Jump to content
Tanuki Racoon

Homosexuality is in the genes, study claims

Recommended Posts

Homosexuality is in the genes, study claims

July 03, 2005 9:40 AM EDT

Sexuality is determined well before birth and is not the result of social influences, scientists will claim this week. The authors of a new book published on Thursday say that sexual orientation is decided by a mixture of genetic factors and hormonal activity in the womb " and that homosexuality cannot be 'cured'.

Born Gay by Dr Glenn Wilson of the Institute of Psychiatry and Dr Qazi Rahman of the University of East London has been welcomed by gay rights activists, who say it proves there is nothing 'unnatural' about homosexuality. But the book has also been criticised for suggesting that men who see themselves as bisexual should be classed as gay.

Born Gay summarises the latest research into the psychobiology of sex orientation, concluding that studies with twins show that around 30 to 50 per cent of sexual orientation is due to genes. The rest is the result of processes in the womb.

The genes involved in sexual orientation produce receptors in the brain which absorb male hormones released by the developing baby's testicles. It is thought that in gay men these receptors are less sensitive or are blocked. The absence of testosterone results in the brain developing certain female characteristics, including attraction to men.

It is also believed that the unabsorbed testosterone affects the body's extremities. This would explain, Dr Rahman said, why the finger lengths of adult gay men tended to be more male-like that those of heterosexual men, in that their index fingers are significantly shorter than their ring finger. (Women's index and ring fingers tend to be of equal length).

The hormone may also be responsible for increasing the size of the penis, another extremity. A number of studies have shown that gay men are better endowed than heterosexual men.

The scientists also claim that true bisexual men are extremely rare. Studies showed that heterosexual men respond to lesbian pornography, but not to gay pornography. 'What's interesting is that bisexual men do not response to both type of stimuli. Almost 95 per cent of bisexual men respond exclusively to gay stimuli,' said Dr Rahman.

According to the researchers, there is much evidence to contradict claims that homosexuality is caused by social factors, such as seduction, or that it can be learnt. 'Showing that homosexuality is not due to learning, or seduction, or smothering mothers has very clear implications for social policies, Dr Rahman added. 'Clause 28 emphasised the notion that homosexuality should not be talked about because that might encourage young people to experiment.

Ben Summerskill, the chief executive of Stonewall, said he welcomed evidence that made discrimination against gay people untenable.

Link to comment
and I'm hung like a water buffalo. :-D

Thanks for sharing your fantasy with us sweetheart....

:)

No, no, no- my fantasy involves Seth Green, Brett Farve and a sauna...

Link to comment
Nonsense! :x

First, I might very well be the first gay in my family.

Second, I believe that only 10 % are gay, 10 % are straight and all others hover in between.

Ideas anybody?

Cheers! :)

Rad

Why be so obsessed with the origin? When people look for the origin of something, in my experience, they generally are looking for a way to destroy it, or manipulate it. Why can't people just live with the fact that gays are here to stay, and that it doesn't matter what causes homosexuality because it's going to happen no matter what.

-N

Link to comment
Nonsense! :x

First, I might very well be the first gay in my family.

Second, I believe that only 10 % are gay, 10 % are straight and all others hover in between.

Ideas anybody?

Cheers! :)

Rad

Why be so obsessed with the origin? When people look for the origin of something, in my experience, they generally are looking for a way to destroy it, or manipulate it. Why can't people just live with the fact that gays are here to stay, and that it doesn't matter what causes homosexuality because it's going to happen no matter what.

-N

Knowing the origin of homosexuality is very important!

Our critics claim that homosexuality is a choice like deciding what to have for breakfast or a sickness like psycosis.

If it can be shown that homosexuality is a naturally occurring condition, then it becomes very difficult to justify systemic discrimination or attempts to "cure" us.

Link to comment

There was a play in the early nineties entitled Twilight of the Golds, (a Wagnerian play on words), based on the premise that homosexuality was genetic, in which a strongly pro-life family discovered, through genetic testing, that their unborn son had the "gay gene." They were faced with the dilemna of violating their pro-life priniciples and aborting the baby or violating their anti-gay priniciples and raising the gay baby.

These arguments have a double edge. What if the "Christians" decide to eliminate the "gay gene" from the gene pool? What if they decide it's a genetic defect?

I agree that it's genetic and I can see the validity in the pre-natal hormone theory, as well. I believe that we should use the biological arguments in debates with the immoral moralists. However, we need to be prepared for the day when they accept our explanations.

What if...

Link to comment
There was a play in the early nineties entitled Twilight of the Golds, (a Wagnerian play on words),

1997, actually. And more a play on Wagnerian words:

http://victorian.fortunecity.com/manet/394...94/page18a6.htm

TR

Link to comment
I saw the play in the spring of 1993 at the Paramount Theater in Austin Texas. There was a movie made of the play in the mid nineties.

Strange, it was published in 1994. The movie came out in 1997.

TR

Link to comment

I think I was correct. I found a reference to the play being written in 1993:

'Twilight of the Golds' raises serious issues with superficiality

By DAMIEN JAQUES

Journal Sentinel theater critic

Posted: June 17, 2005

Jonathan Tolins' 1993 drama "The Twilight of the Golds" addresses that with an interesting and troubling twist.

All of which takes away from the point I think he was trying to make. Lets not get lost in minutiae when a bigger point is being made.

Link to comment

Questioner was repeating Bill Coleman's idea, I was just clearing up the minoosha. The play's listed as published in 1994, movie in 1997. Bill's post was eloquent, I don't care to add to it as I share most of his opinions on this (and some other) subjects.

TR

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...


×
×
  • Create New...