Who chooses their sexual orientation?

[pubic_assistance]

A line grabbed from another thread that was "off topic"....

I would like to ask how many members ultimately felt they CHOSE their sexual orientation as opposed to having it assigned ?

For me ....I have been completely bisexual throughout my life from the time I was a child an my mother needed to explain to me that I was "supposed to" be attracted to girls but only "like" boys as friends. ( It never quite worked out that way for me ).

Ultimately I needed to "Pick a team" to have a serious relationship. ( Not really a believer in the thrupple concept ).

So married my female bestie who I share the commonality of a long history of bisexual exploration.

It's interesting to me that so many gays are in complete denial of the ability to choose. I'm sure there are as many gays who can't as straights who can't but I am always feeling a bit left out when the gays pretend that NONE of us make a choice.

WHO ELSE CHOSE THEIR LIFESTYLE ?

[+ nycman]

Nope.

I was born a "blue ribbon" homo…and I shall die as such.

[mike carey]

24 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

It's interesting to me that so many gays are in complete denial of the ability to choose. I'm sure there are as many gays who can't as straights who can't but I am always feeling a bit left out when the gays pretend that NONE of us make a choice.

WHO ELSE CHOSE THEIR LIFESTYLE ?

It seems to me that you have answered a different question to the one you posed in the title. You made is quite clear earlier in your post that you were bisexual, full stop, end of story. It seemed you were saying that your bisexual orientation was 'assigned'.

The 'lifestyle' you have chosen is a separate thing, and a choice you are free to make but that is different to claiming that one has chosen their sexual orientation. But as you made clear, you chose that lifestyle, and it is not the same as the innate orientation you had said that you have.

[pubic_assistance]

7 minutes ago, mike carey said:

But as you made clear, you chose that lifestyle, and it is not the same as the innate orientation you had said that you have

Yes. A valid point. thanks. But my understanding was that orientation was the same because it's your identity not necessarily your biology

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion

 

noun

noun: sexual orientation; plural noun: sexual orientations

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

Edited January 11 by pubic_assistance

[misterhumphries]

There is no choosing sexuality; it simply is. For me, my choice was to accept that I am sexually interested only in men. I did not sit myself down and wonder: "Hmm.. What can I do to make my life that much more difficult and to feel ostracized?"

The very idea that sexuality is a choice is a step backwards that led to the gay reprogramming camps and religious groups who used to believe they could  pray the gay away. The DSM long-ago stopped classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder. Sexuality is biological, a genetic quirk.

[+ Italiano]

The only thing I chose (after spending all my teens trying to be like all my male friends who liked girls and had girlfriends and thinking that my homo feelings were something wrong) was at 20 to stop lying and coming out to family and close friends.

[jeezifonly]

Men know what actually makes their dick hard. The sexual attraction to one or to both genders is innate. You cannot change what you want, only what you do.

Denial of the “wrong” attraction is often the default setting for those living in a home (or society) that expresses its disapproval of all same-sex attraction. For people religiously motivated, the denial of what one wants is a sign of being “good”

It has worked with great success in the Roman Catholic Church. 

 

 

 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, misterhumphries said:

Sexuality is biological, a genetic quirk.

And which gene is that? 

[NJF]

53 minutes ago, BnaC said:

And which gene is that? 

The exact gene or genes have not been identified yet. However, the genetic factor is undeniable based on multiple studies of the sexuality of identical twins.

[+ DynamicUno]

I never chose being gay, any more than a typical heterosexual man has ever chosen to desire women.  My choice was not bow to the social and familiar pressures to hide in a heterosexual relationship or live as a celebate because the church said so.

[+ Unicorn]

This has been "discussed" ad nauseam in other strings. Anyone who's really interested in the subject can look at the extensive research which has been done on the subject, and understand that sexual orientation is determined by birth (or, less likely, soon thereafter). It's far more complex than simple genetics, especially in the Mendelian sense, since identical twins can, on occasion, have opposite sexual orientations. I'll never forget the 60 Minutes episode in which two identical twin boys decorated their rooms completely differently: one with military themes and GI Joes, the other with pink, and unicorns jumping over clouds. The mother noted their vastly different personalities since they were toddlers. 

Anyone can look up the science online if he's really interested. As others have pointed out, one can choose to deny one's sexual orientation, and even get married to a person of the opposite gender and have children, but I somehow doubt those people ever live satisfied lives. But whether or not sexual orientation is a choice has been thoroughly studied, and we know the answer. Socratic argument will not change the facts. 

