Who chooses their sexual orientation?

[pubic_assistance]

14 minutes ago, Medin said:

There seems to be a lot of confusion between sexual orientation and lifestyle.  There may be fluidity in both, but they are not the same.   

I suggest you read through the entire thread.

No one is confused.

 

[spidir]

I self-identified as asexual, bisexual, heterosexual, homosexual, and pansexual at various points in my life. What does that make me?

ANSWER: Old and happy!

[Medin]

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

I suggest you read through the entire thread.

No one is confused.

 

I could name several in this thread who appear to be. 

[pubic_assistance]

5 hours ago, Medin said:

I could name several in this thread who appear to be. 

I could name a few who are arrogant about their archaic misinformation .

I don't think anyone is "confused"...just not up to date with current psychological opinions on the matter.

 

[jeezifonly]

On 1/11/2023 at 9:23 AM, pubic_assistance said:

Thank you !

Beautifully put.

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

The gays. 
❔ 
I wonder if they know the blacks… 😅

We all have the potential to partner with the opposite gender. Gay men are far less attracted to women, and have chosen not to pretend to be attracted in the same way to women, in spite of societal pressure to be hetero-oriented. 

Sometimes attraction is just sex, sometimes romance and companionship, but usually a blend of all three. Bro-job, anyone? OK but no kissing…Perhaps the “victims” are the people who deny it, and those who love them. 

[Guest]

21 hours ago, spidir said:

I self-identified as asexual, bisexual, heterosexual, homosexual, and pansexual at various points in my life. What does that make me?

ANSWER: Old and happy!

The title of this string is "Who chooses their sexual orientation?", not "Who chooses how they self-identify?". I can choose to "self-identify" as a leprechaun if I want. That won't give me a pot of gold. And my identifying myself as a unicorn doesn't give me hooves, either! 😄 A man with a biologically normal sex drive knows very, very well to which gender(s) he's attracted. That doesn't mean he can't choose to identify otherwise. And most men will end up happiest hooking up with whatever gender or genders he's most physically attracted to. 

[pubic_assistance]

37 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

A man with a biologically normal sex drive knows very, very well to which gender(s) he's attracted

Rather a broad statement about a matter that some people struggle with. Most people suppress any homosexual tendencies they naturally have through social conditioning.

So NO. They don't "know very well".

Plenty of people struggle with their sexuality. Including MANY trans people who will literally change their gender sooner than face the shame of being known as a homosexual.

 

[wsc]

Well, when you get down to it, if the man doesn't know which gender he's attracted to, his d**k will let him know.

Some things just aren't that complicated.

Edited January 15, 2023 by wsc

[pubic_assistance]

1 hour ago, wsc said:

Some things just aren't that complicated.

I suggest you speak to a few transexuals and tell me if you still believe that sentence to be accurate.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

Rather a broad statement about a matter that some people struggle with. Most people suppress any homosexual tendencies they naturally have through social conditioning.

So NO. They don't "know very well".

Plenty of people struggle with their sexuality. Including MANY trans people who will literally change their gender sooner than face the shame of being known as a homosexual.

A number of statements in this post point to a fair degree of cluelessness on this subject. First of all, you appear to be confused about the difference between gender identity and sexual orientation. You might benefit from reading an autobiography from a trans person, such as Skylar Kergil's Before I had the Words.  For the most part, trans people don't get gender reassignment surgery and treatments to avoid "facing the shame of being known as a homosexual." Believe me, trans people face a lot more persecution, sometimes quite violent, than gay men or lesbians. In fact, quite a few trans men are gay (I've had sex with two of them). 

I'm as gay as a fruitcake, but I've certainly never wanted to have tits. I also know that I'd have quite a few more social problems as a trans woman than as a gay man. Have you ever even talked with trans people?

Second of all, the fact that someone may struggle with "homosexual tendencies" doesn't mean the feelings aren't there. There are, of course, certain conditions which cause a very low sex drive, so in those rare cases a man may not understand to whom he's sexually attracted. In other cases, YES, the man knows very well. And studies have also shown that attempting to change one's sexual orientation is a fruitless (so to speak) endeavor. That's why conversion therapy for minors is illegal in so many places. It doesn't change the youth's sexual orientation. It just makes them more neurotic.

[pubic_assistance]

3 hours ago, Unicorn said:

A number of statements in this post point to a fair degree of cluelessness on this subject.

NO.

I am well familiar.

You always have your own viewpoints. That's fine. Doesn't make you right and me wrong.

I simply know a lot more than your limited experiences in the subject.

I don't need to "read a book". I am a long time friend of Veronica Vera..and have met many of her trans students..and discussed their journey. Just because you hang out in gay bars and go to drag shows doesn't mean you know about transgenderism.

