophobic up until a few years ago; having taken psychology, giving me a better understanding of the way humans operate.
Although I'd like to think that society has taken great strides towards reducing open prejudice towards homosexuality, I think the election has made it abundantly clear that the way people feel is a far cry from the things people say in public, in real life.
-------------
What I know about it:
Compared to strangers (about a 10% chance), blood siblings that have slightly higher chance of both been homosexual (about 14%).
A fraternal (dizygotic) twin has a slightly higher chance (or maybe the same; the difference is quite small) than a sibling of homosexuality if one is already a homosexual.
An identical (monozygotic) twin has the highest chance of homosexuality if his/her sibling is already one. (~38%)
A single biological parent that expresses homosexuality raises the chance significantly of homosexuality in the offspring. With two biological parents that express it, the chance is much higher; on par with a person that has a homosexual monozygotic twin (~37%)
A child of homosexual adoptive parents has a chance of homosexuality on par with strangers (~13%).
A non-blood related sibling (adoptive child) will have equal chance as a stranger of been a homosexual, if a sibling is one.
These figures are as best as I can recall from my lost textbooks. If you can provide better ones and sources for them, it would help alot.
From that, it's very fair to say that genetics can be a large part of the issue with homosexuality. Disentangling environmental effects from genetics can be difficult; short of studying disparately (in different homes) brought up MZ twins, which can be a difficult task given the very small available sample size and population. And even then, the genes have an expressive effect on their environment. But the difference among the given conditions are large enough that it's safe to say that there's a definite gene effect.
But given the numbers for similar environment conditions (siblings, adoptive parents, etc), it's clear that 'environment' has little effect on homosexuality.
The largest factor involved in determining a homosexual would be unique chance factors, with some individuals having a higher predisposition towards having the trait triggered.
But this is an oversimplified analysis of the numbers; homosexuality isn't a switch which turns on and off. As much as some people would like to simplify it down to this, it would be doing a great diservice to everyone, even themselves. As with many genetically inheritable traits, there are varying degrees; as with schizophrenia - although there's a baseline for clinical schizophrenia, there's a large amount of evidence for those traits to be expressed to milder degrees in their shared biological relations.
------------
What I think
If homosexuality is indeed a genetic 'problem', it is one that has a particularly devastating bearing on the individual marked by it; not because of a deficiency in them, but rather because of the deficiency in society to accept or even tolerate them. This is unique among most (probably all) genetic problems.
Moreover, it doesn't serve us in the long term to continually pressure homosexuality into 'straightness'; if we allow people to pair off as per their natural desire... the marked inability to reproduce would filter out and eventually finish off the genetic trait. Even with recessive genes, which aren't expressed, but carry the genetic code to be expressed in later generations, the trait will eventually doom itself, due to its low rate of natural genetic survival. But this is given the collarary that people stick with long term manogamy, as is with the case of marriages.
It's true that in the future (or even currently; for the use of one parent's genetic material) that there maybe avenues to combine the genetic material of both homosexual parents for an offspring, the limitations are quite prohibitive; with high financial cost been a large factor. In terms of total effect, it still wouldn't be a huge issue.
What would be more dangerous would be to allow an erosion of civil liberties, recognition of and a movement towards equality and a culture that breeds contempt for compassion and understanding.
Even if homosexuality is something of a choice, and something that will stick with us for as long as we're humans, from a personal stand point, apart from some trivial disagreement about the hotness of booty, they no more negatively or postively effect the way I live my life. I don't find it necessary to infringe upon their rights as people of an equal merit and status in society.
A popular idea about homophobes is that in some ways, they're more predisposed to homosexuality than a person that can healthily accept that these people do exist and not as anything but people with different sexual choices; as they're 'closer to the sun' so to speak, they engage in strong cognitive strategies that include heavy bias against the target group... like a reverse cognitive dissonance so to speak; trying to shift behaviour towards attitude.
what I've expressed on the issue is far from a comprehensive discussion of the issue, but I do hope that it can serve as something of a 'starter guide' and a jump off point for discussion.
------------------
Truth is, I don't expect this thread to convert anyone from their views, been that these somewhat emotional issues that have been deeply ingrained into people. Any attempt to change that would understandably be met with fierce reaction and deep polarization (at least initially)... but I hope that this can act as a seed for breaking down that intolerance and illogic that often surrounds such strongly polarized views; when a person of sound mind reads enough or is exposed to enough sound arguments, it is my faith, that they'll come around. On the otherhand, every sound argument and exposure along a person's mental development part on an issue will help push them along.
I'd like for this topic to serve as an open forum towards helping people understand what exactly it is that causes homosexuality and what homosexuals have to face because of it.
