One of the criticisms made by homophobic people is that sexual orientations other than heterosexuality are merely choices people make. Such baseless and ridiculous claims often lead to even more harmful views such as the notion that LGBTs are mentally unstable, or all are promiscuous. These hateful charges against the LGBT community must be recognized and fought against. It is not only the duty of Marxists and leftists to fight for the emancipation of such groups of oppressed peoples, but a duty of the human race; for how can any one, of any ideology, speak of liberation yet be so hypocritical as to claiming that LGBTs do not fit in their “freedoms?”
In regards to the claim that sexual orientation is merely choice, this is false. There have been numerous cases of natural, wild animals exhibiting homosexual tendencies for example. Thousands of animal species have been studied, and not a single one of those species lacked homosexual behavior.
Therefore it is evident that such arguments made against homosexuals and other LGBTs are wildly inaccurate. But don’t just take my word for it. Here are some more scientific studies.
“The role of genetics in male sexual orientation was investigated by pedigree and linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men. Increased rates of same-sex orientation were found in the maternal uncles and male cousins of these subjects, but not in their fathers or paternal relatives, suggesting the possibility of sex-linked transmission in a portion of the population. DNA linkage analysis of a selected group of 40 families in which there were two gay brothers and no indication of nonmaternal transmission revealed a correlation between homosexual orientation and the inheritance of polymorphic markers on the X chromosome in approximately 64 percent of the sib-pairs tested. The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0 (P = 10(-5), indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.” ( Source )
“The Darwinian paradox of male homosexuality in humans is examined, i.e. if male homosexuality has a genetic component and homosexuals reproduce less than heterosexuals, then why is this trait maintained in the population? In a sample of 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men and their relatives (a total of over 4600 individuals), we found that female maternal relatives of homosexuals have higher fecundity than female maternal relatives of heterosexuals and that this difference is not found in female paternal relatives. The study confirms previous reports, in particular that homosexuals have more maternal than paternal male homosexual relatives, that homosexual males are more often later-born than first–born and that they have more older brothers than older sisters. We discuss the findings and their implications for current research on male homosexuality.” ( Source )
“Homosexual male probands with monozygotic cotwins, dizygotic cotwins, or adoptive brothers were recruited using homophile publications. Sexual orientation of relatives was assessed either by asking relatives directly, or when this was impossible, asking the probands. Of the relatives whose sexual orientation could be rated, 52% (29/56) of monozygotic cotwins, 22% (12/54) of dizygotic cotwins, and 11% (6/57) of adoptive brothers were homosexual. Heritabilities were substantial under a wide range of assumptions about the population base rate of homosexuality and ascertainment bias” ( Source )
“We examined data from a large cohort of homosexual and heterosexual females and males concerning their siblings’ sexual orientations. As in previous studies, both male and female homosexuality were familial. Homosexual females had an excess of homosexual brothers compared to heteroxual subjects, thus providing evidence that similar familial factors influence both male and female homosexuality. Furthermore, despite the large sample size, homosexual females and males did not differ significantly from each other in their proportions of either homosexual sisters or homosexual brothers. Thus, results were most consistent with the possibility that similar familial factors influence male and female sexual orientation. We also examined whether some parental influences comprised shared environmental effects on sexual orientation. Scales attempting to measure such influences failed to distinguish subjects with homosexual siblings from subjects with only heterosexual siblings and, thus, did not appear to measure shared environmental determinants of sexual orientation.” ( Source )
As for the relation between Marxism and homosexuality, it is true that many historical Marxists were homophobic. Engels is notorious for speaking against homosexuals, in some instances even equating them with pedophiles. Homosexuality was outlawed in various states adhering to socialistic ideologies. The main reasoning behind this is that, in accordance to Engels views, homosexuality was perceived as “bourgeois decadence.” Primarily based on the behavior of wealthy males of ancient Greek and Roman society who often practiced sodomy while attending lavish parties. Same-sex sexual orientation was also seen as promoting “gender chauvinism,” and the output of too many bored, confused, sexually frustrated and decadent capitalists. Although the actual leaders of socialist states seldom spoke of homosexuality, it was common for it to be outlawed. Lenin receives a lot of praise for legalizing it, but it wasn’t something he particularly mentioned personally, so it is not to say he was the one who legalized it. It was then delegalized later during Stalin’s leadership, but again, he never spoke of homosexuality. Still, at the time when this was occurring, the world over was inherently conservative on the matter of same-sex relationships. Nonetheless, it was indeed a poor mistake in judgement of past Marxists.