Hubbry Logo
HomosexualityHomosexualityMain
Open search
Homosexuality
Community hub
Homosexuality
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Homosexuality
Homosexuality
from Wikipedia

Symbols of homosexuality.

Homosexuality is romantic attraction, sexual attraction, or sexual behavior between people of the same sex or gender.[1][2][3] It also denotes identity based on attraction, related behavior, and community affiliation.[4][5]

Along with bisexuality and heterosexuality, homosexuality is one of the three main categories of sexual orientation within the heterosexual–homosexual continuum.[4] Although no single theory on the cause of sexual orientation has yet gained widespread support, scientists favor biological theories.[6][7][8] There is considerably more evidence supporting nonsocial, biological causes of sexual orientation than social ones, especially for males.[6][9][10] A major hypothesis implicates the prenatal environment, specifically the organizational effects of hormones on the fetal brain.[6][8][11] There is no substantive evidence which suggests parenting or early childhood experiences play a role in developing a sexual orientation.[6][12] Scientific research shows that homosexuality is a natural and normal variation in human sexuality and is not in and of itself a source of negative psychological effects.[4][13] Major mental health organizations overwhelmingly reject sexual orientation change efforts (such as conversion therapy) as ineffective, scientifically unsupported, potentially harmful, and rooted in stigma rather than evidence.[14][15]

The most common terms for homosexual people are lesbian for females and gay for males, but the term gay also commonly refers to both homosexual females and males. The number of people who are gay or lesbian is difficult for researchers to estimate reliably, as many gay and lesbian people do not openly identify as such due to discrimination or prejudice such as heterosexism or homophobia.[16] Homosexual behavior has also been documented in many non-human animal species,[17][18][19][20][21] though domestic sheep are the only conclusively documented example of nonhuman animals exhibiting exclusive same-sex orientation.[6]

Many gay and lesbian people are in committed same-sex relationships. These relationships are equivalent to heterosexual relationships in essential psychological respects.[5] Homosexual relationships and acts have been admired as well as condemned throughout recorded history, depending on the form they took and the culture in which they occurred.[22] Since the end of the 20th century, there has been a global movement towards freedom and equality for gay people, including the introduction of anti-bullying legislation to protect gay teenagers at school, legislation ensuring non-discrimination, equal ability to serve in the military, equal access to health care, equal ability to adopt and parent, and the establishment of marriage equality.

Etymology

[edit]

The word homosexual is a Greek and Latin hybrid, with the first element derived from Greek ὁμός homos, "same" (not related to the Latin homo, "man", as present in the genus Homo, which includes Homo sapiens and now extinct species), thus connoting sexual acts and affections between members of the same sex, including lesbianism.[23][24] The first known appearance of homosexual in print is found in an 1868 letter to Karl Heinrich Ulrichs by the Austrian-born novelist Karl-Maria Kertbeny[25][26] arguing against a Prussian anti-sodomy law.[26][27] In 1886, the psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing used the terms homosexual and heterosexual in his book Psychopathia Sexualis. Krafft-Ebing's book was so popular among both laymen and doctors that the terms heterosexual and homosexual became the most widely accepted terms for sexual orientation.[28][29]

Many modern style guides in the U.S. recommend against using homosexual as a noun, instead using gay man or lesbian.[30][31][citation needed] Similarly, some recommend completely avoiding usage of homosexual as it has a negative, clinical history and because the word only refers to one's sexual behavior (as opposed to romantic feelings) and thus it has a negative connotation.[30] Gay and lesbian are the most common alternatives. The first letters are frequently combined to create the initialism LGBT (sometimes written as GLBT), in which B and T refer to bisexual and transgender people.

Gay especially refers to male homosexuality,[32] but may be used in a broader sense to refer to all LGBTQ people. In the context of sexuality, lesbian refers only to female homosexuality. The word lesbian is derived from the name of the Greek island Lesbos, where the poet Sappho wrote largely about her emotional relationships with young women.[33][34]

Although early writers also used the adjective homosexual to refer to any single-sex context (such as an all-girls school), today the term is used exclusively in reference to sexual attraction, activity, and orientation. The term homosocial is now used to describe single-sex contexts that are not specifically sexual. There is also a word referring to same-sex love, homophilia.[citation needed]

Some synonyms for same-sex attraction or sexual activity include men who have sex with men or MSM (used in the medical community when specifically discussing sexual activity) and homoerotic (referring to works of art).[35][36] Pejorative terms in English include queer, faggot, fairy, poof, poofter[37] and homo.[38][39][40][41] Beginning in the 1990s, some of these have been reclaimed as positive words by gay men and lesbians, as in the usage of queer studies, queer theory, and even the popular American television program Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.[42] The word homo occurs in many other languages without the pejorative connotations it has in English.[43] As with ethnic slurs and racial slurs, the use of these terms can still be highly offensive. The range of acceptable use for these terms depends on the context and speaker.[43] Conversely, gay, a word originally embraced by homosexual men and women as a positive, affirmative term (as in gay liberation and gay rights),[44] came into widespread pejorative use among young people in the early 2000s.[45]

History

[edit]

Same-sex relations are documented throughout history and varied in acceptance depending on time and place.[46] However, many historians and anthropologists warn against using terms like "homosexuality" to describe these practices, because that may draw false equivalencies between acts that, while technically similar, may have been viewed as completely different acts. In many cultures, same-sex relations were not always considered sexual in the same way that "reproductive" sex between men and women was—particularly lesbian sex.[47][48] Modern-style homosexual partnerships, including marriages, are even more uncommon, probably because marriages have almost always been oriented around producing children.[48] Other scholars argue that there are significant continuities between historical and modern homosexuality.[49][50][51]

Burning of two homosexuals (the knight Richard von Hohenburg and his squire Anton Mätzler) at the stake outside Zürich, 1482 (from the Spiezer Schilling chronicle)

In cultures influenced by Abrahamic religions, the law and the church established sodomy as a transgression against divine law or a crime against nature. The condemnation of anal sex between males, however, predates Christian belief. Throughout the majority of Christian history, most Christian theologians and denominations have considered homosexual behavior as immoral or sinful.[52][53] Condemnation was frequent in ancient Greece;[citation needed] for instance Plato, in his Laws, described the idea of homosexuality as 'unnatural' and argued for its prohibition,[54] while Socrates advocated for platonic love over sexual pederasty.[55]

Many historical figures, including Socrates, Lord Byron, Edward II, and Hadrian,[56] have had terms such as gay or bisexual applied to them. Some scholars have regarded uses of such modern terms on people from the past as an anachronistic introduction of a contemporary construction of sexuality that would have been foreign to their times.[57][58] Other scholars see continuity instead.[59][51][49]

In social science, there has been a dispute between "essentialist" and "constructionist" views of homosexuality. The debate divides those who believe that terms such as "gay" and "straight" refer to objective, culturally invariant properties of persons from those who believe that the experiences they name are artifacts of unique cultural and social processes. "Essentialists" typically believe that sexual preferences are determined by biological forces, while "constructionists" assume that sexual desires are learned.[60] The philosopher of science Michael Ruse has stated that the social constructionist approach, which is influenced by Foucault, is based on a selective reading of the historical record that confuses the existence of homosexual people with the way in which they are labelled or treated.[61]

Africa

[edit]

The first record of a possible homosexual couple in history is commonly regarded as Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum, an ancient Egyptian male couple, who lived around 2400 BCE. The pair are portrayed in a nose-kissing position, the most intimate pose in Egyptian art, surrounded by what appear to be their heirs. The anthropologists Stephen Murray and Will Roscoe reported that women in Lesotho engaged in socially sanctioned "long term, erotic relationships" called motsoalle.[62]

The anthropologist E. E. Evans-Pritchard also recorded that male Azande warriors in the northern Congo routinely took on young male lovers between the ages of twelve and twenty, who helped with household tasks and participated in intercrural sex with their older husbands.[63] Some scholars have criticized labeling relationships like these "homosexual", because these relationships were temporary arrangements designed to prepare young men for full manhood, rather than the permanent sexual orientation implied by the word "homosexual".[48] Evans-Pritchard also recorded information about sexual relationships between women, based on reports from male Azande. According to male Azande, women would take female lovers and that partners would penetrate each other using bananas or other food items carved into the shape of a phallus. They also reported that the daughter of a ruler may be given a female slave as a sexual partner. Evans-Pritchard also recorded that the male Azande were fearful of women taking on female lovers, as they might view men as unnecessary.[64]

Americas

[edit]

Indigenous cultures

[edit]
Dance to the Berdache
Sac and Fox Nation ceremonial dance to celebrate the two-spirit person. George Catlin (1796–1872); Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Illustration of two Aztec homosexual men talking, from the Florentine Codex (1577)

As is true of many other non-Western cultures, it is difficult to determine the extent to which Western notions of sexual orientation and gender identity apply to Pre-Columbian cultures. Evidence of homoerotic sexual acts and transvestism has been found in many pre-conquest civilizations in Latin America, such as the Aztecs, Mayas, Quechuas, Moches, Zapotecs, the Incas, and the Tupinambá of Brazil.[65][66][67]

The Spanish conquerors were horrified to discover sodomy openly practiced among native peoples, and attempted to crush it out by subjecting the berdaches (as the Spanish called them) under their rule to severe penalties, including public execution, burning and being torn to pieces by dogs.[68] The Spanish conquerors talked extensively of sodomy among the natives to depict them as savages and hence justify their conquest and forceful conversion to Christianity. As a result of the growing influence and power of the conquerors, many native cultures started condemning homosexual acts themselves.[citation needed]

Among some of the indigenous peoples of the Americas in North America prior to European colonization, a relatively common form of same-sex sexuality centered around the figure of the Two-Spirit individual (the term itself was coined only in 1990).[citation needed] Typically, this individual was recognized early in life, given a choice by the parents to follow the path and, if the child accepted the role, raised in the appropriate manner, learning the customs of the gender it had chosen. Two-Spirit individuals were commonly shamans and were revered as having powers beyond those of ordinary shamans. Their sexual life was with the ordinary tribe members of the same sex.[citation needed]

During the colonial times following the European invasion, homosexuality was prosecuted by the Inquisition, sometimes leading to death sentences on the charges of sodomy, and the practices became clandestine. Many homosexual individuals went into heterosexual marriages to maintain appearances, and many joined the (unmarried) Catholic clergy to escape public scrutiny of their lack of interest in the opposite sex.[citation needed]

Canada

[edit]

During the colonial period, both the French and the British criminalised same-sex sexual relations. Anal sex between males was a capital offence.[69] Post-Confederation, anal sex and acts of "gross indecency" continued to be criminal offences, but were no longer capital offences.[70] Individuals were prosecuted for same-sex sexual activity as late as the 1960s, which led to the federal Parliament amending the Criminal Code in 1969 to provide that anal sex between consenting adults in private (defined as only two persons) was not a criminal offence. In advocating for the law, the then-Minister of Justice, Pierre Trudeau, said: "The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."[71]

In 1995, the Supreme Court of Canada held that sexual orientation is a protected personal characteristic under the equality clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.[72] The federal Parliament and provincial legislatures began to amend their laws to treat same-sex relations in the same way as opposite-sex relations. Beginning in 2003, the courts in Canada began to rule that excluding same-sex couples from marriage violated the equality clause of the Charter. In 2005, the federal Parliament enacted the Civil Marriage Act, which legalised same-sex marriage across Canada.[73]

Canada has been referred to as the most gay-friendly country in the world, ranked first in the Gay Travel Index chart in 2018, and among the five safest in Forbes magazine in 2019.[74][75] It was also ranked first in Asher & Lyric's LGBTQ+ Danger Index in a 2021 update.[76]

Mexico

[edit]

Anthropologist Joseph Carrier found in the 1990s that same-gender sexual relations were relatively common in many neighborhoods in Mexico City. While long-term partnerships were not acceptable, and queer men were still expected to marry and have children, it was acceptable for men to have "discreet" relations with other men as long as they took on the active, penetrative role. Taking the passive role was considered detrimental to one's masculinity.[77]

United States

[edit]

During the Victorian era, same-sex desire was viewed as a common sin. Anyone was capable of "succumbing" to same-sex attraction, and various sexual and non-sexual acts—including masturbation—were considered possible ways that someone could be "turned" queer. Queer people were often viewed as predators, exclusively attracted to heterosexuals, and therefore a danger to society.[48]

Same-sex relationships were generally stigmatized throughout the 20th century, and hate crimes were commonly carried out, especially against men. Most queer people lived out these relationships in secret, often while still having opposite-sex marriages and families. Anti-gay sentiment surged after the Cold War, when homosexuals were seen as a threat to American society and were rooted out of organizations across the country.[48]

Homosexuality was declassified as a disease by the American Psychiatric Association in 1973.[48]

In 1986, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Bowers v. Hardwick that a state could criminalize sodomy, but, in 2003, overturned itself in Lawrence v. Texas and thereby legalized homosexual activity throughout the United States of America.

It is only since the 2010s that census forms and political conditions have facilitated the visibility and enumeration of same-sex relationships.[78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86]

Same-sex marriage in the United States expanded from one state in 2004 to all 50 states in 2015, through various state court rulings, state legislation, direct popular votes (referendums and initiatives), and federal court rulings.

Asia

[edit]

East Asia

[edit]
Anal sex between two males being watched, Qing dynasty. Painting. 18th Century

In East Asia, same-sex love has been referred to since the earliest recorded history.

Homosexuality in China, known as the passions of the cut peach and various other euphemisms, has been recorded since approximately 600 BCE. Homosexuality was mentioned in many famous works of Chinese literature. The instances of same-sex affection and sexual interactions described in the classical novel Dream of the Red Chamber seem as familiar to observers in the present as do equivalent stories of romances between heterosexual people during the same period. Keith McMahon suggests that homosexual relationships between men in Ming stories such as Bian er chai was described as more harmonious and enjoyable than heterosexual relationships.[87] Writings from the Liu Song dynasty by Wang Shunu claimed that homosexuality was as common as heterosexuality in the late 3rd century.[88]

Opposition to homosexuality in China originates in the medieval Tang dynasty (618–907), attributed to the rising influence of Christian and Islamic values,[89] but did not become fully established until the Westernization efforts of the late Qing dynasty and the Republic of China.[90]

North Asia

[edit]

Early Russian ethnographers observed that Chukchi shamans in Siberia were sometimes said to called by mystical forces to engage in a form of ritualized homosexual relations with other men. This ritual typically involved a gender change—a religious ceremony that, it was believed, transformed his genitalia into that of a female. After the change, he might dress in women's clothing and behave in feminine ways. He was then believed to "lose" masculine traits like hunting skill, and instead take on "feminine" traits, like healing and nurturing. Some of these shamans would take male lovers, and could even marry other men, and the shaman would take on a "wifely" role. Homosexual relations outside of this specialized role were reportedly not tolerated.[48][91]

South Asia

[edit]

South Asia has a recorded and verifiable history of homosexuality going back to at least 1200 BC. Hindu medical texts written in India from this period document homosexual acts and attempt to explain the cause in a neutral/scientific manner.[92][93][94] Numerous artworks and literary works from this period also describe homosexuality.[95][96][97][98]

Several ancient Hindu texts have passages that condemn homosexuality. For example, Manu-smṛti (11.174) says that if a man has sex with another man, then he should take a shower with clothes on. The implication of the statement is that sex between two men is not considered normal.[99] Pali Cannon, written in Sri Lanka between 600 BC and 100 BC, states that sexual relations, whether of homosexual or of heterosexual nature, is forbidden in the monastic code, and states that any acts of soft homosexual sex (including masturbation and interfumeral sex) does not entail a punishment but must be confessed to the monastery. These codes apply to monks only and not to the general population.[100][101] The Kama Sutra written in India around 200 AD also described numerous homosexual sex acts.[102][103]

Prior to early modern period and colonialism, there were no strict laws against homosexuality and transexuality. However certain dharmic moral codes forbade sexual misconduct (of both heterosexual and homosexual nature) among the upper class of persists and monks, and religious codes of foreign religions such as Christianity and Islam imposed homophobic rules on their populations.[104][105]

Hinduism describes a third gender that is equal to other genders and documentation of the third gender are found in ancient Hindu and Buddhist medical texts.[106] There are certain characters in the Mahabharata who, according to some versions of the epic, change genders, such as Shikhandi, who is sometimes said to be born as a female but identifies as male and eventually marries a woman. Bahuchara Mata is the goddess of fertility, worshipped by hijras as their patroness.[citation needed]

Europe

[edit]

Classical period

[edit]

The earliest Western documents (in the form of literary works, art objects, and mythographic materials) concerning same-sex relationships are derived from ancient Greece.

Same-sex relationships were a social institution constructed differently over time and from one city to another. The formal practice, an erotic yet often restrained relationship between a free adult male and a free adolescent, was valued for its pedagogic benefits and as a means of population control, though occasionally blamed for causing disorder. In his Symposium, Plato has Phaedras praising its benefits whilst having Socrates encouraging platonic relationships between older and younger men[55] (the literal origin of the term, platonic love). In his later work, Laws, he has an Athenian stranger propose prohibition of sexual relationships between men entirely saying that it is unnatural.[107] Aristotle argues that some homosexual men become that way through habituation, as in being a victim of hubris (rape) in childhood, and others due to being born that way.[108]

Some scholars argue that there are examples of homosexual love in ancient literature, such as Achilles and Patroclus in the Iliad.[109]

Female youths are depicted surrounding Sappho in this painting of Lafond "Sappho sings for Homer", 1824.

