- Introduction
It was Sigmund Freud who first suggested that human psychosexual development is heavily influenced by one’s relationship with one’s father or mother (Katz-Wise 2). However, in reality, the development of sexuality is quite different and significantly more complex. Gender identity has become different from sexual identity, and one’s sexual orientation is different still (Katz-Wise 2). Before detailing the prevailing arguments regarding sexual identity and all the issues that go along with it, it is first important to understand the nature of the discussion.
Sexual identity, for the purposes of discussion here, will be taken to mean the way an individual thinks of him or herself and who he or she is attracted to (Katz-Wise 3). This may be used interchangeably with the idea of “sexual orientation” in this discussion (Papadopoulos et al. 93). Gender identity, on the other hand, is the gender one thinks of oneself as: this allows for the identification of a transperson as an individual of a different gender, even if that transgendered person still has the sex organs he or she was born with (Katz-Wise 3). The separation of sex and gender is a fundamentally important issue to understand, and without a keen understanding of the language used to discuss these issues, the discussion soon becomes cloudy and confused. This discussion will focus primarily upon the development of sexual identity or sexual orientation, considering the question of whether nature, nurture, or both nature and nurture simultaneously are responsible for the development of one’s sexual orientation.
- The Argument for Nature
Perhaps one of the loudest cries from the GLBTQ movement is the insistence that people are born homosexual (Whitam). No one chooses to be gay, the refrain goes; who would, given the struggles that gay people go through? It is a logical argument, and one that is backed up by a number of different studies (Whitam). In one of the most famous studies on the prevalence of homosexuality in twin pairs conducted in recent years, Långström et al. write:
Biometric modeling revealed that, in men, genetic effects explained .34–.39 of the variance [of sexual orientation], the shared environment .00, and the individual-specific environment .61–.66 of the variance. Corresponding estimates among women were .18–.19 for genetic factors, .16–.17 for shared environmental, and .64–.66 for unique environmental factors the results are consistent with moderate, primarily genetic, familial effects, and moderate to large effects of the nonshared environment (social and biological) on same-sex sexual behavior (Långström et al. 76)
In the argument for nature, this is very significant. In this case, the twins share the same genetic material, and twins are far more likely than other siblings to share a sexual orientation; male twins are particularly likely to share a homosexual orientation (Långström et al. 80). It is interesting that Långström et al. find that the prevalence of sexualities in male twins is enough to determine that regardless of environment-- some of the twins did not share a living environment in their formative years-- twins tended to share the same sexual identity (Långström et al. 80).
However, if the argument that homosexuality and sexual identity as a whole is a function of nature rather than nurture, one would expect twins that share the same genetic material to share the same sexual identity 100% of the time (Papadopoulos et al. 102). Because this is not true, then it cannot be determined that sexual identity is purely the function of genetics; this is where the argument for nature in the development of sexual identity arises (Långström 80).
- The Argument for Nurture
If the gay and lesbian world is shouting that the development of sexual identity is not a choice, then the other side of the argument-- often the strictly religious-- have a tendency to claim that homosexuality and deviance from heterosexuality as a whole is the result of nature-- that is, the way an individual is raised (Henshaw 959). Henshaw suggests that twin studies may be biased in the selection process: homosexual twins that are interested in proving the twin studies true are more likely to sign up for those studies, providing researchers with an artificially high number of homosexual twins (Henshaw 960).
Papadopoulos et al. (100) note that there are a number of problems with the “nature” theory of sexual identity. Papadopoulos (100) writes, on the behaviors of Greek university students, “ Same gender sexual experiences presented quite low rates (3.4% of the respondents). Most of the respondents (72%) manifested an agreement with their parents' mentality. There are indications that university students keep on following this mentality and consequently face their relationships, as modern couples, in a quite traditional way” (Papadopoulos et al. 100). This indicates that students have a high likelihood of participating in behavior that their parents find acceptable; if sexuality were a natural choice, perhaps it would be more difficult for students to deny their natural urges and do as their parents say (Papadopoulos et al. 100).
The nurture theory suggests that parents have a significant impact on the gender identity and sexual identity of their child. An overbearing mother, for instance, is often theorized to be the underlying cause of homosexuality in males (Katz-Wise 2). However, because there is no humane or ethical way to do experiments on children by altering how they grow up, it is very difficult to design double-blind studies to determine the actual impact of nature on a child’s eventual sexual identity (Katz-Wise 2).
- “Somewhere In Between”
The reality of the development of sexual identity is really probably somewhere in between the purely nature and purely nurture camps (Katz-Wise 4). Genetics do play some role in the development of sexual identity, although how much of a role they play is still unknown, and humanity’s grasp of the intricacies of genetics still leaves much to be desired (Katz-Wise 6). However, most researchers do agree that the genetic component of sexual identity is very real; some postulate that it is an overabundance of one hormone or another in the womb; some suggest that the “gay gene” is a genetic code that is contained in one of the millions of DNA pairs each individual carries around (Katz-Wise 4). However, this gene or genetic component may or may not be activated based on the environment that the individual grows up in. This is why twins who do not grow up in the same household may or may not grow up to share a sexual orientation, although they often do (Långström et al. 76).