 

[pubic_assistance]

9 hours ago, misterhumphries said:

The very idea that sexuality is a choice is a step backward

Which is probably why gays get so upset when bisexual people explain that for us, our sexual orientation and lifestyle IS and CAN BE a choice. I chose to maintain a heterosexual lifestyle while occasionally acting on my homosexual interests but without engaging in anything more than sex with men.  Romantic relationships with men never worked for me, because gays always seem to have their eyes on the next hot hook up, leaving little time for focusing on building a solid relationship. That's not to say relationships with women aren't complicated and sometimes a minefield of navigating unfamiliar emotions...but I have always felt a stronger commitment from women to build a nest. So that's what I CHOSE.

Edited January 11 by pubic_assistance
extra sentence

[pubic_assistance]

2 hours ago, Unicorn said:

As others have pointed out, one can choose to deny one's sexual orientation, and even get married to a person of the opposite gender and have children, but I somehow doubt those people ever live satisfied lives

In my observation, this is the gay man's argument. That somehow you're bound to be unhappy if you get married and have kids. This "research" you speak of is far too frequently tossed around by homosexuals as a badge of honor. "Oh...I'm a victim of biology, that's why I suck dick". I'm quite sure there are many homosexuals who have never had any romantic feelings toward women. But this research that dates back to the 70's and 80's failed to identify the large population of bisexual people who are left indecisive about  their sexual orientation and what to do about it for years, until they settle down ( or don't). THAT is the population I am speaking to in my question.

How many of you are men who had romantic feelings for women at one time, but decided a boyfriend was more suited to your needs ? I went back and forth all through my twenties with boyfriends and girlfriends.  I needed to pick a side that worked best for me. That's a CHOICE.

Doesn't mean that some gays don't have a choice, that biology wins out.

I am speaking to those who did have a choice.

Edited January 11 by pubic_assistance
spelling

[Rudynate]

13 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

Yes. A valid point. thanks. But my understanding was that orientation was the same because it's your identity not necessarily your biology

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion

 

noun

noun: sexual orientation; plural noun: sexual orientations

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

In the 70's, the Christian right (Jerry Falwell, Anita Bryant, et al. ) popularized the idea that sexual orientation was a "lifestyle choice" and we've been stuck with that notion ever since.   It just isn't like  having a favorite color, or liking Italian food, or reading Proust in your spare time, and you know that.  

It seems like you cherry-picked that definition to fit the point you are trying to make.

Edited January 11 by Rudynate
add content

[+ WilliamM]

22 minutes ago, Rudynate said:

In the 70's, the Christian right (Jerry Falwell, Anita Bryant, et al. ) popularized the idea that sexual orientation was a "lifestyle choice" and we've been stuck with that notion ever since.   It just isn't like  having a favorite color, or liking Italian food, or reading Proust in your spare time, and you know that.  

It seems like you cherry-picked that definition to fit the point you are trying to make.

The  1970s were five decades ago, my friend. Young people don't know who  Jerry Falwell and Anita Bryant were.

[musclestuduws]

11 hours ago, misterhumphries said:

There is no choosing sexuality; it simply is. For me, my choice was to accept that I am sexually interested only in men. I did not sit myself down and wonder: "Hmm.. What can I do to make my life that much more difficult and to feel ostracized?"

The very idea that sexuality is a choice is a step backwards that led to the gay reprogramming camps and religious groups who used to believe they could  pray the gay away. The DSM long-ago stopped classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder. Sexuality is biological, a genetic quirk.

I think that to reject choice because of the cruelties and abuses that organized religion and totalitarian regimes have committed and keep committing is a self defeating argument that inadvertently reinforces the very determinism upon which fascist ideologies are founded. For me, the strongest, most profound way of counteracting such dogmas is precisely by reclaiming and celebrating freedom of choice in  sexuality itself. What totalitarian ideologies and religious dogmas abhor  more than anything is freedom in all its forms. So I fiercely defend anyone’s freedom to choose how to live their sexuality in order to go against whatever anyone else might want to impose on others. To fall in the trap of genetic determinism is another way of surrendering to the kind of dogmatic thinking that ultimarely leads to believing that sexuality is divinely or genetically preordained. If you think about it, they are one and the same. Freedom of choice (in anything) is the strongest and most effective political way of opposing fascist eugenics and its contemporary iteration, genetic determinism. To the Christian Right I say, yes it is a lifestyle choice and whatever they think about what’s right or wrong is a result of their own sexual perversions projected onto others and, above all, of their desire to exercise power over others by restricting their freedom and their privacy. 

Edited January 11 by musclestuduws

[Rudynate]

12 minutes ago, WilliamM said:

The  1970s were five decades ago, my friend. Young people don't know who  Jerry Falwell and Anita Bryant were.

Exactly.  It seemed the OP could use some historical context concerning the contamination of the national discourse by radical religionists. 

