Is heterosexuality genetic?

[afleitch]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

[IDS Judicial Overlord John Dibble]

Dude, we know what this is really about, and you disgust me. Marriage is between a man and a man or a woman and a woman or a man, a goat, and a waffle. That's what Stan, our lord and master, intended.

[ShadowOfTheWave]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

Heterosexuality is an absurd term, the correct term is normal sexuality. Any sexual attraction outside of man-woman attraction has no natural purpose, and is therefore biologically abnormal as is usually the bi-product of genetic problems.

[Communists For McCain]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

Heterosexuality is an absurd term, the correct term is normal sexuality. Any sexual attraction outside of man-woman attraction has no natural purpose, and is therefore biologically abnormal as is usually the bi-product of genetic problems.

Oh right, so sexual attraction, and intercourse, between a brother and a sister is considered "natural" and biologically "normal"?

[afleitch]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

Heterosexuality is an absurd term, the correct term is normal sexuality. Any sexual attraction outside of man-woman attraction has no natural purpose, and is therefore biologically abnormal as is usually the bi-product of genetic problems.

Given that homosexuality is displayed in every observable animal species that re-produced through procreation, it is a natural trait. It may not be common, like left handedness, blue eyes, blond hair and porcelain skin, or being colour blind, or being deaf, or having unnattached earlobes, or fallen arches and so on. It's simply a trait. A bit like reproducing by procreation, which is on the grand scale of things a minority method of reproduction. It's also a reappearing trait. It appears in animals seperated by millions, tens of millions of years of evolution so has probably been prevailant for millions upon millions of generations.

[Ghyl Tarvoke]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

What does that even mean?

[afleitch]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

What does that even mean?

It's actually the mirror version of a phrase used to describe homosexuality; i.e that the expression of it wasn't 'legitimate'

[Redalgo]

I reckon that most if not all forms of human sexuality - heterosexual preferences and behaviors included - are the products of a multitude of biological predispositions. Each of the predispositions, for any given individual, may be hard-wired into how the person develops, might go unexpressed unless in some fashion triggered, or can be triggered - in which case interpersonal interactions and social norms may impact whether one opts to accept or make an effort to suppress their desires.

Though it is not a subject I admittedly know much about, my attitude is currently that the influences of "nature" and "nurture" are inseparably interwoven regardless of whether some people deem the outcomes to be right, wrong, normal, immoral, etc.  Expressions of human sexuality are simply that, regardless of whether any of us subjectively consider them to be legitimate. Controversies concerning sexual preferences and behaviors amount to disputes over our customs. There is absolutely nothing innately proper or awry about any critter's biology.

[Simfan34]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

Heterosexuality is an absurd term, the correct term is normal sexuality. Any sexual attraction outside of man-woman attraction has no natural purpose, and is therefore biologically abnormal as is usually the bi-product of genetic problems.

While I'm not going to go as far as to deem it a "problem" but rather a recessive trait, I think this is somewhat correct.

afleitch, are you trolling?

[Vasall des Midas]

should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

Clearly not. That is disgusting.

Decent people like me stick to their goats and waffles.

[Torie]

Nobody knows for sure at the moment, but just why is it relevant?  I mean, if just whom one is attracted to is not genetic, just like maybe that your prefer blue to green, or cats to dogs, or emo to classical, assuming that is not genetic, and maybe all that is too, so what? Or preferring brunettes to blonds? The whole debate is a waste of time. And in my case, no amount of therapy or reeducation is going to get me to prefer dogs to cats. Resistance is futile.

[gunnut]

Considering sexuality is completely controlled by hormones, it might just be a genetic thing. It also might depend on where you live or the morals you're taught while you grow up

[Thanks for all the fish!]

Given that studies of sexuality don't 100% declare that heterosexuality is genetic and may in fact be a myriad of different pre-natal, hormonal and genetic flavours, should heterosexuality be considered a legitimate expression of human sexuality?

Heterosexuality is an absurd term, the correct term is normal sexuality.

Replacing a neutral term with a biased term is a cheap rhetorical trick that dodges the issue completely.

Any sexual attraction outside of man-woman attraction has no natural purpose

First, you're implicitly falling victim to the naturalist fallacy: "it's natural, therefore it's good."

Second, your statement is false.  Chimpanzees, bonobos, giraffes, dolphins, buffalo and elephants all engage in homosexual relations (this, by the way, is not even close to an exhaustive list).  It is suspected that in many of these cases, male-male homosexual relations help foster the friendships and social ties which are required for a united group or tribe.  Other times, homosexual relations are a way for a male to put another male "in his place."  An interesting example is rats: when rats are overcrowded, many males will only mate with either males or non-ovulating females.  Homosexuality here seems to be a reaction to overpopulation.

Among humans, the Greeks and Romans had a lot of homosexuality for purposes of fostering closeness among soldiers and letting slaves know their place.  Native tribes from both Africa and America were found to practice ritualized homosexuality, much to the explorers' disgust.

[Free Palestine]

I think people need to realize that there's a third option out there: sexuality isn't genetic, nor a choice, but something that's derived from environment.  Like with gender.

[Swedish Cheese]

I think people need to realize that there's a third option out there: sexuality isn't genetic, nor a choice, but something that's derived from environment.  Like with gender.

^This!^

[crypto-fascist superhero]

I think it's any of some combination of genetic predisposition, life experience, and hormonal exposure in the womb.