I believe that the majority of people lobbying society into a belief that a gene exists which has resulted in ones homosexuality, or in other words; ‘a gene which has direct influence to the outcome of ones sexual attraction’, are doing so because of socialistic norms, negative stereotypes, and ideas which have been superimposed upon homosexuality by society. I will elaborate and clarify on that idea below, but before I continue I would like to give a disclaimer, that when using the word homosexual, or homosexuality in this article, I am strictly referring to the attraction to the sex organs which are the same that one possesses themself. It has no emotional or psychological attraction associated with it in my writing. I am doing so because when discerning between any of an almost infinite number of sexualities, there is no general consensus or definitive description as to what it means to be ‘gay’, ‘lesbian’, ‘pansexual’, etc., and it is often an opinionated answer that varies from each person of whom you are asking. Most people refer to being homosexual as having both sexual attraction, and emotional attraction to the same sex. There are people who exist whose emotional attractions differ from their sexual attractions, and I believe these are separate entities within a being that could be determined by different factors; either biologically or psychologically. So for the purpose of this article, I am stating that what is being discussed when referencing ‘homosexuality’ is the sexual attraction alone.
If it were concluded that homosexuality be biologically determined, the effects on society would be vastly dramatic. The implications would affect religion, politics, and rattle the stigmas and predispositions about homosexuality that millions of people hold across the world. In the United States, there are laws that protect people who have immutable characteristics, such as race, from discrimination. If homosexuality were proven to be an immutable characteristic, then the laws would then be changed. The effects would be far reaching, nonetheless. When thinking about the things that would result from a ‘gay gene’ having been proved to exist, or things that would result from merely convincing people that a ‘gay gene’ exist whether true or not, the consequences are almost entirely positive. I think that these ‘positive outcomes’ are what motivate and perhaps subconsciously urge homosexuals and others to spread the ideology that the ‘gay genes’ existence is truth. However unscientific, or scientific, I don’t believe that the positive outcomes of claiming and believing in the ‘gay gene’ justifies the acceptance of this ideology into ones beliefs as truth. I think that the number of people who believe that being gay is a choice is still very significant. Because if it were not a choice, no one would be able to justify treating them any differently than their heterosexual counterpart.
The majority of homosexuals fail to realize that the idea that it’s not a choice, and the idea that it is not determined or influenced by genetics can co-exist. Just because someone is gay and didn’t make the choice to be gay, does not have to imply that their homosexual attractions were the result of genetics. It is argued because it is fact that no one has control over their own genetics. If homosexuality was proven to be genetically related or determined, it would then mean that they did not actively make the choice to be gay, a concept which happens to be an important part of the gay agenda. Why is so much effort being spent on proving that a gay gene exists as opposed to a pedophile gene, or a serial rapist gene? Is it that some of us have so little pride in who we are that we feel the need to justify or excuse the way in which we live with a ‘biological destiny for which we have no control over’. One can have no control over their sexual attraction while it still being completely unaccredited to genetics. I believe that our sexuality is shaped strictly by external influence beginning at an early age for some, and possibly later for others.
If you believe as I do, that homosexuality has no genetic relation, then depending on what criteria you let dictate what it means to ‘choose’ something, it could be argued that gay people did choose to be gay, but just not actively or consciously choose to, or chose without knowing the implications of that choice. Allow me to explain what I mean by ‘not actively choosing’, because ‘actively choosing’ something is an important facet of what many deem necessary to classify something as ‘choice’. Let’s say that a deaf man is on a walk with his five year old granddaughter. They walk casually down the street towards the local park and come upon a set of railroad tracks that they must cross. The deaf grandfather, being senile, does not look for a train before crossing, nor does he hear one. You, an innocent bystander who is located several thousand feet away, notice a train barreling down the tracks only seconds from crushing the blind man and his young granddaughter. You are located too far away to push or scoop away the blind man or his granddaughter. But, you are conveniently located right beside the railroad switch plate. You can pull the lever and send the train veering left onto the left siding of the track and off of an incomplete bridge completely missing the blind man and his granddaughter. Or you can let the train continue onward and crush the blind man and his granddaughter. In a rush you chose to flip the switch and send the engineer and his conductor to their deaths in order save the blind man and his young granddaughter crossing the tracks. It later turns out that the train was carrying 300 passengers who are now all deceased. Regarding what dictates a choice, would you walk away from that situation admitting that you chose to kill to 300 people? Was it still a choice since you didn’t know the implications of the choice? If someone has offered you a piece of strawberry cake, and a piece of chocolate, and you chose to eat the chocolate cake and it’s revealed that the chocolate cake had poison in it but the strawberry did not, and you then die from ingesting the poison. Did you choose death? Or did you just make a decision unknowingly that resulted in your death?
I feel that this is the way that gay people are brought up into society. By fate, external influences, opportunity, early experiences, and possibly a few ‘choices’ for which you may have not have known what would result of them, and for which may not have even been related to homosexuality directly at the time. I think that most would conclude that since these choices are not consciously made, that they are not in fact ‘choices’ at all, since the general consensus is that a choice involves an active reasoning, logical process, and an understanding of the consequences.
Among the research showing that sexuality is influenced by or the result of genetics, the unsubstantiated part remains to be if the differences in heterosexual and homosexual brain characteristics form as a result of their sexuality, or if their sexuality is a result of these differences. Additionally, in case studies, the differences are not found prevalent among all or even most homosexuals. There could also be no natural selection for a gay gene because gay persons are not able to reproduce. So with the prohibition of reproduction, wouldn’t it be naturally selected out of the gene pool? So if a gay gene exists, it must have some other naturally desirable function associated with it, otherwise it could not be selected for. Thus, the data appears to be inconsistent enough for anyone to use as a sole justification for their belief.
Regarding the ample amount of research in all directions, that one’s sexuality is A) strictly a result of environmental influence, B) strictly a result of genetics, or C) a result of both environmental and genetic factors, a lack of proof continues to be the case for all. Until proof is provided, it will remain a mystery that I feel is only determined by one’s own personal experience, discussion, and contemplation. Gays are seemingly given more credibility and have more persuasive-power when sharing their opinion regarding this with straight people, and undecided gay people alike. If you are gay person who believes that your homosexuality is the result of genetics, and have come to the realization that the ‘positive outcomes of a gay gene existing’ are the only reasons for your belief, then I highly encourage you to further challenge your ideas. However you see the issue, whether straight or gay, tolerance of someone’s sexuality shouldn’t be dictated by whether or not they were born with it, or whether it developed later in life.
What are your ideas on whether or not you believe a gay gene exists and why. Do you feel as though you have been gay since birth, and whether or not you think it was determined by a source which wasn’t environmental and after your birth, or have you recently come to the realization that you have same-sex sexual or emotional attractions after happily living a heterosexual life? I think the only way to help us understand why we believe as we do is to discuss them with people of differing opinions, to have them challenge your beliefs and to challenge your own for those things that remain unproven.