To What Degree Is Homosexuality 'Social'?

Homosexuality, despite what the critics might say, is probably largely biological. It seems to be hardwired in our brains even before birth. I even talk about it here:

Homosexuality May Be Biological After All (DES)...

But it does seem to be at least partly social too. Some people identify as gay, and some not. Some who do may in fact be bisexual. And there just seemed to be more gay people at various times in history, though that's debatable. In the book of Genesis, all the men of Sodom come to Lot's home to rape the angels, because apparently back then they thought all men were capable of homosexual desire. That story is at the very least an exaggeration, though of course. But the term "homosexual" didn't even come into being until the Victorian era. Until then, there was no such thing, at least as an orientation people thought. Though homosexual acts go way back in human history, of course.

So to what degree is biological? And more importantly, to what degree is it social?

 

I think biological. I don't understand what you mean by homosexuality being social.

 

I was going to add that anorexia nervosa is almost unheard of in the African American community. That's because black women always get such positive feedback from their boyfriends. Also weigh is viewed differently with them. It can be a sign of beauty. Just to be clear, anorexia is an illness, homosexuality isn't of course. Also certain mental illnesses can be brought about by stress, even if they are obviously biological because they are treatable with medicine. So culture does play at least some part in sexuality. And some countries claim they have no gays, that it's a western thing. But their gays might just be in hiding.

 

I can sort of understand. Back in the 1960's, gay people tended to hold their own parties that were largely confined to people of similar orientation. As acceptance has increased, these parties are largely a thing of the past. Because real change happens slowly, I had to think back 50 years.
These days, men tend to be more open, but women are largely more secretive.

 

I rather doubt that "social homosexuality" is a thing. However, "situational homosexuality" is, in melieus such as same-sex boarding schools, monasteries, and prisons. Humans are sexual creatures with an innate need for human touch (think Harry Harlow's monkeys) and sexuality will still be expressed even if oposite-sex partners simply aren't available. I wouldn't call it "social homosexuality" because I strongly suspect that 92.9% would choose an opposite-sex partner if given the choice, and when no longer in a same-sex institution, readily revert to heterosexuality.

 

I think you're presenting us with a false dichotomy. If anything, it's probably more a matter of nature vs. nurture, which isn't exactly the same as "social". "Much of the known environmental influence appears to be intra-uterine and there is no currently convincing evidence that social environment plays a significant part." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13558358.2020.1818541?scroll=top&needAccess=true Environmental influences from such things as parenting (overprotective mothers, distant fathers, etc.) are probably experienced in early childhood, and can't really be considered a choice. CGN (childhood gender non-conformity)--i.e., the early development of behaviors culturally associated with those of the opposite sex, does seem to play a role in the development of homosexual orientation.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J529v12n01_05
Sexual orientation and childhood gender nonconformity: evidence from home videos - PubMed
But what is the cause of that?

There were ancient societies, notably the Greeks, that favored homosexual bonding between older and younger males (pederasty) and between soldiers, who were deemed to fight better when paired with their lovers. The Sodomites, however, seem to have been practicing rape as a means of humiliation and dominance over strangers rather than an expression of sexual attraction. It was commonplace in ancient societies to sodomize defeated male warriors, thereby turning them into "women"--i.e, low status persons. It may have been the experience of bondage that made the Israelites particularly hostile to male homosexuality, which was also associated with fertility rituals and certain cults like the male eunuch prostitute devotees of the goddess Cybelle. Note: Leviticus condemns only male, not female homosexuality. It was the males that mattered, and mustn't be treated like women!

Generally, in the Greco-Roman world, the submissive male in a gay relationship was regarded with some contempt, while the dominant partner was accepted. The Jews simply extended condemnation to both partners. But consul Gaius Scribonius Curio called Julius Caesar "every man's wife and every woman's husband".

 

But did the parties turn straight folks gay? I suspect they were gay already, stable in their identity to the point of making a sub-culture about it.

 

Culture plays an enormous part in how LGBTQs are perceived. That can lead to closeted behavior. Interestingly, though--even in Latin countries where machismo is considered the norm and homosexuals are ridiculed and rejected, there are still homosexuals. And there are homosexuals in Iran where the punishment is being thrown out the window of a tall building. And even in Putin's Russia, where discrimination against homosexuals is the norm, there are homosexuals. Conclusion: Homosexuality isn't a choice. Why would anyone choose it in the countries I just mentioned?

 

The entire subject needs to be defined more broadly to be understood. My opinion is that there two origins of male homosexuality, with bisexuality being a progressive version of heterosexuality.

1: Some males are born with one Y chromosome from their father, and one x chromosome from their mother and another from their father. The two x chromosomes are more dominant than the single y and make the individual more female than male. There may be other physical attributes that have the same effect.

2. Some males are unattractive to most females and are rejected early in life or they have traits or genetalia that cannot satisfy a female partner sexually.

3: Some males are heterosexual as adolescents but progress in their sexual desires with age to more more extreme sexual activity (as their spouses are declining in sexual desire). Ultimately these males develop an increasing curiosity for sex with other men. We call these individuals Bisexuals, but the term may not be accurate. There are countless examples of sex between men in history, especially in Greek and Roman societies. It may be that males have a capacity to have sex with variety of partners, because they view sex as a recreational activity.

4: With women there is an emotional element to intimacy, and they may turn to other women to avoid physical or psychological abuse or to satisfy needs that are not received from men.

 

I am not so sure about the abuse. Their has been more than one case, where the passive partner in a relationship ended up murdered when the tried to end the relationship. Their have been several other cases of serious physical violence, not to mention emotional blackmail.
The dominant partner in a lesbian relationship is mostly very clearly the boss.

 

Really? A little off topic, wouldn't you say? I notice you posted the identical message on eight unrelated sites. Is this an infomercial? Will we be hearing next about the wonders of Medicare Advantage, Celebrex , Glucofreeze or Car Shield? "Germs--germs that can cause bad breathe, diahrrea..." Please peddle your wares elsewhere! We get enough commerical spam on our phones and email!

 

I cannot stop laughing, thinking back to the time when an extrovert Australian girl working at one of our theatres invited 4 guys back to her apartment for a wild party after a premier.
She put the kettle on, got the beers out and started making a few sandwiches, while they went upstairs to freshen up and get ready. When they did not return, she went upstairs, to find all 4 of them having a great time in her bedroom. She did not realise that male reception staff in London theatres are mostly gay.
The really funny part was when she calmly collected all their clothes up and hurled them out of the window. Her apartment was above the shops in a busy main road and since the entrance was at the rear, they had to run around 3 sided of the block to retrieve what was left of their clothing. Only one of the guys found both shoes.
Life in London's west end in the 1970's was great fun at times.

 

I once thought that my attraction towards females as a female, was due to the years of abuse that my father inflicted upon my mother when I was a child. I accepted it as such, and even thought it was something I was going to get rid of through therapy one day.

Now, after reading the science, I believe that homosexuality is not socially constructed but goes much deeper than anyone could ever imagine. It's biological, maybe even spiritual?