
The definition of homosexuality has changed in many ways throughout the years. In scientific terms, homosexuality was first seen as a disease of the brain that needed to be cured. Advances in science have now proven that homosexuality is not a disease, but a mere difference in genes and environmental impacts on humans in the early stages of life. The moral definition of homosexuality is still an argument to this day. There is an ongoing debate about whether homosexuality is morally ‘right’ in the eyes of large communities, traditional family life, and in religious settings. Thoughts on this topic have changed and evolved over several hundreds of years in several different countries and regions. People’s thoughts change according to their homelands, religions, political views, childhood experiences, and more. In the United States specifically, homosexuality was shunned and there weren’t many people who were ‘out’ to the world for fear of rejection. During the 1960s in a wave of feminism and human rights, LGBTQ+ activist groups fought for equality which lead up to the 1973 decision by the American Psychological Association (APA) to remove homosexuality from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Heterosexual people in history have given the homosexual lifestyle several different definitions and reasons as for the cause of homosexuality in humans. Numerous studies and research papers have been completed on possible causes of homosexuality considering that it occurs in less humans than heterosexuality. Various other counter-studies have also been completed that would argue that the different genes in homosexual humans are a result of a genetic mutation, or a disease. Ever since the APA’s 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from the (DSM), homosexuality has proven to be nothing more than differences in genetic material or environmental influences on a fetus – not a disease. Homosexuality is the result of environmental influences and biological differences in humans, but this should not be interpreted as a disease as it has been interpreted historically by certain groups.  

The environment can largely influence how a person turns out in regards to sexuality. Some of the environmental factors that affect sexuality can include chemical exposure to a fetus, child abuse, stress, and diet (Knapton). The first few years of life can have major effects on how the individual will turn out when they grow up in many different aspects, one of them being their sexuality. This is much like when a baby is born into a stressful environment and they grow up in a loud, noisy environment they will obtain certain traits that weren’t embedded in their genetic codes before birth. The field of study on a child for the years directly after birth is called epigenetics (Knapton). Studies in epigenetics have found that it is possible to tell whether a man is gay or straight by monitoring tiny changes in how his DNA functions after his birth with 70% accuracy (Knapton). If a fetus is exposed to certain chemicals before birth or the mother inhales different chemicals in the air, this can affect the genetic makeup and hormone levels in the fetus which will have a direct outcome on their genetic code and personality traits (Knapton). A child exposed to certain chemicals or different environments before and after birth will have an effect on the genes or hormones that influence sexuality. Babies exposed to different environments will mature differently. From the environmental causation perspective, homosexual patterns are believed to be a product of an individual’s learning and experience throughout their lives (Kallman). This means that from before birth and all the way through life, homosexuality can be a learned behavior according to different experiences. 

With respect to childhood experiences, children who grew up to be lesbian or gay were perceived to be significantly more gender-nonconforming than other children (Patterson, D’Augelli). For both men and women, there is a strong association between their adult sexual orientation and how well they recall gender nonconformity as a child. This notion supports the idea that homosexuals can be subjected to some influences of the opposite sex in their young life (Garnets, Kimmel). These findings suggest that observing children’s behaviors through adulthood can give an idea of what their sexuality may be. Environmental factors on humans can strongly influence what their sexuality will be later in life. 

Environmental factors influence the biology of human genetics and hormones that can determine sexuality. There are many scientific perspectives on homosexuality that suggest it is nothing more than differences in genetics. One of the different perspectives of the biological outlook on homosexuality is the neuroendocrine theory of sexual orientation. This states that the brains of gay men are more similar to brains of heterosexual men and likewise for lesbian’s brains with heterosexual men’s brains (Garnets, Kimmel). According to this view, the brain differences are relatively innate and depend less on postnatal experiences than exposure to homosexuals (Garnets, Kimmel). Other research on neuroanatomical differences between men and women of deviant sexual orientations has focused on the hypothalamuses. It has been found that the hypothalamus was 1.7x larger and contained 2.1x as many cells in a sample of gay men versus a sample of heterosexual men (Patterson, D’Augelli). Again, these neuroanatomical differences in the brains generally indicate that gay men resemble heterosexual women and that lesbians resemble heterosexual men (Patterson, D’Augelli). These findings show the biological differences in homosexual individuals compared to heterosexual individuals. This perspective shows the anatomical differences, but how exactly do these differences occur? What makes the brains of homosexual individuals different from heterosexual individuals? Every single difference in each human’s body is determined by their specific genetic code.

