Epigenetics - Nature, Nurture, and Gays

[The Nehor]

11 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

If there is a biological basis for homosexuality, then it is possible through gene therapy, drugs, or some other medical means it can be changed.  So perhaps 20 years from now, gays can become straight.  

I doubt there is any drug treatment that would work. There might be a way to target epigenetics but it would be difficult. The problem is that it is unlikely to be one single epigenetic “marker” so any therapy would have to understand the genetic code much more extensively than we do now. Oddly it is more likely if we identify some of the markers we could make people bisexual but if we try to shut down sexual expression it could easily make someone asexual. It is also not clear if it would work at all. Imagine if tomorrow your preferred gender preference switched. Would that be enough to override decades of built up attraction? I don’t know.

I would not want such a treatment found right now to be honest. There are too many nations that would make its use compulsory.

[Stargazer]

16 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Most gay people I know don’t want to be straight. 

There are those, however, who do. A famous (some say infamous) gay man whose name I won't mention so as not to distract from the point, was quoted occasionally as saying that he would rather have been hetero, and that he would sometimes attempt to cross over to see if he could remedy his situation. Didn't work, of course. Although he was decidedly derisive about gay marriage, he eventually gave up and just married his male partner.

But there may be many more factors at work here than just sexuality. It is sometimes possible, for example, for deaf people to have that problem cured, so they can hear, and yet some resist it because they feel great identification with the deaf community. And to be hearing again (or even for the first time), they may feel, would remove them from their community. And since a large part of their identity is wrapped up with their condition and their community, leaving it or the thought of leaving it can feel like a betrayal or an abandonment.

Last year there was an interesting article on this issue in respect of deafness which appeared in Discover Magazine: Why Deaf People Oppose Using Gene Editing to "Cure" Deafness.

Are deaf or gay people broke?  Many say NO. And if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I happen to "suffer" from Attention Deficit Disorder. I once tried out a drug which actually worked, but whose side effects were undesirable, so I stopped using it. By all accounts there are now drugs that are much better for the condition, but have I done anything about getting access to any of them? Nope. Why not? Because I kind of like the way I am. But should I? I sometimes get frustrated by my lack of follow-through on projects that I would like to take on, and I know good and well that my ADD is a large part of it. Yet here I am, still cheerfully distracted.

I'm quite sure that a similar phenomenon would occur in members of the gay community, if a "cure" for homosexuality were to be found.

And it's quite understandable. Especially in the case of a gay person who loves and is committed to a same-sex partner. The very idea would be repugnant, for that very reason.

 

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I doubt there is any drug treatment that would work.

See the article I linked to above in response to @katherine the great. I have no idea if Crispr-Cas9 could be used in this case, but things that used to be impossible and were considered to be forever impossible, now seem less so.

Quote

There might be a way to target epigenetics but it would be difficult. The problem is that it is unlikely to be one single epigenetic “marker” so any therapy would have to understand the genetic code much more extensively than we do now. Oddly it is more likely if we identify some of the markers we could make people bisexual but if we try to shut down sexual expression it could easily make someone asexual. It is also not clear if it would work at all. Imagine if tomorrow your preferred gender preference switched. Would that be enough to override decades of built up attraction? I don’t know.

Like you, I don't know. But it's something that could/should be tried.

Quote

I would not want such a treatment found right now to be honest. There are too many nations that would make its use compulsory.

I know what you mean, and I sympathize with it, but some of those nations make homosexuality a capital offense, too. To a gay person, perhaps being straight might be better than being dead. Or maybe not, everyone's different.

Edited February 6, 2021 by Stargazer

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

But it's something that could/should be tried.

Could I understand, why “should”?  So the option is there if wanted?

Edited February 6, 2021 by Calm

[Stargazer]

Just now, Calm said:

Could I understand, why “should”?

Because some gay folks would want it to be.  There exists a cure for some forms of deafness.  Those who want it now have the option, whereas before they didn't.  Why not for homosexuality?

And do you know? If "gayness" could be cured, then presumably it would also be possible to cure heterosexuality, too. If a mechanism is found for the one, it seems logical that it would be found for the other.

Now there's a scary thought.

[MrShorty]

28 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

If "gayness" could be cured, then presumably it would also be possible to cure heterosexuality, too.

