Jump to content
Johncr8992

How far are we to change the sexual orientation of a person using neuroscience, CRISPR, Neuromodulation, neuronal transplants and other technologies?

Recommended Posts

DrmDoc, thank you for the reference, I will read it! But do you know or have more articles more specifically related on the area, but involving people without gender dysphoria(just researching the orientation)? I haven't found a research from 2016, and it seems many stuff is inconclusive... Are we that far from understanding it, like, more than 20 years?

About the discussion, I confess I was afraid the topic could went into ethics, as it seems to be hard to focus on touchy topics always '_' But I guess a more clever way to reask the same question is ' How far are we to identify the circuitry involved in sexual orientation? And for those who, in an equal society, still wanting to change it, how long science seems to deliver that kind of approach? '

 

I think the answer to your question here is what the research link I provided shows. That research suggests that sexual orientation involves neural activations of the hippocampus, parahippocampal gyrus, anterior cingulate gyrus, putamen, amygdala, hypothalamus, and insula. Specifically, that research shows those areas of the brain activated or aroused in the presence of visual stimuli associated with our sexual interests. Although this research suggests those brain areas involving our sexual arousal, it doesn't identify the cause of that arousal. If the question is about the neural circuitry that causes our sexual attraction to a specific gender, this research doesn't provide an answer. If the question regards the neural circuity associated with our gender identity, we won't find an answer in this research either. I believe what you are looking for is the possibility to overwrite our neural circuitry; however, our gender attraction and identity isn't just a neural matter. We can't reprogram our brain circuitry without including other factors such as genetic, hormonal, and social environment.

 

So DrmDoc you "think our quest should be about finding ways to be happy with oneself without radical changes and for others to be more accepting and respectful of our differences" ?

So you don't agree with sex reassignment surgery, and the very need for transgendered people ?

 

Did you mean something else or are you being hypocritical ?

 

As StringJunky and iNow have so eloquently expressed, my comments regarded the rights, acceptance and respect of others for who they are rather than a denial of their options to be who they are.

Edited by DrmDoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm wondering is if the use of CRISPR, genetically changing the receptors sensitivity for some stymulus, and also the use of optogenetics, nanotechnology, and the future technologies that are coming, in general, can make a revolution in everything concepting not only sexual orientation, but mental ilnesses (such as schyzophrenia, autism, and many others), and the mind as well. Don't you believe we can really map the human brain and uncover it one day? We are still so limited on this field, but I always read hoping news about everything for the future

I certainly think we will continue to advance our understanding of the brain and make strides in our abilities to alter genetics and change certain traits. What I struggle with is how you're equating homosexuality (whether intentionally/consciously or not) with mental illness, schizophrenia, autism, and others.

 

Basically, I question the premise of why we'd ever want to, especially when you refer to CRISPR technology which would mandate doing all of this before fertilization or in the womb, hence would not be a personal choice of the individual and how they themselves feel about their own sexuality. No... somebody would be doing this TO them based on reasons related to social biases and prejudices.

Edited by iNow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I struggle with is how you're equating homosexuality (whether intentionally/consciously or not) with mental illness, schizophrenia, autism, and others.

It's almost a Freudian Slip isn't it? Speaking of disabilities or diseases in the same breathe as homosexuality; revealing the fact that one really thinks it's deviant behaviour, despite ones protests to the contrary; we are prone to carrying unconscious, culturally-indoctrinated agendas that turn out to be divisive and not conducive to an all-inclusive social harmony.

 

I say this not to denigrate you John, but to possibly help you realise that your approach may be coloured by a long-held personal agenda, unconsciously created and nurtured within your family, perhaps, or other important personal influences. I admit, I have fallen for the very same influences in my teens and early twenties. It takes a conscious effort to address and deal with it so that one can have a more objective, inclusive and compassionate view of people who fall outside of cultural norms but who's behaviour is not detrimental, in any way, to a cohesive and co-operative society.

 

Social workers in the UK are keenly aware of personal biases and agendas affecting their judgement; I learnt about it from one or two such friends.

