Category: Sexual Orientation

Paraphilic disorders are characterised by abnormalities and disturbances in one’s sexual behaviour and attraction which causes significant distress and impairment to personal functioning. Paedophilia is a psychosexual paraphilic disorder involving sexual attraction towards children below the age of consent. Paedophilic attraction is mistakenly used synonymously with child molestation, this is present in the diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). The DSM-5 diagnosis criteria for paedophilia requires the occurrence of sexual behaviour towards children for more than 6 months, even if the person does not have sexual fantasies or urges towards children. This criteria is problematic as there are non-offending paedophiles and 43% of offenders are indeed paedophiles. The seemingly automatic link between offenders and paedophilic attraction reiterates the stigma the disorder faces, possibly discouraging paedophiles of seeking medical help. Paedophilia itself is not inherently harmful, child sexual offences are, especially regarding psychological damage. Whilst there are non-offending paedophiles and a differentiation is important, research shows that paedophilia remains a disorder not an orientation.

Current research supports the statement that paedophilia is a disorder (DSM-5). The 2014 meta-analysis paper featured research which linked paedophilia with neurological abnormalities, the paper featured 3 independent voxel-based morphometry (VBM) studies which through MRIs found a reduced volume of the amygdala in paedophiles. The 2007 study by Schiltz analysed MRIs of 15 male offending paedophiles and 15 controls without the disorder, 13 of the offenders were solely attracted to children and were not on medication; the data suggested that the structural abnormalities found could interfere with sexual maturation. However, the study did not specify whether the paedophiles had dealt with neurodevelopmental problems, previous brain injury or. On the other hand, the findings are supported by a previous study which linked brain irregularities and lesions with anomalous sexual attractions. The 1993 study found that as one reaches puberty there is a decrease in child sexual interest, data from that study showed that loss of sexual interest for children peaked at the age of 12, however this is not the case for paedophiles. Some may argue that this is proof of paedophilia being an orientation as sexual orientation develops around puberty.

However, differently to non-paedophiles, research indicates that paedophiles develop this paraphilic attraction due to brain structural anomalies which prohibits the loss of child sexual attraction, which normally occurs around puberty. The second study featured in the 2014 paper featured 18 inpatient paedophiles who were only attracted to children and were unmedicated as well as 24 controls. 50% of the total 42 participants were solely attracted to males, the other 50% was solely attracted to females. This study also found reduced volume of the amygdala in paedophiles. From the results the authors inferred a relation between obsessive-compulsive disorder and paedophilia. Reduced amygdala volume has also been linked with psychopathic traits such as aggression, emotional apathy as well as lack of empathy. The shared neurological abnormalities found in other psychological disorders further suggests that paedophilia is a disorder also. The third study compared 9 unmedicated offending paedophiles with 11 non offending paedophiles, the study also found volume reductions in the amygdala in their participants. Whilst the 3 VBM studies had small sample sizes their research showed matching results across the studies. The amygdala has been linked in sexual arousal processing; it is likely the amygdala irregularity could be a definitive trait of paedophilic disorder. Overall, the combined corresponding results between the 3 studies draws a considerable link between amygdala irregularities and paedophiles, since it indicates there is a neurodevelopmental irregularity regarding sexual arousal processing present. Further research should be conducted regarding these findings as they may provide new diagnosis tools and therapies to better help paedophiles understand their condition and prevent offenses. Overall, these brain irregularities have not been expressively linked to the healthy controls of which many were heterosexual and homosexual, therefore paedophilia is clearly a disorder not an orientation.

Lastly, it is understood that paedophilia has a lifelong duration. Since paedophilic age of onset matches that of other sexual orientations and paedophiles deal with their paraphilic attraction for upwards of 40 years some may argue that it is a lifelong attraction and therefore orientation, as it cannot be changed. On the other hand, the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid (KSOG) does not include age preference as a component of sexual orientation. The KSOG is deemed an admissible research tool. However, the KSOG is arguably outdated, Seto’s 2012 study is a more contemporary outlook and uses parameters, including age onset which would allow paedophilia to be deemed a sexual orientation. Although, as previously stated age of onset shows a disturbance within the paedophiles neurological structure due to structural abnormalities in the brain, it is not evidence of paedophilia being an orientation.

