Gay brothers may hold genetic clues for roots of homosexuality

glasshouse

prism wrote:

since such a tiny percentage of child molesters are women how do you then explain what contributes to females becoming lesbian?

again not that it matters what does or doesn't "make" a person gay or lesbian or straight, they just "are". i don't think that nurture and a child's environment has nearly as much of an impact on someone's sexual orientation as does nature and that people really are "born that way"

fair enough - i don't hold the answer, just an opinion.

know1

I do not believe in a single cause for homosexuality (or anything for that matter).

There might be a genetic predisposition and for some people it could be purely choice. For most, it probably falls into some combination thereof.

810wmb

prism wrote:

since such a tiny percentage of child molesters are women how do you then explain what contributes to females becoming lesbian?

umm, because women taste good?

i would be a lesbian, if i was a woman

soulsinging

glasshouse wrote:

iv'e read somewhere that 8/10 people who get molested (by the same sex) during infancy/childhood do have homosexual tendancies during adulthood. i did not say this theory explains homosexuality as a rule, i just think it is a contributing factor. i know 3 people who were molersted as children and all 3 of them are gay today.

that says nothing. all it says is that being molested as a kid fucks up your sexual identity. talk about a "no shit" conclusion. i'm willing to bet they also have bisexual, hetereosexual and all kinds of other sexual "tendencies" during adulthood. hell, what IS a homosexual tendency? if you want to support your theory, you've got to find gay people and see what percentage of them were molested as kids. if you're right, it will be pretty damn high, way higher than the normal rates.

qwerty1

You are born gay, it is not a choice. I know that for sure!

NoK

glasshouse wrote:

iv'e read somewhere that 8/10 people who get molested (by the same sex) during infancy/childhood do have homosexual tendancies during adulthood. i did not say this theory explains homosexuality as a rule, i just think it is a contributing factor. i know 3 people who were molersted as children and all 3 of them are gay today.

i think it only applies to paedophilia.. if you're a paedophile you've most likely been molested as a kid.. and if ur molested as a kid u have a higher risk of developing into one... those are the only things i've read about that topic

Collin

Abuskedti wrote:

Is there a Pearl Jam fan gene?

I don't know, but I'd love to lead the research!

NoK

i think if they find gay and non-gay identical twins then that would piss on the whole gay gene theory.. thats what they should be looking for..

i think the more likely outcome is that the changes of expression of specific genes between people might cause changes in sexual orientation but my opinion is that those changes are the outcome of social factors..

Collin

qwerty wrote:

You are born gay, it is not a choice. I know that for sure!

I don't see how you can know that for sure. I mean, if you're gay you can say, I've felt this urge and I never chose for it like straight people didn't choose to be straight. But that doesn't mean other factors couldn't have "made" you gay, you know. I never felt a gay urge but then again, who knows maybe if I were molested as a child or grew up in a different environment I might have been gay...

In that way it's interesting to know... but I doubt this will make any difference...

Your sig. is hilarious by the way

surferdude

elmer wrote:

surely any developments will only be used negatively, as for parents being given the choice to interfere with the genetics of future children......

But I thought every abortion was a good abortion? Who are you to judge some abortions as negative? Pro-choice means accepting all choices without judgement.

Is aborting a fetus because it may be gay baby any worse than aborting it because it is a baby period? or the mother is poor or feels unprepared?

qwerty1

I grew up in as normal a hosehold as possible, and I am gay. Im sure there are gay people who were molested as children, just like there are many straight people that were molested as children. That can not be an indicator of ones sexuallity. I no more choose to be gay than you choose to be straight. Im very happy with my life btw.

Collin wrote:

I don't see how you can know that for sure. I mean, if you're gay you can say, I've felt this urge and I never chose for it like straight people didn't choose to be straight. But that doesn't mean other factors couldn't have "made" you gay, you know. I never felt a gay urge but then again, who knows maybe if I were molested as a child or grew up in a different environment I might have been gay...

In that way it's interesting to know... but I doubt this will make any difference...

Your sig. is hilarious by the way

Ahnimus

Maybe choosing which movie you watch isn't so much of a choice.

There are gay penguins and other animals.

Oh, but we have free-will. Never mind, condemn the queers.