Every human has a unique genetic code for every aspect of their physical body and personality traits. These are the characteristics that make each person different from one another. No two people are exactly alike. By this logic, it would only make sense that there are different genes that cause different variations of sexualities. There is no single sexuality, just like there is no single eye color or hair color or temperament or skin color. Each person is unique and will therefore have differing sexualities as well. There is also no single gene that can be assumed to be capable of determining the final choice of a person’s sexual partner (Kallmann). Different alleles on human genomes determine each part of our bodies and personalities. Researchers have identified at least nine areas in the human genome where the genes functioned differently when one twin out of a set was homosexual (Knapton). This study showed areas on the genome that differed and could possibly be correlated to sexuality considering twins have extremely similar DNA. Just because the genes aren’t similar, which they aren’t in any two humans, that doesn’t mean there is a serious disease caused by significant differences or mutation. It can be a simple different genetic code for any certain trait in the body. 

The degree of genetic causation, or heritability, of sexual orientation can be represented numerically on a scale from 0 (no genetic influence) to 1 (no genetic influence) and these values will be intermediate (Bailey). There are other extreme traits, such as eye color or height that are almost completely heritable and then there are characteristics such as religious affiliation that are almost completely environmentally influenced, so the genetic causation of homosexuality falls somewhere in the middle (Bailey). People also release different amounts of certain hormones in the hypothalamus in the brain. If different hormone levels are released, there will be a chemical imbalance in the brain which causes different personality traits to appear. 

Chemical imbalances in the brain can possibly be the direct cause of different sexualities in different people, but this is not a threat to a person’s mental or physical health, and therefore should not be viewed as a disease of the brain. Sexualities are determined by different genetics, not ‘wrong’ or ‘right’ genetics. Richard Pillard conducted studies in the early 1990s that found that homosexuality is actually largely biologically determined, and not as much environmentally (Cornuelle). Pillard was quoted saying that he “thinks the future of this kind of research belongs to people who are geneticists, people who are experts in gene mapping.” (Cornuelle). Many advances in gene mapping have been made, but sexuality is still not down to an exact science yet. There has been evidence all along though, that sexuality is influenced strongly by biological factors and the environment. Thanks to these findings throughout the years, homosexuality was scientifically seen as a difference in genetics and no longer as a disease after many years of debate.

In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder and removed it from the official Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). This event was sparked by social protest movements during the 1950s-1970s which began as African-American civil right movements, but later on stretched into the realm of women’s and gay rights movements (The History of Psychiatry and Homosexuality). Before homosexuality was removed from the DSM, it was classified as a sociopathic personality disturbance, which agreed with societal attitudes about homosexuality during the 1950s (The History of Psychiatry and Homosexuality). Then, in 1968, homosexuality was listed as a sexual deviation, but no longer a mental disorder. And finally in 1973, homosexuality was removed entirely from the DSM. During this time, Alfred Kinsey revolutionized the way modern society thought of sexuality with his controversial studies on sexology and his even more controversial Kinsey Scale which rated individuals on a scale of 1-6 to classify their sexual behaviors (The History of Psychiatry and Homosexuality). Kinsey criticized scientists who typically represented homosexuals and heterosexuals as different type of individuals (The History of Psychiatry and Homosexuality). Further studies during this time found that homosexuality was common across many different cultures and it also existed in almost every non-human species of animal. This finding supported that homosexuality is both natural and widespread in cultures and even other species. This information helped LGBTQ+ activist groups during this time in their revolution against the classification of homosexuality as a disease. 

During the 1950s through the 1970s, more modern gay rights activist groups realized gay men and women were vulnerable physically, economically, and were still being denied basic human rights (The History of Psychiatry and Homosexuality). These gay rights activists confronted the APA’s decision about homosexuality in the DSM. There were many protests between the activists and scientists and psychiatrists at annual meetings of the APA, and eventually, many psychiatrists began to agree with and support the protestors’ views on homosexuality (The History of Psychiatry and Homosexuality). Some APA members still opposed homosexuality as ‘normal’, however, and they called for a referendum of the entire APA membership about the removal of homosexuality from the DSM. The decision to remove the term homosexuality from the DSM was upheld with a 58% majority of voting APA members (Gudel). There are still many people today who disagree with the methods of protestors and the influence they may have played in the removal of homosexuality from the DSM. These people may still perceive homosexuality as a pathological mental illness and believe psychiatrists may have been threatened to vote for the gay rights activists’ views. 