Studies show a strong link between being a childhood victim to later developing and perpetrating paedophilic sexual disorder. The study retrospectively reviews the clinical cases of 843 patients. Whilst the 2001 study featured a large sample size it consisted of a clinical population; the sample was large but arguably not representative of the wider population. However, the results were conclusively drawn from a large sample size which does make the found link likely to be true. Since it is more likely for paedophilia victims to become perpetrators it seems that it is not innate like sexual orientation is. Since being a child sexual assault victim leads to psychological trauma and mental health issues it is possible that paedophilic disorder is an extension of mental health trauma faced in early years.

Current research concludes that paedophilia cannot be an orientation. Not only is it defined as a disorder by the DSM-5, it is also not included as an orientation in the KSOG. Furthermore, studies show that paedophiles tend to have a reduced volume of the amygdala; the amygdala has been implicated with sexual arousal and processing; therefore, the irregularity likely results in paedophilic disorder. Research shows that victims of child sexual abuse are more likely to become perpetrators of paedophilia, these findings further indicate that paedophilia is not an orientation but a psychological disorder. Since paedophilia is a disorder it is important to understand that paedophiles cannot be blamed for their paraphilic sexual attractions, they should be held responsible for their actions not for having the disorder. Understanding paedophilia as a disorder is likely to have positive societal outcomes, perhaps paedophiles will be more likely to seek help and will feel less shame since research shows they are not at fault for their disorder.

In today’s world, gender has been an overlooked topic in society. But what some may not be aware of that there are more than just your basic male (boy) and female (girl) gender. Hence, to point out clearly, there are many different genders that people in the world use to identify themselves. Our generation needs to understand and know the variety of genders that are out there, as it is important for what they want to be known and referred to as.

Gender Identity

What can gender identity possibly be? According to psychology, gender identity is an individual’s internalized belief about being a male or female, which may or may not be the same as the biological sex exhibited at birth. (Schallhorn) Your biological sex would be if you are a male or female that was able to be seen within an ultrasound inside the womb or when you were simply born to the outside world. If you were assigned as a male, it would mean two things. Your chromosomes and genitalia. A male’s chromosomes contain an X and Y. If the Y chromosomes are present it is responsible for the development of a male. With that being said you can also know if it’s a male by their reproductive system. A male’s reproductive system consists of sex organs (penis and testicle) that have a role of reproduction. During puberty, males change such as having a flat chest, Adam’s apple, excessive body hair, muscular muscles. (Wolchover) For females, they have a double X chromosome. If the Y chromosome is not present in a fetus, it goes under female development. Their reproductive system contains the following: ovaries, uterus, and vagina. Like males, they also go through puberty but very differently. Having breasts that secrete milk, small cartilage voice boxes, less body hair, and a curvy body structure. (Wolchover) Originally there are two biological sexes and genders, male and female. As time seems to change new sexes and gender was formed. For instance, transgender also called transsexual. Those who differ in gender identity from their biologically define sex are known to be transgender. (Schallhorn) Well, known transgenders include Jazz Jennings, Caitlyn Jenner, Laverne Cox, and many more. From their point of view of being transgender is very highly judged from society and sometimes life-threatening. But they appear in tv shows, movies, interviews and radio stations that people like and support for who they are. Along with transgender, there is androgyny. Androgyny is a combination of masculine and feminine characteristics. Also known as intersex. Sometimes it is not seen very clearly the masculine and feminine traits. So how would they simply dress? Do they dress in female clothes or male clothes? There is a term called unisex, where styles are suitable for both genders. A prime example of androgyny people would be Ruby Rose, Adam Lambert, Kristen Stewart, and so forth. Overall, gender identity is something very common in the world but still being understood. Though it’s crucial where we need to be informed that biological sex doesn’t correlate with gender.

Gender Spectrum

Within the community of genders, there is a gender spectrum. This spectrum breaks down’s society’s traditional and outdated ways of understanding genders. The spectrum contains gender identity, gender expression, and gender roles. Since gender identities have to with one’s perception of having a particular gender. Like male, female, transgender, androgyny, agender, etc. Could gender expression and roles be the same thing? Is it all linked together? Gender expression is explained by one’s behavior, mannerisms, interests, and appearance. It may include clothing, hairstyles, makeup, and social expressions like names or pronouns. Some examples of gender expressions would be androgynous, gender-neutral, and feminine/masculine. (Gender Identity) Some of the population may have the same expressions all the time though some may change their expressions due to time or some situations. For instance, gender-fluid. It wasn’t commonly used till the 1980s, where expression shifts between the masculine and feminine. You may know someone who may have used this term before or heard of it somewhere. Besides that, back then from today’s time gender roles were taken very differently. These roles we’re expected to act, speak, dress, groom, and conduct towards our assigned sex. (Parenthood) It can correlate with stereotypes too. Where females are to reproduce heirs for the male, stay at home to take care of the children, and just do chores around the house. Males, on the other hand, have to sustain the family, go to work, and pass down their wealth to their oldest child. According to today, it can be both genders. There are males today that take the role of females and females that take the role of the male. It wasn’t troubling when roles were switched but there are some in the population who live on or believe in the old traditional roles than modern roles. With everything else, it shouldn’t be assigned what roles would be taken or assigned to which gender you are identified.

