Not like it was a disease but if I got the decision on my hand to turn straight I wouldn't. Some people say that being homosexual is hard, other people imply it's easier to be a victim, there is truth on both sizes, but because most homosexual wants to be happy their sexuality can be a real life challenge and in some places a real nightmare. It's only logical that tormented people, young and old would choose to change straight, a lot of people have try that and a lot of poeple will keep on trying, sadly going against their own nature. One thing is sex but another thing is love, I already knew love towards another man and that is worth fighting for, it is worth suffering. Love is more valuable than having the choice to be like most people and not to be persecuted or rejected. I have thought what my life would be if I was straight, and yes, there is a big chance that I would have meet a girl and love her, but things are just not that way and that's it, period, I like the way I am and that is just that.
Every person is different. Some may wish to change, and some may not. Some may change, then find out they liked the previous option better in comparison and change back. Asking whether or not EVERY individual of a group would choose anything is the same as asking if all humans like a certain kind of food, drink or music.
That being said, homosexuality is a biological survival strategy and exists within a small percentage of individuals for that reason. Most people simply don't understand / know enough about biology. If anything, I'd like there to be a pill against stupidity and scientific illiteracy.
Considering I have experienced fluid sexuality. If I knew the effect, then yes I would. I would do anything to eliminate irrational emotions or emotions that puts me at a disadvantages in the sense of being able to control my own life while still having some functionality. I'm now lacking the needs to have sex in order to fullfill emotional needs unlike many sexuals.
I'm bi myself and I sure wouldn't give up my attraction for slim, yet well built, and clean-shaven young men. Why would I? They make me feel good and horny inside. I like that. I like to keep things I like. Is that so strange?
The amount of uninformed people in this thread making me LOL.
This question is just a matter of opinion and should be asked to those that are actually gay. Different people have different standpoints. It depends entirely on the situation. If you're straight, you really can't speak for anyone; even my comment is just broad speculation.
If you really want to know if gays would voluntarily change their sexuality if possible, why don't you ask them? Don't ask us, because most of the people on this thread are just going to generalize and voice themselves on something that doesn't even apply to them. Instead, you should listen to those that can provide a concrete legitimate answer. Even so, you'll never be able to get a solid answer that represents every homosexual on this topic.
As a bisexual in a same-gender relationship, I'd say keep that crap away from me. The idea of being straight gives me the hebie-jeebies. The thought of being limited to only the opposite gender...it's depressing to be honest. How you monosexual people go through life, just dismissing a person because they're the wrong gender is beyond me. It seems a bit...shallow to me. Plus I wouldn't give my significant other for anything.
I'm not sure how that's relevant. But probably not. Dogs tend to be very physically active, whereas I'm not. And they can't handle the controllers of the consoles I like to play so unless they like sci-fi I doubt we'd have enough in common to have a relationship.
I know. I'm just giving my perspective on the situation. I don't know why anyone would pick that. In fact, the real question should be, if they made a pill that made you bi why the heck wouldn't you want to take it.
Who are you addressing? Your question seems to be aimed at homosexuals yet the language you are using is not exactly addressing them.
"would they do it?" I don't know, anything I can say would just be speculation, I'm not gay...
Those members of the gay "community" who are really ashamed by their gayness (in lieu of a better word) and wanted to return to a society that shunned them probably would take the "cure". Then there are those who don't care what society thinks and enjoys their gayness despite the ostracism, they would fervently refuse.
That being said; that's assuming that the status quo is a queer hating conservative hive mind...
In short "would they do it?". Who the hell knows?! go ask some gay people, damn... Because the answer is going to be Yes, No, Maybe depending on each individual gay persons ideals/ life...
In Canada there isn't a lot to gain by becoming straight unless there's some family issues, religion, or you just really really want to use your genetic material in the traditional way.
I dont' think all gays would do it, but I think there will be a lot, especially teenagers, who would do anything to be 'normal.' Even today there are gays trying to 'fix themselves' because society tell them they're sick and they're gonna burn in hell if they don't.
Given that they had access to such a "cure," then yeah, I guess it would make it a choice. I really don't see how that matters, though. I suspect that most of them wouldn't be interested, and it's still not okay to discriminate against a person for their lifestyle "choice." So basically all it does is make that ignorant conservative argument, "Homosexuals choose their disgusting lifestyle!" technically accurate, but no less invalid.
Now if we could find a cure for arbitrary discrimination...
This 'cure for gay-ness' will result in a knee-jerk reaction: Further fueling gay-rights movements.
Off-topic: If you rewind history for a bit, even something like masturbation was once considered to be a disease by some medical authorities. I even have an old gynecology textbook which makes such a claim in a straightforward manner!
