homosexuality not genetic

Science has suggested that there is a gene for sexual appetite. Here is an old article from 2006. However, I am unsure of any connection made between appetite and gay behavior. I can say that I am in the 20% population of the study I just linked to below. However, I would never engage in homosexual activity. So, maybe there is no link for me.

The researchers found that students with one particular version of the gene scored roughly 5% lower, on average, in sexual desire than those with an alternative gene variant; a small but statistically meaningful difference. Around 70% of the population carry the low-arousal version and some 20% carry the high-arousal version of the gene. Their findings appear online in the journal of Molecular Psychiatry.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by tamusan]

Originally posted by 0nce 0nce
Ive always concluded that homosexuality was a mental condition, much like a rare type of psychosis.

Ive read that the "feeling" heterosexual people get when they are "attracted" to each other is a chemical reaction, and Ive wondered exactly what triggers the chemical reaction. My conclusion was that subconscious and conscious "thoughts" from the mind were responsible for triggering the chemical reaction, which then led me to believe the "thoughts" of homosexuals were opposite of heterosexuals.

This is why I concluded that homosexuality is a mental condition.

Although, I'm a heterosexual, so I wouldn't know for sure.

Is being heterosexual a mental condition? That makes a lot of sense

Someone with no background I'm fairly sure in healthcare or psychology is going to give us his opinion on disease, lovely. It's like a Christian fundementalist explaining evolution.

It is a bit sad that it seems so few people have even taken basic college classes concerning psychology or biology. And these "experts" like to give us their thoughts, lawl.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by ghaleon12]

reply to post by Welfhard


bwahaha. You speak my language. funny guy.
peace!

reply to post by tamusan



sorry i was unclear. The connection i was trying to make was between the women in the study and the fact they have more children. Maybe they're just more horny? So maybe they should look and see if gay people are more horny?
From MY PERSONAL experience, they are, but as this could be due to a myriad of different reasons, it doesn't mean much to me.
h and thx for the link, bud.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by heyo]

Homosexuality is genetic, you are born with it but one might consider it a defect. So homosexuals are basically genetic defects, one can be born with a wide range of genetic defects and homosexuality is one of them.

Alright, as much as I didn't want to get involved in this conversation, apparently I do.

I don't believe that homosexuality is a genetic condition or is caused by a "gay gene". It's counter productive to the overall species as placed in the OP.

That being said, I am gay, and have spent years attempting to decipher the causes of why I either turned out this way, or was born this way.

Now I was never cohersed by any adult as some would think. I was not indoctrined into it by friends or any of that thing. I simply liked boys, from a very early age. And have I tried not to? Ofcourse I have, every gay person has at one time wished they were straight, it would be far easier.

However that's impossible, since attracting is a chemical reaction in the brain and isn't something you can have control over. (unless you are one of those high and mighty types who think religion can cure you, ie brainwash)

Either way it doesn't really matter whether it's genetic or a choice, the fact is that people have the right to live their lives the way they want to, free of persecution and belittlement from the people who simply refuse to accept that such things exist and people have the right to behave so.

It's not a matter of gentics, it's a matter of love. What two concenting adults do in their spare time with eachother is nobody's buisness. If they are not hurting anybody or infringing on the rights of anybody, then why should it bother anybody?

And for those who say they are ruining the moral fabric of our society, you need look no further than CNN and FOX, hell throw in the Disney Channel and Reality TV to find the true cause of what is ruining our society.

Nobody but the beings and energies that govern our world have the right to judge human beings for being themselves.

~Keeper

Originally posted by redhead57
Blah, Blah, Blah......one more sad effort to belittle a segment of our population.

If you look at nature you see homosexual behavior in animals, it is normal for crying out loud, it is part of nature.

When will we as a people ever just accept the differences in us? When???

Many people, including some in this thread, have no desire for truth. When homosexual behavior is seen in other animals, they don't care. No one to where I've read in the thread has addressed the fact that when one monozygotic twin is gay, the other will be gay 30% of the time. The reason? Because they'd have to admit that it is out of a person's control whether or not they are gay. The video I posted even said 70% of the time they will be gay, although I haven't read that.