Sexual Orientation

They say that sexual orientation connects with your gender. But it is very different from gender. Sexual Orientation is who you’re attracted to and want to have relationships with. (LGBTQ Info) This may include lesbian, gay, bisexual, straight, and asexual. Now, sexual orientation connects with sexual attraction. Therefore, it could be interest or romantic. As your body has an emotional response where you find someone sexually appealing and desire for sexual contact with the person. What was said in the beginning, you can be attracted to the same gender as yourself, the opposite gender, or not at all. If you classify as a straight person, you’re a heterosexual. Heterosexuality is when you are attracted to the opposite gender than yourself. So, this can be a male who is attracted to a female or a female attracted to a male. After heterosexual, there is homosexual. An example would be gay or lesbian. The term gay is where a male is sexually attracted to their gender. It may be used for females as well that are attracted to the same gender as them. Though it most commonly used for males. Next, would be lesbian. The word lesbian is where a female is attracted to another female. They can also be used to classify what they are sexually attracted to. What happens if you are into both genders at the same time? Is there a term for that? Likely so, that there is. It called bisexual. Bisexual is when a person is romantically or sexually attracted to both male and female genders. Although what if you’re not attracted to either. Asexual also known as “aces” is described as a lack of sexual attraction towards others. (Barrell) Now all these sexual orientations exist on a spectrum. Some may be common within society while some aren’t so recognized. We are all aware of LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, etc.) Its everywhere on tv shows, movies, radio stations, magazines, books, and so on. According to GLAAD, in 2017, only 12.8% of major studio movies showed any LGBTQ characters. Of the few that did, 64% showed gay men, 36% showed lesbian, and 14% showed bisexual women or men – and these characters were all cisgender. (Brabaw) In today’s generation, the sexual orientation community is bit approve by society, unlike back then. In some religions and countries, it is considered taboo or even illegal. This may include death. As time goes by, maybe these orientations and genders will be fully accepted.

Gender Studies

Along with sexual orientation and gender, there is an academic field called gender studies. To sum up, on what gender studies can be, basically, it is analyzing gender identity and gender representation. Along with women/men and queer studies. The field may also offer all together with the study of sexuality. Besides, this field isn’t something offered in some colleges or universities around the world. You’d be in luck if there was at your school. At a college or university, you’d be hard-pressed to find a department that brands itself as simply Gender Studies. (Zaborskis) Within the studies, you be learning the letters G, W, S, including Q and F. Now when you see these letters what they signify? Well, of course, applying it towards the field, G(gender), W(women), S(sexuality), Q(queer), and F(feminine). According to Zaborskis, the field has developed over the last several decades, as well, the understanding and critiquing of our world. A woman named Robyn Wiegman who is a professor at Duke University taught in Literature and Gender, Sexuality and Feminist Studies. Wiegman states that she has tracked some anxieties that have emerged from women studies in which it decenters women and erases the feminist activism that gives the rise of the field. (Zaborskis) Some may say what’s the point in having this curriculum. But it has a lot of benefits especially if you interested in understanding the spectrum that is out there. Once again gender is an overlooked topic within our generation, despite all the different varieties. And having more people in this field would have a greater cause of accepting what gender really is.

Gender Today

Lastly, the gender we see today. We can all say it is indeed different than the 20th century or even way back. It was mentioned earlier there were just two genders – male and female. Then transgender surfaced along with many other genders. Now that all these genders exist what would it be in a workspace or school? It’s important to recognize this distinction because binary thinking around gender can exclude a large – and overlooked – part of the workforce. (McLaren) Though in the work field you may have a coworker or friend that is transgender or not. Some transgenders are careful when they are in the workspace as everyone may not agree to the gender they specify as. There is an estimate of 1.4 million transgender adults in the US today, representing about 0.6% of the adult population. (McLaren) That seems to be a lot to some, but it is really not. It’s not just only adults that are transgender, teens to children identify themselves as transgender.