No shortage of men (and women) (most in sexless marriages) in the sexology circles I follow who would love to find some magic pill or treatment that could turn their sexuality off. If we could figure out how to switch attraction from same sex to opposite sex and we believe that such a treatment would be morally acceptable, why not also include the variation that lets us turn it on/off at will? Wouldn't it be nice during our teen/YSA  years to be able to turn it off? Then consciously turn it on after marriage, then turn it off again if/when a spouse loses interest in sex.

Definitely agree, Stargazer. Some scary thoughts.

[Ahab]

On 2/5/2021 at 6:50 PM, Calm said:

Right....

Yes, it is right.  And to prove it to you I will stop talking to you/communicating with you for at least 5 minutes.  Starting now...

[mfbukowski]

24 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yes, it is right.  And to prove it to you I will stop talking to you/communicating with you for at least 5 minutes.  Starting now...

Unfortunately then with language in the off position, there will be nothing to remind you to turn it back on....

Edited February 8, 2021 by mfbukowski

[Ahab]

5 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Unfortunately then with language in the off position, there will be nothing to remind you to turn it back on....

I know the difference between using language to say something and not using language, how to start and how to stop, without needing any reminders to let me know when I am saying something and when I am not.

[Ahab]

On 2/6/2021 at 4:17 PM, MrShorty said:

No shortage of men (and women) (most in sexless marriages) in the sexology circles I follow who would love to find some magic pill or treatment that could turn their sexuality off. If we could figure out how to switch attraction from same sex to opposite sex and we believe that such a treatment would be morally acceptable, why not also include the variation that lets us turn it on/off at will? Wouldn't it be nice during our teen/YSA  years to be able to turn it off? Then consciously turn it on after marriage, then turn it off again if/when a spouse loses interest in sex.

Definitely agree, Stargazer. Some scary thoughts.

Not scary at all, from my perspective.  I still see both sexes as sexually attractive, each in their own way, with some who are more sexually attractive to me than some others.  And I can still choose to be/act however I want to be/act.

I've been/acted homosexual before and I could still choose to be/act homosexual now.  And I can also choose to be/act as a heterosexual is/acts, sexually, if and whenever I want to be.  Not scary at all to me that I have the power to be/act however I want to be.

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Not scary at all, from my perspective.  I still see both sexes as sexually attractive, each in their own way, with some who are more sexually attractive to me than some others.  And I can still choose to be/act however I want to be/act.

I've been/acted homosexual before and I could still choose to be/act homosexual now.  And I can also choose to be/act as a heterosexual is/acts, sexually, if and whenever I want to be.  Not scary at all to me that I have the power to be/act however I want to be.

So are you volunteering to test this treatment?

[MrShorty]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

Not scary at all, from my perspective.  I still see both sexes as sexually attractive, each in their own way, with some who are more sexually attractive to me than some others.  And I can still choose to be/act however I want to be/act.

I've been/acted homosexual before and I could still choose to be/act homosexual now.  And I can also choose to be/act as a heterosexual is/acts, sexually, if and whenever I want to be.  Not scary at all to me that I have the power to be/act however I want to be.

I would note that the people who I am talking about are not looking at choosing heterosexual or homosexual attractions or behaviors, but are looking for asexual (the tail end of the LGBTQIA+ alphabet that often gets left off or ignored). These people who are often married to good people in otherwise happy marriages would choose if they could to completely turn off their sexual attractions and desires in order to get rid of the pain and frustration of sexless marriages. While I know that some people seem able to take it or leave it, those I had in mind when I commented seem unable to choose to not experience sexual desire or attraction. Would you extend your own experience with being able to choose to include the ability to choose no attractions/desires?

Anecdotally, I am aware of others like you with a more bisexual-like experience. I cannot understand it in any real way because, no matter how hard I try (and, admittedly, I have not tried that hard), I cannot find men attractive. I've read and heard enough of what makes men attractive so that I can logically and rationally look at a man and make a logical determination that "he would be quite attractive to someone" or "he wouldn't be very attractive", but I cannot make myself actually experience that attraction. My experience has been strictly heterosexual. In that respect, I find it easier to understand the experiences of a gay man or lesbian who woman says that they have tried but cannot make themselves find the opposite sex attractive.

[Kevin Christensen]

Regarding this from MrShorty, 

Quote

I would note that the people who I am talking about are not looking at choosing heterosexual or homosexual attractions or behaviors, but are looking for asexual ...