Little is known of female homosexuality in antiquity. Sappho, born on the island of Lesbos, was included by later Greeks in the canonical list of nine lyric poets. The adjectives deriving from her name and place of birth (Sapphic and Lesbian) came to be applied to female homosexuality beginning in the 19th century.[110][111] Sappho's poetry centers on passion and love for various personages and both genders. The narrators of many of her poems speak of infatuations and love (sometimes requited, sometimes not) for various females, but descriptions of physical acts between women are few and subject to debate.[112][113]

Sappho reading to her companions on an Attic vase constructed c. 435 BC

In Ancient Rome, the kind of homosexuality seen took the form of pederastic relationships, where older free men took on an active role and slaves or freed youths took the receptive/passive role in sex. Romans saw passivity as generally unmanly, and as incompatible with the warrior ethos expected of men serving the expansionist Roman state.[114]

In his letter addressed to the Christian community in Rome, Paul the Apostle writes of people engaging in idolatry ("[they] exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles") who eventually become infatuated with a person of the same sex in a "suffering of dishonour".[115][non-primary source needed]

Pederastic attentions were legitimate only when directed toward current or former slaves. The Hellenophile emperor Hadrian is renowned for his relationship with Antinous, but the Christian emperor Theodosius I decreed a law on 6 August 390, condemning passive males to be burned at the stake. Notwithstanding these regulations taxes on brothels with boys available for homosexual sex continued to be collected until the end of the reign of Anastasius I in 518. Justinian, towards the end of his reign, expanded the proscription to the active partner as well (in 558), warning that such conduct can lead to the destruction of cities through the "wrath of God".[116][117]

Renaissance

[edit]

During the Renaissance, wealthy cities in northern ItalyFlorence and Venice in particular—were renowned for their widespread practice of same-sex love, engaged in by a considerable part of the male population and constructed along the classical pattern of Greece and Rome.[118][119] But even as many of the male population were engaging in same-sex relationships, the authorities, under the aegis of the Officers of the Night court, were prosecuting, fining, and imprisoning a good portion of that population.

From the second half of the 13th century, death was the punishment for male homosexuality in most of Europe.[120] The relationships of socially prominent figures, such as King James I and the Duke of Buckingham, served to highlight the issue, including in anonymously authored street pamphlets: "The world is chang'd I know not how, For men Kiss Men, not Women now;...Of J. the First and Buckingham: He, true it is, his Wives Embraces fled, To slabber his lov'd Ganimede" (Mundus Foppensis, or The Fop Display'd, 1691).

Modern period

[edit]
Photograph of the Finnish artist Touko Laaksonen (1920–1991) alias Tom of Finland, well known for his stylized and highly masculinized homoerotic art, playing the piano in late 1950s. In the background, his partner Veli Mäkinen (left) and his sister Kaija (right).

Love Letters Between a Certain Late Nobleman and the Famous Mr. Wilson was published in 1723 in England, and is presumed by some modern scholars to be a novel. The 1749 edition of John Cleland's popular novel Fanny Hill includes a homosexual scene, but this was removed in its 1750 edition. Also in 1749, the earliest extended and serious defense of homosexuality in English, Ancient and Modern Pederasty Investigated and Exemplified, written by Thomas Cannon, was published, but was suppressed almost immediately. It includes the passage, "Unnatural Desire is a Contradiction in Terms; downright Nonsense. Desire is an amatory Impulse of the inmost human Parts."[121] Around 1785 Jeremy Bentham wrote another defense, but this was not published until 1978.[122]

Executions for sodomy continued in the Netherlands until 1803, and in England until 1835, James Pratt and John Smith being the last Englishmen to be so hanged.[citation needed]

Between 1864 and 1880 Karl Heinrich Ulrichs published a series of 12 tracts, which he collectively titled Research on the Riddle of Man-Manly Love. In 1867, he became the first self-proclaimed homosexual person to speak out publicly in defense of homosexuality when he pleaded at the Congress of German Jurists in Munich for a resolution urging the repeal of anti-homosexual laws.[16] Sexual Inversion by Havelock Ellis, published in 1896, challenged theories that homosexuality was abnormal, as well as stereotypes, and insisted on the ubiquity of homosexuality and its association with intellectual and artistic achievement.[123]

Although medical texts like these (written partly in Latin to obscure the sexual details) were not widely read by the general public, they did lead to the rise of Magnus Hirschfeld's Scientific-Humanitarian Committee, which campaigned from 1897 to 1933 against anti-sodomy laws in Germany, as well as a much more informal, unpublicized movement among British intellectuals and writers, led by such figures as Edward Carpenter and John Addington Symonds. Beginning in 1894 with Homogenic Love, Socialist activist and poet Edward Carpenter wrote a string of pro-homosexual articles and pamphlets, and "came out" in 1916 in his book My Days and Dreams. In 1900, Elisar von Kupffer published an anthology of homosexual literature from antiquity to his own time, Lieblingminne und Freundesliebe in der Weltliteratur.[citation needed]

Middle East

[edit]
An illustration from the 19th-century book Sawaqub al-Manaquib depicting homosexual anal sex with a wine boy

There are a handful of accounts by Arab travelers to Europe during the mid-1800s. Two of these travelers, Rifa'ah al-Tahtawi and Muhammad as-Saffar, show their surprise that the French sometimes deliberately mistranslated love poetry about a young boy, instead referring to a young female, to maintain their social norms and morals.[124]

Israel is considered the most tolerant country in the Middle East and Asia to homosexuals,[125] with Tel Aviv being named "the gay capital of the Middle East"[126] and considered one of the most gay friendly cities in the world.[127] The annual Pride Parade in support of homosexuality takes place in Tel Aviv.[128]

On the other hand, many governments in the Middle East often ignore, deny the existence of, or criminalize homosexuality. Homosexuality is illegal in almost all Muslim countries.[129] Same-sex intercourse officially carries the death penalty in several Muslim nations: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, northern Nigeria, and Yemen.[130] Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, during his 2007 speech at Columbia University, asserted that there were no gay people in Iran. However, the probable reason is that they keep their sexuality a secret for fear of government sanction or rejection by their families.[131]

Pre-Islamic period

[edit]
Shah Abbas I of Persia with a boy. By Muhammad Qasim (1627).[132]

In ancient Sumer, a set of priests known as gala worked in the temples of the goddess Inanna, where they performed elegies and lamentations.[133]: 285  Gala took female names, spoke in the eme-sal dialect, which was traditionally reserved for women, and appear to have engaged in homosexual intercourse.[134] The Sumerian sign for gala was a ligature of the signs for "penis" and "anus".[134] One Sumerian proverb reads: "When the gala wiped off his ass [he said], 'I must not arouse that which belongs to my mistress [i.e., Inanna].'"[134]

In later Mesopotamian cultures, kurgarrū and assinnu were servants of the goddess Ishtar (Inanna's East Semitic equivalent), who dressed in female clothing and performed war dances in Ishtar's temples.[134] Several Akkadian proverbs seem to suggest that they may have also engaged in homosexual intercourse.[134] Anal intercourse was depicted in figurative art in Uruk, Assur, Babylon, and Susa from the 3rd millennium BC, which showed that the sex act was practiced as part of religious ritual.[135]

It is thought that ancient Assyria (2nd millennium BC to 1st millennium AD) viewed homosexuality as negative and at least criminal,[136] with the religious codes of Zoroastrianism forbidding homosexuality.[137] Some religious texts contain prayers for divine blessings on homosexual relationships. The Almanac of Incantations contained prayers favoring on an equal basis the love of a man for a woman, of a woman for a man, and of a man for man.[135]

South Pacific

[edit]

In some societies of Melanesia, especially in Papua New Guinea, traditional practices required a prepubertal boy to be paired with an older adolescent who would become his mentor and who would "inseminate" him (orally, anally, or topically, depending on the tribe) over a number of years in order for the younger to also reach puberty.[138] This practice among the Simbari people occurred due to local belief that semen was necessary for male growth. The practice did not appear to affect male sexual orientation; nearly all males were happy to move on to relationships with women once permitted.[139] A small minority of males remain bachelors and continue to engage in homosexual relations, and are considered unusual and ridiculed by other tribesmen.[140] Many Melanesian societies have abandoned this practice since the introduction of Christianity via European missionaries.[138]

Sexuality and identity

[edit]

Behavior and desire

[edit]

The American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the National Association of Social Workers identify sexual orientation as "not merely a personal characteristic that can be defined in isolation. Rather, one's sexual orientation defines the universe of persons with whom one is likely to find the satisfying and fulfilling relationships":[5]

Sexual orientation is commonly discussed as a characteristic of the individual, like biological sex, gender identity, or age. This perspective is incomplete because sexual orientation is always defined in relational terms and necessarily involves relationships with other individuals. Sexual acts and romantic attractions are categorized as homosexual or heterosexual according to the biological sex of the individuals involved in them, relative to each other. Indeed, it is by acting—or desiring to act—with another person that individuals express their heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality. This includes actions as simple as holding hands with or kissing another person. Thus, sexual orientation is integrally linked to the intimate personal relationships that human beings form with others to meet their deeply felt needs for love, attachment, and intimacy. In addition to sexual behavior, these bonds encompass nonsexual physical affection between partners, shared goals and values, mutual support, and ongoing commitment.[5]

The Kinsey scale, also called the Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale,[141] attempts to describe a person's sexual history or episodes of his or her sexual activity at a given time. It uses a scale from 0, meaning exclusively heterosexual, to 6, meaning exclusively homosexual. In both the Male and Female volumes of the Kinsey Reports, an additional grade, listed as "X", has been interpreted by scholars to indicate asexuality.[142]

Sexual identity

[edit]

Often, sexual orientation and sexual identity are not distinguished, which can impact accurately assessing sexual orientation. According to Bailey et al. "sexual identity, is one’s self-conception (sometimes disclosed to others and sometimes not) as a homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual person". One's sexual identity label may not align with one's sexual behavior or sexual orientation (e.g. in the case of homosexual persons who may present themselves as heterosexual).[6]: 48, 89 

Sexual fluidity

[edit]

While sexual orientation is a stable attribute that is an innate characteristic and an immutable trait, some research suggests that some people may experience change in their sexual orientation identity over the course of their lives, and this is more likely for females than for males.[143][144][145] The American Psychological Association distinguishes between sexual orientation (an innate attraction) and sexual orientation identity (which may change at any point in a person's life).[146]

Same-sex relationships

[edit]
Male homosexuality symbol
Female homosexuality symbol

People with a homosexual orientation can express their sexuality in a variety of ways, and may or may not express it in their behaviors.[4] Many have sexual relationships predominantly with people of their own sex, though some have sexual relationships with those of the opposite sex, bisexual relationships, or none at all (celibacy).[4] Studies have found same-sex and opposite-sex couples to be equivalent to each other in measures of satisfaction and commitment in relationships, that age and sex are more reliable than sexual orientation as a predictor of satisfaction and commitment to a relationship, and that people who are heterosexual or homosexual share comparable expectations and ideals with regard to romantic relationships.[147][148][149]

Coming out of the closet

[edit]

Coming out (of the closet) is a phrase referring to one's disclosure of their sexual orientation or gender identity, and is described and experienced variously as a psychological process or journey.[150] Generally, coming out is described in three phases. The first phase is that of "knowing oneself", and the realization emerges that one is open to same-sex relations.[151] This is often described as an internal coming out. The second phase involves one's decision to come out to others, e.g. family, friends, or colleagues. The third phase more generally involves living openly as an LGBT person.[152] In the United States today, people often come out during high school or college age. At this age, they may not trust or ask for help from others, especially when their orientation is not accepted in society. Sometimes their own families are not even informed.

Outing is the practice of publicly revealing the sexual orientation of a closeted person.[153] Notable politicians, celebrities, military service people, and clergy members have been outed, with motives ranging from malice to political or moral beliefs. Many commentators oppose the practice altogether,[154] while some encourage outing public figures who use their positions of influence to harm other gay people.[155]

Demographics

[edit]

In their 2016 literature review, Bailey et al. stated that they "expect that in all cultures ... a minority of individuals are sexually predisposed (whether exclusively or non-exclusively) to the same sex." They state that there is no persuasive evidence that the demographics of sexual orientation have varied much across time or place.[6] Men are more likely to be exclusively homosexual than to be equally attracted to both sexes, while the opposite is true for women.[6][9][10]

Surveys in Western cultures find, on average, that about 93% of men and 87% of women identify as completely heterosexual, 4% of men and 10% of women as mostly heterosexual, 0.5% of men and 1% of women as evenly bisexual, 0.5% of men and 0.5% of women as mostly homosexual, and 2% of men and 0.5% of women as completely homosexual.[6] An analysis of 67 studies found that the lifetime prevalence of sex between men (regardless of orientation) was 3–5% for East Asia, 6–12% for South and South East Asia, 6–15% for Eastern Europe, and 6–20% for Latin America.[156] The International HIV/AIDS Alliance estimates that worldwide between 3 and 16% of men have had some form of sex with another man at least once during their lifetime.[157]

According to major studies, 2% to 11% of people have had some form of same-sex sexual contact within their lifetime;[158][159][160][161] this percentage rises to 16–21% when either or both same-sex attraction and behavior are reported.[161]

According to the 2021 United States Census, there were about 1.2 million same-sex couple households.[162] In the United States, according to a report by The Williams Institute in April 2011, 3.5% or approximately 9 million of the adult population identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.[163] A 2013 study by the CDC, in which over 34,000 Americans were interviewed, puts the percentage of self-identifying lesbians and gay men at 1.6%, and of bisexuals at 0.7%.[164]

In October 2012, Gallup started conducting annual surveys to study the demographics of LGBT people, determining that 3.4% (±1%) of adults identified as LGBT in the United States.[165] It was the nation's largest poll on the issue at the time.[166][167] In 2017, the percentage was estimated to have risen to 4.5% of adults, with the increase largely driven by millennials. The poll attributes the rise to greater willingness of younger people to reveal their sexual identity.[168]

Measuring the prevalence of homosexuality presents difficulties. It is necessary to consider the measuring criteria that are used, the cutoff point and the time span taken to define a sexual orientation.[16] Many people, despite having same-sex attractions, may be reluctant to identify themselves as gay or bisexual. The research must measure some characteristic that may or may not be defining of sexual orientation. The number of people with same-sex desires may be larger than the number of people who act on those desires, which in turn may be larger than the number of people who self-identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.[169]

Reliable data as to the size of the gay and lesbian population are of value in informing public policy.[169] For example, demographics are of help in calculating the costs and benefits of domestic partnership benefits, of the impact of legalizing gay adoption, and of the impact of the U.S. military's former Don't Ask Don't Tell policy.[169] Further, knowledge of the size of the "gay and lesbian population holds promise for helping social scientists understand a wide array of important questions—questions about the general nature of labor market choices, accumulation of human capital, specialization within households, discrimination, and decisions about geographic location."[169]

Psychology

[edit]

The American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the National Association of Social Workers state:

In 1952, when the American Psychiatric Association published its first Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, homosexuality was included as a disorder. Almost immediately, however, that classification began to be subjected to critical scrutiny in research funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. That study and subsequent research consistently failed to produce any empirical or scientific basis for regarding homosexuality as a disorder or abnormality, rather than a normal and healthy sexual orientation. As results from such research accumulated, professionals in medicine, mental health, and the behavioral and social sciences reached the conclusion that it was inaccurate to classify homosexuality as a mental disorder and that the DSM classification reflected untested assumptions based on once-prevalent social norms and clinical impressions from unrepresentative samples comprising patients seeking therapy and individuals whose conduct brought them into the criminal justice system.

In recognition of the scientific evidence,[170] the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the DSM in 1973, stating that "homosexuality per se implies no impairment in judgment, stability, reliability, or general social or vocational capabilities." After thoroughly reviewing the scientific data, the American Psychological Association adopted the same position in 1975, and urged all mental health professionals "to take the lead in removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with homosexual orientations." The National Association of Social Workers has adopted a similar policy.