Bibliography

1. Brabaw, Kasandra. “Allosexual, Demisexual, Bicurious-& Other Sexualities You Need To Know.” Sexuality List Of Sexual Orientation Types, Definitions, 18 June 2019, www.refinery29.com/en-us/sexual-orientation-types-of-sexualities.
2. “Gender Identity & Expression.” SmartSexResource, smartsexresource.com/topics/gender-identity-expression.
3. McLaren, Samantha. “15 Gender Identity Terms You Need to Know to Build an Inclusive Workplace.” LinkedIn Talent Blog, 20 May 2019, business.linkedin.com/talent-solutions/blog/diversity/2019/15-gender-identity-terms-for-inclusive-workplace.
4. Parenthood, Planned. “Gender Identity & Roles: Feminine Traits & Stereotypes.” Planned Parenthood, 2020, www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/gender-identity/sex-gender-identity/what-are-gender-roles-and-stereotypes.
5. Parenthood, Planned. “LGBTQ Info For Teens: Sexual Orientation & Gender Identity.” Planned Parenthood, 2020, www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/teens/sexual-orientation.
6. Schallhorn, Charles D. Psychology: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination. Perfection Learning, 2017.
7. Wolchover, Natalie. “Men vs. Women: Our Key Physical Differences Explained.” LiveScience, Purch, 22 Sept. 2011, www.livescience.com/33513-men-vs-women-our-physical-differences-explained.html.
8. Zaborski’s, Mary. “Gender Studies: Foundations and Key Concepts.” Daily Jstor, 29 Nov. 2018, daily.jstor.org/reading-list-gender-studies/.

Rachel H. Farr conducted a longitudinal study during the early 2000’s to see whether parental sexual orientation effected childhood development in early to middle childhood of children that were adopted (Farr, 2017).

The participants for the study were recruited from five private adoption agencies from across the continental United States, where adoption by same-sex couples was legal (Farr, 2017). The researchers conducted the study over two time periods 2007-2009 and 2013-2014 with a gap of five years in between the first and second parts of the study. The participants that were involved in the study did so on a voluntary unpaid basis. The participants were from a cross section of society comprising of married couples from different sexual orientation, ages and different races as well as the children from both sexes and different racial backgrounds, however the one thing that all the children had in common was that none of them were biologically related to their respective parents (Farr, 2017). For the first part of the experiment children form age one to age five were used, for the second part children from age eight to age ten were used. The researchers conducted the experiment by asking teachers and parents to answer questionnaires regarding the children’s behavioral adjustment as well as development additionally the researchers asked the parents to answer questions about parenting stress, couple relationship adjustment and family functioning as it related to their marital relationship and its possible effect on their children’s development (Farr, 2017). The researchers used three different methods to interpret the data gathered from the two parts of the study, namely Hierarchical linear modeling, SPSS Amos 23 and Actor-Partner Independence Model (Farr, 2017).

As the debate still continues about which family structures are best for positive childhood development, the researchers found that all the children involved in the study exhibited an increase in behavioral problems as they progressed from preschool age to middle school age and developed equally irrespective of their adoptive parents’ sexual orientation (Farr, 2017).The researchers observed that school-age children from families with same sex parents were more likely to experience discrimination from their peers (Farr, 2017). The researchers also found that with the increase of age and behavioral problems in the children, parents of all sexual orientations had an increase in parenting stress (Farr, 2017).The researchers concluded from the results of the questionnaires that child sex was strongly related to behavioral problems, with boys exhibiting more behavioral problems than girls (Farr, 2017). The researchers noted that families with boys reported worse family functioning than families with girls (Farr, 2017). The researchers also found that as time progressed children’s behavioral problems did not change based on their parents’ sexual orientation (Farr, 2017). The researchers reported that although parenting stress increased with a child’s age and more frequently occurring behavioral problems during middle childhood, parents described their married relationships as being happier and more stable as during this time period opposed to the time period directly after adoption of infants (Farr, 2017). In conclusion, Farr reports (as cited in Lamb, 2012) the researchers found that, adoptive families with parents varying in sexual orientation much like other families emphasized positive childhood development is more dependent on family functioning than family structure.

I was primarily interested in this article because it related to me as a gay man that will soon be married, and my partner Myles and I are interested in adoption in the future. I Found that the article aligned with my beliefs that parental sexual orientation doesn’t matter as long as the parents have a well-functioning relationship among themselves as well as with their children.