There is this widely-used approach, which tends to be overlooked in most conversations in the general public, I think because it does not fit the preferred social narratives.

http://squaretwo.org/Sq2ArticleChristensenRashomon.html

Addition recovery is not about changing one's orientation, but about dealing with the two major components of addiction: obsession and impaired judgement.  The last thing an addict needs to be told is "This is just the way you are, nothing can change you, so you might as well be 'true to yourself."  Recovery (which takes from 1. 5 to three years if done properly) directly addresses the obsession and impaired judgement that define addiction.  For recovered sex addicts, sex is not a need, but an option. By definition, people with options have more freedom than those with inescapable needs.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

[The Nehor]

On 2/6/2021 at 4:21 PM, Stargazer said:

There are those, however, who do. A famous (some say infamous) gay man whose name I won't mention so as not to distract from the point, was quoted occasionally as saying that he would rather have been hetero, and that he would sometimes attempt to cross over to see if he could remedy his situation. Didn't work, of course. Although he was decidedly derisive about gay marriage, he eventually gave up and just married his male partner.

But there may be many more factors at work here than just sexuality. It is sometimes possible, for example, for deaf people to have that problem cured, so they can hear, and yet some resist it because they feel great identification with the deaf community. And to be hearing again (or even for the first time), they may feel, would remove them from their community. And since a large part of their identity is wrapped up with their condition and their community, leaving it or the thought of leaving it can feel like a betrayal or an abandonment.

Last year there was an interesting article on this issue in respect of deafness which appeared in Discover Magazine: Why Deaf People Oppose Using Gene Editing to "Cure" Deafness.

Are deaf or gay people broke?  Many say NO. And if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I happen to "suffer" from Attention Deficit Disorder. I once tried out a drug which actually worked, but whose side effects were undesirable, so I stopped using it. By all accounts there are now drugs that are much better for the condition, but have I done anything about getting access to any of them? Nope. Why not? Because I kind of like the way I am. But should I? I sometimes get frustrated by my lack of follow-through on projects that I would like to take on, and I know good and well that my ADD is a large part of it. Yet here I am, still cheerfully distracted.

I'm quite sure that a similar phenomenon would occur in members of the gay community, if a "cure" for homosexuality were to be found.

And it's quite understandable. Especially in the case of a gay person who loves and is committed to a same-sex partner. The very idea would be repugnant, for that very reason.

Hi fellow ADD/ADHD sufferer.

[The Nehor]

On 2/6/2021 at 6:17 PM, MrShorty said:

No shortage of men (and women) (most in sexless marriages) in the sexology circles I follow who would love to find some magic pill or treatment that could turn their sexuality off. If we could figure out how to switch attraction from same sex to opposite sex and we believe that such a treatment would be morally acceptable, why not also include the variation that lets us turn it on/off at will? Wouldn't it be nice during our teen/YSA  years to be able to turn it off? Then consciously turn it on after marriage, then turn it off again if/when a spouse loses interest in sex.

Definitely agree, Stargazer. Some scary thoughts.

How many of these asexual teens and young adults would get to the marriage part without physical desire?

[The Nehor]

53 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Regarding this from MrShorty, 

There is this widely-used approach, which tends to be overlooked in most conversations in the general public, I think because it does not fit the preferred social narratives.

http://squaretwo.org/Sq2ArticleChristensenRashomon.html

Addition recovery is not about changing one's orientation, but about dealing with the two major components of addiction: obsession and impaired judgement.  The last thing an addict needs to be told is "This is just the way you are, nothing can change you, so you might as well be 'true to yourself."  Recovery (which takes from 1. 5 to three years if done properly) directly addresses the obsession and impaired judgement that define addiction.  For recovered sex addicts, sex is not a need, but an option. By definition, people with options have more freedom than those with inescapable needs.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

The US also needs to move beyond the 12 step programs and our random rehab clinics as the end all and be all of addiction recovery. I am not knocking the program. It served a purpose but there are better methods of dealing with addiction being developed with higher success rates. In the US we have a glut of addiction recovery plans that basically don’t work and there is no licensing or oversight into what goes on. It is a mess.

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I would note that the people who I am talking about are not looking at choosing heterosexual or homosexual attractions or behaviors, but are looking for asexual (the tail end of the LGBTQIA+ alphabet that often gets left off or ignored). These people who are often married to good people in otherwise happy marriages would choose if they could to completely turn off their sexual attractions and desires in order to get rid of the pain and frustration of sexless marriages. While I know that some people seem able to take it or leave it, those I had in mind when I commented seem unable to choose to not experience sexual desire or attraction. Would you extend your own experience with being able to choose to include the ability to choose no attractions/desires?

