AIBU to think believing science can change sexual orientation is a logical and reasonable assumption?

[haggistramp]

From Ann Widdicome who believes that as science can change a person's sex then its logical that science could change a person's sexual orientation? To be clear I dont believe this, I dont think science (be it hormones or extreme plastic surgery) can change a person's sex, let alone a person's sexual orientation but for those who do believe humans can change sex, do you agee? If not, why not?

Ann Widdicombe? The woman is stark staring bonkers - I wouldn't believe or give credit to a single thing she says!

Widdecombe is a bigoted piece of shit

^Widdecombe is a bigoted piece of shit

I couldn't agree more.

She could tell me the sun would rise in the morning and I'd be reluctant to believe her.

If you’re talking about trans people then you’ve made a fairly basic mistake in confusing biological sex with gender.

What’s more, whether you agree with Widdecombe or not, it is bloody homophobic to use her argument as bait to make whatever point you’re trying to get across about transgenderism.

LGBT people don’t exist as straw men for you to pit against each other, and as a bisexual woman I’m repulsed that you’re using the homophobia I experience directed at me as a means of oppressing trans people.

Can science change you from being a bigoted, odious twat?

Im not disagreeing, what she says sounds ridiculous because I believe in real science where facts dont care about feelings but for the majority of people (or so it sometimes seems) believe that you can change your sex, with or without surgery or hormones is some cases, do they then believe that sexual orientation can also be changed? If you believe the former, then logically the latter also stands to be true surely?

Nothing can change a persons sex, only the outward appearance can be changed. I’m confused how a presumably educated adult thinks this and actually it’s very arrogant
The nature v nurture argument ref: sexual orientation will always go on, no one knows do they?

It's not logically continuous no because we'd be talking here of method, which takes into account first the 'what' that's being changed, and the determination of sex is materialist whereas sexual orientation largely is not thought of in such terms - i.e. it's not like sexual orientation is chromosomally represented, we don't have sexual orientation organs, we don't have sexual orientation hormones.

What a load of goady bollocks. Nobody believes people can change sex. Obviously you're attempting to refer to individuals living as a different GENDER to that assigned at birth.

You're not clever. But no doubt this will go down well on Mumsnet, where the feminist board seems to have become a happy home for bigots.

(There have been studies proving higher prevalence of PCOS diagnosis or ovarian cysts (it's one but not both, can't remember, very odd!) in lesbians vs. rest of female population, but again there are very few secondary conclusions to draw there that aren't merely correlative.)

X posted - when you pin people down about “sex changes” they may concede that you can’t “actually” change sex. But a lot of people just nod and agree. The word “sex change” doesn’t help; I suppose it means they’ve changed the appearance of their external sex organs to match that of the opposite sex but people don’t question things.

What do you mean? How could science change the people you are attracted to? I don’t understand what you’re getting at? If you don’t agree, why ask?

Gender is not a protected characteristic, im not even sure what gender is, ive yet to hear a concise definition of it. Tbh the more I read about gender, the more it sounds like one's unique personality, everyone has one that is more or less different from everyone elses and has nothing to do with either sex or sexual orientation. Im not bigoted against transpeople, I'll fight for and with them so that have the same human rights as much as every other human, regardless of how they rightfully choose to act or appear.

Whether you agree with Widdecombe or not, it is bloody homophobic to use her argument as bait to make whatever point you’re trying to get across about transgenderism.

OP are you Anne Widdicombe? I can't think of another explanation for your statement.

Obviously you're attempting to refer to individuals living as a different GENDER to that assigned at birth.

How is gender assigned at birth?

Sex is an observable fact for 99.9% of babies at birth. Gender takes much longer to be layered on top (girls = pink and dolls, boys = blue and dinosaurs).

My parents dressed me in orange and brown as a baby (70s), so what gender did that make me?

Of course science can change sexuality. Lots of middle aged straight blokes can, with the application of science a dress become lesbians

@haggistramp did it even occur to you how hurtful it is to those of us who are LGB to have such an important part of our identities picked over in this way and dragged out for discussion just because you want to make a point about transgenderism?

Do you really not see how it’s goady and cruel to play devils advocate and invite everyone to comment on whether we could be made normal by science so you can have a ‘gotcha!’ moment about trans rights?

Personally i believe there are some aspects of changing ones gender (whatever that may be) which appear to be homophobic, and I dont think its homophobic to point that out. But thats not the point of this thread, if some people think its possible to change sex then why not the ability to change sexual orientation? But from some of the responses so far, im being told no one thinks its possible to change sex, which is in line with what I also think.

Does Ann Widdecombe believe that a person can change sex? That doesn’t sound like her.

I get what the OP is saying (I think) - I haven't seen Widdecombe's comments though and she's generally a twat.

But - if you believe that you can change sex (or gender) and you classify sexual orientation as being attracted to a particular sex (or gender) then surely you do believe you can change sexual orientation?

I don't believe you can change sex and I think gender is a pile of shite, FWIW. But if you believe a man can become a woman (whether you consider this a sex or gender definition) or vice versa, and if you define orientation as being related to the same definitions, then surely in this situation their sexual orientation has changed. So if they were previously a gay male (attracted to men) and have become a woman then they are now a straight woman?

@LMS, equally some of us who are LBT are very concerned that the push of the ability to change sex is damaging and dangerous to the LGB community as seen with the Anne Widdicomes comments and the disgusting homophobic assertations that lesbians are transphobic if they dont accept female penis. But again, not the point i was trying to make. I was more looking at it from a gay conversion viewpoint, that if people believe the former (and I think a lot do) then the latter is also probably possible, and I think that if gay conversion was somehow socially/scientifically pushed it would appeal sadly to a lot of people.

All OP is asserting is that the reasoning behind both propositions is consistent it's a hypothetical question, what happened to questioning stuff just because it's interesting. This kind of Q sheds light on the kind of weird unmerited associations we make between sex, bodies and sexual orientation.
OP's asking whether the nature of changeability of sex and sexual orientation coalign in such a way that scientific method would be suited to undertaking such a task. It's irrelevant whether science is currently suited to it or not.

I think posters are misunderstanding your point OP. Which is a shame because it’s a good one.

You’re pointing out the homophobia that’s inherent in trans ideology. If you can will it hard enough and take enough hormones then you can change sex (according to trans ideology) therefore, surely you ought to be able to do the same and turn from gay-straight?

Except of course that’s bollocks.