No gay gene.

[TheFrogger]

Investigation into genetics has revealed that there is no such thing as a gay gene. Thoughts?

Perhaps it's because that if there was a gay gene, it would be inherited, which homos fail to pass on.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Investigation into genetics has revealed that there is no such thing as a gay gene. Thoughts?

Perhaps it's because that if there was a gay gene, it would be inherited, which homos fail to pass on.

most of your posts come across as somewhat superficial by design troll posts so i tend to ignore any intellectual meaning in them.
however, you seem to have posted this in biology rather than free thoughts

Investigation into genetics has revealed

where is the link ?
forum rule breach #1 ?

i am quite interested to discuss your concepts around the sexual orientation concept, however you seem to be using terminology that is many decades old and quite inaccurate.

Thoughts?

lol

translates as "who is up for some trolling"

maybe you could post 2 links
#1 a link to the material you are assigning as the foundation of the concept of "a gay gene" so we can at-least be on the same page
#2 post a link to the claim you have made in a science topic area(rather than free thoughts)

i have a great deal of thoughts, study and years of experience socializing & working with LGBTQ+ people

however your post is wearing the big tin-foil hat currently

your final psychological tryst of emotionally loaded inference of

which homos fail to pass on

seems to read as a deliberate attempt to troll (i hope you prove my doubts wrong)

 

[EgalitarianJay]

I looked it up and there does appear to be a study on the subject making news.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/30/health/gay-gene-study-trnd/index.html


Same-sex attraction appears to run in families, and identical twins are more likely to be aligned in their sexuality than either fraternal twins or other siblings, noted the researchers. Both these factors suggest genetic influences are at play. Researchers conducted analyses of data for 477,522 participants in surveys from the UK and US, and then performed comparison testing among some 15,142 people in the US and Sweden. Different base studies provided different survey results. Some surveys recorded whether participants ever had a same-sex partner, and others recorded how people identified their orientation.

Several hundred genes appeared to have an influence on sexuality. Five variants showed significant effects, the researchers said. When tested, though, these genetic factors combined accounted for 8% to 25% of same-sex behavior participants reported, according to the researchers. The analysis also showed different genetics in play for women and men. This could reflect the influence of hormones or possibly social differences among gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, the study authors speculated. Since the prevalence of same-sex behavior participants reported changed over time, it is likely that social environments have influence, as well, the authors noted.


What the study indicates is that there is a genetic component to homosexual behavior. Genes influence sexual orientation and it isn't one gene it is lots of genes. Since homosexuality runs in families these "gay genes" can be inherited. Heterosexuals can give birth to homosexual children and bisexuals often choose opposite sex partners who they have children with. Even a few homosexuals still get married and have children because of social pressure to live a straight lifestyle. So even those gay people like the same sex genes from homosexuality find a way to get passed on.

There are genetic and epigenetic factors at play since identical twins are more likely to both be gay when one is than fraternal twins. I spoke to Joseph Graves, an evolutionary biologist about this subject. Here is his email and two videos on the biology of homosexuality.

Dear Dr. Graves,

I recently got in to a debate with a poster about the subject of sexual orientation and whether people can be born gay as well as whether homosexuality could be "cured" through genetic engineering. You told me that the idea that we can alter polygenic traits like sexual orientation as well as athleticism and intelligence was within the realm of science fiction because there are too many genes that influence these traits. I told my opponent about this. He insisted that you were wrong and that homosexuality could not be a polygenic trait because we would see a wider distribution of the trait if the phenotype were impacted by the expression of many genes. In other words there would be many more bisexuals and homosexuals if sexual orientation were polygenic.

I argued that a trait could be rare and still be polygenic but he says that polygenic traits absolutely must have a wide distribution. Here are some more of his arguments:

* If sexual orientation was a polygenic trait of the same kind as height or athletic ability, it would have a smoother continuous distribution than it has, and bisexuals would be far more common than gays.

* If sexual orientation was a polygenic trait of the same kind as height or athletic ability, identical twins would never radically differ in their sexual orientations.

