Is homosexuality genetic?

[ringmastery]

Interesting article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/03/opinion/03KRIS.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists

Yet surprisingly few readers raised the most obvious question: if homosexuality is partly genetic, why are there so many gays?

After all, gays are presumably less likely to engage in heterosexual pairings — the behavior that passes down genes. So if there are genes linked to homosexuality (which is still not proved, but seems increasingly likely), then how have they been passed down to our day?

Scientists have offered a range of theories. One is that gays might not have been fecund baby-producers, but that they guarded their nephews and nieces from saber-toothed tigers and thus helped ensure the survival of closely related genes.

Another theory is that gays have unusually strong sex drives, and that while most of this energy has been wasted on nonreproductive flings, enough goes toward male-female pairings that the genes are passed on. Both theories have largely been discounted.

One clue to a more subtle theory is that other primates, including close relatives like the bonobos, often engage in homosexual behavior, apparently as a way of forming alliances. Bonobos curry favor by performing oral sex on others of the same gender, even though they also seize every opportunity to mate with those of the opposite sex.

It may be that for bonobos — and perhaps for our cave-dwelling ancestors — an inclination to engage in homosexual sex conferred Darwinian advantages by helping to gain favor and protection from group leaders. But the pattern fits bonobos better than it does human males: bonobos appear primarily heterosexual or bisexual, while some human males (more than females, some scholars say) seem hard-wired to be exclusively gay.

[sangh0]

1. No, it's biological

and if you don't what the difference is, you can read the article you linked for some hints.

Example "if homosexuality is partly genetic"...."unusual androgen levels in the womb (which also appear to play a role)"

[rucky]

2. Do you have a study on that?

I'm the oldest of three siblings - my brothers are gay & I'm straight. I know there's a study out there that explains this pattern & it has something to do with the hormonal balance of the mother that changes with each pregnancy. Just can't find it.

edit: google is my friend: "androgen" was the missing word. Thanks!

[nostamj]

7. i'm the oldest of four

i'm gay and my siblings are straight.

is there a study for that pattern??

[trof]

10. Ever read "Brain Sex"?

Fascinating book. Primarily about differences in male and female brains, but there are interesting sections about homosexuality and hormonal changes in the womb.

[sistersofmercy]

3. The important question to me is, why are there studies on the subject

in the first place? Are they attempting to find a "fix"? An anti-gay serum?
Yet there are all sorts of studies on the effects of hormones on brain development in utero as well as during puberty.
Perhaps I'm missing something but wouldn't that research money be better spent elsewhere? Then again, I believe gay people are gay and that is just that, that is who they are. Looking for a cause seems futile to me.
I'd much rather the money be spent on the reasons for homophobic behavior! To me that is a DISEASE and needs a cure. But once again we have the scientific community's approach being quite the opposite.

[sangh0]

4. There are many reasons for this

One of them is to counter the right's claim that homosexuality is a lifestyle "choice"

[ringmastery]

6. Although isn't it a choice for some?

That's where it gets confusing.

Heterosexual men can go to prison and change their orientation.

Also, What about bisexual men and women who "choose" to be with whoever they want?

[rucky]

8. Prison sex is about domination

not orientation

RE bisexuality: Think of sexual orientation as a spectrum with varying degrees (maybe a reverse bell curve with a higher slope on the "straight" end?), rather than an either/or.

[joeybee12]

28. Disagree--men go to prison and perhaps engage in homosexual sex

but that does not change their orientation. Having homosexual sex and being homosexual are completely different. Their's is simply an outlet for sexual release.

[leftist_rebel1569]

31. That's implying that sexuality is always absolute

Think about it for a minute...assuming that it's biological, it would mean it would have varying degrees like everything else decided by genes. The color of hair isn't always a solid brown or red or blonde...there are people with auburn and light brown hair that are mixes. People don't have the same color eyes, nor is everyone the same height. Same thing with sexuality, it's not black and white. Sure, it can be for a few, but not everyone.