As one of three boys that came from a dysfunctional and abusive family with heterosexual parents, I believe my family’s dysfunctionality effected my personal growth and development as a child that directly effects my adult life. If my family functioning was better or “normal”, I feel that I would be more well-rounded emotionally speaking, more trusting and open, etc. With that said, the former mentioned does not define me as a person.

References

1. Farr, R. H., (2017), Does parental sexual orientation matter? A longitudinal follow-up of adoptive families with school-age children, Developmental Psychology, 53, 252-264
2. Lamb, M. E., (2012), Mother, fathers, families, and circumstances: Factors effecting child adjustment, Applied Developmental Science, 16, 98-111

Brief Overview

A critical factor in understanding health disparities lies in defining the status of sexual minority groups over an extended development period. Lack of quality and unanimity in the methods used to collect, operationalize, and analyze data is a critical barrier, especially when sexual orientation begin to emerge. The age between adolescence and the late 20s is the most affected since many disparities are in the developmental process. In this regard, the article “Sexual Orientation Trajectories Based on Sexual Attractions, Partners, and Identity” utilizes an operationalization method to design a typology that classifies the status of sexual minority as a multidimensional, individual-centered, nuanced, time-sensitive construct. The study findings reveal a particular type of classification system that views dynamic multivariate processes as a continuum from the adolescent stage to young adulthood.

Are the theoretical constructs grounded in general theories of behavior?

The theoretical perspective adopted applies a multidimensional approach based on three constructs of measurement, namely sexual attraction, behavior, and identity of the sexual minorities. The article outlines several challenges encountered by researchers who wish to embark on studies related to sexual orientation. Firstly, utilizing one of the dimensions and excluding the other two can lead to misclassification bias. On the other hand, integrating all of them is problematic because it might confuse the researcher during analysis. The author also addresses the issues of continuum and fluidity for the expected behavioral change and development among youth. The argument presented here suggests that the sexual orientation of adolescents and young adults varies depending on social and biological factors such as age, gender, environment, and personal preferences.

Are analog studies, experimental models, or animal models appropriate to the questions?

The author utilizes appropriate analogous studies and experimental models, therefore providing a continuous flow of thoughts throughout the article. The theory section should focus on disseminating relevant concepts to show a literature gap and justify the significance of the study (Rowland, 2017). Health disparities among sexual minorities emerge as a result of a myriad of factors, including identity biases, lack of appropriate classification and measurement methods as well as biases in data analysis and interpretation. The methodology section utilizes secondary data from the Add Health study, an organization whose data meets size and sampling requirements, making it appropriate for generalization. In this sense, the study meets the necessary standards for conducting sex research.

Is the sample size adequate to the problem?

Christine E. Kaestle selected data sets from Wave I, III, and IV of the Add Health studies. Bentler and Abramson, (1981) asserts that although the sample size varies based on the type, goal, cost, experimental procedure, and difficulty of obtaining data, the recommended figure is several hundreds. In this study, the researcher restricted his study sample to only N = 6,864 for various reasons. The decision not to incorporate data collected during Wave II was informed by the fact that the wave excluded high school graduates. The sample was thus limited to only those with longitudinal weights for participating in the other three waves. To construct a more homogeneous group, the researcher decided to only include data for adolescents aged 16 years and above, thereby eliminating teenagers with undefined sexual experience and attraction. The final sample size represents data from points in life: 16-18 years, the 20s, and late 20 – early 30s.

Do the dependent variables cover the relevant domain of the expected effects?

The study encompasses three significant dependent variables, namely sex attraction, sexual relationship behavior, and sexual identity (or self-labeling). The first trajectory constituted of four category variables (Other sex only, Same-sex only, both same and other sex, and No attractions reported) that signify the romantic attractions of a person. The second one encompassed “other sex only, Same-sex only, both same and other sex, and No relationships reported.” Self-labelling had six possible outcomes, “100% heterosexual, mostly heterosexual, bisexual, mostly homosexual, 100% homosexual, and not sexually attracted to either sex.” The three trajectories cover the relevant domain of sexual orientation.

Are the most powerful available methods being used to analyze the data?

The application of a longitudinal latent class analysis allows for the measurement of class membership at multiple time points. Another benefit associated with using this technique concerns the ease of detecting discontinuity at any particular time point. The researcher adhered to the best-fitting model by conducting a fit statistical analysis. Exploring invariance of latent classes helped in hypothesizing the experience of sexual orientation. He also assessed the optimal number of classes for the male and female group in the final step of the latent class analysis invariance testing. Therefore, the study used the most powerful techniques to analyze data.