Thus, mental health professionals and researchers have long recognized that being homosexual poses no inherent obstacle to leading a happy, healthy, and productive life, and that the vast majority of gay and lesbian people function well in the full array of social institutions and interpersonal relationships.[5]

The consensus of research and clinical literature demonstrates that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality.[171] There is now a large body of research evidence that indicates that being gay, lesbian or bisexual is compatible with normal mental health and social adjustment.[12] The World Health Organization's ICD-9 (1977) listed homosexuality as a mental illness; it was removed from the ICD-10, endorsed by the Forty-third World Health Assembly on 17 May 1990.[172][173][174] Like the DSM-II, the ICD-10 added ego-dystonic sexual orientation to the list, which refers to people who want to change their gender identities or sexual orientation because of a psychological or behavioral disorder (F66.1). The Chinese Society of Psychiatry removed homosexuality from its Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders in 2001 after five years of study by the association.[175]

According to the Royal College of Psychiatrists, "[t]his unfortunate history demonstrates how marginalisation of a group of people who have a particular personality feature (in this case homosexuality) can lead to harmful medical practice and a basis for discrimination in society."[12]

Most lesbian, gay, and bisexual people who seek psychotherapy do so for the same reasons as heterosexual people (stress, relationship difficulties, difficulty adjusting to social or work situations, etc.); their sexual orientation may be of primary, incidental, or no importance to their issues and treatment. Whatever the issue, there is a high risk for anti-gay bias in psychotherapy with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients.[176] Psychological research in this area has been relevant to counteracting prejudicial ("homophobic") attitudes and actions, and to the LGBT rights movement generally.[177]

According to the American Psychological Association,[171] the appropriate application of psychotherapy is grounded in acceptance of evidence that: same-sex attractions and orientations are natural variations of human sexuality, not signs of mental or developmental disorders. While homosexuality and bisexuality have often been stigmatized, leading to social stress and other negative effects, these orientations are part of the normal range of human experience. People with same-sex orientations can and do lead fulfilling lives, forming stable, loving relationships and families. There is no scientific evidence supporting claims that same-sex orientation results from family dysfunction or trauma.[171]

Sexual orientation change efforts

[edit]

There are no studies of adequate scientific rigor that conclude that sexual orientation change efforts work to change a person's sexual orientation. Those efforts have been controversial due to tensions between the values held by some faith-based organizations, on the one hand, and those held by LGBT rights organizations and professional and scientific organizations and other faith-based organizations, on the other.[14] The longstanding consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions is that homosexuality per se is a normal and positive variation of human sexual orientation, and therefore not a mental disorder.[14] The American Psychological Association says that "most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation".[178] Some individuals and groups have promoted the idea of homosexuality as symptomatic of developmental defects or spiritual and moral failings and have argued that sexual orientation change efforts, including psychotherapy and religious efforts, could alter homosexual feelings and behaviors. Many of these individuals and groups appeared to be embedded within the larger context of conservative religious political movements that have supported the stigmatization of homosexuality on political or religious grounds.[14]

No major mental health professional organization has sanctioned efforts to change sexual orientation and virtually all of them have adopted policy statements cautioning the profession and the public about treatments that purport to change sexual orientation. These include the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, American Counseling Association, National Association of Social Workers in the U.S.,[179] the Royal College of Psychiatrists,[180] and the Australian Psychological Society.[181] The American Psychological Association and the Royal College of Psychiatrists expressed concerns that the positions espoused by NARTH are not supported by the science and create an environment in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish.[180][182]

The American Psychiatric Association says "individuals maybe become aware at different points in their lives that they are heterosexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual" and "opposes any psychiatric treatment, such as 'reparative' or 'conversion' therapy, which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder, or based upon a prior assumption that the patient should change his/her homosexual orientation". They do, however, encourage gay affirmative psychotherapy.[183] Similarly, the American Psychological Association is doubtful about the effectiveness and side-effect profile of sexual orientation change efforts, including conversion therapy.[184]

The American Psychological Association "encourages mental health professionals to avoid misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts by promoting or promising change in sexual orientation when providing assistance to individuals distressed by their own or others' sexual orientation and concludes that the benefits reported by participants in sexual orientation change efforts can be gained through approaches that do not attempt to change sexual orientation".[14]

Causes

[edit]

Scientists have come to favor biological causes of sexual orientation.[6][7] There is considerably more evidence supporting nonsocial, biological causes of sexual orientation than social ones, especially for males.[6][8] There is no substantive evidence which suggests parenting or early childhood experiences play a role with regard to sexual orientation.[12][7][6]

The American Academy of Pediatrics stated in Pediatrics in 2004:

There is no scientific evidence that abnormal parenting, sexual abuse, or other adverse life events influence sexual orientation. Current knowledge suggests that sexual orientation is usually established during early childhood.[7]

The American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and National Association of Social Workers stated in 2006:

Currently, there is no scientific consensus about the specific factors that cause an individual to become heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual—including possible biological, psychological, or social effects of the parents' sexual orientation. However, the available evidence indicates that the vast majority of lesbian and gay adults were raised by heterosexual parents and the vast majority of children raised by lesbian and gay parents eventually grow up to be heterosexual.[4]

Prenatal hormones

[edit]

The prenatal hormonal theory of homosexuality posits that variations in exposure to sex hormones, particularly androgens and estrogens, during critical periods of early brain development play a central role in shaping sexual orientation. Evidence from natural experiments in humans and animal studies have found that elevated prenatal androgens are associated with increased attraction to females, while reduced androgen signaling or increased prenatal estrogen exposure may be linked to increased attraction to males.[11][185][6]

Genes

[edit]

Evidence from twin studies and molecular genetics studies indicate that genes likely play some role in sexual orientation.[6]: 74–77 [186] Scientists caution that many people misconstrue the meanings of genetic and environmental. Environmental influence does not automatically imply that the social environment influences or contributes to the development of sexual orientation. Hypotheses for the impact of the post-natal social environment on sexual orientation are weak, especially for males.[6]

In the 2010s, potential epigenetic factors have become a topic of increased attention in genetic research on sexual orientation. A study presented at the ASHG 2015 Annual Meeting found that the methylation pattern in nine regions of the genome appeared very closely linked to sexual orientation, with a resulting algorithm using the methylation pattern to predict the sexual orientation of a control group with almost 70% accuracy.[187][188][186]

Maternal immune response

[edit]

One environmental hypothesis of homosexuality is the maternal immune hypothesis, which proposes that male homosexuality might arise from a biological response by a mother's immune system to a male fetus during pregnancy.[6] According to the hypothesis, when a woman is pregnant with a male fetus, her body is exposed to male-specific antigens linked to the Y chromosome. In some mothers, this exposure triggers an immune response that produces antibodies against these proteins. With each successive male pregnancy, the maternal immune response is thought to strengthen, and the resulting antibodies may cross the placenta to affect the sexual differentiation of the developing fetal brain. This process is hypothesized to underlie the fraternal birth order effect, the observation that the likelihood of a man being homosexual increases with the number of older biological brothers he has.[6][189][8]

Epigenetic hypothesis

[edit]

A hypothesis developed by Rice et al. proposes that epigenetic "epi‐marks" (non–DNA sequence modifications like DNA methylation) play a central buffering role in sexual development, by controlling how strongly fetal androgen signaling influences tissues.[190][186] Some of those epi‐marks are sex‐specific (i.e. different in XX vs. XY embryos) and help protect against atypical androgen exposure (too much in XX, too little in XY). Occasionally, some of these protective epi‐marks escape erasure across generations, and find themselves in an opposite‐sex individual, causing a gonad–trait discordance (a mismatch between gonadal sex and some sexually dimorphic traits).[190] Rice et al. propose that such a discordance may be causing same‐sex sexual orientations.[190][186]

Evolution

[edit]

Since homosexuality tends to lower reproductive success, it is unclear how it is maintained in the population at a relatively high frequency.[191] There are many proposed explanations, such as genes predisposing to homosexuality also conferring advantage in heterosexuals (sexual antagonism),[6] a kin selection effect,[192] self-domestication,[193] and more.

Parenting

[edit]

Scientific research has been generally consistent in showing that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents, and their children are as psychologically healthy and well-adjusted as children reared by heterosexual parents.[194][195][196][5][197][198][199]

Some research has examined the sexual orientation of children raised by same-sex couples. A 2005 review of studies by Charlotte J. Patterson for the American Psychological Association did not find higher rates of homosexuality among the children of lesbian or gay parents.[200] According to Bailey et al. 2016, available data do not suggest higher rates of non-heterosexuality among children of same-sex couples. However, they state that even given a modest heritability of sexual orientation, it would be expected that biological children of non-heterosexuals would be more likely to have a non-heterosexual orientation due to genes alone.[201] According to a 2011 data, 80% of the children being raised by same-sex couples in the US are their own biological children.[202] In addition, accepting social environments may facilitate the open expression of individuals same-sex attraction.[203] Thus, it is necessary to control for various confounding factors.[201] One study by Bailey et al. found that the sexual orientation of sons raised by gay men was not related to length of time they had lived with their fathers (social theories of homosexuality would predict sons who lived with a gay father the longest would be most likely to be gay).[204] The Bailey et al. review conclude that social environmental influence on male sexual orientation is not well supported, while it remains more plausible for female sexual orientation.[203]

Health

[edit]

Physical

[edit]
Blood donation policies for men who have sex with men
  – Men who have sex with men may donate blood; No deferral
  – Men who have sex with men may donate blood; Temporary deferral
  – Men who have sex with men may not donate blood; Permanent deferral
  – No Data

The terms "men who have sex with men" (MSM) and "women who have sex with women" (WSW) refer to people who engage in sexual activity with others of the same sex regardless of how they identify themselves—as many choose not to accept social identities as lesbian, gay and bisexual.[205][206][207][208][209] These terms are often used in medical literature and social research to describe such groups for study, without needing to consider the issues of sexual self-identity. The terms are seen as problematic by some, however, because they "obscure social dimensions of sexuality; undermine the self-labeling of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people; and do not sufficiently describe variations in sexual behavior".[210]

In contrast to its benefits, sexual behavior can be a disease vector. Safe sex is a relevant harm reduction philosophy.[211] Many countries currently prohibit men who have sex with men from donating blood; the policy of the United States Food and Drug Administration states that "they are, as a group, at increased risk for HIV, hepatitis B and certain other infections that can be transmitted by transfusion."[212]

Mental

[edit]

When it was first described in medical literature, homosexuality was often approached from a view that sought to find an inherent psychopathology as its root cause. Much literature on mental health and homosexual patients centered on their depression, substance abuse, and suicide. Although these issues exist among people who are non-heterosexual, discussion about their causes shifted after homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) in 1973. Instead, social ostracism, legal discrimination, internalization of negative stereotypes, and limited support structures indicate factors homosexual people face in Western societies that often adversely affect their mental health.[213] Stigma, prejudice, and discrimination stemming from negative societal attitudes toward homosexuality lead to a higher prevalence of mental health disorders among lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals compared to their heterosexual peers.[214] Evidence indicates that the liberalization of these attitudes is associated with a decrease in such mental health risks among younger sexual minority people.[215]

Gay and lesbian youth

[edit]

Gay and lesbian youth bear an increased risk of suicide, substance abuse, school problems, and isolation because of a "hostile and condemning environment, verbal and physical abuse, rejection and isolation from family and peers".[216] Further, LGBT youths are more likely to report psychological and physical abuse by parents or caretakers, and more sexual abuse. Suggested reasons for this disparity are that (1) LGBT youths may be specifically targeted on the basis of their perceived sexual orientation or gender non-conforming appearance, and (2) that "risk factors associated with sexual minority status, including discrimination, invisibility, and rejection by family members...may lead to an increase in behaviors that are associated with risk for victimization, such as substance abuse, sex with multiple partners, or running away from home as a teenager."[217]

Crisis centers in larger cities and information sites on the Internet have arisen to help youth and adults.[218] The Trevor Project, a suicide prevention helpline for gay youth, was established following the 1998 airing on HBO of the Academy Award winning short film Trevor.[219]

Law and politics

[edit]

Legality

[edit]
Worldwide laws regarding same-sex intercourse, unions and expression
Same-sex intercourse illegal. Penalties:
  Death
  Prison; death not enforced
  Death under militias
  Prison, with arrests or detention
  Prison, not enforced1
Same-sex intercourse legal. Recognition of unions:
  Extraterritorial marriage2
  Limited foreign
  Optional certification
  None
  Restriction of expression, not enforced
  Restriction of association with arrests or detention

1No imprisonment in the past three years[timeframe?] or moratorium on law.
2Marriage not available locally. Some jurisdictions may perform other types of partnerships.

Most nations do not prohibit consensual sex between unrelated persons above the local age of consent. Some jurisdictions further recognize identical rights, protections, and privileges for the family structures of same-sex couples, including marriage. Some countries and jurisdictions mandate that all individuals restrict themselves to heterosexual activity and disallow homosexual activity via sodomy laws. Offenders can face the death penalty in Islamic countries and jurisdictions ruled by sharia. There are, however, often significant differences between official policy and real-world enforcement.

Although homosexual acts were decriminalized in some parts of the Western world, such as Poland in 1932, Denmark in 1933, Sweden in 1944, and England and Wales in 1967, it was not until the mid-1970s that the gay community first began to achieve limited civil rights in some developed countries. A turning point was reached in 1973 when the American Psychiatric Association, which previously listed homosexuality in the DSM-I in 1952, removed homosexuality in the DSM-II, in recognition of scientific evidence.[5] In 1977, Quebec became the first state-level jurisdiction in the world to prohibit discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. During the 1980s and 1990s, several developed countries enacted laws decriminalizing homosexual behavior and prohibiting discrimination against lesbian and gay people in employment, housing, and services. On the other hand, many countries today in the Middle East and Africa, as well as several countries in Asia, the Caribbean and the South Pacific, outlaw homosexuality. In 2013, the Supreme Court of India upheld Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code,[220] but in 2018, overturned its previous ruling and legalized homosexual activity in India.[221] Ten countries or jurisdictions, all of which are predominantly Islamic and governed according to sharia law, have imposed the death penalty for homosexuality. These include Afghanistan, Iran, Brunei, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, and several regions in Nigeria and Jubaland.[222][223][224][225][226][227]

Laws against sexual orientation discrimination

[edit]

United States

[edit]

European Union

[edit]

In the European Union, discrimination of any type based on sexual orientation or gender identity is illegal under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.[237]

Political activism

[edit]

Since the 1960s, many LGBT people in the West, particularly those in major metropolitan areas, have developed a so-called gay culture. To many,[who?] gay culture is exemplified by the gay pride movement, with annual parades and displays of rainbow flags. Yet not all LGBT people choose to participate in "queer culture", and many gay men and women specifically decline to do so. To some[who?] it seems to be a frivolous display, perpetuating gay stereotypes.[citation needed]

Original Rainbow Pride Flag in San Francisco, designed by Gilbert Baker in 1978

With the outbreak of AIDS in the early 1980s, many LGBT groups and individuals organized campaigns to promote efforts in AIDS education, prevention, research, patient support, and community outreach, as well as to demand government support for these programs.[citation needed]

The death toll wrought by the AIDS epidemic at first seemed to slow the progress of the gay rights movement, but in time it galvanized some parts of the LGBT community into community service and political action, and challenged the heterosexual community to respond compassionately. Major American motion pictures from this period that dramatized the response of individuals and communities to the AIDS crisis include An Early Frost (1985), Longtime Companion (1990), And the Band Played On (1993), Philadelphia (1993), and Common Threads: Stories from the Quilt (1989).[citation needed]

Publicly gay politicians have attained numerous government posts, even in countries that had sodomy laws in their recent past. Examples include Guido Westerwelle, Germany's Vice-Chancellor; Pete Buttigieg, the United States Secretary of Transportation, Peter Mandelson, a British Labour Party cabinet minister and Per-Kristian Foss, formerly Norwegian Minister of Finance.[citation needed]

LGBT movements are opposed by a variety of individuals and organizations. Some social conservatives believe that all sexual relationships with people other than an opposite-sex spouse undermine the traditional family[238] and that children should be reared in homes with both a father and a mother.[239][240] Some argue that gay rights may conflict with individuals' freedom of speech,[241][242] religious freedoms in the workplace,[243][244] the ability to run churches,[245] charitable organizations[246][247] and other religious organizations[248] in accordance with one's religious views, and that the acceptance of homosexual relationships by religious organizations might be forced through threatening to remove the tax-exempt status of churches whose views do not align with those of the government.[249][250][251][252]

Military service

[edit]
U.S. President Barack Obama signs into law the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010.

Policies and attitudes toward gay and lesbian military personnel vary widely around the world. Some countries allow gay men, lesbians, and bisexual people to serve openly and have granted them the same rights and privileges as their heterosexual counterparts. Many countries neither ban nor support LGB service members. A few countries continue to ban homosexual personnel outright.[citation needed]

Most Western military forces have removed policies excluding sexual minority members. Of the 26 countries that participate militarily in NATO, more than 20 permit openly gay, lesbian and bisexual people to serve. Of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, three (United Kingdom, France and United States) do so. The other two generally do not: China bans gay and lesbian people outright, Russia excludes all gay and lesbian people during peacetime but allows some gay men to serve in wartime (see below). Israel is the only country in the Middle East region that allows openly LGB people to serve in the military.[citation needed]

According to the American Psychological Association, empirical evidence fails to show that sexual orientation is relevant to military effectiveness including unit cohesion, morale, recruitment and retention.[253]

Society and sociology

[edit]

Public opinion

[edit]
2019 Pew Global Research Poll: Should homosexuality be accepted in society? Percentage of responders that answered accept:
  0–10%
  11–20%
  21–30%
  31–40%
  41–50%
  51–60%
  61–70%
  71–80%
  81–90%
  91–100%
  No data

Societal acceptance of non-heterosexual orientations such as homosexuality is lowest in Asian, African and Eastern European countries,[254][255] and is highest in Western Europe, Australia, and the Americas. Western society has become increasingly accepting of homosexuality since the 1990s. In 2017, Professor Amy Adamczyk contended that these cross-national differences in acceptance can be largely explained by three factors: the relative strength of democratic institutions, the level of economic development, and the religious context of the places where people live.[256]

These stereotypical beliefs of the people against the LGBTQ+ community have caused rejection and discriminatory behavior against them. Various researches have shown that LGBTQ+ people in societies that do not recognize homosexuality as a sexual identity of such group feel insecure, psychological pressure and isolated from the society.[257][258][259][260] Kameel Ahmady, an anthropologist and social researcher, who along with team conducted a fieldwork study in Iran with the aim of understanding the attitude of the Iranian LGBTQ+ community towards their position in the Iranian society, believes that the traditional and religious structure of the society, along with the legal obstacles and restrictions, has caused this groups not to be able to express themselves and often suppressing their gender identity.[261][262][263][264][265][266] Legal restrictions such as imprisonment, fear of execution, not been to allowed employment in governmental jobs, along with informal restrictions such as sexual abuse in society, exclusion from family and social groups, verbal and public humiliation, etc., have all made life difficult for the LGBTQ+ groups.[267][268][269][262] A 2024 study found that 12.8% of the world population oppose having gay neighbours.[270]

Relationships

[edit]

In 2006, the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association and National Association of Social Workers stated in an amicus brief presented to the Supreme Court of California: "Gay men and lesbians form stable, committed relationships that are equivalent to heterosexual relationships in essential respects. The institution of marriage offers social, psychological, and health benefits that are denied to same-sex couples. By denying same-sex couples the right to marry, the state reinforces and perpetuates the stigma historically associated with homosexuality. Homosexuality remains stigmatized, and this stigma has negative consequences. California's prohibition on marriage for same-sex couples reflects and reinforces this stigma". They concluded: "There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage."[5]

Religion

[edit]

Though the relationship between homosexuality and religion is complex, current authoritative bodies and doctrines of the world's largest religions view homosexual behaviour negatively.[citation needed] This can range from quietly discouraging homosexual activity, to explicitly forbidding same-sex sexual practices among adherents and actively opposing social acceptance of homosexuality. Some teach that homosexual desire itself is sinful,[271] others state that only the sexual act is a sin,[272] while others are completely accepting of gays and lesbians.[273] Some claim that homosexuality can be overcome through religious faith and practice. On the other hand, voices exist within many of these religions that view homosexuality more positively, and liberal religious denominations may bless same-sex marriages. Some view same-sex love and sexuality as sacred, and a mythology of same-sex love can be found throughout the world.[274]

Discrimination

[edit]
LGBT activists at Cologne Pride in 2015 carrying a banner with the flags of 70 countries where homosexuality is illegal

Gay bullying

[edit]

Gay bullying can be the verbal or physical abuse against a person who is perceived by the aggressor to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or generally queer, including persons who are actually heterosexual or of non-specific or unknown sexual orientation. In the US, teenage students heard anti-gay slurs such as "homo", "faggot" and "sissy" about 26 times a day on average, or once every 14 minutes, according to a 1998 study by Mental Health America (formerly National Mental Health Association).[275]

Heterosexism and homophobia

[edit]
Protests in New York City against Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill

In many cultures, homosexual people are frequently subject to prejudice and discrimination. A 2011 Dutch study concluded that 49% of Holland's youth and 58% of youth foreign to the country reject homosexuality.[276] Similar to other minority groups they can also be subject to stereotyping. These attitudes tend to be due to forms of homophobia and heterosexism (negative attitudes, bias, and discrimination in favor of opposite-sex sexuality and relationships). Heterosexism can include the presumption that everyone is heterosexual or that opposite-sex attractions and relationships are the norm and therefore superior. Homophobia is a fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexual people. It manifests in different forms, and a number of different types have been postulated, among which are internalized homophobia, social homophobia, emotional homophobia, rationalized homophobia, and others.[277] Similar is lesbophobia (specifically targeting lesbians) and biphobia (against bisexual people). When such attitudes manifest as crimes they are often called hate crimes and gay bashing.