[joeybee12]

33. Well, I think I'm defining homosexuality as more than just sex

I see your point, and I've heard it often--usually to explain bisexuality.

But to say someone changes their orientation due to circumstances I don't buy. If so, then these inmates would solely have homosexual sex outside of prison, and I doubt they do.

[leftist_rebel1569]

34. I was only trying to explain bisexuality

I didn't really touch on the prison sex thing. That said, I agree with you in that I don't believe that prison sex makes inmates gay. It's more of a form of domination than anything else, imo.

[joeybee12]

36. Yeah, and I really don't want to talk or THINK about prison sex

too much.

Other than on Oz.

[leftist_rebel1569]

37. Agreed

n/t

[sistersofmercy]

11. Fair enough!

But if it were scientifically found to be a lifestyle choice, so what?
Do you honestly believe if it were found to be biologically based that it would change the sentiments of any homophobes? I believe it just further fuels the homophobic ignorance. People need to mind their own business IMHO. There certainly are more ways than one to look at the issue and if the majority of gays find no fault with it, well, than who am I to say.

[ArkDem]

5. Science can be be a bummer.

.

[dani]

9. There has been some research into homophobia

For example, see this article on Planet Out:
http://www.planetout.com/pno/news/article.html?2002/02/08/3

Heterosexual males who may feel insecure about their masculinity could have a tendency to be aggressive toward gays, says a new study.

The research may point to the psychological roots of homophobia and gay-bashing, explained researcher Richard H. Gramzow of Northeastern University in Boston.

"Men with a threatened male ego may be typically more hostile towards gay men," he told Reuters Health, "and that could eventually translate into more aggressive behaviors."

[sistersofmercy]

12. Yes I have read them but none which are definitive.

[trof]

13. My analogy.

Maybe a bit too simplistic, but something along these lines...
The world is mostly brown-eyed, and blue-eyed people are demonized for "choosing" to have blue eyes and not being like all the rest of us.

Advances in medical and biological studies amazingly reveal that blue eyes are NOT a "choice" after all. The individual has absolutely no control over eye color.

Eveyone who used to demean and belittle blue eyes realizes the error of their ways, apologizes, and we all live happily ever after.

Except...except for a small group of narrow-minded fanatics who don't believe in science and continue to persecute (and even prosecute, if possible) blue-eyeds whenever and wherever they can because, after all, they're STILL different and unrepentant.
:-)

[geniph]

30. Actually, a better analogy is to left-handedness

because the world assumes right-handedness is the default, makes it inconvenient to be a southpaw, and they used to badly mistreat southpaws. As recently as the 50s, kids had their left arms tied behind their backs or were whacked every time they tried to use their left hands. It was seen as defective to be left-handed. We're becoming less leftophobic societally, but scissors are still backward.

And, hell, I'm righthanded but not narrow!

[LeahMira]

15. Eugenics?

The important question to me is, why are there studies on the subject .... in the first place? Are they attempting to find a "fix"? An anti-gay serum?

Actually, I have read some suggestions like that. Pretty horrible idea, IMO.


Then again, I believe gay people are gay and that is just that, that is who they are. Looking for a cause seems futile to me.

To me, too. But I think that all sorts of qualities are passed along genetically... or somehow! I don't think we will ever entirely separate the nature/nurture thing, but I tend to look more at the nature side.

Being a person who was adopted I can tell you that there are talents and attitudes that run straight through my birth families and definitely are not present in my adoptive family but I have them. I'm not talking about appearance, but about more intangibles. Go figure.

You are right on. People are who they are and that is just that. Why on earth would anyone want to tinker with it?

[Silverhair]

16. It is the nature of scientist to ask, "Why" about everything.

I would oppose anyone who tried to stop any research because you didn't politicly approve of it.

[sistersofmercy]

17. Ok but I'm merely questioning the motives for the research to begin

with and believe there are other more worthy issue to undertake with research. That's all! As I stated, if the majority of the gay community has no problem with and would like the research to continue, then who I am to complain.