Edited by StringJunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was busy yesterday and saw that today, sorry guys. String, I know, and I appreciate your words. Actually, I will expose my situation briefly, even if its not related to the scientifc line of the topic and the forum. Im homossexual, and I don't have religion, my family is completely supportive and friends are nice. Even with no rejection at all, personally I prefer women, as I find them more attractive, kind and gentle. So there's the reason of my bias. That's why I told there are cases not related to prejudice that can boost a person for a change in the orientation. The byproduct of acceptance is that you should accept always your condition. But me, personally, feel this approach imprisoning like the prejudice per se, but on the other way. Of course, for now it works, as it's a life-long condition. But why is it a problem to develop a way to change that in cases like mine? And when the condition will be available, we may need to rethink ethics carefully (Probably there are some controversial scientists that can eventually find something, so I guess we can't really stop that, only slow the process). Not always is exactly prejudice or bias toward awkwardness.

That's why theres a need for regulation actually. Kids and people in a difficult situation would not ble able to do a procedure like that, exactly to give the person the right of choose. But the person has to have the right.... Its different than gene-editing, for example, when you are editing a person that don't have the power of choice.

Ethics are complex because new technologies are turning possible what years ago was only sci-fi. These days a scientist achieved the dead-line for an IVF embryo, 13 days, and there's discussion about how long should we allow scientists to do research on embryos.

Edited by Johncr8992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate your candour. Perhaps, the mods might split this off just before your last post because it and this post is not related to this forum.

 

If you have an appreciation and affection for the opposite sex, could you not stop labeling yourself as 'homosexual', which can be an exclusive term regarding ones desires, and think of yourself as 'sexually fluid'; use a label with a wider definition to define that side of yourself? That way, you might not feel so trapped within one narrow view of oneself; be and think what you feel at any particular time instead of thinking "I can't do this or think like this because I'm <insert label>". Just let yourself go.

 

I might add that the mods, forum policy, and many nuclear members are supportive of all varieties of gender and sexual identities, consistent with the laws and commonsense of the UK and US. If you wish to talk about that side of things in other contexts within more appropriate forums on this site it will not be frowned upon.

 

Regarding sexual identity reassignment I can only reiterate what we've said before.

Edited by StringJunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, its possible String. Maybe next time I'll try to make an even more neutral approach with controversial topics and issues. Well, how could I say... the desire is stronger for men...for woman it's really hard to feel anything. But men, for me, were not exactly something I really felt it was fitting in me, even after many and many years. It's just that women are what I like most, even without the sexual 'support' (the reason I labelled myself as homossexual). But then, there's why I think we should try to develop such a technology. It can be used in a harmless way, i really believe that. So, before mods come and finish this..... scientifically talking, do you think we will be alive when this type of modification of the brain and the mind comes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My preference would be for science to be used primarily to help us realize more of our potential and to be focused less on trying to find new ways to change ourselves.

 

I concede, however, that my opinion is limited to my own experience and should in no way way be used to prevent others from pursuing whatever path they feel is best for their own personal wellbeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point iNow, and I respect it. I'm from the team that science can be used for good or bad, but what can be good is when science brings happiness to the humans, despite the real purpose. I mean, if we can find ways to regulate the tools, we can use it to help people to pursue what they want, if this is not harming nobody! Science as a tool for humans expanding themselves, but also to help them achieve happines, equilibrium and well being in a life-span

Edited by Johncr8992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point iNow, and I respect it. I'm from the team that science can be used for good or bad, but what can be good is when science brings happiness to the humans, despite the real purpose. I mean, if we can find ways to regulate the tools, we can use it to help people to pursue what they want, if this is not harming nobody! Science as a tool for humans expanding themselves, but also to help them achieve happines, equilibrium and well being in a life-span

You could make the subject of this post a thread in itself in Ethics or possibly philosophy depending on the angle you wish to pursue. You could encompass what iNow said and what you think as contrasting approaches to discuss in your question.

Edited by StringJunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand, don't disagree in spirit, and want you to be well.

 

Thought of this for some reason:

 

 

Marcus-Aurelius-Quotes-25-The-Best-Ones.

 

Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.