Seriously people, if you are going to hold that genes or prenatal factors play no role in homosexuality, please explain the above. If you can't, then your beliefs are frankly bigoted and stupid, since they aren't based on reason and science.

Some guy said, "Don't call me a homophobe, I'm only basing my opinions on science" Oh rly, please explain the above or change your beliefs. You guys don't give a darn about science.


Also, about the "gay gene", that's a media creation. All human traits are based on a large number of genes. You won't find a "shyness" gene. You won't find an "extroversion" gene. But those things are genetic particially, but they are determined by a large number of genes. So please, everyone delete the term "gay gene" from your vocabulary.

[edit on 6-5-2009 by ghaleon12]

My theory is ,that gay men were supposed to be born female,and gay women were supposed to be born male.

Some sort of mix up occurs during early development in the womb.

Thats what i think anyway.

reply to post by tamusan



Wow. the link you gave me describes a gene possibly related to different people's level of horniness, in a nutshell, then they go on to say "there is some evidence the drd4 is linked to novelty-seeking."

If you have a gene that's responsible for novelty-seeking and horniness, what would you end up with? Seems like there's something to it, i don't know.

could it be that said gene is responsible for the propensity for novelty(nature), and being gay is just one novelty that they've chosen? (nurture).
Like some straight people do some pretty whach things in the sack...maybe it's just luck of the draw they aren't gay, or luck of the draw that gays are?


[edit on 6-5-2009 by heyo]

[edit on 6-5-2009 by heyo]

Originally posted by Phlegmi
Homosexuality is genetic, you are born with it but one might consider it a defect. So homosexuals are basically genetic defects, one can be born with a wide range of genetic defects and homosexuality is one of them.

Yeah, I guess black people are genetic defects as well, poor things

You must be a homosexual to call it a defect, you'd have to have some knowledge about it to label it such a thing. To speak about it and not having any sort of experience would be foolish otherwise.

Here are some important quotes from wikipedia. en.wikipedia.org...

Research has identified several biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual orientation. These include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure

Since identical twins have the same genetic makeup (genotype) while non-identical twins share no less than 50% of their genes, a difference between these types of twins provides evidence of a genetic component.

Bailey and Pillard (1991) in a study of gay twins found that 52% of monozygotic (MZ) brothers and 22% of the dizygotic (DZ) twins were concordant for homosexuality.

Self reported zygosity, sexual attraction, fantasy and behaviours were assessed by questionnaire and zygosity was serologically checked when in doubt. MZ twin concordance for homosexuality was found to be 30%.

A number of sections of the brain have been reported to be sexually dimorphic; that is, they vary between men and women. There have also been reports of variations in brain structure corresponding to sexual orientation. In 1990, Swaab and Hofman reported a difference in the size of the suprachiasmatic nucleus between homosexual and heterosexual men

That link has just about anything that could be brought up in this sort of talk. These disscussions are largely useless. A lot of straight people people want, for some strange reason, to believe that homosexuality isn't based on genes, prenatal factors, or brain structure. Why is that? What would be so bad if that was the case? It's like a game of chess. People on both sides moving pieces so that they can win, but why are some straight people playing this game? That's what I don't understand. You have no stake in anything, so why concern yourself in this game? Just to bug people? It's hard to tell.

Do you have a lot of gay friends or want gay friends? The fascination and fixation on this topic by straight people is a bit odd. Are some of you fighting homosexual tendancies or something? lol, it does happen...


[edit on 6-5-2009 by ghaleon12]

In certain times in ancient Greece and the Roman empire, it was considered fairly elite to have a homosexual relationship with a young adolescent ('courtboys' or something similar). In this culture, the persons with the most chance of reproduction - those with wealth and status, the elitists - were also the most gay ones.

You may extrapolate this concept.

If you truly belive homosexuality or gender based issues are related to environment and not genetics, then you need to watch these two videos and then post your ignorant comments.





Prejudice concerning gender and sex is not different than racism.