/sarcasm

surferdude

Ahnimus wrote:

Maybe choosing which movie you watch isn't so much of a choice.

There are gay penguins and other animals.

Oh, but we have free-will. Never mind, condemn the queers.

/sarcasm

Even if we don't have free-will is aborting a gay fetus any better or worse than aborting a straight fetus?

Ahnimus

surferdude wrote:

Even if we don't have free-will is aborting a gay fetus any better or worse than aborting a straight fetus?

It shouldn't be any different. Unless we are adopting Eugenics as a social policy.

turnedmyworldtoblack

jeffbr wrote:

Perfectly said. That is what it comes down to. Why do people even care about this argument (except for the interest in science)? Whether one is born gay, or chooses to be that way, it should not matter in the slightest. Live and let live.

I am curious as to what "accept him for who he is" type post will ensue from this... but I think this situation would matter in the slightest...

My brother is gay. He claims he was born that way. I personally do not think I should have to raise my kids to believe that him having a boyfriend is normal when we go to any type of family gathering. I don't want to have to lie to save his little secret either. I don't understand all this stuff that teaches to accept people for who they are, it is not normal.

jlew24asu

jeffbr wrote:

Perfectly said. That is what it comes down to. Why do people even care about this argument (except for the interest in science)? Whether one is born gay, or chooses to be that way, it should not matter in the slightest. Live and let live.

I'm only interested because of pure curiosity. and the science of it. that would have been a better discussion instead of the thread starter throwing useless abortion opinions.

RainDog

surferdude wrote:

But I thought every abortion was a good abortion?

No more than saying free speech means all speech is good speech.

surferdude wrote:

Who are you to judge some abortions as negative? Pro-choice means accepting all choices without judgement.

You may think so; but I don't believe pro-choicers are comfortable with pro-lifers defining what it means to be pro-choice.

surferdude wrote:

Is aborting a fetus because it may be gay baby any worse than aborting it because it is a baby period? or the mother is poor or feels unprepared?

On paper, not really. I'd compare it to a woman who slept with a black man, got pregnant, and decided to have an abortion because she doesn't want to have a black baby. I believe she should have every right to do it. I'd also think of her as a horrible, racist person. The two aren't exclusive.

Ahnimus

jlew24asu wrote:

I'm only interested because of pure curiosity. and the science of it. that would have been a better discussion instead of the thread starter throwing useless abortion opinions.

Bailey and Pillard found a 52 percent coherence of sexual orientation in monozygous twins. Only a 22 percent coherence in dizygous twins.

This suggests that genetics has an influence on sexual orientation, but is not a sufficient causal conditional. If genetics alone were sufficient cause for sexual orientation, there should be a 100 percent coherence in monozygous (single zygote/identical twins) twins.

But I question wether the other factors (environment, society, etc..) work to suppress the genetic factors. So one not oriented as gay, might still have biological desires for the same sex. Nothing has been conclusive, except that genetics has something to do with it. We can see across species that homosexuality is normal.

cornnifer

If there were a "gay" gene, wouldn't it have died out a long time ago? Obviously this gene isn't being passed along much. How do you explain the one gay guy that pops up in the family from a long line of very ungay ancestry? I'm honestly just curious. Maybe someone far more versed in genetics than i am can explain it to me.

On the other hand, i've seen, with my own eyes, some pretty gay JEANS.

RainDog

cornnifer wrote:

If there were a "gay" gene, wouldn't it have died out a long time ago? Obviously this gene isn't being passed along much. How do you explain the one gay guy that pops up in the family from a long line of very ungay ancestry? I'm honestly just curious. Maybe someone far more versed in genetics than i am can explain it to me.

On the other hand, i've seen, with my own eyes, some pretty gay JEANS.

While I'm not a geneticist, and personally believe homosexuality has more than one factor contributing to it (i.e. the 52% identical twin post Ahnimus made), I will say that you can't really determine that gay isn't genetic by claiming if it was it would have "died out" by now. First, societal issues likely kept many old-timey homosexuals in the closet - giving the appearance of a "long line of very ungay ancestry." And second, there are a number of genetic conditions that keep a person from being able to have children, and those conditions are all still around.