Edited January 11 by Rudynate

[pubic_assistance]

7 minutes ago, musclestuduws said:

Freedom of choice (in anything) is the strongest and most effective political way of opposing fascist eugenics and its contemporary iteration, genetic determinism. 

Thank you !

Beautifully put.

The gays don't hear how victimized they sound when they want to hide behind their "born this way" dogma.

[pubic_assistance]

15 minutes ago, Rudynate said:

Exactly.  It seemed the OP could use some historical context concerning the contamination of the national discourse by radical religionists. 

AGAIN (why do I have to keep repeating this )....I am not speaking to those of you who have NEVER had feelings for a woman. I am speaking to those who had to spend time deciding.

I am quite well aware of "pray the gay away".

I would point out that very religious families often have MANY expectations of how you are supposed to live. Not just with your sex life.  Hiding behind a made up narrative about being forced into homosexuality is fine for some but not for all of us.

I had no problem with people identifying me as "gay" during those years when I dated men, and spent a lot of time hanging around gay venues. But that was only PART of my journey to find where I wanted to land. It's distorting to the complexity of how I view myself sexually, socially and spiritually, to say my destiny was predetermined by my biology.

The Argument(s) Against 'Born This Way' 

Gabrielle Kassel  Published on September 23, 2021

"While the slogan was useful historically, these days, many LGBTQ+ people believe that the catchphrase actually intercepts long-term progress.

For starters, it privileges those who experience their sexuality or gender as a fixed, non-changing thing, while invalidating those who experience their sexuality or gender as fluctuating, fluid, ever-evolving things."

Edited January 11 by pubic_assistance

[+ keroscenefire]

2 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

Which is probably why gays get so upset when bisexual people explain that for us, our sexual orientation and lifestyle IS and CAN BE a choice. I chose to maintain a heterosexual lifestyle while occasionally acting on my homosexual interests but without engaging in anything more than sex with men.  Romantic relationships with men never worked for me, because gays always seem to have their eyes on the next hot hook up, leaving little time for focusing on building a solid relationship. That's not to say relationships with women aren't complicated and sometimes a minefield of navigating unfamiliar emotions...but I have always felt a stronger commitment from women to build a nest. So that's what I CHOSE.

I consider myself bisexual/pansexual and definitely can relate to what you're saying. I've definitely found it easier and been more interested in forming romantic relationships/partnerships with women than men. But I probably find myself more sexually attracted to men (though I enjoy sex with women as well).

My sexuality has changed in the course of my life. In high school and college, truly I was very bi, having sex with men and women very easily. In my 20s, I had a long relationship with a women and we truly loved each other. Unfortunately that ended in tragedy and caused some trauma in my life. After that relationship, I found myself more attracted and pursuing men. 

 

[Rudynate]

14 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

Yes. A valid point. thanks. But my understanding was that orientation was the same because it's your identity not necessarily your biology

sex·u·al o·ri·en·ta·tion

 

noun

noun: sexual orientation; plural noun: sexual orientations

1. a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are sexually attracted; the fact of being heterosexual, homosexual, etc.

You agreed with Mike's clarification but then you persist.  I think your definition of sexual orientation must have come from some extreme right website.  I certainly agree that the heteronormative lifestyle you are living is a matter of choice.   And I do believe that bisexuality exists as a sexual orientation and I do believe that you are bisexual, but you didn't choose your orientation any more than someone who has no attraction whatsoever to the opposite sex did. 

[pubic_assistance]

3 minutes ago, keroscenefire said:

I consider myself bisexual/pansexual and definitely can relate to what you're saying

Thank you for sharing your life experience.

Yes, tragedy and emotional trauma can also affect a person's sexual choices.

It's not just biology.

[pubic_assistance]

6 hours ago, Rudynate said:

You agreed with Mike's clarification but then you persist.

Actually I did not.

I said he was making a VALID POINT. That doesn't mean I agreed with it. Simply that he shared a perspective that is common to the way SOME people view sexual orientation, so I clarified my use of the term in context to my conversation.

Edited January 12 by pubic_assistance
grammar

[Rudynate]

5 minutes ago, Rudynate said:

You agreed with Mike's clarification but then you persist.  I think your definition of sexual orientation must have come from some extreme right website.  I certainly agree that the heteronormative lifestyle you are living is a matter of choice.   And I do believe that bisexuality exists as a sexual orientation and I do believe that you are bisexual, but you didn't choose your orientation any more than someone who has no attraction whatsoever to the opposite sex did. 

Very intelligently, you have chosen a lifestyle that is congruent with your sexual orientation. 

[+ StLouisOct]

My mind is too simple. I’ve always maintained that no matter what psychological or electrical treatment you give me, you’re never going to make me like the taste of liver.