>>10371 (samefag)
Also I personally don't see why everyone thinks it's important to know if homosexuality (or anything else) is innate or not.
Suppose it isn't. So what? You still need an extremely good reason to make prescriptive claims about it.
Admittedly people can have different standards for what counts as that. I mean there are people who eat literal shit as a fetish (dumb term btw, hererosexuality counts as a fetish) and I don't think that means they ought to be sent to asylums to get "cured" or something, nor do they need to show receipts that the reason for why they like eating shit is innate.
Lots of people, however, would agree with these sorts of measures against shit-eaters if their behaviour isn't inherent, unfortunately. It cuts both ways.
My point is that everyone (ranging from chvds to wokes) places undue importance on innateness & bio-essentialism as if that's supposed to change anything. It becomes extra frustrating since there are many behaviours that are genetic in origin but which many people agree that it should curtailed. That's completely fine because innateness shouldn't be a part of the equation in the first place, but the hypocrisy is annoying since it does become part of that elsewhere.