Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I thought the main causes were some biological switches to not engage while the fetus is developing which later manifests itself as a homosexual preference when approaching puberty. Of course if one believes Kinsey there are degrees of sexuality as well from exclusively hetero to homo.
Maybe genetic and maybe a weak gene which can be affected by hormones or maybe just an imbalance in hormones due to environmental reasons?
I thought the main causes were some biological switches to not engage while the fetus is developing which later manifests itself as a homosexual preference when approaching puberty.
This is a currently popular idea, and would explain very well what we see in terms of inheritance patterns. But given what we do see with inheritance patterns, IMO it is unlikely that there is a single mechanism that completely explains it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C
Of course if when believes Kinsey there are degrees of sexuality as well from exclusively hetero to homo.
If we could find a human population that was truly matter-of-fact about homosexuality, it would be easier to get a fix on this. As it is, the social pressure on gay people strongly affects how willing they are to express what they feel. Also, we don't have a good explanation for the range we see in the strength of the human sex drive. We've all known people of reproductive age that appear to have little interest in sexual relationships, while we've known others who are completely obsessed. To what extent is this range genetic? And how does it interact with the genes that affect sexual orientation?
If it's true that there is a range, then an epigenetic mechanism could explain this. So could a multi-gene constellation, similar to what we see with the inheritance of intelligence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felix C
Maybe genetic and maybe a weak gene which can be affected hormones or maybe just an imbalance in hormones due to environmental reasons?
Those are all good hypotheses, and productive lines for continuing research.
This rant is absolutely pathetic from a scientific point of view. The person who wrote it understands little about evolution and pretty much nothing about genetics.
I don't even know where to start.
But here's the lowest-hanging fruit - there's no evidence at all that homosexuality is associated with physical infertility. Because gay people have been closeted for so many generations, many have been forced into straight marriage and have become parents. Whatever the genetic origin of homosexuality, it has been and is being spread throughout the general population by the social strictures that have forced gay people into sexual relationships with straight people.
So an intelligent person who really opposed homosexuality ought to be encouraging gay people to have sex only with other gay people. That's the only way, by the author's "logic", that the "gene" could eventually die out.
It is so odd to me that so many miss this point.
There are millions of gay biological parents.
Millions.
In any event, the latest research does show natural causes.
I thought the main causes were some biological switches to not engage while the fetus is developing which later manifests itself as a homosexual preference when approaching puberty. Of course if when believes Kinsey there are degrees of sexuality as well from exclusively hetero to homo.
Maybe genetic and maybe a weak gene which can be affected hormones or maybe just an imbalance in hormones due to environmental reasons?
Yes, most of this thread is very behind the times on the prevailing research.
Researchers looking for a genetic signature of homosexuality have been barking up the wrong tree, according to a trio of researchers in the United States and Sweden. Instead, the scientists posit, epigenetic influences acting on androgen signaling in the brain may underlie sexual orientation. In a paper published last week (December 11) in The Quarterly Review of Biology, they propose a model describing how epigenetic markers that steer sexual development in males could promote homosexual orientation in females, and vice versa. The scientists offer their model to explain both the tendency of homosexuality to run in families, and the fact that so far no “homosexual gene” has been identified.
In this chapter, we will review the evidence that sexual orientation has biological underpinnings and consider the involvement of epigenetic mechanisms. We will first discuss studies that show that sexual orientation has a genetic component. These studies show that sexual orientation is more concordant in monozygotic twins than in dizygotic ones and that male sexual orientation is linked to several regions of the genome. We will then highlight findings that suggest a link between sexual orientation and epigenetic mechanisms. In particular, we will consider the case of women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH). These women were exposed to high levels of testosterone in utero and have much higher rates of nonheterosexual orientation compared to non-CAH women. Studies in animal models strongly suggest that the long-term effects of hormonal exposure (such as those experienced by CAH women) are mediated by epigenetic mechanisms. We conclude by describing a hypothetical framework that unifies genetic and epigenetic explanations of sexual orientation and the continued challenges facing sexual orientation research.
"Science," however, usually isn't a strong point for people who have issues with homosexuality, so it's no surprise that they simply latch on to dated and shallow analysis on this issue.
How does what someone does in the privacy of their bedroom affect them on a day to day basis?
Once again, I fail to understand the obsession with both gays and transgenders ... don't like it/don't agree - then don't talk about.
It's not just the op who cares. The core argument of gay rights for decades has been that people are born gay, sexual orientation is similar to eye color or race. Apparently, scientists and the medical profession also care, resulting in all the articles about the topic.
It's not just the op who cares. The core argument of gay rights for decades has been that people are born gay, sexual orientation is similar to eye color or race. Apparently, scientists and the medical profession also care, resulting in all the articles about the topic.
Exactly, because unlike behavior, if "you are born that way", it creates the ability to say "I have no control over how I was born".
Here is a comparative analogy. A person who is obese will get dirty looks and criticism for their assumed gluttony.
However when you hear that the person has a genetic or medical condition (i.e. thyroid problem, taking steroids to combat illness) which causes them to be fat, people tend to be less critical/judgmental.
That all boils down to their behavior which people are not tolerant of, vs. something beyond their control, which people will be more understanding about.
So if it winds up being true that homosexuals are not "born that way" as most claim, it changes the narrative they have been so careful to create.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