Edited January 16, 2023 by pubic_assistance

[LookingAround]

On 1/14/2023 at 10:09 AM, pubic_assistance said:

You made the point right there in your response. You automatically assumed that everyone here is gay.

My question was posed to those who don't identify as 100% gay.

Not everyone in the forum has his buried in the sand, pretending that he is a victim of predetermined destiny.

 

They just all have sex with men. 

The degree of homophobia in this arena never ceases to amaze me. 

Some people (and it’s obvious who they are) protest SO MUCH that that, itself, makes a statement. 

Edited January 16, 2023 by LookingAround

[Guest]

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

...I don't need to "read a book". I am a long time friend of Veronica Vera...

??? Are you telling me that Veronica Vera told you that she underwent transitioning/gender reassignment surgery because she was too ashamed to be known as a gay man???? I find that almost incredible. If true, then she's in a minority among the trans community.

🤨

[pubic_assistance]

10 hours ago, Unicorn said:

??? Are you telling me that Veronica Vera told you that she underwent transitioning/gender reassignment surgery because she was too ashamed to be known as a gay man???? I find that almost incredible. If true, then she's in a minority among the trans community.

🤨

If you don't even know who Veronica Vera is, then I am quite sure I am WAY ahead of you on the subject.

[AroiDee]

12 hours ago, LookingAround said:

They just all have sex with men. 

The degree of homophobia in this arena never ceases to amaze me. 

Some people (and it’s obvious who they are) protest SO MUCH that that, itself, makes a statement. 

Yes.

Some people seem to have an army of acquaintances who are expert in every field of inquiry known to man.

How nice. For them.

[Lookin]

Seems to me this is one of those nature vs. nurture questions that nearly always end up with an answer of "both".  Whether it's 50/50, 90/10, or 10/90, it's really unlikely to be 100/0 or 0/100.  Not only that, but smarter folks than I am will tell you that genetics can affect behavior and, conversely, behavior can affect genetics.

Given the range of possibilities, it's not surprising that, even in a forum oriented to gay sexuality, there's still a wide range of viewpoints and experiences.

(I also happen to believe, although I know of no supportive research, that one's first eye-popping sexual experience will have an outsized influence on future sexual desires.)

Personally, I've always found guys more sexually attractive than girls.  However, I realized that my life would be a lot easier if I lived it as a straight man.  My coming of age was in the fifties and sixties when opportunities could be and were denied to gay men, and it was important to me not to be shoved aside.  So I chose to date girls when my attraction was to guys, and I had straight sex a few times.  It was only after falling in love with my male partner that I made a clean break.

If you'll pardon a little editorializing, I believe that either/or questions about human behavior almost always end up being "some of each".  For me, the question that always springs to mind is, "How could it not be?"

[pubic_assistance]

16 minutes ago, Lookin said:

If you'll pardon a little editorializing, I believe that either/or questions about human behavior almost always end up being "some of each".  For me, the question that always springs to mind is, "How could it not be?"

Thanks for sharing and understanding the point of the post.

[pubic_assistance]

39 minutes ago, Lookin said:

I also happen to believe, although I know of no supportive research, that one's first eye-popping sexual experience will have an outsized influence on future sexual desires.

My first "eye popping" sexual experience was when my girlfriend and I drove into a cornfield at night to have sex in her car. We put the convertible top down and I fucked her over the back seat. I remember the feel of the cool evening breeze on my bare ass and the danger of a farmer noticing our car and shooting us for fucking in his cornfield. One of my hottest memories. To this day I love moments that involve dangerous public sex 🥳

[jeezifonly]

On 1/15/2023 at 9:27 AM, pubic_assistance said:

I suggest you speak to a few transexuals and tell me if you still believe that sentence to be accurate.

Gender identification is not sexual attraction (orientation)

Societal “otherness” links the two for the purpose of exclusion, but generally, sexual/romantic desire is separate from how one presents, and either can create decades of internal struggle. 

[pubic_assistance]

5 hours ago, jeezifonly said:

Gender identification is not sexual attraction (orientation)

Societal “otherness” links the two for the purpose of exclusion, but generally, sexual/romantic desire is separate from how one presents, and either can create decades of internal struggle. 

Yes.

Did you have a point to make ?

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Lookin said:

 

Seems to me this is one of those nature vs. nurture questions that nearly always end up with an answer of "both".  Whether it's 50/50, 90/10, or 10/90, it's really unlikely to be 100/0 or 0/100.  Not only that, but smarter folks than I am will tell you that genetics can affect behavior and, conversely, behavior can affect genetics...I also happen to believe, although I know of no supportive research...

