Firstly, let me establish that I LOVE Lady GaGa; she's utterly brilliant. And the new song is fantastic, a little similar to Express Yourself I agree, but 100x better for this day and age I think. And it's obvious that it's going to be a gay anthem for a while with lyrics like:
"No matter gay, straight or bi
Lesbian, transgendered life
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born to survive...
Don't be a drag- just be a queen!"
It's fairly brave of her in my opinion to be releasing such blatently pro-gay material as is this is but she's 100% right to do so. Good on her, and much love. The only woman I'd probably ever marry if I'm honest lol.
Then it got me thinking about the whole nature/nuture debate for being gay. I think it's true, to an extent. I mean, I know my feelings for blokes didn't just arise out of nowhere but I think they were primarily the product of my environment that I was exposed to at an early age. Because of the type of business my family is into, I was pretty much surrounded by females from the start of my life, and very few straight manly men; if there were any good looking men then all the women/girls would be chatting about him so I think that their attitudes diffused into me as a child.
Strange to think how things could have turned out differently if, say, my family had been very sporty and were into rugby massively, where I would have been surrounded by massive hulking manly blokes from being little; would I have just become one of them, or started to fancy one of them like I would now? Will never know but interesting to wonder about it.
I don't regret my upbringing because of the way I've turned out, not at all. To be honest, I think I'm a more rounded, well adjusted person for being mainly gay than if I was straight. It's a massive mental conflict, coming to terms with it as a lot of you will know and I think I've come out stronger on the other side of my own epiphany.
So basically, I reckon it's primarily nuture, rather than nature. Although there's plently of animals in nature that shag the same sex, and most of them aren't animals that have sex for pleasure like humans do. So I guess that's evidence, and you could never test this nature thing on humans really so I guess we'll never know.
Besides, might as well just forget about trying to find the cause of being gay like it's a disease, because it's something to be proud and happy about! And this is why I'm happily singing along to "Born This Way" like a nutty bitch all day lol!
Much love dudes!
I'm not so convinced about the nurture thing myself. It's true that I had the classic distant father and the slightly dominating mother but so did a lot of guys I know who didn't end up liking cock ;-)
ReplyDeleteCould it be down to a single, life shaping event then? Maybe the first time we got sexually aroused (probably by accident) we happened to be in an environment of guys and there was some kind of neural link made that just got built upon. Perpetually being reinforced. Doesn't seem likely really but you never know. Phobias often start with a similar process though (minus the sex bit - umm, usually)
There was something on tv a while ago where they were looking into sexuality and talked about relative finger length being an indicator. Something to do with testosterone levels in the foetus. Later born brothers also seemed more likely to be gay possibly due to reduced testosterone. As far as I know I'm the first born to my mother (unless my parents had a very big secret LOL) so that doesn't fit with me but the fingers one does. There's also the hair whirl (or whorl) direction idea too. I fit that as well.
Maybe we were just "born this way" after all.
Yeah I've heard about the finger length - testosterone thing and I guess it's true in my case. Heard about the later brothers hypothesis as well, which seems to make sense to me but doesn't apply to me either. Never heard the hairl whirl one but my hair doesn't curl or anything at all really. Interesting none the less!
ReplyDelete