Ariel – that is such an interesting article by Peter Tatchell!!! Personally, having had a read around, I think there’s evidence for a biological component to sexual orientation – but not a simple genetic link.

Whichever way – his discussion around the social consequences of the genetic approach are interesting. I guess what the Kinsey institute has done is highlight how much diversity there is in sexual desires and experiences. Personally, I think the homo/hetero distinction is a bit old. There’s so much more diversity within human sexuality – what we are attracted to, in who, where and when, what we find sexually arousing in what situations (and perhaps terrifying or repugnant in others). Its all very fascinating. But I suspect we won’t be able to explore that as a community until people really truly get beyond these two categories (homo, hetero, with bisexual somewhere in the middle).

I will have a think and maybe write something on my blog. Thanks for highlighting it!

CA

PS. Warren – you can’t tell. There is no evidence for any associations between sexual orientation and early life experiences ;). What do I win?

Maybe instead we could guess which one is the negro?

Those histories tell me nothing about who they may be sexually attracted to.

If we had more about the way they described those histories I may, however, be able to guess who’s been ex-gayed…

And on that, I’d pick James and Gareth as the most vulnerable.

Here is a gay activist who actually argues against the theory of genetic causation for sexual orientation! He actually states that early childhood experiences and social values, in addition to having a genetic predisposition (different from CAUSATION) may lead one to become homosexual at a young age, and thus mistakenly believe that they were gay from the day they were born.

Please read it, and maybe write a review of it?

Ariel

Impulsive me; I posted a question without thinking a bit about prizes.