Biology and Homosexuality


What is the relationship between biology and Homosexuality in humans?

Is the human body even able to handle such acts?

Edit: I made this thread because it seems to me that biology has influence on people. I would like to see studies that are not biased please


If you mean whether or not the human body can handle sodomy, then no.
You can check the webmd page on anal s*x.

If you mean whether homosexuality is biological or not, then look at studies of sexuality in twin pairs.


I know some gay men in their 70s and older who have probably been engaging in anal s*x for decades and they seem to have been able to handle it just fine.

As for the study of twins, the fact that all identical twins do not always have the same sexual orientation does not mean that sexual orientation is not genetic. Although such twins have the same genotype (i.e. the genetic constitution of an individual organism), those genes will not necessarily express themselves in both twins in an identical way. What someone turns out to be like with respect to observable characteristics is a combination of genotype + environment + chance. It is well known that in terms of their phenotype (the set of observable characteristics of an individual resulting from the interaction of their genotype with the environment), so called “identical twins” are not actually identical. So, even if there is a genetic predisposition for both twins to be gay, only one might turn out gay and the other one might not.


The point is that it is not entirely biological, but as you say, affected by environment, even though twin pairs typically share a similar environment.

The dangers of anal sex are real despite your elderly men whom you suppose have been having anal sex for decades. You can check the dangers yourself. I don’t know what precautions they have been taking, assuming they have been doing as you say.


There’s no scientific consensus yet. It’s an interesting topic to research, if you enjoy studies such as that. Take a quick glance at the wikipedia page for “Biology and sexual orientation” and you’ll see how much inconclusive research has been done thus far.

Is the human body even able to handle such acts?

depends on what they’re doing… But like @Kei said, anal sex poses significant risk.


The WebMD article is exaggerated. Using lubrication will eliminate many of the problem listed (pain, tearing). Diseases like AIDS, human papillomavirus (HPV), herpes and hepatitis can all be spread through vaginal intercourse, as well. If neither person has any disease, this is not a problem. And I know lots of straight men who don’t engage in anal s*x who get hemorrhoids.


CDC reports that anal s*x is the riskiest behavior for getting and transmitting HIV. It happens in other types but not nearly as often.


Well, it’s not very risky If precautions are taken. Despite the belief by many people here in CAF that condoms are useless because there is even one iota of risk, according to the CDC, “Epidemiologic studies that compare rates of HIV infection between condom users and nonusers who have HIV-infected sex partners demonstrate that consistent condom use is highly effective in preventing transmission of HIV.” And being in a committed and monogamous relationship could reduce the risk to zero if neither person has HIV to begin with.


Yep, condoms definitely reduce the risk


Are the ears biologically meant to handle glasses?


Not to mention the poor nose.


no diffrence ,just follow your like


No, but do glasses cause fecal incontinence like anal s*x? Tell me, how can we say that glasses, which are supposed to help the user, are similar to a sexual act that is known to cause fecal incontinence?


Well, yes, if you use artificial things like this combined with regular bathing, then you can mitigate risks.
However, the question was if biology could handle it. And the answer is, naturally, it is very dangerous.
Modern artificial things can mitigate (not eliminate) such things.

It is not so much that we think condoms are useless (though I personally was conceived despite the use of a condom), but that it’s immoral to use artificial contraception.


Humans do lot of other dangerous things. Do you know what the second biggest cause of death in the developing world for women between the ages of 15 and 44 is? According to the World Health Organization (WHO), “Maternal deaths are the second biggest killer of women of reproductive age. Every year, approximately 287 000 women die due to complications in pregnancy and childbirth, 99% of them are in developing countries.”

Obviously, childbirth is a very dangerous thing for women in developing countries. So, do you think that women there should refrain from having children because it is so dangerous? If no “artificial things” were done like using antibiotics to prevent infection, or receiving other medical care during and after pregnancy, the deaths might be even greater than they already are.


The biology is that the male and female reproductive systems are designed to function in a complementary manner with each other.


These are questions for google. Why are you asking it here? What are you willing to pay me to do your google search for you?


Are you speaking to me?


I meant it in good jest. :wink:


But, childbirth serves an actual purpose, namely, propagation of the human species. Danger sometimes is needed in aspects that are actually important or necessary.

One can die from eating contaminated food? Does this mean we should never eat? No, but we should refrain from dipping our chicken sandwiches in stool.

I also never said we shouldn’t do something because it is dangerous. In the case of sodomy, one shouldn’t do it as it is disordered, against the natural law, and is sinful.

My replies were an answer to the question. For instance, to demonstrate my point, ones biology does not allow him to fall from a very tall building. However, modern medical attention can help someone not die. So, if someone asks if our biology can handle jumping off of tall buildings, the answer should be no, even if we can survive with modern conveniences like medical care.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit