So, today, I had a nice long chat with my Biology teacher about the Gay Gene. As most people know, the gay gene itself, as a single gene has been disproven, but he thinks there are still genetic factors in it. He thinks that there is a genetic factor in the woman's ability to femenise a boy, and that although there hasn't been a study on lesbians, that its also a genetic factor, that some women produce more testosterone than others. That would go quite well with me, because my mother (and probably me) have polysistic ovaries, which if i recall correctly means she would produce more testosterone. I also wanted to do a little test. I often find lesbians react in a typical male way to girls, and gay guys the opposite. So I wanted to find out if there was any correlation between 'masculine lesbians' and having a male reaction, which would mean they are anatomically closer to guys. Its not to make fun of people for - i'm actually trying to test a theory here I didn't put this in the Health section because its not a plea for help - its just discussion about the above theory, and others people have come up with/heard of.
It's hard to say what my sex drive is like. On the one hand, I'm not promiscuous, and I wouldn't be even if situational barriers didn't prevent me from being such (as they do now), and I want there to be some connection between me an a guy before we do anything. However, that might also come from the fact that my fetish and kinks are so specific that I probably couldn't possibly be turned on by regular sex unless there is some sort of emotional connection, so perhaps if I had the opportunity to have sexual encounters with multiple people who share my fetish, I would. I'd like to think I wouldn't but considering I've never had any experiences anywhere close to that kind of scenario, I really can't say. Of course, my answer (I picked the second one) is given under the assumption that women aren't as promiscuous as men, which it turns out might not be true. But that's another matter for another thread.
Thats not exactly how i meant it. Straight girls, in general can very easily keep their eyes off a man's muscles, and keep from having immediate and incredibly strong sexual fantasies. In other words, they can do maths homwork at the same time as watching a movie. I cannot. the moment i see breasts or legs, i'm instantly captivated, my heartrate goes up and i can't look away. Most straight men are like that as well. so i did the poll to see if the closer in anatomy to a man a lesbian is, is her sexuality more like that of a guy's. and the other way round, with gay guys. you see, i have a very masculine build, and if you saw me from behind, you'd think i was a guy. Last year, the male teachers complained that the girls were dressing too sexually, and they couldn't concentrate on teaching. a new dress code was enforced. my straight female friends made jokes and stuff, but i understand that so easily.
Sexuality is partly genetic. It is also partly prenataly biochemical. Do we understand the precise mechanisms behind the development of sexuality? No, but researchers are discovering more daily. It definitely isn't "nurture." All of the examples of environment causing "gayness" which I've seen are fallacious and no evidence suggests that changes of sexuality are possible and a change is what would have to happen if the cause is environmental.
Eh. I'm neither femme nor butch. I really don't fit those stereotypes. And I also like male identified people. So I can't vote. I'd be an outlier anyways. My sex drive is absurdly high.
I don't actually know how to answer. Namely because I also don't like to say I'm a butch gay or girly gay. I'm just me...
genes, hormones, womb environment, life environment... all will play their part in creating a unique person.
Yeah - i knew there'd be lots of people in the middle. its not a bad thing - i just didn't want to make the poll too confusing
When I think about it, if it is genetic, even due to the mom's ability to estrogenize her children, homosexuality would most likely be weeded out. But, Lets say 10% of the world is gay. Before modern times, gay people were pressured to mate anyways with the opposite sex and pass on their genes. Now since it is more accepted, gay people don't have children or pass on their genes. Don't you think homosexuality will be weeded out in future generations? Even if it has to do with the mother's ability to estrogenize her children, that would mean the mothers with less estrogenizing abilities would produce more offspring that will produce more children. From an evolutionary standpoint how does homosexuality help our species? Given current conditions, since minimal genes will be passed down from homosexuals, if it is genetic, we'll see it less and less in accepting societies. NO MATTER WHAT. Even if brothers of homosexuals pass it to their children, it still narrows down and will eventually disappear. Unless it is a constantly, random mutation of the genes or something. Like down syndrome is random not genetic. (I think) Anyways, this leads me to think: 1. It's environmental only. 2. If it's genetic, then it will be weeded out eventually. We better hope it's environmental.
To me, to be honest, I don't find any causes of 'queerness'. It's just what it is there. So... be happy of what we are now. Keeps the life simple and happier.
idk i would consider myself neither masculine or feminine,i don't think that has to do with being gay anyway because straight males can be feminine and straight females can be masculine,i think it is who you are on the inside,sort of like an invisible race which cannot be changed or weeded out. Idk how this inner race happens but it certainly is unique and we should embrace that.