What potential positive and negative effects are there on subjects participating in sex research?

Using human subjects may result in ethical concerns, including objectivity, confidentiality, openness, and legality of the research. Given this study utilized secondary data from Add Health, it is essential to note that the organization has a limited access policy, therefore guaranteeing the anonymity of participants’ identity (Add Health, 2019). It also ensures the administration of informed written consent and that their data files do not include identifier files.

Brief Summary

Conducting sex research is one of the most challenging undertakings due to the sensitivity of the topic, especially when using human subjects. The research must ensure strict adherence to quality data collection methods, ethical standards, and legal provisions. In “Sexual Orientation Trajectories Based on Sexual Attractions, Partners, and Identity,” Kaestle makes all the necessary efforts to construct a concrete hypothesis, tests it, and proves it. The researcher utilizes applicable theories, sampling, and analysis techniques to reveal “a new typology of longitudinal latent classes that describes dynamic multidimensional processes continuing from late adolescence through the late 20s.”

References

1. Add Health (2019). Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved from https://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/faqs on 30/9/2019.
2. Bentler, P. M., & Abramson, P. R. (1981). The science of sex research: Some methodological considerations. Archives of sexual behavior, 10(3), pp. 225-251.
3. Kaestle, C. E. (2019). Sexual orientation trajectories based on sexual attractions, partners, and identity: A longitudinal investigation from adolescence through young adulthood using a US representative sample. The Journal of Sex Research, pp. 1-16.
4. Rowland, D. R. (2017). Reviewing the Literature: A Short Guide for Research Students. The Learning Hub, Student Services, University of Queensland.

Recently, in western society sexual orientation has been a large topic of discussion. Kauth and Kalichman (1995) defined sexual orientation as “the cumulative experience and interaction of erotic fantasy, romantic-emotional feelings, and sexual behavior directed toward one or both genders” (p. 82, as cited in Wilkinson & Roys, 2005, p. 66). Yet, questions arise with regards to the etiology of sexual orientation, which prompted the investigation of the question: What factors influence sexual orientation in men and women? This paper aims to explore the genetic, hormonal and social factors that may contribute to the development of one’s sexual orientation, followed by a conclusion that summarizes the critical points that were discussed in the paper.

Genetic Influence

Genetic factors were a popularized notion when explaining sexual orientation, yet studies concluded that genetic evidence was “inconclusive at best” (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1180). For instance, a study conducted by Hamer, Magnuson, Hu and Pattatucchi (1993) allegedly associated an “X-linked gene at position Xq28” as the culprit responsible for homosexuality amongst males (p. 1186, as cited in Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, p. 1186). Yet, a recent study conducted by Rice, George, Anderson, Risch, and Eberis (1999) was unable to replicate their findings (p. 1186, as cited in Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, p. 1186). Therefore, if a gene responsible for one’s sexual orientation does exist, it should exist elsewhere on the chromosome (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, p. 1186).

Furthermore, some past studies compared the “monozygotic (MZ) twins’ concordance” for homosexuality with the likelihood of homosexuality in dizygotic (DZ) twins (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1184). Most of the family studies indicated an increased prevalence in homosexuals amongst MZ twins as opposed to DZ twins (Bearman, & Bru ̈ckner, p.1184). However, the recent study conducted by Bearman, & Bru ̈ckner reported there to be only a 6.7% concordance amongst the MZ twins, and a 7.2 % concordance amongst the DZ, who has less genetic similarity than MZ (p. 1197). Although both sides of the argument were presented, the recent study utilized a big sample pool to collect the data, which was indicative of more reliable report (Bearman, & Bru ̈ckner, p. 1184). Yet, additional research would be required before genetic factors can be removed from of the argument.

Hormonal Influence

A prominent hormonal study associated homosexuality to the extreme exposure to prenatal androgens during pregnancy (Berenbaum & Hines, 1992, as cited in Bailey, Bechtold, & Berenbaum, 2002, p. 334). It was believed that this would slow the developmental process of the left hemisphere, leading to “anomalous dominance”, associated with non-righthandedness (Geschwind & Bryden, 1985, as cited in Mustanski, Bailey, & Kaspar, 2002, p. 114). Increase or decrease in non-right handedness was a potential indication of homosexuality in females and males respectively (Mustanski et al, p. 115). Similarly, a study by Mustanski et al., indicated that non-right handedness correlated to female homosexuality, yet nothing significant was observed for males, suggesting that sexual-orientation was at “least partly inborn” (p. 118).

