I'm curious about what you all think of this view of homosexuality

Would it be possible for you to provide a link or reference to that article? Even a title would help.

In my opinion, trying to find a "cause" for homosexuality is equivalent to finding a cause for the colour of your hair, or the colour of your eyes.

From the American Psychological Association's website, the following paragraph may be instructive:

It is better to live with honest uncertainty, as described above by the APA, than to reach for reasons that are, more likely than not, in error. When evaluating whatever it is you read, it is advisable to be skeptical of pat answers to complex questions.

 

The fact that the article is biased towards religion says a lot. The people/person who wrote this is probably homophobic and I'm not going to say that there is no truth in it (apart from viewing God or Mary as your parents which imo won't work) because I obviously don't know exactly why people are gay.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but he isn't talking about what causes homosexual orientation, but rather what causes the homosexual behavior, which are two different cases.

For example, I am not in denial about my sexual orientation, I am 100% confused. I know this because I've tried coming out gay so many times, even to my therapist (where I am most calm), and I always go back to the conclusion that I'm mostly straight with some homosexual interests, and these homosexual interests are nowhere near enough for me to conclude that I'm gay, or bi at the very least.

However, I feel that my life would be much happier since I have a sexual attraction to much older men, but let's be honest how realistic is that relationship with such an unbalanced power dynamic? If anything, I would rather date a guy my age, but at the moment that's just not happening. In fact a lot of times I will force myself to imagine a date with a individual but it doesn't work.

With that said, I understand your point in that someone is born with a set orientation. While sexuality is a continuum, you are born with a particular orientation.

 

So, what does that mean for me, who was a complete momma's kid and is still closer to her than anyone else in the world?

I had a rocky relationship with my father, but my mom and I are thick as thieves.

 

I highlighted in bold what you wrote above because it is important to understand that this distinction is not as clear as a simple dichotomy.

From the same APA website that I referred to above, their answer to the question "What is sexual orientation?" the following answer they provide (my bolds) is enlightening:

Orientation is this "enduring pattern" but yes, it is incomplete to consider this as simply a characteristic of a person without considering the facet of "relationships with others" and the whole spectrum of "nonsexual physical affection between partners", etc.

I am deeply skeptical of the notion that one can be "truly" straight, yet think oneself gay due to life circumstances, behaviour, especially the pattern of persistent sexual behaviour (and I include simple attractions as part and parcel of "behaviour") does define orientation to a large extent. The APA does not mention problematic lack-of-love relationships with fathers as a "cause" of homosexual behaviour for the simple reason that such problematic father-child relationships are very common, especially in our society, does this mean everyone, or even a significant number with an absent unloving father will turn gay? Not likely.

If the article the OP mentions is of a kind that revolves around exploiting a common and problematic father-son dynamic to make a point about being gay; or convincing someone that one can be truly straight but thinks himself gay because he is the victim of said family dynamic, such that this person (victim) being gay is thus "proven" to be some kind of an extension of the pathology, i.e. absent or distant father leads to damaged son who then thinks he is gay, but the kind of gay that is "really" an illness that can be "cured" by curing the relationship with the father through some kind of pseudo-therapy we are all familiar with (gay "reparative" therapy for those who aren't).

Rather despicable article, if such is the case...but I reserve final judgment until I can read it.

 

Broadly speaking this argument is nonsense. Speaking in particulars there might be some merit to explain some aspects of how humans form and seek relationships in general, but it still does not make sense to apply it to sexual orientation.

The gay law student, Scott Blair in this video beautifully demonstrated why and how the argument is flawed:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDipt48sVyo (it starts around 2 minutes into the video)

The points he made were in response to a councillor specialising in some form of 'reparative therapy': he exposed how the councillor first inquired about family circumstances of the 'patient', and then according to what response he would get, he would attribute this as the cause of being gay: eg. bad relationships with father- could be a reason to being gay (seeking father figure), bad relationship with mother - could be a reason for being gay (being put off women). So no matter what kind of household setting the child grew up, there would always be a reason to claim that this caused the person to be gay. Scott called BS on that, and I agree with this.