[edit on 6-5-2009 by magickmaster]

[edit on 6-5-2009 by magickmaster]

[edit on 6-5-2009 by magickmaster]

Originally posted by scraze
In certain times in ancient Greece and the Roman empire, it was considered fairly elite to have a homosexual relationship with a young adolescent ('courtboys' or something similar). In this culture, the persons with the most chance of reproduction - those with wealth and status, the elitists - were also the most gay ones.

You may extrapolate this concept.

Interesting. I've been wondering how if as time passes, the gene is supposed to become more scarce, if yo go back in time, it should become less scarce.

reply to post by HulaAnglers


Then how does that explain the FACT the vast, and I mean VAST majority of pedophiles are white heterosexual males?

You’re speaking from pure prejudice, ignorance and hate.
And don’t come back and ask me to *prove it*.

I’m not going to spoon feed your lack of knowledge - because you know what, I have a sneaking feeling you could have all the facts served up to you on a silver platter and you’d still choose a meal of ignorance.

*************************************************************

IMO sexual preference in humans has no baring on evolution of humans as a species because we're not animals - meaning - we can control our population - or not - at will.

reply to post by silo13


That's interesting. I wonder what the methods of detecting pedophilia in africa are..........

reply to post by InfaRedMan

I'm not sure why some people are so hung up on the whole sexuality thing.

It may have something to do with our species behavioral tendency for male dominance, which is displayed across many mammalian species. Like most other ape species, humans tend to migrate into social groups lead by a single individual - and generally it's a male. However, if you look at our closest ape relative, you'll notice something. In Chimpanzees, male members of the group lead the pack - and disputes are solved with violence and displays of aggression. The pessimists here may say that sounds just about right for our closest relative, but there is another ape that is even more closely related to us. The Bonobo Chimp.

In contrast to common chimps, bonobo conflicts are generally non-violent and often resolved by sexual means. The exception to this being males from other groups - which they have been reported to attack and kill. Bonobo family groups are lead by a matriarch female, and mating is less restricted between various different partners in direct contrast to the harems of alpha male led chimps. They've also been observed engaging in face-to-face copulation, tongue kissing, and various genital stimulation as greetings/bonding activities.

(Darrr... maybe conservatives are descended frum chimps and liberals r desended frum bonobos.. durrhurhur)

So in comparison, it seems like very much a genetically behavioral disposition for male dominant societies - but not a very strong one. Think of it as part of the collective sub-conscious of entire species - which often manifests, but does not preclude the emergence and promotion of other social configurations.

So my best estimation is that the reason so many people have a problem against homosexuality is that we're seeing modern society change from an extended period of strong cultural oppression of homosexuality which was reinforced by a behavioral predisposition for alpha male mindset societies. It's still very much an out of place behavior for many people. Even though we've recognized the equality of women, the alpha male archetype is still a promoted behavior in our culture.

So when you get down to it... it's a combination of the traces of cultural taboo, evolutionary behavior tendencies, and a problem with male-male mating vs. dominance for competing for females. That's my best estimation anyhow.

A few points.

1. It should be said that homosexual behavior is observed in both chimps and bonobos, though more frequently in bonobos.

2. Female-Female pairings generally don't carry the stigma that male-male pairings do judging by porn site traffic. I believe this is because we still live in a society that is tailored for male dominance we tend to accept the "lesbian fantasy" as desirable and promotable - so it's in the media a lot. However, acceptance of female homosexuality usually ends with the rejection of the dominant male archetype. It seems to me that women typically don't have as much a problem with the act of male homosexuality, but far fewer of them find it arousing when compared to the percentage of males who are aroused by lesbians. This would exemplify the cultural impact, as women simply aren't inundated by the male form and sensual male-male pairings the way males are to lesbians.

3. There is a significant cultural and behavioral taboo against anal intercourse that I left out which compounds the issue.

reply to post by Lasheic

1. It should be said that homosexual behavior is observed in both chimps and bonobos, though more frequently in bonobos.

The study I saw said that the bonobos were 100% bisexual.