Negative stereotypes characterize LGB people as less romantically stable and more likely to abuse children, but there is no scientific basis to such assertions. Gay men and lesbians form stable, committed relationships that are equivalent to heterosexual relationships in essential respects.[5] Sexual orientation does not affect the likelihood that people will abuse children.[278][279][280] Claims that there is scientific evidence to support an association between being gay and being a pedophile are based on misuses of those terms and misrepresentation of the actual evidence.[279]

Violence against homosexuals

[edit]

In the United States, the FBI reported that 20.4% of hate crimes reported to law enforcement in 2011 were based on sexual orientation bias. 56.7% of these crimes were based on bias against homosexual men. 11.1% were based on bias against homosexual women. 29.6% were based on anti-homosexual bias without regard to gender.[281] The 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard, a gay student, is a notorious such incident in the U.S. LGBT people, especially lesbians, may become the victims of "corrective rape", a violent crime with the supposed aim of making them heterosexual. In certain parts of the world, LGBT people are also at risk of "honor killings" perpetrated by their families or relatives,[282][283][284] or violence perpetrated by the state.[285]

Homosexual behavior in other animals

[edit]
Roy and Silo, two New York Central Park Zoo male chinstrap penguins similar to those pictured, became internationally known when they coupled and later were given an egg that needed hatching and care, which they successfully provided.[286]

Homosexual and bisexual behaviors occur in a number of other animal species. Such behaviors include sexual activity, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting,[20] and are widespread; a 1999 review by researcher Bruce Bagemihl shows that homosexual behavior has been documented in about 500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms.[20][21] Animal sexual behavior takes many different forms, even within the same species. The motivations for and implications of these behaviors have yet to be fully understood, since most species have yet to be fully studied.[287] According to Bagemihl, "the animal kingdom [does] it with much greater sexual diversity—including homosexual, bisexual and nonreproductive sex—than the scientific community and society at large have previously been willing to accept".[288] According to Bailey et al., domestic sheep are the only conclusively documented example of animals to exhibit an exclusively homosexual orientation, besides humans.[6]

A review paper by N. W. Bailey and Marlene Zuk looking into studies of same-sex sexual behaviour in animals challenges the view that such behaviour lowers reproductive success, citing several hypotheses about how same-sex sexual behavior might be adaptive; these hypotheses vary greatly among different species.[289]

In October 2023, biologists reported studies of animals (over 1,500 different species) that found same-sex behavior (not necessarily related to human orientation) may help improve social stability by reducing conflict within the groups studied.[290][291]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Homosexuality is a sexual orientation defined by an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic, and/or sexual attractions to persons of the same biological sex, distinct from heterosexuality and bisexuality. While the term homosexuality typically refers to human sexual orientation, same-sex sexual behavior has also been documented in many non-human animal species (see § Homosexual behavior in non-human animals). It manifests primarily through self-reported identity, fantasies, or behaviors, with empirical surveys indicating prevalence rates of approximately 1-2% for exclusive same-sex attraction among adults in Western populations, though broader measures including bisexual identification elevate estimates to 3-5%. Twin studies reveal moderate heritability, with monozygotic concordance for homosexual orientation in males ranging from 52% to 66%. This underscores genetic influences alongside non-shared environmental factors—including biological elements such as prenatal hormonal influences and stochastic variations in brain wiring—as no single "gay gene" accounts for variation and full genetic determinism is unsupported. Some evidence suggests homosexual men may exhibit certain brain structures, such as hypothalamic nuclei, that are incompletely masculinized and resemble female-typical patterns. Documented across human history and cultures—from ancient Mesopotamian texts and Greek pederasty to indigenous practices in pre-colonial Americas and Africa—homosexual behaviors have elicited responses ranging from ritual integration to severe prohibition, often tied to kinship structures and reproductive imperatives rather than modern identity frameworks. Key controversies center on causal origins, with evidence pointing to prenatal hormonal effects and neural differences but rejecting purely social construction or volitional choice models; public health data highlight elevated risks of sexually transmitted infections, cardiovascular conditions, and psychological distress among men engaging in same-sex activity, attributable in part to behavioral patterns like higher partner counts and receptive anal intercourse, independent of societal stigma. These disparities persist despite legal advancements in some regions, fueling debates over policy interventions that prioritize harm reduction over affirmation.

Terminology and Definitions

Etymology and Historical Usage

The term homosexuality is a compound formed from the Greek prefix homo- (ὁμός), meaning "same," and the Latin noun sexus, meaning "sex" or "gender," denoting sexual attraction or relations between persons of the same biological sex. This hybrid construction emerged in the mid-19th century amid efforts to classify human sexual behaviors scientifically, replacing earlier moralistic or legal descriptors like "sodomy" or "buggery," which focused on acts rather than orientations. The word was coined on May 6, 1868, by Austrian-born Hungarian writer and activist Karl-Maria Kertbeny (born Károly Mária Benkert) in a private German-language letter, where he introduced "Homosexualität" to argue against Paragraph 143 of the Prussian legal code criminalizing male same-sex intercourse. Kertbeny, motivated by personal experiences including the suicide of a friend prosecuted for homosexuality, posited it as an innate, non-pathological trait equivalent to heterosexuality, which he termed "Heterosexualität" in the same correspondence; he viewed both as natural variations undeserving of legal penalty. Kertbeny expanded the term's usage in anonymous pamphlets published in 1869 ("A Question of Justice: On the Creation and Protection of §152 of the Revised Prussian Criminal Code of 6 April 1851") and 1870, framing homosexuality as a biological imperative rather than a moral failing, though these works gained limited traction outside activist circles at the time. The adjective "homosexual" first appeared in English in 1892, with the Oxford English Dictionary citing its earliest documented use in 1891 by British poet and scholar John Addington Symonds in discussions of Greek same-sex practices. In historical contexts, the term's adoption reflected a medicalization of same-sex desire; Austrian psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing employed "homosexual" and "heterosexual" in his 1886 treatise Psychopathia Sexualis, classifying it as a perversion akin to other deviations, influencing psychiatric discourse into the 20th century. Early usage often carried pejorative connotations in clinical settings, contrasting with Kertbeny's neutral intent, and it supplanted Victorian-era euphemisms like "invert" or "Uranian" by the early 1900s, though slang terms such as "gay" (with homosexual connotations traceable to 16th-century French usage but widespread only post-1920s) persisted in subcultures. By the mid-20th century, "homosexuality" dominated scientific and legal terminology, appearing in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (first published 1952) as a sociopathic personality disturbance until its declassification in 1973 following empirical challenges to its pathological framing.

Core Definitions and Distinctions

Homosexuality refers to a relatively enduring pattern of sexual attraction directed toward individuals of the same biological sex, encompassing physical, emotional, and romantic dimensions. This orientation is typically distinguished from heterosexuality, which involves attraction to the opposite sex, and bisexuality, which involves attractions to both sexes. Empirical assessments of homosexuality often rely on self-reported attractions, arousal patterns to stimuli, and historical patterns of fantasy or behavior, rather than sporadic acts alone. A key distinction exists between homosexual orientation and homosexual behavior: the former denotes an intrinsic pattern of attraction, while the latter involves observable same-sex sexual activities, which may occur among individuals whose predominant attractions are heterosexual, such as in prison settings or cultural rituals. For instance, surveys indicate that up to 10% of self-identified heterosexual men report occasional same-sex experiences, without altering their core orientation. Conversely, individuals with homosexual orientation may abstain from same-sex behavior due to social, religious, or personal constraints. Homosexuality is independent of gender identity, which concerns an individual's internal perception of their own maleness or femaleness; thus, a biologically male person with homosexual orientation experiences attraction to other biological males, regardless of those males' self-perceived gender. This separation is evident in clinical data where homosexual attractions persist post-gender transition, as measured by genital arousal responses to same-sex stimuli. Additionally, homosexual orientation differs from sexual identity labels like "gay" or "lesbian," which incorporate cultural, social, and self-declaratory elements that may not fully align with underlying attractions; for example, some individuals reporting same-sex attractions identify as heterosexual due to internalized norms. Male homosexuality and female homosexuality exhibit asymmetries: male homosexuality is more consistently exclusive and linked to early developmental markers, whereas female same-sex attractions show greater variability and fluidity in longitudinal studies tracking self-reports over decades. These distinctions underscore that homosexuality is not a monolithic category but a spectrum of attractions measured empirically through physiological responses, such as penile plethysmography for males or vaginal photoplethysmography for females, which correlate with self-reported orientation at rates exceeding 80% in controlled settings.

Biological Correlates

Genetic and Heritability Studies

Twin studies have provided the primary evidence for a genetic component in sexual orientation. In a 1991 study of male twins recruited through gay organizations, monozygotic (MZ) twins showed a 52% concordance rate for homosexuality, compared to 22% for dizygotic (DZ) twins and 11% for adoptive brothers, indicating shared genetic factors beyond familial environment. A smaller 1992 study reported 65.8% MZ concordance (34 male pairs), though limited by volunteer bias and small sample size. Meta-analyses of twin studies estimate heritability at 30-40% for male same-sex attraction, with lower figures (around 20%) for females, reflecting greater environmental influence in women. Family aggregation studies support modest heritability, with brothers of gay men being 3-4 times more likely to identify as homosexual than population averages, though this includes non-genetic familial effects. Adoption studies further disentangle genetics from rearing environment, showing elevated rates of homosexuality among biological relatives of adoptees compared to adoptive ones. Early linkage analyses, such as the proposed Xq28 marker from Hamer et al. (1993), suggested X-linked inheritance but failed replication in larger samples, highlighting the polygenic nature rather than single-locus control. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) confirm polygenicity without identifying deterministic variants. The 2019 Ganna et al. study, analyzing 477,000 UK Biobank and consumer DNA participants, identified five loci associated with same-sex behavior, collectively explaining 8-25% of variance via SNP heritability, with partial sex differences in genetic architecture. A 2017 GWAS of 1,077 homosexual men found no genome-wide significant hits but enriched signals near olfactory and sex hormone genes. These findings indicate thousands of small-effect variants contribute, interacting with non-shared environment to account for discordance in MZ twins (typically 40-50% non-concordant). Heritability estimates vary by phenotype—higher for attraction than behavior—and are moderated by measurement (e.g., self-reported vs. categorical). Critics note ascertainment biases in volunteer samples inflate concordances, while population-based registries yield lower MZ rates (e.g., 20-30%), emphasizing gene-environment interplay over genetic determinism. No evidence supports a "gay gene"; instead, polygenic scores predict only a fraction of variance, leaving substantial non-genetic causation.

Prenatal Hormonal and Developmental Factors

The fraternal birth order effect refers to the observation that each additional older brother increases the probability of homosexuality in later-born males by approximately 33%, independent of family size or other birth order factors. This effect accounts for 15-29% of homosexual males in the population and has been replicated across multiple large-scale studies involving thousands of participants. The maternal immune hypothesis posits that successive male pregnancies trigger a maternal immune response against Y-linked proteins, such as neuroligin-4 Y-linked (NLGN4Y), producing antibodies that cross the placenta and alter sexual differentiation in the fetal brain of subsequent sons, leading to reduced attraction to females. Direct evidence includes elevated anti-NLGN4Y antibodies in mothers of right-handed homosexual sons with older brothers, but not in mothers of heterosexual sons or firstborn homosexual sons. Prenatal androgen exposure plays a role in sexual orientation via organizational effects on brain development during critical periods, with atypical levels hypothesized to decouple genital sex from brain sexual orientation. In males, homosexuality correlates with evidence of reduced prenatal testosterone exposure, as indicated by higher (more feminized) second-to-fourth digit ratios (2D:4D) in some studies, though findings are inconsistent across populations and meta-analyses show small effect sizes. For females, higher prenatal androgen exposure is associated with non-heterosexual orientation; women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), who experience elevated prenatal androgens, exhibit increased rates of bisexuality or lesbianism, with 30-40% reporting same-sex attraction compared to 5-10% in controls. Digit ratio studies support this, showing lesbians with lower (masculinized) 2D:4D ratios than heterosexual women in multiple samples. Other developmental factors include prenatal exposure to synthetic progestins, such as those used in treatments for threatened miscarriage; daughters exposed in utero to high doses show elevated rates of non-heterosexual orientation, with odds ratios up to 2.8 for bisexuality or homosexuality. Maternal stress during pregnancy has been linked to altered offspring sexual orientation in animal models via glucocorticoid effects on steroid signaling, but human evidence remains correlational and confounded by postnatal factors. Overall, these prenatal influences explain a portion of variance in sexual orientation but interact with genetic factors, as twin studies indicate heritability estimates of 30-50% alongside non-shared environmental effects.

Neurological and Physiological Differences

Studies have identified differences in hypothalamic structure associated with male sexual orientation. In a 1991 postmortem analysis of 41 brains, the third interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH-3) was found to be more than twice as large in heterosexual men compared to women and homosexual men, with homosexual men's INAH-3 volumes resembling those of women. This dimorphism suggests a biological substrate for sexual orientation, though the sample size was small (19 homosexual men, 16 heterosexual men, 6 women), and subsequent replications have been limited due to challenges in obtaining postmortem homosexual brain tissue. Cerebral asymmetry and connectivity also differ by sexual orientation. A 2008 study using positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on 90 subjects found that homosexual men and heterosexual women exhibited more symmetrical cerebral hemispheres, while heterosexual men and homosexual women showed rightward asymmetry, mirroring patterns by preferred sex. Functional connectivity in the amygdala, assessed via pheromone responses, revealed homosexual men responding to male pheromones similarly to heterosexual women, and homosexual women to female pheromones like heterosexual men. Recent large-scale MRI studies confirm structural variations. A 2021 analysis of over 2,000 participants identified differences in cortical thickness, subcortical volumes (e.g., thalamus, putamen), and hemispheric asymmetry linked to same-sex behavior, with patterns varying by sex: homosexual men showed female-like traits in certain regions, while homosexual women displayed male-like features. These findings indicate sexual orientation correlates with sexually dimorphic brain organization, potentially reflecting prenatal developmental influences, though causality remains unestablished and studies often involve self-reported orientation. Peripheral physiological markers further suggest atypical prenatal androgen exposure. The second-to-fourth digit ratio (2D:4D), a proxy for fetal testosterone, is higher (more female-typical) in homosexual men than heterosexual men across meta-analyses of thousands of participants, while homosexual women show lower (more male-typical) ratios, though effect sizes are small and not universally replicated. Similarly, click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (OAEs)—echoes from the inner ear—are stronger and more prevalent in homosexual men and heterosexual women, indicating feminized auditory system development in gay men, with homosexual women exhibiting reduced female-typical OAEs. These markers correlate with prenatal hormonal effects but do not determine orientation individually, and environmental confounds cannot be ruled out.

