LGBTQ Issues and Nature Versus Nurture

This paper sheds light on the process of personality development and the “Nature Versus Nurture: An Age Old Debate” by means of shedding light on the LGBTQ issues. The role played by genetics in the individuals with queer sexual orientation can in no way be undermined for the queer sexual preferences that these individuals display.

Running head: NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
LGBTQ Issues and Nature Versus Nurture
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author’s Note:

1NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
“...man is a bundle of relations, a knot of roots,
whose flower and fruitage is the world...”
The above quoted lines of Ralph Waldo Emerson speak volume regarding the nature
versus nurture debate which has been going on since the traditional times. As opined by
Beaver, Barnes and Boutwell (2014), the human beings are a rational creature and generally
like to know the mechanisms of the things which are happening or the reasons for their
occurrence. Lock and Palsson (2016) are of the viewpoint that the net result of this is the fact
that the human beings have tried to rationalize their own personality as well as actions on the
basis of the knowledge that they gained. It is pertinent to note that people hold different
viewpoints regarding the behavior of the human beings and also the factors which influence
the behavior of the human beings. In this context, it needs to be said that there are individuals
who are viewpoint that the behavior of the human beings is determined to a great extent by
the environment in which the concerned individual dwells, their parentage or other similar
factors that wield a substantial influence on their life (Tabery, 2014). On the other hand, there
are people who are of the viewpoint that the concept of genetics or the genes of an individual
are the sole deciding factors of the actions or the behavior of the human beings (Gottlieb,
2014). This paper intends to shed light on the process of personality development and the
“Nature Versus Nurture: An Age Old Debate” by means of shedding light on the LGBTQ
issues.
Sasaki and Kim (2017) are of the viewpoint that the personality of an individual can
be defined as the conglomeration of the different character traits, emotions, cognitions and
other aspects which determine greatly the actions or the behaviour of an individual. As
opined by Gadjev (2015), these aspects of the personality of an individual are greatly
dependent on the external environment in which an individual dwells and also the biological

2NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
factors. More importantly, it is seen that the construct of personality not only determines the
actions or the behaviour of an individual but at the same time contributes in a substantial
manner towards the identity of the concerned individual as well (Felix, 2016). This can be
explained on the basis of the fact that the individuals are judged as well as identified on the
basis of the actions that they perform or the kind of behaviour that they display. Furthermore,
it is seen that the machinery of personality not only lends distinctiveness to the people but at
the same time makes them unique as well (Conrad, 2016). In this regard, it needs to be said
that the personality of one individual is different from another individual and it is on the basis
of this aspect that one individual is distinguished from another one. Thus, it can be said that
personality forms an integral part of the lives as well as the identity of the human beings and
this is one of the major reasons why the notion of personality has gained such prominence in
the contemporary world.
As opined by Elliot (2016), the unprecedented significance that the notion of
personality has gained within the contemporary world in turn gets reflected in the insistence
of the individuals on the process of personality development. For example, it is seen that
because of the correlation that personality has with the aspect of the identity, individuals are
increasingly resorting to the use of the construct of personality development. Lock and
Palsson (2016) are of the viewpoint that the process of personality development helps the
individuals to effectively channelize their own thoughts, emotions, cognition and other
aspects of their lives so as to gain an effective understanding of themselves. More
importantly, the tool of personality development at the same time helps the individuals to
understand the environment or the society in which they dwell in a much more effective
manner through the development of their physical as well as mental response (Schultz &
Schultz, 2016). Recent researches have suggested that the individuals who undertake the
personality development have a far greater chance of having an effective understanding of

3NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
themselves and also their surrounding environment than the ones who do not indulge in such
processes (Conrad, 2016).
As stated by Gottlieb (2014), the “Nature versus Nurture” is perhaps one of the oldest
debates of the world which has been going on since the dawn of the human civilization. The
central focus of this debate is to understand which factor, namely, the natural environment,
upbringing, parentage and others or the genes of an individual determine the actions as well
as the behavior of the human beings (Gray, 2017). It is pertinent to note that since the
traditional times it had been believed that the natural environment, upbringing, parentage and
other kinds of similar factors were the major ones which determined the actions and also the
behavior of the human being (Breedlove, 2017). In this regard, it needs to be said that various
authors as well as philosophers like Aristotle, Plato, Descartes, Emerson and others concur
with this viewpoint and have even gone to the extent of scholarly works on the same (Ah-
King, 2018). For example, John Locke in his famous work “Essay Concerning Human
Understanding” said, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper void of all
characters, without any ideas….Whence has it all the materials of reason and knowledge? To
this I answer, in one word, from Experience” (Breedlove, 2017). Immanuel Kant also
reiterated this viewpoint in his famous work “Idea for a Universal History from a
Cosmopolitan Point of View” has stated, “Whatever concept one may hold….human actions,
like every other natural event, are determined by universal laws….single individual may be
seen from the standpoint of the human race as a whole to be a steady and progressive though
slow evolution of its original endowment” (Gray, 2017).
Wang and Kosinski (2018) are of the viewpoint that the advancements which the
human beings have made in the fields of science and technology has not only improved the
quality of their lives but at the same time helped them to understand the important aspects of
their own lives. For example, in the earlier times it the human beings held the viewpoint that

4NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
the human beings are the creation of God however Darwin’s “The Origin of Species” clearly
showed that the human beings have evolved from apes (Lock & Palsson, 2016). In addition to
this, the recent developments that has taken place in the field of genetics has also helped the
human beings to gain an understanding regarding themselves and also offers an insight into
their own behavior or actions (Tan, 2018). For example, it is seen that the genes that an
individual had inherited from their parents or family members not only determines the
physical features of theirs but at the same time influences the behavior or the actions of the
individuals (Psychologicalscience.org, 2018). In this regard, it needs to be said that if the
parents of an individual have a high of intelligence then it is likely that the offspring of these
individuals would also be an intellectual person and vice versa because of the genes that the
concerned individual had gained from their parents. More importantly, recent researches have
even suggested that the human beings inherit the majority of their character as well as
behavior traits from their parents (Sasaki & Kim, 2017). This can be explained on the basis of
the fact that the genes from both the parents are being transferred to the offspring at the very
initial stages of fertilization and also the formulation of the cells of the offspring. The net
result of this is the fact that many of the character as well as well as behavior traits of the
parents and also the family members are present in that of the offspring. Thus, it can be said
that the genes or the genetics of the individuals also determine greatly the actions as well as
the behavior traits of the human beings.
Golombok et al. (2014) are of the viewpoint that the LGBTQ issues had become the
catch phrase of the 21st century and at the same time is an important one from the perspective
of the modern society or the world at large. The acronym LGBTQ stands for “lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender and queer” kinds of person who show a variance from the normal or the
standard sexual preferences normally shown by the common people of the world (Browning,
2016). As opined by Jourian (2015), the personality or the identity of the individuals depends

5NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
greatly on the kind of sexual preferences that they display. In this regard, it needs to be said
that since the traditional times the human beings have been expected to display normal sexual
preferences wherein a man is supposed to have sexual desires for a woman and vice versa
(Ah-King, 2018). More importantly, it has been seen that there has latent deviant tendencies
in the human beings since the traditional times yet they have been suppressed not only the
human beings but at the same time by the human society in which they lived (Gegenfurtner &
Gebhardt, 2017). This can be seen as the net result of the various punishments which were
levied on the individuals who dared to go beyond the normal conventions established by the
human society. However, in the recent times, it is seen that this trend has changed in a
substantial manner and the individuals who increasingly accepting these queer sexually
conventions and they are even getting recognition from the society as well as the nation in
which they dwell (Joslyn & Haider‐Markel, 2016). In this regard, it needs to be said that the
national governments of the various nations of the world like Canada, Australia, some of the
states of the United Nations of America like California and others have legalised this kind of
sexual preferences or orientation of the people (Ah-King, 2018). As a matter of fact, it is seen
that these individuals are entitled to the same kind of rights or privileges that the other people
of the nation are entitle and strict legal action is being taken against the individuals or
institutions which try to infringe the basic human rights of these individuals (Gray, 2017).
This is important since in the earlier ages the individuals who had sexual orientations other
than the ones propounded by the society were not only deprived of their basic human rights
but at the same time had to face the stigma of the society as well. The net result of this the
fact that these queer kinds of sexual orientations are not only being readily accepted by the
people but at the same time they have become the norm of the modern society as well.
The LGBTQ issue when analysed through the lens of the nature versus nurture debate
is likely to reveal insightful information which will in turn help in a far better understanding

6NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
of the debate itself. It is pertinent to note in this context that the environmental factors,
parentage, upbringing and also the genes that the individuals had inherited from their parents
play a significant role in these kinds of sexual deviance. Joslyn and Haider‐Markel (2016) are
of the viewpoint that the one of the most important results of the stringent hold of the society
on the lives of the individuals since the traditional times was the fact that the individuals had
to suppress their queer sexual desires and lead a normal life because of the fear of punishment
that might be imposed on them. However, in the recent times, the acceptance of these queer
sexual orientations acts as the motivational factors for these individuals to openly embrace
these kinds of sexual orientations (Breedlove, 2017). More importantly, the influence of the
peers and also the family members is another factor on the basis of which these kinds of
deviances on the part of the individuals can be justified. For example, recent researches have
suggested that the individuals who had a gay or similar kind of friends or family members are
more likely to display these kinds of sexual orientations than the ones who do not have
(Wang & Kosinski, 2018). In addition to this, it is also seen that if the parents of an
individual are having or had marital problems in their marriage then this can also affect the
sexual preferences or the orientation of the individuals in a substantial manner (Jourian,
2015). Furthermore, another important trend seen among these kinds of individuals is the fact
that they are mostly the individuals who had very limited amount of sexual interaction with
the people from other sexes in the early formational years of their life (Browning, 2016). This
can in turn lead them to display queer sexual orientation in the later part of their lives
however this is not always true. Thus, it can be said that the natural environment, parentage,
upbringing and other similar kinds of factors have an important role in the lives of the lives of
the people who display queer sexual orientation.
As opined by Conrad (2016), the role played by genetics in the individuals with queer
sexual orientation can in no way be undermined for the queer sexual preferences that these

7NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
individuals display. According to Psychologicalscience.org (2018), “Various biological
factors—including prenatal hormones and specific genetic profiles—are likely to contribute
to sexual orientation, though they are not the sole cause”. More importantly, as per another
scientific research conducted in the year 1983 it was revealed that there are slight genetic
variations in the X chromosomes of the men who display sexual preferences for the other
men (Tan, 2018). Furthermore, in the year 1995, the scientists pinpointed this variation as “a
region on chromosome 8” (Tan, 2018). Further research works conducted in subsequent times
through a comparison of the DNA of more than “1077 gay and 1231 straight men” also
revealed the same fact (Psychologicalscience.org, 2018). Another important research work
conducted by the neuroscientist Simon LeVay in 1991 revealed the fact that the size of
hypothalamus in the brain of the straight and the people with deviant sexual preferences also
revealed a discrepancy (Felix, 2016). As a matter of fact, the size of the hypothalamus of the
people with queer sexual orientations was much smaller than the ones of the normal straight
men (Felix, 2016). These scientific research works and other similar ones conducted by the
scientists clearly reveal the fact that the genes of the individuals also play a pivotal role in the
sexual preferences displayed by these individuals.
To conclude, the nature versus nurture debate which has been going on since the
traditional times is an important one which offers an insight into the actions or the behaviors
of the human beings. On the one hand, there are people who argue the fact that the
environment, parentage, upbringing and other similar factors are the key deciding elements
which determine the actions or the behavior of the individuals. On the other hand, there are
individuals who are of the viewpoint that the genes that the individuals had inherited from
their parents are the sole determining factors of the behavior or actions of the human beings.
However, it is interesting to note that recent researches have revealed the fact that both of
these factors play a significant role on the actions or the behavior of the individuals. This

8NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
becomes apparent from an analysis of the LGBTQ issue and queer sexual behavior which has
become the norm in the contemporary society. An analysis of this issue on the basis of the
nature versus nurture debate clears reveals the fact that genes of the individuals and also the
environment, upbringing and other similar play a vital role in the queer sexual behavior that
these individuals display.

9NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
References
Ah-King, M. (2018). Queer Nature. Towards a non-normative view on biological
diversity (pp. 115-132). Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG.
Beaver, K. M., Barnes, J. C., & Boutwell, B. B. (Eds.). (2014). The nurture versus biosocial
debate in criminology: On the origins of criminal behavior and criminality. SAGE
Publications.
Breedlove, S. M. (2017). Prenatal influences on human sexual orientation: Expectations
versus data. Archives of sexual behavior, 46(6), 1583-1592.
Browning, F. (2016). The Fate of Gender: Nature, Nurture, and the Human Future.
Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
Conrad, R. (2016). The Lure of the Gay Gene. The Gay and Lesbian Review, 25-28.
Elliot, P. (2016). Debates in transgender, queer, and feminist theory: Contested sites.
Routledge.
Felix, M. S. (2016). Nature or Nurture? A Qualitative Study of the Source of
Homosexuality. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 24(4).
Gadjev, I. (2015). Nature and nurture: Lamarck's legacy. Biological journal of the Linnean
Society, 114(1), 242-247.
Gegenfurtner, A., & Gebhardt, M. (2017). Sexuality education including lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues in schools. Educational Research Review.

10NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
Golombok, S., Mellish, L., Jennings, S., Casey, P., Tasker, F., & Lamb, M. E. (2014).
Adoptive gay father families: Parent–child relationships and children's psychological
adjustment. Child Development, 85(2), 456-468.
Gottlieb, G. (2014). Synthesizing nature-nurture: Prenatal roots of instinctive behavior.
Psychology Press.
Gray, J. M. (2017). Heteronormativity without Nature: Toward a Queer Ecology. QED: A
Journal in GLBTQ Worldmaking, 4(2), 137-142.
Joslyn, M. R., & Haider‐Markel, D. P. (2016). Genetic attributions, immutability, and
stereotypical judgments: An analysis of homosexuality. Social Science
Quarterly, 97(2), 376-390.
Jourian, T. J. (2015). Evolving nature of sexual orientation and gender identity. New
Directions for Student Services, 2015(152), 11-23.
Lock, M., & Palsson, G. (2016). Can science resolve the nature/nurture debate?. John Wiley
& Sons.
Psychologicalscience.org, (2018). What Scientists Know—And Don’t Know—About Sexual
Orientation. Retrieved from
https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/what-scientists-know-and-dont-
know-about-sexual-orientation.html
Sasaki, J. Y., & Kim, H. S. (2017). Nature, nurture, and their interplay: A review of cultural
neuroscience. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 48(1), 4-22.
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2016). Theories of personality (11th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.

11NATURE VERSUS NURTURE
Tabery, J. (2014). Beyond versus: The struggle to understand the interaction of nature and
nurture. MIT Press.
Tan, M. (2018). Are we products of nature or nurture? Science answers age-old question.
Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/may/19/are-we-products-
of-nature-or-nuture-science-answers-age-old-question
Wang, Y., & Kosinski, M. (2018). Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at
detecting sexual orientation from facial images. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 114(2), 246.
Willey, A. (2016). Biopossibility: A queer feminist materialist science studies manifesto,
with special reference to the question of monogamous behavior. Signs: Journal of
Women in Culture and Society, 41(3), 553-577.