Yes, and I have actually done that, too.  For days and days, sometimes, before choosing to arouse my faculties or allow my faculties to be aroused.  A state of being I usually refer to as simply not being in the mood for any sexual relations.

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

Anecdotally, I am aware of others like you with a more bisexual-like experience. I cannot understand it in any real way because, no matter how hard I try (and, admittedly, I have not tried that hard), I cannot find men attractive. I've read and heard enough of what makes men attractive so that I can logically and rationally look at a man and make a logical determination that "he would be quite attractive to someone" or "he wouldn't be very attractive", but I cannot make myself actually experience that attraction. My experience has been strictly heterosexual. In that respect, I find it easier to understand the experiences of a gay man or lesbian who woman says that they have tried but cannot make themselves find the opposite sex attractive.

I think you are hitting the nail on the head as far as describing what is actually involved in the arousal process.  Finding someone who you consider to be sexually attractive is what it is all about, as far as each individual is concerned.  For some men, only some women of a very narrow range of particular attributes does the trick.  Some other men are able to see a much broader range of women as sexually attractive, and some men see women of all types as sexually attractive.  But then again some men do not see any woman as sexually attractive to them, or only a few would hit all of the right buttons for them.  It's all about what any person sees or does not see as what they each would consider to be sexually attractive.  I think I am just able to see more people, and maybe even all people, as sexually attractive in some way.  And yet I still see some as more or less sexually attractive than some other people.

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yes, and I have actually done that, too.  For days and days, sometimes, before choosing to arouse my faculties or allow my faculties to be aroused.  A state of being I usually refer to as simply not being in the mood for any sexual relations.

I think you are hitting the nail on the head as far as describing what is actually involved in the arousal process.  Finding someone who you consider to be sexually attractive is what it is all about, as far as each individual is concerned.  For some men, only some women of a very narrow range of particular attributes does the trick.  Some other men are able to see a much broader range of women as sexually attractive, and some men see women of all types as sexually attractive.  But then again some men do not see any woman as sexually attractive to them, or only a few would hit all of the right buttons for them.  It's all about what any person sees or does not see as what they each would consider to be sexually attractive.  I think I am just able to see more people, and maybe even all people, as sexually attractive in some way.  And yet I still see some as more or less sexually attractive than some other people.

You are generalizing your ability to do this to all humans. The idea that if one person can do something than everyone can has led to a lot of frustration.

[Ahab]

3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You are generalizing your ability to do this to all humans. The idea that if one person can do something than everyone can has led to a lot of frustration.

I am saying that because I think everyone can do what I have done, if they really want to, and I would rather think they can than think they simply can't.  But then again, I dunno, maybe some people really can't see what I see, no matter how hard they may try.

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, Ahab said:

I know the difference between using language to say something and not using language, how to start and how to stop, without needing any reminders to let me know when I am saying something and when I am not.

Your off button is not working

[california boy]

On 2/5/2021 at 11:19 AM, MrShorty said:

Perhaps, but I cannot help but question what the appropriate role of sexuality is in the design of marriage and God's long-term vision(s). I've studied enough about how sexual compatibility (for lack of a better word) problems intersect with general marriage problems to know that they tend to correlate well (even Pres. Kimball once noted that "most" divorces were caused by sexual incompatibility without supporting data). I can probably agree that sexuality is not supposed to be the lone driver behind marriage, but it also seems to be one of many significant drivers behind marriage. It seems to me that there is a lot of confusion in the LDS world and the broader Christian world about how sexuality and marriage should and do intersect.

I don't think that sexuality is even close to being the most important thing about a gay marriage either.   It certainly isn't even in the top 5 reasons why I am with my same sex partner.  

Think about it logically.  Because most in the gay community have been marginalized by the religion they grew up in, having sex outside of marriage is very common.  So why do these gay couples want to marry?  Does anyone really think it is so they can have sex?  Or is it for the exact same reasons most humans are married.  They want a significant and meaningful relationship with the person they love.  They want to care for that person for the rest of their lives and be cared for as well.  It is the Church that seems to make it all about sex and appearances.

When I talked to my Bishop about this I asked him if I could just live with another man.  Not have sex with him at all, but still love him and care for him.  He said no.  I asked him what laws of God would I be breaking.  He said, it was the whole appearance of evil.  It was at that moment that I knew I could no longe be a part of the Church.