You know the old saying "opinions are like assholes; everyone has them." What's the point in science examining a question if people respond with "I don't care about 'supportive research'--I'm just going to believe what I want!"? There have been tons of research in this area, and every study from every angle points to a biological answer. I haven't seen a single scientific study supportive of a mechanism which points to child rearing being involved. The video of the twin boys in the first page of this string is demonstrative. Obviously they were brought up with the same parents at the exact same time, yet with very different sexual orientations. 

One can never disprove a negative, of course, and one cannot rule out a 99/1 ratio in the nature nurture split. That being said, the question has been addressed with actual studies, not with an "I happen to believe" approach. Any all science points to nature being by far the dominant influence, perhaps the only relevant one. 

[Lookin]

56 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

You know the old saying "opinions are like assholes; everyone has them."

Ah, yes, but you don't need to go around talking out of it.  

 

56 minutes ago, Unicorn said:

What's the point in science examining a question if people respond with "I don't care about 'supportive research'--I'm just going to believe what I want!"?

If you're asking a rhetorical question, you've got your rhetorical answer.  If you're trying a response to my post, I'll respectfully ask that you read and comprehend it first.

 

11 hours ago, Lookin said:

(I also happen to believe, although I know of no supportive research, that one's first eye-popping sexual experience will have an outsized influence on future sexual desires.)

It says I don't know of supportive research about the effect of a first sexual experience on subsequent preferences.  It sure doesn't say I wouldn't believe it if it exists.  I'd very much like to read it.

 

1 hour ago, Unicorn said:

There have been tons of research in this area, and every study from every angle points to a biological answer. I haven't seen a single scientific study supportive of a mechanism which points to child rearing being involved.

Of course, yours is a different point entirely.  Concerning my post, if you know of any research on initial sexual experience as a factor in future preferences, I'd very much appreciate a reference.  I don't need a ton, even one relevant link would be helpful.

I've got my own first experience, which is an experience I enjoyed repeating.  And the OP shared his first experience, which is one he enjoys repeating.  That's only two data points and I'm wondering if it might be more common than that.

With your broad, science-based expertise, you may know the definitive answer and we can all put our opinions and assholes to rest.  

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Lookin said:

... Concerning my post, if you know of any research on initial sexual experience as a factor in future preferences, I'd very much appreciate a reference....

Well, if you want to support your position, it's up to you to find the research supporting it. This article probably provides the best overview of the massive amount of research which has been done on the subject:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100616637616

It quotes several dozen studies, from twin studies, to antibody studies, to studies of boys who were (unknowingly to them) assigned female at birth (who usually end up preferring females). It concludes in its summary:

"Two contrasting views of the development and causes of homosexuality tend to divide those with pro- and anti-homosexual attitudes. The first, associated with positive attitudes toward homosexuality, is that a small percentage of people are homosexual for so-far-unspecified reasons of nature rather than social nurture (Knauer, 2000). The second, associated with negative attitudes toward homosexuality, is that homosexuality is to some extent socially contagious and can spread either through sexual recruitment or through the relaxation of moral and legal prohibitions of homosexual behavior (Eskridge, 2005, 2008; Knauer, 2000). We believe scientific evidence supports the first view much more strongly than it does the second.

Several dependable findings of large effect are consistent with the former but not with the latter. Children who will become homosexual often differ in noticeable ways from those who will become heterosexual. These differences often emerge long before the children clearly have anything like a sexual orientation. Furthermore, these differences in childhood gender nonconformity emerge despite socialization, which works to enforce gender norms, not because of it. Homosexual attractions emerge prior to homosexual behavior in most people.²⁹ This should not be surprising because it follows the same pattern by which most heterosexual people’s lives unfold. Perhaps the most extreme and plausibly effective social manipulation possible—changing boys into girls, socially and physically—has been attempted, with no apparent alteration of sexual orientation. These individuals—natal males changed into females—typically grow up to be attracted to women, based on limited available evidence. There is good evidence for both genetic and nonsocial environmental influences on sexual orientation. The limited evidence we have about the prevalence of nonheterosexuality across cultures and time suggests that homosexual orientation does not increase in frequency with social tolerance, although its expression (in behavior and in open identification) may do so."

[pubic_assistance]

6 hours ago, Unicorn said:

I haven't seen a single scientific study supportive of a mechanism which points to child rearing being involved.

I've posted two. You don't want to read them so you can keep believing your old fashioned attitude toward human sexuality.

[spidir]

Gallup reports that 86.3% Americans say they are straight or heterosexual and that bisexual identification is the most common among LGBT Americans (e.g., 57%, indicate they are bisexual, 21% are gay, 14% lesbian, 10% transgender and 4% something else.) I am surprised by the poll results given the dismissive attitudes towards bisexual males. I suspect that sexual orientation is more fluid than many believe. Time will tell as individuals are given more room to express their orientation in action and words.