The part of the argument which could hold some truth is that people do sometimes seek to 'heal' childhood wounds through relationships, and that this could lead them to seek *relationship* with a 'parent figure', but I don't think this has anything to do with actual sexual attraction/orientation, because often this kind of relationships occurs in absence of significant sexual attraction- the emotional attraction is more important.
What the argument about 'born straight, gay due to family" is doing is conflating sexual attraction and sexual orientation with emotional attraction and emotional reasons for seeking a relationship.

It is entirely possible to seek out an emotional/sexual relationship due to emotional reasons contrary to ones own sexual preference, so it is entirely possible that a gay person would end up in a straight relationship for emotional reasons, but this has no bearing on sexual attraction.

Unless a person is sexually attracted to the same sex, they are not homosexual. And if they are sexually attracted to the same sex, the 'family' argument does not hold, because it applies to emotional reasons, rather than sexual reasons.

So it might be true that people might seek emotional relationships contrary to their sexual preference, but it does not tell us anything about their sexual orientation, and hence should not be used as an argument about 'how do people become gay'.

Just because a woman or a man is seeking an emotional attachment to an older man who would be a father figure, and are willing to have sex with them for emotional reasons, it does not necessarily mean that they are *sexually* attracted to said man: they might be emotionally attracted & sexually neutral. The reasons why the person is seeking such an arrangement might not be sexual in the first place, and might not tell you much about the sexual orientation of the person, and hence should not be used to determine reasons for how sexual identity is formed.

Also sexuality is not black and white, and I find the 'born gay' v. 'born straight' argument
reductionist and erasing the possibility of a third option: born bisexual, or with some flexibility. Its amazing how many of those arguments would collapse if this possibility were ever considered.

The person the OP your example: "born straight, but gay due to family circumstances", does not exist, just as the person who was born gay cannot change to being 'straight'.
Engaging in homosexual activity does not make a person gay. Sexual attraction to the same sex does.

They are mostly likely a person born with *straight preference* who is also flexible enough to engage in gay behaviour, this makes them either bisexual, or biromantic, or pan, or even 'straight but open' but it does not make them gay, so this cannot be used to explain how 'people become gay'.

 

Hey, OP, I very much can I identify with you here. My dad was never really warm or encouraging with me either. He didn't believe in showing physical affection, and he often derided me for not playing sports like a "real man." My interests were movies, books, and video games. His was sports and beer and outdoors stuff. We never connected on a deep level, and he eventually left my mom and brother as well. I do feel an ache in my life there sometimes that is hard to fill. In order to not let myself get hurt by my dad's repeated discouragement, I sort of built a wall and blocked him out altogether. It was a defense mechanism of sorts, and it worked for a time. But then it seemed like those walls that once served me as a fortress became a sort of prison. I feel like I am missing a huge part of my life due to not fostering a positive relationship with my father. My mother, on the other hand, is the best mom on the planet. She did the job of two parents, and she was all I could ever ask for and more from a female parent. But I cannot help but wonder if my homosexual attractions are indeed due to some sort of emotional deficit that arose between me and my dad. If they are, I'm not sure indulging those desires (which due to my beliefs I have elected not to do) will solve anything.

I have to say that I agree with the article on one point, OP. I agree that we all need God. We all need the unfathomable love of a Heavenly Father who loves us more than any earthly parent ever could. I can truly say that were it not for Jesus Christ and the salvation, love, and truth that I found in Him, I would be dead right now. In more ways than one. Please do not underestimate God in this, dear one. He uses all sorts of ways to get our attention. Maybe that insightful article you read was His way of getting yours. It's at least worth seriously thinking about, is it not? Anyway, I truly hope you find the truth in all this craziness. Hang in there, and I'm here if you need to talk.