Mental illness is generally referred to as a range of mental health issues that can affect a person’s mood, thoughts, and behaviors (The History of Psychiatry and Homosexuality). Some groups would still classify homosexuality as a mental illness. According to an article in the Christian Research Journal, the three years leading up to the 1973 APA decision were filled with threats and intimidations from the gay rights activist groups that unfairly forced some psychiatrists to vote in their favor instead of according to their true beliefs (Gudel). Also according to this journal, in 1977, ten thousand members of the APA were randomly polled and 69% said they believed that homosexuality is usually a pathological adaptation, not a normal variation. This article would argue that the APA’s 1973 decision can’t be cited as a medical consensus regarding homosexuality as a normal condition because of the amount and intensity of threats made by gay rights activist groups. All of the statements and research in this article was completed in the 1970s and before, so some of this information could possibly be outdated, especially with all of the advancements in modern science and studies on this topic.

So the question becomes, what about today? Even now with magnificent strides in studies concerning sexuality and sexual orientation, there are still certain groups who would classify homosexuality as a disease, despite it not being brought up again by the APA or in the DSM since the 1970s. The concern about homosexuality tends to not be a question of facts or science; numerous studies have found homosexuality to be normal and widespread in humans and other species. It has become a question of morality and cultural perception. Defined now, homosexuality is not a disease anymore. The debate has now turned to whether homosexuality is morally correct in the eyes of different cultures. And this debate is slightly more difficult to prove wrong from right. 

According to differing cultures, the perspective on homosexuality and the definitions of what’s considered to be progressive or traditional have changed significantly over the years. With the American perspective, before the entire situation in 1973 with the DSM, homosexuality was viewed as a disease that needed to be cured. After homosexuality was declassified as a disease, the first and second waves of feminism were happening. This caused more progressive strides towards equality for the LGBTQ+ community in America. Modern gay rights activist groups were created and pushed for equal rights from there on out. 

Cultural outlooks on homosexuality can differentiate between areas of population, ethnicity, even governmental officials can try to have a say in homosexuality. The most prevalent form of discrimination of the LGBTQ+ community often comes from conservative religious populations. These people will say that the bible forbids homosexuality, so it is wrong and should not be practiced. It has been found by studies on populations that lesbians and gay men don’t do worse at their jobs and they can be just as good of friends and citizens in the community as anybody else. Recently, more of the LGBTQ+ community is out and open about their sexual orientation and the general public is starting to realize that they’re pretty much the same as everybody else in society (Cornuelle). When people tend to adhere to homosexual tendencies, it can either be attributed to the social exclusion due to physiological deviations from society’s moral standards or traumatized regression felt by the homosexual community (Kallmann). The negative cultural perspective on homosexuality basically centers around how homosexuals have been viewed throughout history and how hesitant society is now towards a more progressive mindset. 

While homosexuality may have been viewed as a disease in the many years leading up to progressivism, this is a new time in our world’s history. Hundreds of thousands of years ago, in some cultures homosexuality was associated with a warrior status (Byne). Homosexuality was even widely practiced and believed to be essential for the attainment of virility (Byne). In the recent past, however, homosexuality was viewed by many cultures as a disease of the brain that required a cure. People need to understand that that was a different point of time in history. Advances in understanding the brain and chemical imbalances in the body, as well as environmental influences on the turnout of genes have proven past views on homosexuality as invalid. People are more than entitled to their own opinions on homosexuality; whether they believe it to be untraditional or simply don’t agree with it for religious or personal purposes.

There is just no reason for homosexuality to be claimed as a disease anymore. All science has led to the revelation that homosexuality is a simple different in genetics, not a mutation or a disease of the brain. There is no need for harmful and degrading ‘cures’ that can actually cause more harm than good. According to John Spiegel, a closeted gay psychiatrist and president-elect of the APA at the time of the 1973 decision to declassify homosexuality from the DSM, it was a very degrading time and a triumphant victory for the LGBTQ+ community (“81 Words”). This was back in the 1970s, yet here we are 40 years later still fighting this battle over morality versus science. With more people turning towards a more modern, progressive state of mind, it is imperative to keep this in mind while making arguments about whether or not homosexuality is an actual disease. Homosexuality should not be seen as a disease, but a simple genetic difference that doesn’t cause a person harm and shouldn’t require them to change according to differing cultural aspects that they have no control over. Cultural attitudes and science should be separated regarding this topic. It is one thing to not agree with homosexuality in favor of more traditional values, but it is a completely different and unacceptable notion to say that homosexual individuals are diseased and need to be cured. Homosexual individuals are different, not diseased, and they should be treated as equally of humans as heterosexual people because they cannot help who they are or how their body turns out. Different does not and will never mean diseased. 