Simon LeVay, a very famous geneticist who studies the impact of the brain on the development of sexuality and sexual identity, did a famous study on the groups of neurons in the brain that he thought to be controlling sexuality and sexual identity (LeVay). These neurons were all grouped in the hypothalamus; one of these three groups of neurons was found to be significantly larger in the homosexual male group than any other group (LeVay). Although not conclusive, it certainly suggests that there is a physical component to homosexuality in gay men (LeVay).
However, LeVay also notes that the brain itself is quite elastic and strange; humanity does not have a good grasp on how it works yet, nor does humanity truly understand what it means when brains have defects or differences. Some of these defects and differences have been mapped, but people have often shocked science with their brains’ flexibility; it is not unheard of for the brain to overcome huge amounts of trauma, for instance (LeVay). As a result, it is difficult to pinpoint exactly what this group of neurons indicates in terms of nature versus nurture.
- Bisexuality
Bisexuality is the attraction to individuals of both the same sex and the opposite sex, and it is a sexual identity that is constantly under fire. Many researchers do not believe that bisexuality exists; some call it sexual fluidity, and so on (Katz-Wise 4). Katz-Wise (1) suggests that there are significantly more people who experience sexual fluidity than many people think, writing: “Sexual fluidity in attractions was reported by 64% of women and 52% of men, with 49% of those women and 36% of those men reporting sexual fluidity in sexual identity based on experiencing changes in attractions Sexually fluid women used a range of sexual identities, whereas most sexually fluid men identified as completely homosexual/gay. Sexually fluid people were more likely than non-sexually-fluid people to have engaged in past sexual behaviours with both genders” (Katz-Wise 1). Bisexuality then, as a label, may be problematic for some, but in reality, bisexuality is merely a label. The idea of sexual fluidity goes hand in hand with the idea of bisexuality. An individual who is bisexual invariably exhibits significant sexual fluidity (Katz-Wise 5).
- Problems in the development of sexual identity: paraphilias
It seems distasteful to group paraphilias with legitimate sexual identities, which is why paraphilias have been given their own discussion. The idea of a paraphilia is a simple one; it is a deviation from the sexual or the psychosexual norm (Goodman 237). This does not include sexual identities like homosexuality for the purposes of discussion here; instead, this discussion will center around the development of paraphilias like pedophilia and necrophilia (Goodman 237).
Jordan (3010) suggests that the development of paraphilias is still a mystery, but that much of the development of a paraphilia is nurture (Jordan 3010). This sets paraphilias decidedly apart from issues like homosexuality, because homosexuality has a definite genetic component. There is no evidence, according to current research, that paraphilias have any kind of genetic cause (Jordan 3010). However, Jordon (3012) also notes that men with fetishes (a sexual need that must be met for the individual to achieve arousal and orgasm) were more likely to be exposed to higher levels of estrogen in the womb, and were similarly more likely to be left handed (Jordan 3012).
For a long time, homosexuality was treated as a paraphilia, and one that the individual could easily be locked away in a mental hospital for (Jordan 3012). However, today’s scientists seem to draw the line between paraphilias and sexual identity; sexual identity has a genetic component, whereas paraphilias may have been caused by nature-- exposure to estrogen in the womb, for instance-- but are also heavily dependent on nurture to germinate and flourish (Jordan 3012).
- Conclusions
Nature and nurture both play a role in gender and sexual identity, and distinguishing between nature and nurture is not always easy (Eade 126). Just when scientists think that they have a good handle on what it means to be gay, straight, or bisexual and what causes these things, a new wrench is thrown into the process, and new discoveries are made. Sexual fluidity and fluidity in sexual behavior is also much more common than many people think, and indicates that sexual identity as well might be much more fluid than many people believe (Katz-Wise 13). However, perhaps it is society-- nurture-- that keeps people from truly expressing themselves openly.
Paraphilias are often conflated with sexual identity, and it is not hard to see why; each has a sexual component, often a sexual component with some kind of strange way of garnering interest with the public. However, it should be noted that paraphilias like pedophilia that do harm are not considered to be even remotely similar by most scientists; scientists believe that nature plays a huge role in the development of paraphilias, although hormone levels during certain developmental times also plays a significant role (Goodman 239).
References
Archer, Sally L., and Jeremy A. Grey. 'The Sexual Domain Of Identity: Sexual Statuses Of Identity In Relation To Psychosocial Sexual Health'. Identity 9.1 (2009): 33-62. Web.
Birden, Susan. Rethinking Sexual Identity In Education. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2005. Print.
Coleman, E. 'Sexual Deviance: Issues And Controversies'. Psychiatric Services 56.4 (2005): 496-496. Web.
de Graaf, Hanneke, and Jany Rademakers. 'Sexual Development Of Prepubertal Children'. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 18.1 (2006): 1-21. Web.
Eade, Deborah. 'Development With A Body: Sexuality, Human Rights And Development'.Development in Practice 19.1 (2009): 126-127. Web.
Frankel, Loren. 'An Appeal For Additional Research About The Development Of Heterosexual Male Sexual Identity'. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 16.4 (2005): 1-16. Web.
Goodman, R.E. 'Understanding Human Sexuality — Specifically Homosexuality And The Paraphilias — In Terms Of Chaos Theory And Fetal Development'. Medical Hypotheses 48.3 (1997): 237-243. Web.
Hanson, R. Karl. 'Dimensional Measurement Of Sexual Deviance'. Arch Sex Behav 39.2 (2009): 401-404. Web.
Henshaw, Alexis Leanna. 'Geographies Of Tolerance: Human Development, Heteronormativity, And Religion'. Sexuality & Culture 18.4 (2014): 959-976. Web.
Hensley, Christopher, and Richard A Tewksbury. Sexual Deviance. Boulder: L. Rienner Publishers, 2003. Print.
Huegel, Kelly. GLBTQ. Minneapolis, Minn.: Free Spirit Pub., 2011. Print.
Jordan, Kirsten et al. 'The Role Of Testosterone In Sexuality And Paraphilia-A Neurobiological Approach. Part II: Testosterone And Paraphilia'. The Journal of Sexual Medicine 8.11 (2011): 3008-3029. Web.
Katz-Wise, Sabra L. 'Sexual Fluidity In Young Adult Women And Men: Associations With Sexual Orientation And Sexual Identity Development'. Psychology and Sexuality (2014): 1-20. Web.
Kelly, Theresa C., and Chris D. Erickson. 'An Examination Of Gender Role Identity, Sexual Self-Esteem, Sexual Coercion And Sexual Victimization In A University Sample'. Journal of Sexual Aggression 13.3 (2007): 235-245. Web.
Långström, Niklas et al. 'Genetic And Environmental Effects On Same-Sex Sexual Behavior: A Population Study Of Twins In Sweden'. Arch Sex Behav 39.1 (2008): 75-80. Web.
Laws, D. Richard, and William T O'Donohue. Sexual Deviance. New York: Guilford Press, 2008. Print.
LeVay, Simon. Gay, Straight, And The Reason Why. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Print.
Löyttyniemi, Varpu. 'Narrative Identity And Sexual Difference'. Narrative Inquiry 16.2 (2006): 255-274. Web.
Mathy, Robin M. 'The Impact Of Religiosity On Lesbian And Bisexual Women's Psychosexual Development'. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 15.2-3 (2004): 73-100. Web.
McLean, Kirsten. 'Bisexuality And Nonmonogamy: A Reflection'. Journal of Bisexuality 11.4 (2011): 513-517. Web.
Motschenbacher, Heiko. Language, Gender And Sexual Identity. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins Pub. Co., 2010. Print.
Ojeda, Auriana. Homosexuality. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. Print.
Olver, M. E., and S. C. P. Wong. 'Psychopathy, Sexual Deviance, And Recidivism Among Sex Offenders'. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 18.1 (2006): 65-82. Web.
Palmer, Bill. What Causes Sexual Orientation?. Broomall, Pa.: Mason Crest Publishers, 2011. Print.
Papadopoulos, Nikos G., Pavlos Stamboulides, and Theoni Triantafillou. 'The Psychosexual Development And Behavior Of University Students'. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality11.4 (2000): 93-110. Web.
Perezhogin, L. 'Sexual Identity Of Men With Paraphilias'. European Psychiatry 12 (1997): 231s. Web.
Saewyc, Elizabeth M. 'Research On Adolescent Sexual Orientation: Development, Health Disparities, Stigma, And Resilience'. Journal of Research on Adolescence 21.1 (2011): 256-272. Web.
Sax, Leonard. Girls On The Edge. New York: Basic Books, 2010. Print.
Schaffner, Anna Katharina. Modernism And Perversion. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Print.
Schubert, C. 'WORLD OF REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY: Switching Sexual Identity'. Biology of Reproduction (2014): n. pag. Web.
'Sexual Deviance: Theory, Assessment, And Treatment'. Choice Reviews Online 45.11 (2008): 45-6469-45-6469. Web.
Singh, Devita, Shelley McMain, and Kenneth J. Zucker. 'Gender Identity And Sexual Orientation In Women With Borderline Personality Disorder'. The Journal of Sexual Medicine 8.2 (2010): 447-454. Web.
Thornton, David. 'Evidence Regarding The Need For A Diagnostic Category For A Coercive Paraphilia'. Arch Sex Behav 39.2 (2009): 411-418. Web.
Whitam, Frederick L., Christopher T. Daskalos, and Robin M Mathy. 'A Cross-Cultural Assessment Of Familial Factors In The Development Of Female Homosexuality'. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 7.4 (1996): 59-76. Web.
Wilkerson, William S. Ambiguity And Sexuality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. Print.