Even with the presented evidence the precise developmental time period in which sexual orientation may be programmed into ones’ “neural circuitry” remains to be found (Mustanski et al, 2002, p. 113). Nevertheless, the general agreement was that “biology plays an important role in the development of male and female sexual orientation” (Hershberger, 1990, p. 43, as cited in Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1180).

Social Influence

Majority of the information regarding the “etiology of adult homosexuality” were obtained from the self-reported stories of “self-identified homosexuals” (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1200). With this, Bearman & Bru ̈ckner reported that the critical factor affecting sexual-orientation was the opportunities (social component) that enabled for “early same-sex romantic attraction” (p.1200). For instance, it was indicated that male opposite-sex (OS) twins were “twice as likely” to be attracted to the same sex, because of a less gendered upbringing, that increased the likelihood of male same-sex preferences (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1181).

Furthermore, it has been observed that parent’s social bias for heterosexuality has been instrumental in discouraging homosexuality and enforcing behaviour observed in “gendered socialization scripts” (ie: stereotypically how men and women should behave) (Huston, 1983, as cited by Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1182). Likewise, developmental studies found that boys were more likely to become excluded for “preferring female-type toys or games” (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, p. 1182). Conversely, tomboys were more commonly accepted by both sexes and were not a strong predictor of homosexuality (Bailey et al., 2002. p. 335).

Similar trends were observed with the addition of an extra variable, religion, a factor that affected one’s socialization. Wilkinson and Roys’s (2005) study supported the notion that as religiosity increased in heterosexuals, their attitudes towards homosexual males had a more negative behavioural connotation than females (p. 72). Wilkinson and Roys’s believed that the results were tied to the beliefs of conservative Christianity, which places a greater focus on the repression of male homosexual urges (behaviours), while giving less attention to addressing homosexuality in females (p. 79) Although, the specific mechanisms in which socialization impacts individuals’ sexual preferences have been “poorly specified”, further research would be necessary (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1182)

Conclusion

Numerous factors (genetic, hormonal, and social) came into play when determining the etiology of sexual orientation. However, much of these components contained a lot of contradictory evidence and uncertainty, regarding the extent they influenced one’s orientation, especially within genetics. Regardless, some crucial points would be that non-handedness was related to an increase in homosexuality in females, less gendered upbringing increased the likelihood of homosexuality in OS male twins, and opportunity can be a critical component during the development of sexual orientation (Mustanski et al, 2002, p. 118; Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, 2002, p. 1181). Additionally, much of the evidence was generated from correlational studies, which does not necessarily translate to a causal relationship. Therefore, scientists continue to reiterate that “neither genes, nor hormones, nor specific social situations, determine sexual behavior by themselves” (Bearman & Bru ̈ckner, p. 1181). Instead, it should be an interplay of all these factors.

Most people usually would say yes to my question. Why is that? Why do individuals that are more for versed in LGBTQ(+) rights community or equality would usually agree to with this type of question. The Equality Act 2010 states,” You mustn’t be discriminated against because you’re gay, lesbian, bisexual or heterosexual. This is called discrimination because of sexual orientation. Discrimination which is against the Equality Act is unlawful.” This law depicts that sexual orientation is somehow linked with equality, right? “Born this way” has also been a stature for LGBT rights for many years now. The term sexual orientation is advancing in today’s society. However, this judgement is false. It is evident to state that sexual orientation being determined at birth is not only not probable because of scientific evidence, but the attributes of definition of sex orientation itself and the drive of social utility that comes from the phrase “I was just born this way”.

First, let’s talk about the most controversial evidence that I will be acquiring today. SCIENCE! So, in 1993 Dean Hamer, whom was famous on his work in genetics involving sexual orientation and human behavior, was thought to have found a huge scientific discovery on the genetic link to male homosexuality and a yet unidentified gene on the X chromosome. This discovery was thought to rewrite science and give evidence to the theory “I’m born this way!” However, “the results of this original study were never replicated, and the biological reality of such an entity remains hypothetical from the lack of evidence” which was stated, by the US National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. Also, the study couldn’t be repeated making it not even valid enough to even be a theory by DEFINITION. These findings show hat there are not one but many characteristics that contribute to sexual orientation.