Etiology and Causal Mechanisms

Environmental and Experiential Influences

Twin studies consistently estimate the heritability of sexual orientation at 30-50%, leaving 50-70% of variance attributable to environmental factors, predominantly non-shared influences unique to the individual rather than shared family or cultural environments. Shared environmental effects, including parenting practices and household dynamics, have been estimated at near zero across multiple large-scale investigations, such as the Australian Twin Registry analysis of over 4,900 participants, which found no significant role for familial rearing in same-sex attraction for either males or females. This pattern holds in meta-analyses of twin and adoption data, indicating that siblings raised in the same home exhibit sexual orientations no more similar than expected by genetics alone, challenging theories positing broad causal roles for upbringing or socioeconomic context. Non-shared environmental factors, encompassing idiosyncratic experiences like peer interactions, personal trauma, or stochastic developmental events, account for the substantial environmental variance observed. Empirical efforts to pinpoint specific postnatal influences have produced correlational findings without establishing causality. For instance, retrospective surveys reveal that individuals reporting same-sex attraction experience higher rates of adverse childhood events (ACEs), including physical abuse (odds ratio ~2.0), sexual abuse (~2.5), and household dysfunction, with LGB respondents averaging 1.5-2.0 more ACEs than heterosexuals in U.S. national samples exceeding 20,000 adults. However, longitudinal data suggest bidirectional influences: early gender-atypical behaviors, which predict later homosexuality with 70-80% accuracy in prospective studies, often precede and provoke adversity like bullying or rejection, potentially inflating retrospective associations rather than indicating causation from trauma to orientation. Studies on childhood sexual abuse yield mixed evidence; while some abused males report elevated same-sex attractions (e.g., 20-30% higher in clinical samples of male victims compared to non-victims), meta-analyses attribute this partly to targeting of gender-nonconforming boys and measurement artifacts like recall bias, with no randomized or prospective causal links confirmed. Parenting styles, such as authoritarian or permissive approaches, show no predictive power for offspring orientation in controlled comparisons, with zero beta coefficients in multivariate models adjusting for genetics and demographics across datasets like the Add Health longitudinal survey. Peer influences and urban exposure correlate weakly with self-reported identification in cross-sectional data (e.g., 1.5-2.0% higher prevalence in metropolitan areas), but fail to explain core attraction patterns when controlling for reporting stigma or genetic confounders. Overall, the elusiveness of specific experiential drivers underscores that non-shared environmental effects likely involve complex, multifactorial interactions amplifying genetic predispositions, rather than deterministic postnatal triggers; claims of singular causal pathways from experiences remain unsubstantiated by rigorous evidence. This aligns with causal models emphasizing probabilistic development over linear environmental determinism, where individual variability in resilience or perception contributes to outcomes without implying modifiability through intervention.

Evolutionary Hypotheses and Fitness Paradox

Homosexuality presents a challenge to evolutionary theory because individuals exhibiting exclusive same-sex attraction typically produce fewer or no offspring, reducing their direct reproductive fitness compared to heterosexual counterparts. Studies estimate that homosexual men have approximately 80% fewer offspring on average, creating a "Darwinian paradox" wherein traits associated with zero or low fecundity persist at stable population frequencies of 2-5% for exclusive homosexuality. This paradox arises from the expectation that natural selection should eliminate alleles conferring such disadvantages unless compensated by indirect fitness benefits or other mechanisms. One prominent hypothesis is kin selection, positing that homosexual individuals enhance inclusive fitness by directing resources or care toward relatives, thereby propagating shared genes indirectly through kin. Proposed by evolutionary biologists like E.O. Wilson, this "gay uncle" effect suggests non-reproducing individuals invest in nieces and nephews, offsetting personal reproductive costs. Empirical tests yield mixed results: a 2018 study of Indonesian males found homosexual men reported greater willingness to allocate resources to kin, supporting the idea in non-Western contexts. Conversely, a 2001 community sample of Western homosexual and heterosexual men detected no elevated kin-directed altruism, challenging the hypothesis in industrialized societies where familial structures differ. Samoan fa'afafine (androphilic males) exhibit higher avuncular tendencies toward kin, but broader meta-analyses indicate inconsistent evidence across cultures, with critiques noting potential confounds like self-reporting biases. Another leading explanation involves sexually antagonistic selection, where genetic variants beneficial for reproductive success in one sex are deleterious in the other, maintaining polymorphism despite fitness costs to homosexual males. Genes linked to male homosexuality appear concentrated on the maternal X chromosome and correlate with elevated fecundity in female relatives, as evidenced by Italian pedigree studies showing mothers and aunts of gay men have 1.3-1.5 times more offspring than population averages. A 2008 analysis of large-scale genetic data confirmed this dynamic, establishing male homosexuality as a sexually antagonistic trait with net evolutionary persistence. Recent 2024 familial fertility analyses further test this by examining compensatory reproductive advantages in heterosexual siblings, though results remain preliminary and debated due to polygenic influences complicating isolation of specific loci. This hypothesis gains traction from twin studies indicating moderate heritability (around 30-40%) without full penetrance, allowing alleles to spread via female carriers. Additional proposals include overdominance or pleiotropy, where genes for homosexuality confer heterozygous advantages like increased sociosexual behavior or creativity in carriers, and a prosociality hypothesis linking same-sex attraction to traits enhancing group cohesion and alliance formation, potentially boosting survival in social species. A 2020 genomic study found men with genetic markers for bisexual attraction sire more children overall, suggesting a spectrum of orientations resolves the paradox by blending fitness benefits. Empirical validation remains elusive, with no single hypothesis fully accounting for observed prevalence; critiques highlight that same-sex behavior in non-human animals often serves non-reproductive functions like bonding, implying human homosexuality may analogously evolve as a byproduct rather than adaptation. Ongoing genomic research, including GWAS identifying polygenic scores, underscores the multifactorial nature but has yet to pinpoint variants resolving the paradox definitively.

Psychological Dimensions

Development and Stability of Orientation

Sexual orientation typically emerges during childhood or early adolescence, with many individuals reporting first awareness of same-sex attractions between ages 8 and 13. For those identifying as gay or lesbian, the average age of first same-sex attraction is around 10-12 years, preceding self-identification by 1-2 years and often followed by same-sex behaviors in mid-adolescence. Heterosexual individuals generally report later onset of opposite-sex attractions, around ages 10-11 on average, highlighting a developmental timeline where homosexual attractions may manifest earlier in some cases. These milestones are assessed through retrospective self-reports in population surveys, though recall biases may inflate precision. Longitudinal studies indicate high stability of sexual orientation from adolescence to adulthood for most individuals, particularly among men, where exclusive same-sex or opposite-sex attractions persist over decades with minimal shifts. In a 10-year panel of U.S. adults, approximately 90% maintained consistent orientation identity, with changes more common among bisexual or non-exclusive categories. Among adolescents tracked over 6 years, over 80% showed stable orientation components, though self-reports of attractions can fluctuate more than behaviors or identities. Stability is lower in women, with up to 20-30% reporting shifts in attractions or identity over similar periods, often toward greater fluidity rather than complete reversal. Empirical evidence from large cohorts, such as national panels, reveals that 4-9% of adults experience orientation change over 10+ years, frequently involving movement from exclusive heterosexuality to bisexuality rather than to exclusive homosexuality. These shifts correlate with bisexuality and are more prevalent in younger generations or those with nonconforming gender traits in childhood, suggesting developmental plasticity influenced by experiential factors. However, genital arousal measures in longitudinal designs show greater concordance with early-reported orientations than later self-identities, implying that subjective changes may reflect label adjustments rather than core attraction alterations. Academic sources emphasizing innate fixity, often from institutions with documented ideological biases, underreport such variability, while population-based data affirm that while predominant stability aligns with biological underpinnings, change is empirically documented and not negligible.

Sexual Fluidity, Bisexuality, and Changeability

Sexual fluidity refers to changes in sexual attractions, behaviors, or self-identification over time, distinct from fixed orientations. Longitudinal research indicates that such fluidity occurs more frequently among women than men, with one 10-year study of 79 non-heterosexual women finding that two-thirds reported shifts in attractions or labels, often toward greater same-sex or opposite-sex focus depending on relational contexts. This pattern aligns with broader data showing women's sexual identities as less stable over 6-10 years compared to men's, though absolute rates of change remain low overall. Recent analyses challenge overly rigid gender dichotomies, noting emerging evidence of male fluidity, but empirical patterns consistently show higher prevalence in females, potentially linked to greater responsiveness to social and emotional cues in women's sexuality. Bisexuality, characterized by attractions to both sexes, exhibits lower stability than exclusive homosexuality or heterosexuality. In a study tracking genital arousal and self-reports over time, bisexual participants displayed more variability in attractions and lower consistency than monosexual groups, with mean changes exceeding those in heterosexual or homosexual individuals. Physiological data from earlier research, such as penile plethysmography on self-identified bisexual men, often revealed arousal patterns indistinguishable from exclusive homosexuals, raising questions about bisexuality as a stable, intermediate category rather than a transitional state or heightened responsiveness. Population surveys report bisexual identification at 1-3% for men and higher for women, but longitudinal shifts frequently involve movement toward exclusive heterosexuality, particularly post-adolescence, suggesting bisexuality may reflect situational or exploratory phases more than an enduring orientation. Evidence for changeability in sexual orientation includes both spontaneous shifts and outcomes from efforts to modify it. Retrospective and panel data from large U.S. samples show that 10-25% of individuals with minority orientations report changes toward heterosexuality over adulthood, often correlating with life events like marriage or religious involvement, though most remain stable. A 2024 prospective study of adults pursuing sexual orientation change efforts found reductions in same-sex attractions in over half of participants, with behavioral shifts (e.g., cessation of same-sex activity) more pronounced than attraction changes, challenging claims of absolute immutability despite methodological critiques from advocacy groups. Meta-reviews of therapeutic interventions note mixed results, with some participants achieving durable shifts but others experiencing relapse or harm, underscoring that while core attractions show high stability—especially in men—fluidity and volitional influences cannot be dismissed based on ideological consensus alone. Longitudinal data indicate some shifts in sexual orientation or identity over time, with higher fluidity in women and non-exclusive categories.

Therapeutic Interventions and Conversion Efforts

Sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE), also known as conversion or reparative therapy, encompass a range of psychological, behavioral, and religious interventions aimed at reducing same-sex attractions or increasing opposite-sex attractions in individuals experiencing unwanted homosexuality. These efforts emerged in the mid-20th century, initially involving aversive conditioning techniques like electric shocks paired with same-sex stimuli, later shifting toward psychodynamic approaches focusing on childhood experiences or identity exploration. Proponents, including organizations like the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), argue that such interventions can alleviate distress for those seeking change, particularly when homosexuality conflicts with personal values or religious beliefs. Empirical evidence on SOCE effectiveness remains contested. A 2009 American Psychological Association (APA) task force reviewed 83 studies, some of which reported decreases in same-sex attractions or behaviors—for instance, Adams and Sturgis (1977) noted a 34% decrease in attractions in controlled studies and 50% in uncontrolled studies, while McConaghy (1976) found that about half of the men reported reduced interest in men immediately after treatment and at six-month follow-up—and concluded there is insufficient evidence that SOCE reliably changes sexual orientation, noting that modern non-invasive methods have not been thoroughly investigated and thus it cannot be concluded whether they are effective or not, with most outcomes limited to behavioral modifications rather than core attractions, and potential risks including anxiety and depression. Critics of the APA report, including some psychologists, contend it selectively emphasized methodological weaknesses in pro-change studies while overlooking self-reported successes and natural fluidity in orientation. For instance, Robert Spitzer's 2003 study interviewed 200 individuals who self-identified as having changed from predominantly homosexual to heterosexual orientation following therapy; 66% of men and 44% of women reported such shifts, corroborated by partners, though Spitzer later critiqued his own work in 2012 for lacking controls and relying on unverifiable self-reports. Longitudinal data indicate sexual orientation is not invariably fixed, with fluidity observed in adulthood independent of therapy. Sexual orientation, referring to enduring patterns of emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions, is distinct from sexual identity, which involves self-conception or labeling and can be more fluid; changes in identity do not necessarily indicate shifts in underlying orientation. A 2023 analysis of a U.S. national panel found 5.7% of adults changed sexual identities over seven years, bidirectional across heterosexual and non-heterosexual categories, with women showing higher rates of change (up to 18% in some cohorts) than men (around 6%). Surveys of same-sex attracted individuals report 38% of men and 53% of women shifting toward exclusive heterosexuality within six years, suggesting capacity for change without formal intervention. A 2024 prospective study of SOCE participants found reductions in homosexual orientation and stronger behavioral shifts, challenging claims of universal inefficacy, though attraction changes were partial. Regarding harms, mainstream reviews link SOCE to increased depression, suicidality, and PTSD in some cases, based on retrospective self-reports from sexual minorities. However, other research, including a 2022 study of non-efficacious SOCE, detected no elevated behavioral harms compared to controls, with some participants reporting improved well-being and congruence. A 2018 Family Research Council review of six studies from 2000–2018 demonstrated that SOCE can produce meaningful reductions in same-sex attractions and behaviors, as well as increases in opposite-sex attractions, for motivated subsets of clients, while attributing reported harms to pre-existing distress rather than the therapy itself. Legislative bans on SOCE for minors exist in over 20 U.S. states and several countries as of 2025, often justified by harm narratives, though adult access remains debated on grounds of therapeutic autonomy. Alternative therapeutic approaches emphasize acceptance and management without change goals, such as supportive counseling for unwanted same-sex attractions. Psychiatrist Paul McHugh, former Johns Hopkins chief, has advocated viewing homosexuality akin to gender dysphoria, recommending interventions addressing underlying psychosocial factors over affirmation. Empirical support for such models is limited but includes case reports of reduced attractions through exploratory therapy. Overall, while SOCE lacks consensus validation, evidence of orientation fluidity and select positive outcomes underscores ongoing scientific debate beyond predominant institutional positions.

Demographics and Prevalence

Cross-Cultural and Historical Variations

Anthropological surveys indicate that same-sex sexual behavior has been documented in approximately 64% of 76 pre-modern societies examined, often in structured forms such as age-discrepant relationships or ritual practices rather than enduring exclusive orientations. In ancient Greece, pederasty between adult men and adolescent boys was institutionalized among elites from around the 6th century BCE, with Plato's Symposium (c. 385–370 BCE) describing it as a path to philosophical virtue, though exclusive adult male homosexuality was rare and sometimes critiqued. Similarly, in ancient Rome, same-sex acts occurred predominantly in asymmetrical power dynamics, with the passive role stigmatized for freeborn males, as evidenced by legal codes like the Lex Scantinia (c. 149 BCE) penalizing elite male passivity. These historical patterns suggest that while behaviors were prevalent in certain contexts, they did not align with modern identity-based homosexuality, which emphasizes mutual adult exclusivity. In non-Western historical contexts, Ottoman miniatures from the 16th century depict same-sex relations in elite settings, tolerated if the active partner maintained dominance, reflecting Islamic juristic allowances for passive roles among non-Muslims or slaves under Sharia interpretations. Among pre-colonial African groups like the Azande, warriors from the early 20th century took boy wives in temporary unions for military bonding, per ethnographic accounts, but such practices ceased with colonial disruptions. Tribal societies in Papua New Guinea, such as the Sambia, mandated ritual fellatio by boys on older males until the 1980s observations, framed as essential for manhood rather than erotic preference. These examples highlight role-based or instrumental expressions, contrasting with egalitarian models, and underscore that prevalence estimates are confounded by cultural suppression or reframing of acts without identity labels. Modern cross-national surveys reveal self-reported homosexual identification rates of 4.9% for men and 2.1% for women across 28 countries, including diverse regions like Europe, Asia, and the Americas, based on 191,088 respondents. Bisexuality reports higher at 5.1% for men and 7.2% for women, with minimal variation by national gender equality or economic development, suggesting underlying attractions persist despite cultural differences. However, underreporting likely occurs in less tolerant settings; for instance, in Malaysia and Turkey from the same dataset, rates align closely with Western averages, but anecdotal evidence and smaller studies indicate behavioral suppression due to legal penalties. Anthropological critiques note that Western identity categories may not capture non-binary or situational behaviors prevalent in 40–50% of surveyed tribal groups, where same-sex acts serve social functions without implying orientation. Overall, while behavioral evidence spans cultures, self-identified prevalence remains 2–5% globally, influenced by acceptance levels rather than innate variation. In the United States, self-identification as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ+) has risen markedly since systematic polling began, from 3.5% of adults in 2012 to 7.6% in 2023 and 9.3% in 2024, according to Gallup surveys conducted via telephone interviews of over 14,000 adults annually. This increase is disproportionately driven by bisexual identification, which accounted for the bulk of the rise, with homosexual (gay or lesbian) self-identification holding steadier at around 2-3% across the period, though showing modest growth from 1.5% in 2012. The data derive from self-reported responses in nationally representative samples, weighted for demographics, but may reflect expanded label availability alongside underlying orientations. Generational patterns reveal stark shifts, with Generation Z adults (born 1997-2006, aged 18-27 in 2024) reporting the highest rates at 23.1%, compared to 14.2% for millennials (aged 28-44), 5.4% for Generation X (aged 45-59), and under 3% for baby boomers and older cohorts. Within Gen Z, identification skews heavily female, at 31% for women versus 12% for men, largely due to bisexual labels; homosexual identification remains lower and more balanced by sex across generations. These trends align with longitudinal Gallup tracking, where young adult identification surged 21 percentage points for women and 6 for men between 2012 and 2021, suggesting influences beyond mere destigmatization, such as cultural shifts in youth environments. Globally, similar generational elevations appear in cross-national surveys, though data are sparser and vary by region. An Ipsos poll across 30 countries in 2023 found 9% of adults identifying as LGBTQ+, with Gen Z at 18% versus 4% for baby boomers, reflecting higher rates in Western nations like the US, UK, and Canada (10-20% for youth) compared to conservative regions like Indonesia or Turkey (under 5% overall). In Europe, Eurobarometer data from 2019 indicated 6-10% youth identification in countries like Sweden and Germany, up from prior decades, while homosexual-specific rates (excluding bisexual) hovered at 2-4% without equivalent surges. Acceptance correlates with reporting, as Pew Research noted in 2020 that younger adults in 22 of 34 surveyed countries expressed greater comfort with homosexuality, potentially inflating self-reports in liberal contexts. However, non-Western data often undercount due to stigma, with stable low homosexual identification in surveys from Africa and the Middle East (1-2%).
GenerationUS LGBTQ+ Identification (2024, Gallup)Key Drivers
Gen Z (18-27)23.1%Bisexuality (esp. women: 31%)
Millennials (28-44)14.2%Bisexuality and transgender
Gen X (45-59)5.4%Stable homosexual rates
Boomers+ (60+)~2.5%Minimal change
These shifts coincide with expanded social media influence and educational emphases on identity exploration among youth, though empirical causation remains debated; some analyses attribute the bisexual surge to situational fluidity rather than innate orientation, contrasting with steadier homosexual rates.