[Silverhair]

21. It is the nature of humans to be inquisitive.

I could care less about the motive of a researcher, as long as the research is done correctly and subject to the usual peer review process, then the findings, whatever they are are valid. That's how science works.

If the motive for some research has to pass a political correctness test before it can continue, then it will cast a great chill on science.

In fact about 20 years years ago the feminist movement was trying to stop research in the difference between male and female brains. they were afraid the results would be politically damaging to them. It is now known that there are genuine differences, from birth, in the way the sexes process information.

Science must be free from politicaly considerations in it's quest.

[sistersofmercy]

39. Tuskegee Syphilis study, ever heard of it?

FYI, studies of puberty onset are very interesting if you would like to know more about brain development in female and male and the influence of hormones on thought process.
Of course it is necessary to question the motives and ethics behind a study.

[jokerman93]

14. Maybe human sexuality is a yet incomplete evolution

Human's are currently transcending the need for biological procreation. Our species is grotesquely bloated and overpopulated, ravaging and devouring our world habitat. that's one factor.

Another point may be that sexuality in humans is becoming more broadly "analogue" then binary. Perhaps human sexuality is in the process of becoming increasingly complex and expressive because we are the only animals (as far as we know) for whom "meanings" have been applied to sexual behavior for eaons. We can't underestimate the effects of "meaning" attribution on the evolution of human sexual behavior and culture.

In my universe, human sexuality is pushing to become as multifaceted and expressive of individuality as the evolution of language have done.

Human sexuality is a language as much as it is biology.

[DrWeird]

18. Is the ability for women to live past menopause genetic?

After all, they can't reproduce.

[MojoKrunch]

26. But they make excellent allo-mothers.

So says Sarah Hrdy, anyway.

I buy it.

Mojo

[sistersofmercy]

19. Can someone please explain why this was moved from GD?

[Plaid Adder]

20. I don't care.

I really don't.

I know a lot of people think that if we can 'prove' that there is a biological basis for homosexuality, then it will make it easier to argue for tolerance, on the theory that more people will agree that you shouldn't punish people for something they 'can't help.' I understand the attraction of that argument but I think the negatives outweigh the positives:

* If people believe homosexuality has a biological cause, then they will inevitably start looking for a biological 'solution.'

* From a fundie religious standpoint, it doesn't matter whether you're biologically predisposed to homosexuality or not, it's your job to fight those evil sinful urges with every breath in your body. So no help there.

* Something deep within me just gets pissed off about the fact that people seem to feel that they have to represent homosexuality as something that they 'can't help' in order to claim tolerance and understanding. So what if we can help it? For me the question is not, could I have lived as a straight woman, but rather, why should I have to?

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[ringmastery]

22. biological solutions

You know that's going to be one hell of an ethical pandora's box. If the cause of homosexuality is unusual androgen levels in the womb, what's preventing them from detecting that early on in a pregnency and "fixing" those androgen levels to normal levels?

If a doctor tells you that your baby may be predisposed to being gay and a lifetime of prejudice, but if we do this treatment the chances of them being gay are lessened..

I can see the vast, vast, majority of parents opting for the treatment.

Does anyone know if this is science fiction or something that may happen in the future?

[thom1102]

25. There is a play (and even a movie, I think) called Twilight of the Golds..

which explores this ethical dilemma. I haven't seen it, but i'd like to.

[MojoKrunch]

27. Yeppers to the ethical dilema.

If a doctor tells you that your baby may be predisposed to being gay and a lifetime of prejudice, but if we do this treatment the chances of them being gay are lessened.
I can see the vast, vast, majority of parents opting for the treatment.
And could anyone blame them if that were the case given the way this culture treats homosexuals?
Heck, I could see parents who *didn't* getting sued by their "unfortunate" offspring.