Now, Sexual orientation has often been mistaken to be equal with race. Like the term “gay is the new black” as much as I like Orange is the new black…it would only be right if race and sexuality were considered equal but sadly, they’re not. The True-Life states, “Race is a non-moral issue and sexuality is a moral issue which is determined by behavior not birth.” Let’s use their example of two babies,

“Baby boys in the nursery at a hospital. One baby is Caucasian and the other is African-American. One is resting in a white crib and the other in a black crib. Which crib is morally better? It is a nonsensical question. It would be equally nonsensical to ask which baby boy is morally better based on their skin color. (now that… racists anyway…) Now let’s say each boy grows up with equally promiscuous sexual desires. The Caucasian male is sexually promiscuous with every girl he can be (even to the point of date rape) but the African-American male abstains from sex, believing it should be reserved for marriage. Which is morally better? Now this is a valid question because sexuality is a moral issue and moral issues are determined by behavior, not birth.”

Not saying that sexual orientation isn’t often very expressive early and consistently in some cases however sometimes there not. “The patterns of sexual attraction, identity and behavior change profoundly over a young person’s lifetime, with most of the openness to “movement” toward heterosexuality occurring in the late teens and again in the late twenties.” So, lets really dive into the definition of sexual orientation. The Webster dictionary states, “Sexual orientation is a person’s sexual preference or identity as bisexual, heterosexual, or homosexual=” Your sexual orientation can change over your lifetime. Example of this would be finding out my sexual preference later in life after going through couple…OK multiple false attractions. Variability being a key factor in this. Sexual fluidity is a big reason for that. The University of Stanford defines sexual fluidity as just one of the many unique ways in which people experience their sexuality over a lifetime. Lisa M. diamond, a known American psychologist and feminist, known for her work in sexual orientation and fluidity conducted an experiment to test this theory. Her experiment was a decade long and tracked relationships of nearly 100 women who at one point or another had experienced ‘same-sex attraction. Desires where tested in her research many women moved from same sex relationships to hetero relationships. Now what does this tells us about the innateness of sexual orientation? Dr. Diamond responded with one single word,” NOTHING, because there completely unrelated.” She goes further to even state, “even though their genetic contribution to sexual orientation. those contributions do not cement your entire sexual lifespan from birth, but they do push its development in a certain direction. YOUR GENES DO NOT HVE THE LAST WORD”. Which is understandable right? Take a set of twins for example. Dr. Keith Roach asses the studies of twin and states, “Studies have shown that in identical twins, if one twin is gay, then 30 per cent to 66 per cent of the identical twins also will be gay. As this is much higher than the overall rate in the population, this suggests some, but not absolute, genetic influence.”

Continuing, The drive of social utility that come from the term “I was born this way” was the sense for acceptance. The years have not been as nice to the LGBT(+) community that I would have like them too. There has been a time where individuals have been too afraid to come out and openly express them self without feeling the judgement of the church, society not excluding family. “I born this way” has been a seen as a way to gain compassion from society that turn their backs. Their logic was “how could you punish us for something that wasn’t to fault nor choice”. Which depicts being in the LGBT(+) community as a disease or virus you can catch instead owning who they are and what they identify as. The LGBT(+) community is no way or shape or form weak or in need of any pity. The LGBT(+) community is stronger than it has ever been in history before. The Gallup elaborates by stating, “The percentage of American adults identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT(+)) increased to 4.5% in 2017, up from 4.1% in 2016 and 3.5% in 2012.” “I born this way” implicates more means of equality by suggesting individuals who been gay and never switched “since birth” are more deserving of equality or acceptance than some who came out later in life or bisexual or more sexually fluid. “Even within the gay community, I can’t tell you how many people have told me, ‘Oh, I wouldn’t date a bisexual.’ Or ‘Bisexuals aren’t real.’ There’s this idea, especially among gay men, that guys who say they’re bisexual are lying, on their way to being gay, or just kind of unserious and unfocused,” Ian Lawrence, an American Institute of Bisexuality board member, told The New York Times. Which is surprising, considering “Bisexuals comprise a slight majority (1.8% compared to 1.7% who identify as lesbian or gay)” states the UCLA school of law. Sounds like a contradiction to me. Shunning an experience or difference in the way an individual defines their sexuality contradict the whole movement and fight of the LGBT(+) community as a whole. That’s not Acceptance nor equality to me? Do you wanted to be accepted just because they think you were “born that way” or accept that you can make your own decisions, love who you want to love and follow your own path will take you in endless directions in this thing we call life.