Health and Well-Being Outcomes

Physical Health Risks and Morbidity Rates

Men who have sex with men (MSM) face substantially elevated risks of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) compared to heterosexual men, primarily due to higher rates of multiple partnerships and receptive anal intercourse, which facilitates transmission of pathogens like HIV, syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia. In recent years, MSM have accounted for approximately 70% of new HIV diagnoses in the United States despite comprising about 2-4% of the male population, with a lifetime HIV risk of approximately 1 in 6 for MSM versus 1 in 524 for heterosexual men. Globally, MSM face up to 26 times higher HIV acquisition risk compared to the general population. Syphilis rates among MSM are over 100 times higher than in women and significantly exceed those in heterosexual men, driven by similar behavioral patterns. Other STIs, including hepatitis A, B, and C, show markedly higher prevalence in MSM due to sexual transmission routes. Receptive anal intercourse, common in male homosexual activity, correlates with increased incidence of anal cancer, linked to human papillomavirus (HPV) persistence and chronic inflammation. MSM have anal cancer rates 20 to 100 times higher than heterosexual men, with HIV-positive MSM facing even greater odds due to immunosuppression; oral and throat cancers from HPV are also elevated. Lesbian women may face higher cervical cancer risks due to lower screening rates. Other physical sequelae include higher prevalence of enteric infections (e.g., giardia) from fecal-oral contact and trauma-related issues like fissures, hemorrhoids, incontinence, sphincter damage, and other injuries from frequent anal penetration; elevated gastrointestinal issues persist in MSM populations. Lesbians and bisexual women exhibit higher obesity rates than heterosexual women, with studies reporting 14-25% greater likelihood of overweight or obesity, potentially elevating risks for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and certain cancers. STI rates are lower than in MSM but include elevated bacterial vaginosis and herpes transmission via genital contact or shared sex toys. LGBTQ+ individuals overall show 2-4 times higher rates of substance misuse, including alcohol, tobacco, and stimulants like methamphetamine, contributing to addiction, liver disease, and amplified risky behaviors. Population-level data indicate higher all-cause mortality for individuals engaging in same-sex behavior. Among US men aged 17-59, MSM showed greater overall mortality than heterosexual men, with 13% of MSM deaths HIV-related versus 0.1% in heterosexuals. Canadian obituary analyses estimated life expectancy at age 20 for gay and bisexual men at 8-21 years less than the general male population, largely attributable to infectious diseases and injuries rather than external stigma alone; this estimate from the 1990s was influenced by pre-ART AIDS deaths, with some recent studies showing no significant mortality difference for homosexual men but elevations for bisexual men or overall sexual minorities, though persistent STI/HIV disparities imply ongoing risks from cumulative factors including STIs, cancers, substance abuse, and suicide. For women, longitudinal cohorts report lesbian and bisexual females dying 20-37% earlier than heterosexuals, linked to behavioral and comorbidity factors. These disparities persist after adjusting for confounders, underscoring causal roles of sexual practices over purely psychosocial explanations favored in some academic literature. Prevention via safe practices (e.g., condoms, PrEP, screening) and substance reduction mitigates these behavioral risks.

Mental Health Disparities and Causal Factors

Homosexual individuals experience significantly elevated rates of mental health disorders compared to heterosexuals, including depression, anxiety disorders, and suicidality, with 2-6 times higher prevalence. A population-based study of over 36,000 Swedish adults found that gay, lesbian, and bisexual respondents had 2 to 3 times higher odds of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, and substance use disorders after adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Similarly, analyses of U.S. national surveys indicate that lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults are approximately 2.5 times more likely to report serious psychological distress, depression, and suicidal ideation than heterosexual adults. Lifetime suicide attempt rates among homosexual men and women are estimated at 12-20%, compared to 4-5% in the general population, with homosexual men showing particularly high completed suicide rates. The minority stress model, proposed by Ilan Meyer, posits that chronic stress from societal stigma, discrimination, and internalized prejudice primarily drives these disparities by creating a hostile environment that erodes mental well-being. Proponents cite correlations between reported discrimination experiences and poorer outcomes, such as elevated PTSD and anxiety linked to prejudice events. However, empirical evidence challenges the sufficiency of this explanation, as disparities persist in highly accepting societies with minimal legal or cultural stigma. In Sweden and Denmark, where same-sex marriage has been legal since 1989 and 2012 respectively, individuals in same-sex marriages exhibited a 2.3-fold higher suicide rate (adjusted for age and other factors) compared to those in opposite-sex marriages from 1989 to 2016, even as overall suicide rates declined. A Dutch study similarly reported suicide attempt rates of 12.8% among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults, far exceeding general population figures, despite widespread societal tolerance. Alternative causal factors include intrinsic relational and behavioral patterns associated with homosexuality. Same-sex couples experience higher rates of breakup and domestic violence, which correlate with increased depression and suicidality independent of external stigma. Comorbid physical health issues, such as elevated HIV prevalence and substance misuse—reported at 20-30% lifetime rates among gay men versus 10% in heterosexuals—further exacerbate mental health burdens through physiological and social pathways. Childhood adversities, including higher reported rates of sexual abuse (2-3 times more common among homosexuals), may precede orientation development and contribute longitudinally to vulnerability, though causality remains debated. Critiques of minority stress emphasize that model testing often relies on self-reported stress without isolating inherent psychological incongruities or lifestyle factors, such as non-monogamy, which predict poorer outcomes in longitudinal data. Men who have sex with men and gay-identified men show elevated rates of neurodivergence (particularly autism spectrum conditions and ADHD) compared to heterosexual men. Studies consistently report odds ratios of 2–4× for autism and 1.5–3× for ADHD in this population. This overlap is not explained by sociodemographic confounders alone and appears to contribute independently to the higher prevalence of depression, anxiety, substance use disorders, and suicidality observed in homosexual men—even after minority-stress models are applied. The additive burden of masking neurodivergent traits in homophobic or conformist environments is one proposed mechanism. These findings suggest multifaceted etiology, warranting research beyond stigma-centric frameworks to address persistent gaps.

Impacts on Youth and Long-Term Consequences

Homosexual and bisexual youth experience markedly higher rates of suicidal ideation, attempts, and self-harm than heterosexual peers. A meta-analysis of studies involving over 4,800 sexual minority adults reported a lifetime suicide attempt prevalence of 11.6%, 2.5 times greater than among heterosexuals. Another systematic review estimated that homosexual, bisexual, and transgender youths face a risk of attempted suicide 3.5 to 14 times higher, depending on subgroup and methodology. These disparities persist across datasets, with averages showing 28% of sexual minority youth reporting suicidality history versus 12% of heterosexuals. Substance use disorders also disproportionately affect these youth, often as a coping mechanism amid stressors. Federal surveys indicate LGBTQ+ youth report elevated misuse of prescription drugs, with 11% engaging in non-prescribed use in the past year, alongside higher rates of alcohol, e-cigarette, and marijuana consumption. Comparative data reveal sexual minority adolescents exhibit 12-14% past-30-day use of these substances, exceeding general youth norms, with bisexual youth showing particularly acute risks. Such patterns correlate with increased suicide risk, as substance involvement amplifies ideation and attempts. Early sexual debut compounds these vulnerabilities, with gay and bisexual males initiating same-sex activity at a mean age of 14-15 years, earlier than heterosexual counterparts. This precocity associates with downstream risks, including greater marijuana use, suicidal behavior, and HIV exposure among young men who have sex with men. Longitudinal analyses link such early experiences to persistent behavioral risks, independent of orientation but amplified in minority contexts. In adulthood, long-term physical health burdens emerge, including elevated chronic conditions. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual older adults report higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and arthritis than heterosexuals, per national health surveys. Men who have sex with men face increased mortality from HIV-related causes, with cohort studies documenting excess deaths persisting despite treatment advances. Mental health risks attenuate variably; while homosexual orientation shows no independent link to long-term depression, bisexual identity correlates with sustained anxiety and mood disorders. Relationship stability presents additional challenges, with same-sex unions exhibiting higher dissolution rates than opposite-sex marriages. Empirical reviews indicate same-sex couples dissolve at 1.1-1.6% annually, but female same-sex pairs face 2-3 times the divorce risk of male pairs or heterosexuals, based on UK and US registry data from 2015-2023. Prospective studies confirm lower endurance, with 12.3% of lesbian couples dissolving versus 2% of gay male couples over comparable periods. These patterns hold after controlling for legal and socioeconomic factors, suggesting inherent dynamics in pair bonding.

Historical Contexts

Pre-Modern and Ancient Societies

In ancient Mesopotamia, same-sex interactions appear infrequently in surviving texts, with the Epic of Gilgamesh depicting a deep bond between Gilgamesh and Enkidu that some scholars interpret as homoerotic, though explicit sexual content is absent. Priests and priestesses of the goddess Inanna engaged in gender-variant roles that could involve same-sex relations, but such practices were ritualistic rather than indicative of widespread personal identities. The Code of Hammurabi (c. 1750 BCE), the earliest known legal code, makes no direct reference to homosexual acts, suggesting limited legal concern compared to later societies. Evidence for homosexuality in ancient Egypt is sparse and ambiguous, with primary sources like the tomb of Nyankh-Khnum and Khnum-hotep (c. 2400 BCE) showing two male officials in a pose typically reserved for spouses, prompting interpretations of possible same-sex partnership, though familial ties cannot be ruled out. Mythological tales, such as the Contendings of Horus and Seth, include elements of anal penetration as a dominance act, but these served narrative purposes rather than reflecting societal norms. Broader texts, including the Book of the Dead, imply disapproval of male-male acts by listing avoidance of them as a virtue, aligning with a cultural emphasis on heterosexual procreation and masculinity where passivity was demeaned. In ancient Hebrew society, male homosexual acts faced explicit condemnation in the Torah, with Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 (c. 6th-5th century BCE compilation) prohibiting a man from lying with another male "as with a woman," deeming it an to'evah (abomination) punishable by death. The Genesis 19 narrative of Sodom's destruction, traditionally linked to attempted male rape of male visitors, reinforced norms against such violations of hospitality and purity, distinguishing Hebrew views as uniquely prohibitive among Near Eastern cultures. Ancient Greek society institutionalized paiderastia (pederasty) in city-states like Athens and Sparta from the Archaic period (c. 6th century BCE), involving an older male (erastes) mentoring and sexually initiating a freeborn youth (eromenos, aged 12-17), framed as educational and civic preparation rather than mutual adult romance. The practice emphasized the adult's active role and the youth's temporary passivity, with the latter expected to transition to heterosexual marriage and dominance; persistent adult passivity invited ridicule or legal curbs, as in Athenian laws by the 4th century BCE. Female same-sex relations, alluded to in Sappho's poetry (c. 6th century BCE), received less documentation and were often tied to elite women's circles without institutional support. Roman attitudes mirrored Greek ones but stressed imperial masculinity, permitting freeborn adult males to engage sexually with slaves, prostitutes, or youths in the penetrative role, while the receptive position (pathicus) incurred social stigma and legal infamy, potentially barring one from public office. Emperors like Nero (r. 54-68 CE), who "married" male freedmen, and Hadrian (r. 117-138 CE), whose deification of lover Antinous reflected elite tolerance for dominant homoerotic bonds, exemplified this without equating to modern egalitarian homosexuality. Literary sources, such as Petronius' Satyricon (c. 60 CE), depict same-sex acts amid broader libertinism, but Roman law under the Twelve Tables (c. 450 BCE) and later emperors punished excesses like stuprum (illicit penetration of free males) to preserve hierarchy, not orientation. In ancient China, male same-sex relations among elites were documented from the Han Dynasty (206 BCE-220 CE), as in the "cut sleeve" anecdote where Emperor Ai (r. 7-1 BCE) spared his sleeping lover Dong Xian by slicing his sleeve, symbolizing affectionate bonds without exclusive orientation. Terms like longyang (from a Warring States figure) denoted male favorites, often in hierarchical courtly contexts, with bisexuality normalized among rulers but not extending to identity-based communities; Confucian emphasis on filial duty via progeny discouraged exclusivity. The Kama Sutra (c. 3rd-4th century CE), an ancient Indian treatise on eroticism, categorizes men desiring other males as tritiya prakriti ("third nature") and details acts like oral sex between men, framing them as variant practices alongside heterosexual norms without moral condemnation in permissive contexts. Temple carvings at sites like Khajuraho (c. 950-1050 CE, though post-ancient) depict same-sex acts, suggesting cultural acknowledgment in Tantric or artisanal traditions, yet dharma texts prioritized procreative marriage, viewing non-reproductive acts as lesser deviations. In the pre-modern Islamic world (c. 1500-1800 CE), Arabic literature and poetry celebrated male-male desire ('ishq or hubb), as in Ottoman miniatures portraying courtly liaisons, but theological texts derived from the Quran's Lot narrative (Quran 7:80-84) classified liwat (sodomy) as sinful zina, with hudud punishments like stoning applied variably and often leniently for non-public acts. Jurists distinguished penetrative from passive roles, tolerating the former among elites while decrying effeminacy (mukhannathun), reflecting a pre-modern framework of acts and dominance over fixed identities; female relations (sihaq) drew milder rebuke. This contrasts with stricter enforcement in some regions post-19th century under colonial influences.

Modern Era Developments by Region

Europe

During the late 18th century, France became the first European nation to decriminalize homosexual acts with the adoption of the Penal Code of 1791, influenced by revolutionary ideals that removed references to sodomy from criminal law. This marked a shift from medieval religious prohibitions, though social stigma persisted. In the 19th century, early advocacy emerged, including the establishment of the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee by Magnus Hirschfeld in Berlin in 1897, the world's first organization dedicated to homosexual rights, which petitioned for repeal of Paragraph 175 of the German penal code criminalizing male homosexuality. The Weimar Republic (1919–1933) saw relative tolerance in urban centers like Berlin, with vibrant homosexual subcultures, but the Nazi regime intensified persecution, closing gay venues and sending thousands to concentration camps under expanded anti-homosexual laws. Post-World War II decriminalization accelerated across Western Europe: the United Kingdom partially decriminalized male homosexual acts in 1967 via the Sexual Offences Act, limited to England and Wales for those over 21. West Germany repealed Paragraph 175 in 1969 for adults over 21, fully in 1994 after reunification. Eastern Europe lagged due to Soviet influence, with decriminalization occurring later, such as in Czechoslovakia in 1961 and Poland in 1969, though enforcement varied under communist regimes that often suppressed visible homosexuality as bourgeois decadence. By the 21st century, most European countries had legalized same-sex marriage or civil unions, with the European Court of Human Rights issuing landmark rulings like Dudgeon v. United Kingdom in 1981, invalidating Northern Ireland's sodomy laws and influencing broader decriminalization. As of 2023, 22 of 38 same-sex marriage-legalizing countries worldwide are in Europe.

North America

In the United States, homosexual acts remained criminalized under sodomy laws in all states until Illinois repealed its law in 1961, becoming the first to decriminalize private consensual acts between adults. The 1969 Stonewall Riots in New York City catalyzed the modern gay rights movement, shifting from assimilationist groups like the Mattachine Society (founded 1950) to more militant activism against police raids on gay bars. The American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973, reflecting scientific reevaluation amid growing visibility. Federal policy evolved with the 1993 "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" implementation, allowing closeted service but prohibiting open homosexuality in the military, repealed in 2010 by Congress. The Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws nationwide in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) and legalized same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), extending rights to all states. In Canada, homosexual acts were decriminalized in 1969 under Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's reforms, which stated that "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation." Same-sex marriage followed nationally in 2005 after court challenges. Mexico City legalized same-sex marriage in 2009, with nationwide recognition by 2022, amid regional variations where some states retained restrictions until federal overrides.

Latin America

Post-independence from Spain and Portugal in the early 19th century, many Latin American countries adopted liberal penal codes without sodomy prohibitions, influenced by Napoleonic models, effectively decriminalizing homosexual acts earlier than in Europe or North America—e.g., Argentina in 1887 and Brazil under the 1830 code. However, 20th-century dictatorships, such as Argentina's 1976–1983 junta, targeted homosexuals as threats to national morality, with documented disappearances and torture. Democratic transitions in the 1980s–1990s spurred activism; Brazil hosted its first pride parade in São Paulo in 1995, now the world's largest. The 21st century saw rapid legalization of same-sex unions: Argentina became the first Latin American country to enact same-sex marriage in 2010, followed by Uruguay (2013), Brazil (2013), and others, driven by leftist governments and judicial rulings emphasizing equality. By 2023, 10 Latin American countries recognized same-sex marriage, though violence against homosexuals remains high, with Brazil reporting over 400 murders from 2011–2021 linked to sexual orientation.

