Gallup: LGBTQ+ Identification in U.S. Now at 7.6%

....of all this is that it proves that homosexuality, transgenderism, and the like are not genetically determined. If it were, you would see relatively constant levels of these phenomena over the years.

Moreover, the sharp rise in self-reporting also indicates that what's at hand is NOT environmental factors, either, because those environmental factors have not changed much in the past few decades, but the self-reporting numbers have.

Nothing works except for a general cultural trend towards accepting LGBTQ+ as normal and even "cool". It's like the old joke:

Why did the monkey fall out of the tree?

He was dead.

Why did the second monkey fall out of the tree?

He was dead, too.

Why did the third monkey fall out of the tree?

Monkey see, monkey do.

It would be really funny, except for the fact that thousands of people are losing their chance at having a normal, fruitful adult life because of it.

Exactly, Bert.

And from the beginning, many queer theorists, thinkers, and theorists never claimed it was genetic or determined in the first place. A good number openly said, for example, that homosexuality was a choice for them, and one they were perfectly happy with. Many positioned the movement as a positive step toward the destabilization of gender norms across society. Sexuality was on a spectrum. And so on.

Those voices were carefully kept from the national conversation, because the genetic and deterministic arguments were always about selling it to a mainstream America with conventional values.

Note there are not, nor have there ever been, to my knowledge, tests regularly utilized by professionals to ascertain whether or no someone is truly trans or gay as opposed to them having a mental disorder, erotic fixation, or simply hunting for victim cred.

Why not? Because, for practical purposes, it's all the same thing.

I’m not sure about all that, myself. But I believe a percentage of this is fad/bandwagon effect.

One clear fact—as far as Gen Z is concerned—is that younger generations always want to distinguish themselves from the previous one as they enter young adulthood. And they always latch onto various things as key indicators of how they’re going to be better than the generation(s) before them—things they see as kind of core to the previous generation’s shortcomings and essential to their own distinctives.

Of course, real individuals are all over the map, but generations average out this way… and probably always have.

So there is probably a generational distinctive that has LGBTQ identity has a major component. I think it’s bigger than that but includes LGBTQ identity as a prominent feature.

I’m also increasingly inclined to think that a lot of my generation fell into the “orientation” trap (conservative Christians included). I’m not sure we can make a biblical case that there even is any such thing—genetic or otherwise. What we have is God’s revealed design for sexual ethics (and ‘identity’ as a subset).

In the conversations I’ve had with Gen Z (a pretty small sample, I admit) they question quite a lot of the assumptions of my generation, by default. I find that part refreshing. But of course, being humans, they’re going land on some bad answers—just like my generation has.

Precisely what I'm saying.

The "orientation trap" was tailored for your generation. Notice it primarily applied to the L and G, and arguably the B (although that one is interesting and possibly even a defeater to the whole framing, if you think about it; generally it was used to dismiss anyone who was able to change their orientation as "well, really they were bi, so it doesn't count"). It's quite irrelevant to the T and Q--is even potentially undermined by them--so it's not really part of the discourse anymore, except when dialoguing with cultural conservatives, where it still has some currency.

My point about the test was simple: If there is at least some bandwagoning here, and there certainly must be, then doctors should be interested in determining who is hopping on and who has a legitimate difference of identity/orientation, right?

The fact that there seems zero effort at distinguishing the "real" transgenders, for example, from the "confused" is suspect, to say the least.

....that I've noticed is that in some people, there is a progression that seems to speak to sexual opportunism, including but not limited to the "alphabet community". It's hard work to establish and maintain a relationship with one's spouse that will be consistently affectionate, but in certain circles, it's much easier to pursue and bed the desperate.

This then tends to end up with homosexuality for a very simple reason; the promiscuity of the homosexual community appears to exceed that of heterosexuals by a wide margin, and hence the person who has a "opportunistic sexuality ethic" will tend to end up homosexual or bisexual.