Although fear of homosexuals is quite understandable, I find it depressing just the lack of compassion there is in people willing to understand the issue. Even though it's easy to deride the lack of compassion in people for been hellbent against homosexuals, coming to terms with such an issue without a deep examination of it can be difficult. I figure it's best to start practicing what you preach.
-----------
Just to let you know where I'm coming from: I'm personally not homosexual... in fact was fairly homophobic up until a few years ago; having taken psychology, giving me a better understanding of the way humans operate.
Although I'd like to think that society has taken great strides towards reducing open prejudice towards homosexuality, I think the election has made it abundantly clear that the way people feel is a far cry from the things people say in public, in real life.
-------------
What I know about it:
Compared to strangers (about a 10% chance), blood siblings that have slightly higher chance of both been homosexual (about 14%).
A fraternal (dizygotic) twin has a slightly higher chance (or maybe the same; the difference is quite small) than a sibling of homosexuality if one is already a homosexual.
An identical (monozygotic) twin has the highest chance of homosexuality if his/her sibling is already one. (~38%)
A single biological parent that expresses homosexuality raises the chance significantly of homosexuality in the offspring. With two biological parents that express it, the chance is much higher; on par with a person that has a homosexual monozygotic twin (~37%)
A child of homosexual adoptive parents has a chance of homosexuality on par with strangers (~13%).
A non-blood related sibling (adoptive child) will have equal chance as a stranger of been a homosexual, if a sibling is one.
These figures are as best as I can recall from my lost textbooks. If you can provide better ones and sources for them, it would help alot.
From that, it's very fair to say that genetics can be a large part of the issue with homosexuality. Disentangling environmental effects from genetics can be difficult; short of studying disparately (in different homes) brought up MZ twins, which can be a difficult task given the very small available sample size and population. And even then, the genes have an expressive effect on their environment. But the difference among the given conditions are large enough that it's safe to say that there's a definite gene effect.
But given the numbers for similar environment conditions (siblings, adoptive parents, etc), it's clear that 'environment' has little effect on homosexuality.
The largest factor involved in determining a homosexual would be unique chance factors, with some individuals having a higher predisposition towards having the trait triggered.
But this is an oversimplified analysis of the numbers; homosexuality isn't a switch which turns on and off. As much as some people would like to simplify it down to this, it would be doing a great diservice to everyone, even themselves. As with many genetically inheritable traits, there are varying degrees; as with schizophrenia - although there's a baseline for clinical schizophrenia, there's a large amount of evidence for those traits to be expressed to milder degrees in their shared biological relations.
------------
What I think
If homosexuality is indeed a genetic 'problem', it is one that has a particularly devastating bearing on the individual marked by it; not because of a deficiency in them, but rather because of the deficiency in society to accept or even tolerate them. This is unique among most (probably all) genetic problems.
Moreover, it doesn't serve us in the long term to continually pressure homosexuality into 'straightness'; if we allow people to pair off as per their natural desire... the marked inability to reproduce would filter out and eventually finish off the genetic trait. Even with recessive genes, which aren't expressed, but carry the genetic code to be expressed in later generations, the trait will eventually doom itself, due to its low rate of natural genetic survival. But this is given the collarary that people stick with long term manogamy, as is with the case of marriages.
It's true that in the future (or even currently; for the use of one parent's genetic material) that there maybe avenues to combine the genetic material of both homosexual parents for an offspring, the limitations are quite prohibitive; with high financial cost been a large factor. In terms of total effect, it still wouldn't be a huge issue.
What would be more dangerous would be to allow an erosion of civil liberties, recognition of and a movement towards equality and a culture that breeds contempt for compassion and understanding.
Even if homosexuality is something of a choice, and something that will stick with us for as long as we're humans, from a personal stand point, apart from some trivial disagreement about the hotness of booty, they no more negatively or postively effect the way I live my life. I don't find it necessary to infringe upon their rights as people of an equal merit and status in society.
A popular idea about homophobes is that in some ways, they're more predisposed to homosexuality than a person that can healthily accept that these people do exist and not as anything but people with different sexual choices; as they're 'closer to the sun' so to speak, they engage in strong cognitive strategies that include heavy bias against the target group... like a reverse cognitive dissonance so to speak; trying to shift behaviour towards attitude.
what I've expressed on the issue is far from a comprehensive discussion of the issue, but I do hope that it can serve as something of a 'starter guide' and a jump off point for discussion.
------------------
Truth is, I don't expect this thread to convert anyone from their views, been that these somewhat emotional issues that have been deeply ingrained into people. Any attempt to change that would understandably be met with fierce reaction and deep polarization (at least initially)... but I hope that this can act as a seed for breaking down that intolerance and illogic that often surrounds such strongly polarized views; when a person of sound mind reads enough or is exposed to enough sound arguments, it is my faith, that they'll come around. On the otherhand, every sound argument and exposure along a person's mental development part on an issue will help push them along.