Which leads to another ethical conundrum with genetic engineering/correction. At what point will parents be *required* to do something?
Let us say that a not so basic "fix" is for some genetic susceptibility to a certain disease and that it isn't part of the genetic "overhaul" package mom and dad picked out for Jr.
Jr. gets the disease at age 20.
And how many people will get left out because of the cost?
Does the government have the responsibility to make it available to everyone?
Should this only be available to those who can afford it?

I'm unconvinced it is biological and having to do with androgen levels in the womb... the presence of "homosexuality" across the animal kingdom makes me believe this is a result of some heretofore unrealized evolutionary pressure expressed in a cluster of genes.

Does anyone know if this is science fiction or something that may happen in the future?
How can we know?
I mean science fiction speculates about the future.

Is it *possible*?
Assuredly.
Especially if homosexuality is linked conclusively to something like androgen levels.

But, like I said, I remain unconviced it is anything but widely genetic, ie., not a single gene.

Mojo

[Silverhair]

23. It may be due to maternal stress

in the mother during the 4th and/or 5th months of development, that causes the brain development to become different. It is known that homosexual rats can be produced by stressing the mother rat. Also, the East Germans found that women who were PG during the bombing of Berlin had far higher rates of homosexual children.

This still means that the person is born that way, it isn't a choice.

Of interest: Not as an attack on homosexuality, but because of the extremely well documented adverse health effects of stress, a drug company is working on a medication to block the stress harmone.

[thom1102]

24. To answer your question about genetics...

If homosexuality is genetic in nature, it is possible that it is a recessive trait, in which case, the gene may be present in one person, but that person is not gay because there is also a dominant gene for heterosexuality. This condition is known as heterozygous (the gene pairing contains two different genes, one dominant, the other recessive). It is only when two people with the heterozygous genes mate that their offspring can produce a child with with homozygous (two of the same genes) recessive pairing, which in this instance means that two straight parents can produce a gay child.

That is one method the gene could be maintained in the population. One other factor overlooked here is that homosexuals, due to societal pressures have married and have had children throughout history. And if homosexuality is genetic, then those genes have passed down directly in spite of the tendency of most homosexuals not to reproduce, by those who do chose to have children.

Personally, I think human sexuality is much more complex than that, and that complexity is only made worse by the social stigma our society places on gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered.

[Deja Q]

29. Homosexuals will force themselves into heterosexuality to avoid abuse...

Like taunting, maiming, murdering...

That's all I'd guess. Personally, people should treat each others as equals and we'd be a far more peaceful species...

[Djinn]

32. why??

I don't care who people sleep with (consenting natch) and I don't care why they sleep with them.

No-one's doing any research into why lots of women like "bad" guys or why some men like blondes and other like brunettes - who cares

No-one will ever change the fundie's minds - that's the problem with "beleifs" they're hard to change and you can't reason with the unreasonable and I don't see how we change the non fundie yet still homophobic's mind by saying "be nice they can't help it" which is in effect what is being said every time a fundie is countered with the biological/genetic argument.

The fact that there is a genetic factor as to why I have freckles and am short for example doesn't mean that THAT's why I shouldn't be discriminated against - regardless if it's because of something my parents did when I was a child, diet, environment or biology bottom line is you have no right to discriminate against me because of it.

Why should we try and get in line with the bigots?

[private_ryan]

35. not heterosexuality but bisexuality

I know of two guys who I think and everyone agrees that they're gay but they got married. I doubt that they stopped seeing guys

[Fleshdancer]

38. I'm inclined to think it's biological

but I'm no scientist so I really don't have much insight to add to this debate. I just know that heterosexual people don't wake up one morning and choose who they prefer to love emotionally, spiritually, and sexually therefore the same logic would apply to homosexuals.

However, my awesome Grandmother who passed away a few years back had a funny theory - she thought homosexual men were homosexual for biological reasons...because their "g-spot was located inside their anus".

Granted Grandma didn't take into account the ability of homosexual people to love, nurture, and feel the most comfortable with companionship from their own gender, but she was open minded for her generation and her logic still cracks me up today.