Asia

Asia's modern developments reflect colonial legacies and diverse cultural contexts. Japan, never having criminalized homosexuality under its indigenous legal traditions, saw urban homosexual subcultures in the Meiji era (1868–1912) but suppressed visibility during militaristic periods; post-World War II democratization allowed gradual activism, though same-sex marriage remains unrecognized as of 2023. In India, British colonial Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (1860) criminalized "carnal intercourse against the order of nature" until the Supreme Court decriminalized it in 2018, overturning a 2013 reversal and citing privacy rights; this followed decades of activism amid claims of homosexuality as a Western import, despite historical evidence in texts like the Kama Sutra. Taiwan legalized same-sex marriage in 2019, Asia's first, after constitutional court rulings, contrasting with neighbors like China, where homosexuality was decriminalized in 1997 but censorship limits activism. In Muslim-majority states like Indonesia and Malaysia, colonial-era laws persist alongside Sharia-influenced penalties, with no decriminalization; Brunei imposed death penalties in 2019, later amended to imprisonment amid international pressure. Overall, as of 2023, same-sex acts remain illegal in 21 Asian countries, punishable by death in five.

Africa and Middle East

In Africa, colonial powers imposed sodomy laws—British in 11 countries, French in others—criminalizing homosexuality, which many post-independence governments retained or reinforced with narratives framing it as un-African, despite ethnographic evidence of pre-colonial same-sex practices in societies like the Azande. South Africa decriminalized in 1994 with its post-apartheid constitution, the first in Africa to prohibit discrimination on sexual orientation, legalizing same-sex marriage in 2006. Botswana followed in 2019 via court ruling, declaring colonial-era laws unconstitutional, as did Angola in 2020 by legislative omission. Conversely, countries like Uganda enacted harsher penalties in 2023, expanding life imprisonment and introducing death for "aggravated homosexuality," influenced by evangelical imports and local politics rejecting perceived Western imposition. In the Middle East, Ottoman decriminalization in 1858 under Tanzimat reforms persisted in secular Turkey, but most Arab states retain prohibitions rooted in Islamic law, with Iran and Saudi Arabia imposing executions; decriminalization is absent region-wide as of 2023. As of 2023, 30 African countries criminalize same-sex acts, with seven imposing the death penalty.

Societal and Cultural Impacts

Family Dynamics and Child Outcomes

Same-sex couples exhibit higher rates of relationship dissolution compared to opposite-sex couples, with lesbian couples demonstrating particularly elevated divorce risks—approximately 2 to 3 times higher than those of gay male couples or heterosexual marriages in datasets from the United States and United Kingdom spanning 2016 to 2023. This instability persists in cohabiting relationships, where same-sex unions dissolve at rates exceeding those of different-sex couples, influenced by factors such as lower commitment levels and higher conflict. Domestic violence prevalence is comparable or higher in same-sex relationships, with 44% of lesbian women and 61% of bisexual women reporting intimate partner violence, rape, or stalking—exceeding the 35% rate among heterosexual women—while gay men experience rates around 26% for similar victimization. These dynamics contribute to environments of greater relational turbulence, often characterized by elevated infidelity and emotional volatility, which undermine long-term family cohesion. Children raised by parents in same-sex relationships face elevated risks of adverse outcomes compared to those in intact biological mother-father families, including higher incidences of depression, suicidal ideation, unemployment, and early sexual debut, as evidenced by a 2012 population-based study of nearly 3,000 U.S. adults that controlled for family structure stability. The same analysis found children of lesbian mothers particularly disadvantaged, reporting poorer educational attainment and higher welfare dependency, attributing these to relational instability rather than parental sexual orientation per se. Claims of equivalent or superior child outcomes in same-sex families, often promoted by organizations like the American Psychological Association, rely on methodologically flawed studies: over 40% lack heterosexual comparison groups, many use non-representative convenience samples of stable or activist-affiliated parents, and few distinguish stable same-sex unions from those marked by transitions or prior heterosexual marriages. Rigorous reviews critiquing this body of research highlight systemic selection bias and failure to compare against intact opposite-sex parents, leading to overstated equivalence; for instance, a 2015 analysis identified emotional and developmental deficits in same-sex-raised children when proper controls are applied. However, recent population-based studies in the Netherlands using national registry data have found similar behavioral and school outcomes for children of same-sex parents compared to those of different-sex parents. For example, Bos et al. (2022) reported no significant disadvantages in behavioral outcomes, while Boertien and Bernardi (2020) observed comparable or superior school performance, potentially reflecting greater societal acceptance in that context; these contrast with U.S.-based findings such as Regnerus (2012). Causal factors include the absence of complementary maternal and paternal roles, which empirical data link to poorer gender role development and behavioral adjustment, compounded by higher parental conflict and mobility in unstable same-sex households. Longitudinal evidence from national registries further indicates increased internalizing problems and lower academic performance among such children, underscoring the primacy of family stability and parental gender diversity for optimal development.

Religious and Moral Perspectives

In Abrahamic religions, homosexual acts are traditionally viewed as violations of divine law. The Hebrew Bible prohibits male homosexual intercourse in Leviticus 18:22 ("You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination") and prescribes capital punishment in Leviticus 20:13, interpretations upheld in Orthodox Judaism as binding moral imperatives derived from Torah commandments. Christianity draws from these texts alongside New Testament passages, such as Romans 1:26-27, which describes same-sex relations as "contrary to nature" and emblematic of idolatry, a view echoed in evangelical doctrines emphasizing scriptural inerrancy. The Catholic Church's Catechism classifies homosexual acts as "intrinsically disordered" and contrary to natural law, calling persons with same-sex attractions to chastity while distinguishing acts from orientations. Islam condemns such acts based on the Quran's account of Lot's people (Surah Al-A'raf 7:80-84), who are punished for approaching men with desire "instead of women," with classical scholars like those in the Hanafi and Maliki schools prescribing severe hudud penalties, including death in some interpretations. Eastern religious traditions exhibit less uniform condemnation. Hindu scriptures, such as the Arthashastra, treat homosexual intercourse as an offense against dharma but do not prescribe explicit divine prohibitions, with texts like the Kama Sutra acknowledging same-sex practices descriptively rather than normatively; traditional views prioritize procreative duties within varnashrama, rendering non-procreative acts deviations, though third-gender categories like hijra are culturally tolerated. Buddhism's Vinaya texts forbid monks from sexual relations regardless of partner gender, framing misconduct as acts causing harm or attachment rather than inherently sinful based on orientation; the Dalai Lama has described oral and anal sex as inappropriate per Tibetan traditions, yet core teachings emphasize intention over specific prohibitions. Moral perspectives grounded in natural law, as articulated by Thomas Aquinas, argue that sexual acts must align with their teleological end of procreation within complementary sexes, rendering homosexual acts "unnatural" and thus vicious, a reasoning independent of revelation but compatible with it. Secular extensions of this include utilitarian concerns over societal stability, where non-procreative unions undermine incentives for family formation essential to population renewal and child-rearing norms. Empirical data from Pew Research indicates persistent religious opposition: globally, only 9% of Muslims and 21% of Hindus accept homosexuality, compared to 59% of the religiously unaffiliated, with acceptance correlating inversely with doctrinal adherence rather than textual ambiguity. Modern reinterpretations favoring acceptance, often in liberal denominations, prioritize cultural equity over scriptural literalism, reflecting broader secular influences amid declining traditional observance.

Public Opinion, Media, and Cultural Shifts

In the United States, public support for homosexuality has increased substantially since the late 20th century, with Gallup polls recording moral acceptance of gay or lesbian relations rising from 40% in 2001 to 64% in 2023. Support for same-sex marriage reached 69% in a 2024 Gallup survey, up from 27% in 1996, though partisan divides persist, with 83% of Democrats, 74% of independents, and 46% of Republicans in favor. However, recent data indicate a plateau or slight decline in broader LGBTQ+ acceptance; a 2024 Public Religion Research Institute survey found support for nondiscrimination protections falling for the first time in years, from 65% opposition to service refusals in 2022 to 60% in 2024, amid growing concerns over issues like youth gender transitions bundled with gay rights. Self-identification as LGBTQ+ has risen sharply to 9.3% of U.S. adults in 2025 per Gallup, driven largely by younger generations and bisexual women, though this may reflect social desirability effects rather than behavioral prevalence. Globally, acceptance varies widely, with Western Europe and North America showing higher levels—such as 72% in the U.S. favoring societal acceptance in a 2020 Pew survey—while sub-Saharan Africa and parts of the Middle East report majorities viewing homosexuality as morally unacceptable. A 2021 Williams Institute analysis of 175 countries found average acceptance rising since 1980, led by nations like Iceland and Norway scoring above 8 on a 10-point index, but with persistent resistance in regions where same-sex acts remain criminalized in over 60 countries as of 2025. Gallup's 2024 World Poll indicated a median of 46% worldwide viewing their locale as a "good place" for gay or lesbian people, higher (59%) in high-income countries but only 11% where homosexuality is illegal. These disparities correlate with economic development and legal status, though surveys in conservative regions may underreport due to stigma. Media portrayals have shifted from marginalization to normalization, influenced by the repeal of U.S. film censorship under the Hays Code in 1968 and television broadcast codes in 1983, which previously restricted explicit depictions. Landmark events include Ellen DeGeneres's 1997 coming-out episode on her ABC sitcom, viewed by 42 million, and the 1998 debut of Will & Grace, which featured recurring gay characters and correlated with pre-Obergefell rises in marriage support per longitudinal studies. By the 2010s, streaming platforms amplified positive representations, with GLAAD reporting over 10% of series regulars as LGBTQ+ in 2020s programming, often emphasizing aspirational narratives that advocacy groups credit for accelerating acceptance, though critics argue such portrayals downplay empirical health disparities. Cultural manifestations include the proliferation of Pride events, originating from 1969 Stonewall riots and growing to millions attending parades annually by the 2010s, alongside corporate "rainbow capitalism" in advertising since the 1990s. This visibility has prompted backlash, with 2024-2025 polls showing U.S. Republican support for certain protections eroding amid debates over school curricula and sports participation, as evidenced by a 2-point drop in same-sex marriage backing to 83% overall. Increased media scrutiny of detransitioner testimonies and European policy reversals on youth transitions has fueled perceptions of overreach, contributing to populist resistance in elections, such as Uganda's 2023 anti-homosexuality law strengthening despite Western criticism.

Global Legality and Decriminalization

As of February 2025, consensual same-sex sexual activity between adults remains criminalized under national laws in 65 jurisdictions worldwide, primarily through colonial-era sodomy statutes or interpretations of religious and moral codes. These criminalizations affect approximately 30% of the global population, concentrated in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, parts of Asia, and certain Caribbean nations, where penalties range from fines and imprisonment to corporal punishment. In contrast, homosexual acts have been decriminalized in 130 countries, reflecting a gradual liberalization trend since the mid-20th century, accelerated by international human rights advocacy and domestic court rulings. At least 11 countries impose the death penalty for same-sex acts in their penal codes, including Brunei, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria (in northern states under Sharia law), Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen, with Afghanistan under Taliban rule applying it de facto through Islamic jurisprudence. Executions are rare but documented, as in Iran and Saudi Arabia, where charges often blend homosexuality with other offenses like rape or apostasy to justify capital punishment. Enforcement varies, with some nations maintaining laws symbolically while others, like Uganda, have intensified crackdowns following the 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act, which mandates life imprisonment for aggravated cases and death for repeat offenses. Decriminalization efforts have progressed unevenly, with notable advancements in Africa: Angola in 2019, Botswana in 2019, Gabon in 2020 (after a brief recriminalization), and Mozambique in 2014. In Asia, India struck down Section 377 in 2018, affecting 1.4 billion people, while Trinidad and Tobago's laws remain under challenge as of 2025. Backlash persists, as seen in Russia's 2013 "gay propaganda" ban extended nationwide in 2022, and proposed bans in Ghana and Kenya, often justified by cultural preservation or religious doctrine amid claims of Western imposition. International pressure from bodies like the UN has prompted reforms, but reports from organizations like ILGA World indicate that de facto discrimination endures even post-decriminalization in places like China, where no explicit ban exists but social and administrative controls suppress expression.
RegionApproximate Criminalizing JurisdictionsKey Examples
Africa30+Uganda (death/life imprisonment), Nigeria (death in some states), Tanzania (life imprisonment)
Middle East & North Africa10+Iran (death), Saudi Arabia (death), Egypt (de facto via debauchery laws)
Asia10+Afghanistan (death under Taliban), Pakistan (death possible), Indonesia (regional Sharia in Aceh)
Americas (Caribbean)5+Jamaica (up to 10 years), Guyana (life imprisonment)
Oceania1Parts of Micronesia

Anti-Discrimination Laws and Equality Debates

In the United States, Wisconsin enacted the first state-level law prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public accommodations on February 25, 1982. Federally, the Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County (June 15, 2020) held by a 6-3 majority that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bans employment discrimination "because of ... sex," encompasses discrimination against employees for being homosexual or transgender, as such actions necessarily involve sex-based considerations. This ruling extended protections to an estimated 15-employee minimum threshold employers nationwide but did not address areas like housing or public accommodations explicitly. In the European Union, Council Directive 2000/78/EC, adopted on November 27, 2000, prohibits discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in employment and vocational training across member states, implementing Article 19 of the Treaty on the European Union. The directive requires remedies, including compensation, for violations but permits limited occupational requirements where genuine and determining. Broader horizontal protections against discrimination on sexual orientation grounds stalled; a proposed 2008 directive covering goods, services, and other areas was withdrawn in 2016 due to insufficient consensus. Globally, as of 2025, anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation remain uneven; ILGA World data indicates that while over 80 countries ban employment discrimination, fewer than 40 extend comprehensive safeguards to housing, education, and services, with many nations in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East lacking any such laws. In contrast, countries like Canada (federal Human Rights Act amended 1996) and South Africa (equality clause in 1996 Constitution) have enshrined broader equality provisions. Debates over these laws center on whether they advance formal equality or impose special privileges that conflict with other rights, such as free exercise of religion or freedom of association. Proponents, including organizations like the ACLU, assert that sexual orientation protections align with equal protection principles, preventing irrational bias akin to race or sex discrimination, and cite empirical evidence of higher unemployment and poverty rates among homosexuals as justification. Critics argue that framing such laws as "equal rights" masks compelled speech or service, as seen in cases where providers refuse participation in same-sex events on moral grounds; empirical studies show the "special rights" narrative reduces public support for policies by highlighting perceived exemptions from neutral service obligations. A pivotal U.S. case illustrating tensions is Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (June 4, 2018), where the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Colorado officials violated the baker's First Amendment free exercise rights by exhibiting hostility toward his religious objections to designing a cake for a same-sex wedding, despite the state's anti-discrimination law. The decision did not resolve broader conflicts but underscored that neutrality toward religion is required; subsequent litigation, including Phillips' ongoing challenges, reveals causal trade-offs where equality mandates may deter small business participation or foster selective enforcement. Internationally, similar debates arise over religious exemptions, with reports documenting refusals in adoption and healthcare, though data on net societal costs—such as reduced service availability in conservative communities—remains contested due to advocacy-driven sourcing.

Activism, Rights Expansion, and Backlash

Early gay rights activism in the United States began with organizations like the Society for Human Rights, founded in Chicago on December 10, 1924, marking the first documented gay rights group, though it was short-lived due to legal suppression. The Mattachine Society, established around 1950, and the Daughters of Bilitis in 1955, advocated for homosexual acceptance through education and legal reform, emphasizing assimilation over confrontation. A pivotal event occurred on June 28, 1969, when police raided the Stonewall Inn in New York City, prompting patrons, including many drag queens and transgender individuals, to resist arrest, escalating into six nights of clashes described as riots or uprisings. These involved the throwing of objects such as stones, the blocking of Christopher Street, and an incident in which a crowd rocked a taxi, leading to the driver's death from a heart attack, as detailed in historical accounts including David Carter's "Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution." The events galvanized public activism. This resistance spurred the first Pride marches in 1970, commemorating the event and shifting tactics toward visibility and confrontation. Immediately after the Stonewall riots, activists formed the Gay Liberation Front, modeled after revolutionary groups such as the National Liberation Front in Vietnam, declaring psychiatry their primary enemy and organizing protests that included infiltrating APA annual meetings starting in 1970, where activists interrupted speakers through shouting and ridicule, halting proceedings; they threatened to disrupt future conferences unless panels included gay representatives, demanding that psychiatry abandon its previous negative stance toward homosexuality; publicly renounce the “disease theory” in all its forms; launch an active campaign to eliminate prevailing “prejudices,” both through public education and legislative reforms; consult on an ongoing basis with representatives of the gay community. “Our themes: ‘Gay, Proud, and Healthy’ and ‘Being Gay Is Good.’ With or without you, we will energetically work to implement these commandments and fight those who oppose us.” prompting the APA to incorporate gay activists into panels and task forces. A key achievement of this activism was the declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). Robert Spitzer, chairing the relevant APA committee, engaged with activist Ron Gold, who argued against the illness label; this led Spitzer to conclude that homosexuality per se does not meet disorder criteria (lacking inherent distress or generalized impairment), prompting his recommendation for removal, approved by 13 of 15 board members in December 1973. In December 1973, the APA's Board of Trustees voted to remove homosexuality from the DSM-II, influenced by protests at APA annual meetings starting in 1970, where LGBTQ+ activists disrupted sessions to challenge its classification as pathological, even as internal scientific efforts such as a task force chaired by Charles Socarides in the New York District Branch of the APA (1970-1972) produced a report describing homosexuality as a psychological deviation that was rejected by branch leadership, alongside internal advocacy by president-elect John P. Spiegel—a closeted gay psychiatrist—who gathered like-minded colleagues in an informal group called "GayPA" to strategize promoting younger gay-affirming liberals to key positions in place of older orthodox leadership, as recounted by Spiegel's granddaughter; this complemented scientific debates and empirical reviews questioning the evidence for viewing homosexuality as an illness. Opponents organized a referendum among APA members, which was upheld by 58% of approximately 10,000 voting members in 1974. The APA emphasized: “Gay rights activists will undoubtedly claim that psychiatry has finally recognized homosexuality as ‘normal’ in the same way as heterosexuality. They would be mistaken. Removing homosexuality from the list of psychiatric disorders only acknowledges that it does not meet the criteria for a mental disorder… this does not mean that it is as normal or as fully equivalent to heterosexuality.” This marked a shift that diminished psychiatric stigma and supported broader rights claims. Twenty years after her appearance at an APA conference, Barbara Gittings, a key figure in gay rights activism often called the "mother of the gay rights movement," candidly acknowledged: “This was never a medical decision, and that is precisely why it happened so quickly. Only three years passed from the first shock action at the APA conference to the Board of Trustees vote removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. It was a political decision… We were transformed overnight with the stroke of a pen.” At the end of 1977, a survey of APA member psychiatrists published in Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality found that 69% agreed homosexuality is generally a pathological adaptation rather than a normal variation, 73% indicated homosexuals were generally less happy than heterosexuals, 60% viewed them as less capable of mature loving relationships, and 70% attributed difficulties to internal conflicts rather than societal stigma. Rights expansions accelerated in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. In the U.S., the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, enacted in 1993 to allow discreet service by homosexuals, was repealed via the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, signed by President Obama on December 22, 2010, and fully implemented on September 20, 2011, permitting open service without reported disruptions to military cohesion. The Supreme Court's Lawrence v. Texas decision on June 26, 2003, invalidated remaining sodomy laws, effectively decriminalizing private consensual homosexual acts nationwide. Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, mandated recognition of same-sex marriages across all states, following the Netherlands' pioneering legalization in 2001 as the first country to do so. Globally, decriminalization progressed unevenly; France led in 1791, but post-1950 waves included Czechoslovakia in 1962 and the UK (England and Wales) in 1967, with approximately 66% of countries having decriminalized by 2020, often amid international pressure from Western nations and organizations. Backlash has persisted, particularly in regions prioritizing traditional or religious norms. In Africa, recent legislation includes Uganda's 2023 Anti-Homosexuality Act, imposing life imprisonment or death for "aggravated homosexuality," and Burkina Faso's 2025 law criminalizing promotion of homosexuality with up to five years' imprisonment, reflecting a surge in such measures across six countries including Ghana and Tanzania. These laws, often justified by appeals to family values and sovereignty against perceived foreign cultural imperialism, have increased violence and evictions against homosexuals. In the U.S., support for same-sex marriage dipped to 68% by 2024 from prior highs, amid broader resistance from conservative groups citing religious liberty concerns post-Obergefell, leading to exemptions for businesses refusing service. Illiberal governments worldwide have weaponized opposition to homosexual rights to consolidate power, framing activism as a threat to national identity.