The interesting thing is that you're going to get a lot of bigoted responses from people who say there shouldn't be such a thing, or shouldn't need to be such a thing. Or in other words they think they should restrict the sexual options of gays as much as the people they hate want to, but pretend they are more tolerant about it. There's actually a lot of reasons they want to do that, but I'll skip over that for now.
They say that if no one had a problem with it there would be no market. That's obviously a blatant lie, since very few people want to be the odd one out out of fifty people, even if no one cares. Here's the thing. People are only irrevocably dedicated to their specific sexuality BECAUSE there is no options here. They feel like it is irrevocably part of them, and feel the pain of unscientific methods to change it. But if we lived in a world where everyone had full control then that would not be the case. In fact, it's more likely that more straight people would try out gayness than the other way around simply because of how many more of them there are. So this technology would not be capitulating to the whims of fundamentalists; it would actually be increasing the overall gayness in the world.
Note the other thing. These same people love the mantra "who would choose to be gay?" Or in other words they believe two mutually exclusive things at the same time. Since if it was at a point it was literally a choice then it would be absolutely in their hands. They're regressive people who are trying to attach modern standards to a progressive future situation and failing to understand it since they do not realize that the entire dynamic would be changed.
Why shouldn't people have a right to choose their own identity? You see the obvious intense hatred a lot of people have for predominantly gay people who for any reason choose not to live as one. But how is that anyone else's business whether they want to do it for social or religious or any other reason? They are only considered acceptable judging those people as "brainwashed" because they are doing something that is very hard to do. If it was not hard (due to advances in science) then they would have no reason to judge them since it would no longer be a big deal to the people choosing to do it. It's literally the same issue of other people trying to moderate your life and judge you when you do not comply with their own meaningless whims. We're at the same issue we were at before. People constructed their own schema of what they think is acceptable, and have to be dragged forward kicking and screaming because other people having choices of social identity threatens their own schema.
Look at it this way. There are definitely some transsexuals (not all, but some) who only have their issue because of perceived social dismays with their current sex as it corresponds to their mental identity. But these "tolerant" people don't tell them to "deal with it" because they "shouldn't be ashamed of their sex." They want society and then science to eventually catch up to letting them change to what they want. However, they have personal reasons for disapproving of the same thing being true of orientation, so rather than admit that pure therapy failing means they should look into medicine which they know can succeed, they just pretend that the therapy failing means the issue is now closed forever. (don't bother pointing out to me what the differences between those cases are. I know, but the metaphor still stands.)
(P.S. These same people will tell you that anti-gay attitudes are often psychologically an aggression based sexual defense mechanism to cover up their own feelings of homosexuality. Which if true means that there ARE people who have latent gay attitudes they want to get rid of naturally, and there's something in them which tries to self regulate it. Meaning that along the gradient of orientation, the ones you know as gay in an actualized form are only the ones where that becomes dominant enough that it's own drive overrides the circular self regulation. Obviously with some leniency for bisexuals.)
It just seems odd for people to really care, it's all preference really. I mean hell, people don't think about trying to change other aspects of their interests, they just sort of happened. Most of the people on deviantart could probably tell you their passion for art wasn't simply a choice, it just happened. The idea of WANTING to change a preference just doesn't happen.
I think a lot of them might, yeah. Especially the ones who grew up in a very restrictive, religious household, and were brought up with the idea that being gay is wrong and evil. There's no shortage of stories of people who tried to change, who tried to act straight, have girlfriends (or boyfriends), would pray and basically try their darnedest to be as straight as possible, hoping that one day they would no longer have to keep up an act to be straight.
But what happens next? When we get to the point where we can say, yes, homosexuality IS a choice because you can take this pill to stop it, what would that do to the GLBT movement? Would people still be as willing and able to recognize same-sex love as equally valid as opposite-sex love?
Some would, some wouldn't. But that's really the fault of society; nobody pretends not to be gay in an environment where it's considered completely acceptable to be so, so I strongly doubt that anyone would take the cure in a world where everyone saw every form of sexuality as equally valid.
That said, if I had a choice in my sexuality, I think I'd probably change it. Girls are just better, and boobs are awesome.
Considering that realistically these "cures" would make people bisexual rather than go full over, it probably is true that a lot more straight than gay people would take advantage of the enhanced situation.
I think it would depend on how the drug functioned and what particular model of causation it was based on.
But yeah, I could see it being used as a tool for experimentation. Not that just trying stuff without enhancement couldn't be a way of doing the same. I for one long for a future where bisexual experimentation is considered normal.