[california boy]

On 2/5/2021 at 2:38 PM, Ahab said:

As someone who experimented with sexual relations with people of both sexes I understand how genes can be turned on and turned off.  I see beauty in both sexes, some more or less than some others, and sexual relations with either one can be pleasurable.

So for me the "hard" part was choosing between intelligent vs carnal pleasures.  Sex can feel good either way, with a man or a woman, but I think everyone should use some intelligence when choosing who to have sex with.  And God knows what is best for us.

Once again, if it was just about sex and carnal pleasures, then it wouldn't matter what gender you had sex with.  But it is not.  I knew I was gay when I was 12.  I did what the Church told me to do and promised that I would no longer be gay if I married.  That turned out to be a lie.  

I was married for over 20 years because I stayed in that marriage until my children were out of the house.  But during all that time, I never felt anything like when I am with a person of the same gender.  The first time I was with my now partner, all the sudden, this thing called love changed from friendship type love to that deep I want to be with you forever love.  And this is long before I ever had sex with him.  If it was just about sex and feeling good, why did that never happen?  My life certainly would have been much easier.  

God does know what is best.  The peace of mind that I have with my partner now never happened in the 20 years of marriage to a woman.

 

[california boy]

On 2/6/2021 at 2:29 PM, Stargazer said:

See the article I linked to above in response to @katherine the great. I have no idea if Crispr-Cas9 could be used in this case, but things that used to be impossible and were considered to be forever impossible, now seem less so.

Quote

There might be a way to target epigenetics but it would be difficult. The problem is that it is unlikely to be one single epigenetic “marker” so any therapy would have to understand the genetic code much more extensively than we do now. Oddly it is more likely if we identify some of the markers we could make people bisexual but if we try to shut down sexual expression it could easily make someone asexual. It is also not clear if it would work at all. Imagine if tomorrow your preferred gender preference switched. Would that be enough to override decades of built up attraction? I don’t know.

Like you, I don't know. But it's something that could/should be tried.

There doesn't seem to be much movement in the straight community to want to "fix" themselves and become gay.  I wonder why?  Everyone knows being gay is way more fun than being straight.  

 

On 2/6/2021 at 2:29 PM, Stargazer said:

I know what you mean, and I sympathize with it, but some of those nations make homosexuality a capital offense, too. To a gay person, perhaps being straight might be better than being dead. Or maybe not, everyone's different.

Well the answer to your question is Yes, many would rather be gay than straight.  Because even with the threat of execution, they still find ways to connect with someone of the same sex in order to have that love and bonding that all humans need and long for, even if it means their life.

Throwing gays off the tops of buildings, hanging them, torturing them, putting them in prison, stoning them, caneing them in public to the point of near death,  burning them alive, throwing acid on their faces, tying them up and dragging them behind their cars hasn't eradicated those that are attracted to the same sex.   And preventing gay members of the Church from never being able to marry someone of the same sex has not turned those members straight.  Every gay member has a choice: Either stay in the church and never have any type of human companionship that marriage brings, or leave the Church and find happiness and companionship with someone of the same sex.  It has been my experience that the vast majority of gay members leave the Church.  

[MrShorty]

@Kevin Christensen It was an interesting essay, that just doesn't seem to line up with the other marriage and sex therapists that I read/listen to. Even those who accept that sex is sometimes addictive do not believe that every case of sexual frustration/incompatibility is because the higher desire spouse is just unwilling to accept and treat their sexual addiction. Sex addiction is getting to be a long way from epigenetics, but I thought I would at least mention that I see very few arguing that every sexually dysfunctional marriage would be successfully treated by treating the HD spouse's addiction.

[MrShorty]

20 hours ago, The Nehor said:

How many of these asexual teens and young adults would get to the marriage part without physical desire?

This is a common statement in the Church, but I'm no longer convinced that it adequately addresses the real question. It's as if we believe that, in spite of all of our theology of eternally blissful marriages and families and a strongly taught belief that God wants us to marry, that the only way we can successfully lure people into this blissful trap is with the carrot of sex.

I don't really believe this anymore. As @california boy mentioned, marriage isn't always about sex. There are a variety of needs/wants/desires that fuel peoples' choices to marry (or enter into exclusive long term relationships that look like marriage even if they lack the official government issued paper). Sex, I'm sure, figures into the economics in different ways and at different levels for different people, but I don't think it is wise to teach that sex is the only factor at play in the decision to marry or pursue marriage.