Homosexual Behavior in Non-Human Animals

Empirical Observations Across Species

Same-sex sexual behaviors, including mounting, genital contact, courtship rituals, and affiliative interactions, have been empirically documented in over 1,500 non-human animal species across diverse taxa such as insects, fish, reptiles, birds, and mammals. These observations, compiled from field studies, captive observations, and ethological research spanning centuries, reveal behaviors that vary by species, context, and frequency, often occurring alongside heterosexual interactions rather than as exclusive orientations. In mammals, same-sex sexual behavior appears in approximately 4-5% of species, documented across 261 species in 62 families, with prevalence in about 50% of mammalian families overall. Nonhuman primates exhibit particularly high rates, with records in at least 51 species ranging from lemurs to great apes; for instance, in bonobos (Pan paniscus), females frequently engage in genito-genital rubbing for social reconciliation, while male-male mounting occurs in coalitions among chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) display male-male sexual alliances involving erections, intromission, and ejaculations, often lasting days and serving group coordination. A 2024 researcher survey across 52 mammalian species found same-sex behaviors observed in 77.8% of cases (42 species), though only 43.6% of observers had published on it, suggesting historical under-reporting due to publication biases against non-reproductive sexual activity. Avian species show same-sex pairing and sexual displays in dozens of documented cases, such as long-term male-male bonds in greylag geese (Anser anser) involving mutual preening, mounting, and nest-building attempts, or female-female pairs in Laysan albatrosses (Phoebastria immutabilis) that successfully rear offspring via extra-pair fertilizations. Reptiles and fish exhibit transient same-sex mounting or courtship, as in whiptail lizards (Cnemidophorus spp.), where parthenogenetic females perform male-like pseudocopulation to stimulate ovulation. Invertebrates, including fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) and bed bugs, display homosexual courtship or copulation, with genetic and hormonal correlates identified in lab settings. These behaviors are typically opportunistic or context-specific, with frequencies ranging from rare (e.g., <1% of interactions in some primates) to routine (e.g., up to 60% of sexual activity in bonobo females). Comprehensive reviews, such as those drawing on over two centuries of ethological data, indicate no taxonomic exclusivity, with occurrences in every major vertebrate class and many invertebrates, though systematic surveys remain incomplete for less-studied groups.

Interpretive Limitations and Human Analogies

Same-sex sexual behaviors in non-human animals, while documented across over 1,500 species, do not typically reflect a fixed sexual orientation akin to that observed in humans, where individuals may exhibit lifelong, exclusive preferences for same-sex partners independent of opportunistic contexts. In most animal cases, such behaviors are transient, situational, or concurrent with opposite-sex mating, serving functions like alliance formation, conflict reduction, or dominance assertion rather than indicating an intrinsic predisposition. Exclusive same-sex preference, defined as a consistent avoidance of opposite-sex partners, has been documented in domesticated sheep (rams), where approximately 8% exhibit persistent male preference and avoidance of female partners, though it remains exceedingly rare across documented animal studies overall, with limited verified instances of lifelong exclusivity mirroring human patterns. Interpretive challenges arise from anthropomorphic projections, where observers infer human-like motivations—such as romantic attachment or identity—from observable acts without evidence of comparable cognitive states in animals. For instance, mounting behaviors in species like bonobos or dolphins often facilitate social cohesion or tension relief within groups, but lack the self-reflective dimension of human orientation, which involves conscious preference and potential dissociation from reproductive imperatives. Empirical data from field observations reveal high variability: in rams, a small subset (around 8%) show persistent male preference, yet even here, genetic or hormonal markers do not fully explain exclusivity, and analogies to human homosexuality overlook species-specific reproductive pressures absent in human societies. Direct analogies to human homosexuality falter due to fundamental disparities in behavioral persistence and context. Animal same-sex interactions are often bisexual or experimental, with individuals switching partners fluidly based on availability or hierarchy, contrasting human cases where orientation may resist environmental cues. Critiques emphasize that conflating these behaviors risks overstating evolutionary parallels; for example, while same-sex acts may enhance group fitness in mammals by mitigating aggression, this adaptive utility does not validate human-exclusive homosexuality as equivalently "natural" without accounting for human cultural mediation and non-reproductive volition. Such interpretations require caution, as source data from ethological studies—often collected in controlled or wild settings—can be biased toward confirming preconceived notions of behavioral universality, yet fail to bridge the experiential gap between instinctual acts and human self-conceptualization.

Key Controversies and Debates

Innateness Doctrine vs. Multifactorial Origins

The innateness doctrine posits that homosexual orientation is predominantly fixed at birth through immutable biological mechanisms, such as genetics or prenatal factors, rendering it analogous to innate traits like eye color and implying limited potential for change. This view has been promoted in advocacy contexts to underscore that homosexuality is not a choice, thereby supporting arguments for legal and social acceptance without therapeutic intervention. However, empirical evidence challenges strict innateness by demonstrating incomplete genetic determinism and the influence of non-genetic developmental factors. Twin studies, for instance, show monozygotic concordance rates for male homosexuality ranging from 20% to 52%, far below 100%, indicating that shared genetics do not fully predict orientation even in identical twins raised together. Heritability estimates from such research typically fall between 30% and 40% for males, suggesting a moderate genetic component but substantial room for environmental influences. Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) further undermine the notion of a singular "gay gene" or strong predictive genetics. The largest GWAS on same-sex behavior, analyzing nearly 500,000 individuals, identified five genetic loci associated with non-heterosexual behavior, but these variants collectively explain only 8% to 25% of variance in sexual orientation, with the remainder attributable to polygenic and non-genetic factors. No individual genetic marker reliably predicts homosexuality, and the polygenic architecture implies diffuse, small-effect influences rather than deterministic innateness. Critiques of the innateness hypothesis highlight its overreliance on biological determinism, noting that identical twin discordance persists despite identical DNA, pointing to stochastic prenatal or postnatal processes. Moreover, academic sources advancing innateness claims often exhibit interpretive biases favoring biological essentialism, potentially to align with normalization narratives, while downplaying multifactorial data. In contrast, multifactorial origins emphasize an interplay of genetic predispositions, prenatal biological conditions, and non-shared environmental factors. The fraternal birth order effect (FBOE) exemplifies a non-genetic prenatal mechanism: each additional older brother born to the same mother increases the later-born male's odds of homosexuality by approximately 33%, observed across diverse populations and totaling up to 15-29% higher probability for men with two or more older brothers. This effect, replicated in over 20 studies since 1997, is attributed to a maternal immune response (e.g., antibodies against male-specific proteins) progressively altering fetal brain development during gestation, independent of genetics or upbringing. Prenatal hormone exposure also contributes, with atypical androgen levels linked to orientation in animal models and human proxies like digit ratios, though human causation remains correlational. Postnatal environmental influences, such as non-shared experiences (unique to each individual rather than family-wide), account for the remaining variance unexplained by genetics, per behavioral genetic models, though direct causal pathways like childhood adversity show inconsistent links. Non-shared environmental influences, which can include unique prenatal and postnatal experiences, account for the remaining variance unexplained by genetics, per behavioral genetic models, though direct causal pathways like childhood adversity show inconsistent links. Overall, the scientific consensus, drawn from twin, family, and genomic data, supports multifactorial causation over rigid innateness, with genetics providing susceptibility but not inevitability, modulated by prenatal biology like FBOE and hormones. This framework aligns with causal realism, recognizing developmental plasticity without endorsing social constructionism, as cross-cultural prevalence variations (e.g., 2-10% self-reported) and historical fluidity suggest contextual modulation atop biological bases, though rates remain stable enough to refute pure environmental determinism. Claims of pure innateness, while politically expedient, falter against discordant twin outcomes and partial heritability; discordant twin outcomes challenge full genetic determinism but are consistent with probabilistic biological processes, including non-shared prenatal influences like stochastic in utero effects, favoring a model where orientation emerges from probabilistic interactions rather than predestined biology.

Societal Normalization and Potential Harms

In Western societies, acceptance of homosexuality has accelerated since the late 20th century, driven by legal reforms, media representation, and cultural campaigns. Gallup polling data show U.S. approval of gay or lesbian relations as morally acceptable rising from 40% in 2001 to 64% in 2025, with self-identification as LGBT reaching 7.1% of adults by 2022, particularly among younger generations. Globally, Pew Research surveys reveal stark divides, with 94% acceptance in Sweden versus 7% in Nigeria as of 2020, reflecting cultural and religious variances rather than uniform progress. This normalization coincides with elevated health risks tied to homosexual practices, especially anal intercourse among men who have sex with men (MSM). CDC data indicate MSM comprise approximately 2-4% of the male population yet account for 67-70% of new HIV diagnoses annually in recent years, with syphilis and gonorrhea rates also disproportionately high in this group due to biological vulnerabilities and behavioral factors like higher partner counts. WHO reports corroborate global STI burdens, noting MSM face 10-20 times higher HIV incidence than heterosexual men, persisting despite prevention efforts and underscoring causal links beyond social stigma. Psychological harms manifest in higher mental health disparities, with LGBTQ individuals exhibiting 2-4 times greater rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidality compared to heterosexual peers, even in high-acceptance environments. The Trevor Project's 2024 survey found 46% of transgender and nonbinary youth seriously considered suicide in the past year, while substance abuse prevalence exceeds general population norms by 20-40%, often as coping mechanisms amid identity-related stressors. These patterns hold post-decriminalization, suggesting intrinsic factors like minority stress or behavioral correlates contribute, rather than discrimination alone, as rates remain elevated in progressive regions. For children in same-sex households, empirical studies reveal mixed outcomes, challenging claims of full equivalence. Meta-analyses and longitudinal data, such as those by Sullins (2017), document 2-3 times higher emotional problems, depression, and suicidal ideation among offspring of same-sex parents, attributed to family instability, parental mental health issues, or absence of complementary-sex modeling. The Regnerus study (2012) found poorer social and educational outcomes among young adults who experienced a parent in a same-sex romantic relationship during childhood, often amid prior divorce and instability; however, such factors may confound causality, with critiques noting selection biases in "no-harm" research toward stable couples. Regnerus responded that the study captured period-specific conditions, citing higher divorce risks in same-sex marriages in Norway and Sweden (Andersson et al., 2006; Biblarz & Stacey, 2010) and U.S. separations (Hoff, 2010). Recent population-based studies in the Netherlands, using comprehensive registries to minimize bias, found no significant differences in behavioral outcomes (Bos et al., 2022) and comparable or better schooling performance (van Geel & Bos, 2020), reflecting lower-stigma contexts, though broader findings remain debated. Broader societal normalization may erode traditional family structures, correlating with fertility declines. Analyses link same-sex marriage legalization to redefinitions of marriage detached from procreation, contributing to below-replacement birth rates in adopting nations; for instance, gay and lesbian couples report lower fertility intentions than heterosexuals, per 2020-2023 surveys, amplifying demographic pressures amid aging populations. Increased youth identification as non-heterosexual, doubling since 2010, raises questions of social contagion effects, potentially reducing future childbearing and straining welfare systems reliant on stable nuclear families. However, analyses of student trends indicate that substantial changes have primarily occurred in female reports of bisexuality, rather than explosive growth in homosexuality. Studies of adolescent peer networks, such as Brakefield et al. (2013) using data from the 1990s-2000s, found no evidence of same-sex attraction spreading through social ties.

Empirical Disputes on Prevalence and Associations

Estimates of homosexuality prevalence have varied widely across studies, with early claims by Alfred Kinsey in 1948 suggesting that 10% of U.S. males engaged in predominantly homosexual behavior, a figure derived from non-representative samples including prisoners and sex workers. Subsequent population-based surveys have reported lower rates, typically 1-4% of adults identifying as exclusively homosexual, with combined gay/lesbian/bisexual identification around 4% in U.S. data from 2011. Disputes arise over measurement—self-reported identity versus behavior or attraction—with critics arguing Kinsey overstated due to sampling bias, while modern surveys may undercount fluid or non-identifying individuals. Self-reported identification has increased over time, particularly among youth, with U.S. Gallup data showing LGBTQ+ identification rising from 3.5% in 2012 to 9.3% by 2025, driven largely by bisexual labels among younger generations (e.g., 20%+ among Gen Z). Longitudinal studies indicate some instability in orientation labels, with shifts observed in 10-20% of individuals over years, challenging notions of fixed innateness and suggesting social or developmental influences. Critics attribute rises to greater acceptance reducing stigma, while others point to potential over-reporting amid cultural normalization or question the distinction between transient experimentation and enduring homosexuality. Twin studies reveal partial genetic influence but highlight environmental factors, with monozygotic twin concordance for homosexuality ranging from 20-52% across large samples, far below 100% expected for purely genetic traits. Earlier reports claimed higher rates (e.g., 65.8% in a 1993 study of 38 male pairs), but larger registry-based analyses yield lower figures (20-37% for males), fueling disputes over heritability estimates of 30-50% versus shared prenatal or postnatal environments. These discordances undermine strong innateness claims, as identical genetics do not produce uniform outcomes, implicating non-shared experiences. Homosexual individuals exhibit elevated associations with adverse mental health outcomes, including 2-3 times higher rates of depression, anxiety, substance use, and suicidality compared to heterosexuals, per meta-analyses and population surveys. Disputes center on causality: "minority stress" models from academia attribute disparities primarily to discrimination, yet persist even in accepting environments or after statistical controls, suggesting intrinsic or lifestyle factors. Similarly, men who have sex with men (MSM) face disproportionately high sexually transmitted infection rates, accounting for over 70% of new syphilis cases and the majority of HIV transmissions in the U.S., linked empirically to higher partner numbers and anal intercourse risks. Controversial associations include higher proportions of male-on-male child molestations relative to population homosexuality rates, though absolute pedophilia prevalence remains low and distinct from adult-oriented homosexuality. Mainstream sources often reject causal links, emphasizing pedophilia as a separate paraphilia with distinct arousal patterns from adult-oriented homosexuality, but empirical data on victim gender patterns (e.g., 80%+ male victims in boy-targeted cases) sustain debates over overlaps in male sexual deviance spectra, with twin and birth order studies noting shared risk factors like fraternal birth order effects. These findings, drawn from clinical samples, face criticism for selection bias but underscore unresolved causal questions beyond sociopolitical narratives. While some studies suggest overlaps in risk factors like fraternal birth order between homosexual pedophiles and adult homosexuals, mainstream research distinguishes pedophilia as a separate paraphilia, with phallometric studies showing pedophiles' arousal specific to prepubescent children rather than adults of the same sex.

References

  1. They found that gay, lesbian, and bisexual respondents reported experiencing higher numbers of acute mental health problems and reported worse general mental ...
  2. Despite growing social acceptance, mental health disparities persist between sexual minorities—people who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual—and ...
  3. Dec 13, 2012 · Primary and secondary syphilis rates are increasing among gay and bisexual men, who now account for more than 70% of all infections.
  4. Oct 16, 2023 · Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men often get other STDs, including chlamydia and gonorrhea infections. HPV (Human papillomavirus) ...
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.