* If sexual orientation was a polygenic trait of the same kind as height or athletic ability, we would see some family pattern of inheritance, and there is none. Could you please respond to this argument with clarification on the nature of polygenic traits and their relation to sexual orientation?

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

EgalitarianJay


Joseph Graves:

Dear EgalitarianJay,

They are correct that polygenic traits produce "normal" distributions of phenotypes. However, they are not correct in asserting that human sexuality isn't "normally" distributed. Human sexual behavior is quite fluid. The Kinsey reports demonstrated that there was indeed a spectrum between obligate heterosexual and obligate homosexual behavior in US males and females. Also, because homosexuality is so widely condemned it is hard to know how much homosexuality there is in any society (see Klassen, Williams, Levitt 1989: Sex and Morality in the U.S., (Weslayan U. Press). Of course this activity has changed drastically with cultural norms, as in Roman/Greek society homosexual behavior of older males towards younger males was the norm. Another point to be made is the widespread occurrence of homosexuality in non-human species. A good recounting of this can be found in Joan Roughgarden's: Evolution's Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People.

I am critical of Roughgarden's dismissal of sexual selection theory, but the book still contains excellent examples of mechanisms of sexuality in nature. Another useful reference for this discussion is Anne Fauto Sterling, Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. This book also contains excellent evidence concerning human sexuality. Finally attached is Dean Hamer's 2005 genome wide association study, which identified several candidate genes for male homosexual behavior.

Sincerely,

Dr. Joseph L. Graves Jr.

So there isn't a single gay gene but rather multiple genes influencing homosexual behavior and there are also environmental influences.

 

[exchemist]

I looked it up and there does appear to be a study on the subject making news.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/30/health/gay-gene-study-trnd/index.html


Same-sex attraction appears to run in families, and identical twins are more likely to be aligned in their sexuality than either fraternal twins or other siblings, noted the researchers. Both these factors suggest genetic influences are at play. Researchers conducted analyses of data for 477,522 participants in surveys from the UK and US, and then performed comparison testing among some 15,142 people in the US and Sweden. Different base studies provided different survey results. Some surveys recorded whether participants ever had a same-sex partner, and others recorded how people identified their orientation.

Several hundred genes appeared to have an influence on sexuality. Five variants showed significant effects, the researchers said. When tested, though, these genetic factors combined accounted for 8% to 25% of same-sex behavior participants reported, according to the researchers. The analysis also showed different genetics in play for women and men. This could reflect the influence of hormones or possibly social differences among gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, the study authors speculated. Since the prevalence of same-sex behavior participants reported changed over time, it is likely that social environments have influence, as well, the authors noted.


What the study indicates is that there is a genetic component to homosexual behavior. Genes influence sexual orientation and it isn't one gene it is lots of genes. Since homosexuality runs in families these "gay genes" can be inherited. Heterosexuals can give birth to homosexual children and bisexuals often choose opposite sex partners who they have children with. Even a few homosexuals still get married and have children because of social pressure to live a straight lifestyle. So even those gay people like the same sex genes from homosexuality find a way to get passed on.

There are genetic and epigenetic factors at play since identical twins are more likely to both be gay when one is than fraternal twins. I spoke to Joseph Graves, an evolutionary biologist about this subject. Here is his email and two videos on the biology of homosexuality.

So there isn't a single gay gene but rather multiple genes influencing homosexual behavior and there are also environmental influences.

Thanks - a useful summary, on a subject I saw in the news but had not bothered to read about. The best things about this is that it does not give the ghastly, axe-grinding identity politics people anything much to pick up and run with, nor does it give the homosexuality-can-be-cured neanderthals anything either!

So we can all just get on with life......

 

[iceaura]

So there is no single "gay gene" (meaning "allele", probably).

That is hardly surprising - very few human traits ride on a single "gene", even if inherited (height; hair type, color, or loss pattern; fat distribution; oddities of metabolism; cancer and alcoholism risk; all famously correlated with single alleles in some people - but none in isolation: other genes, other alleles, and circumstances of growth or development, weigh in).

There are many genes, some in the mother or father rather than the child, that correlate positively or negatively with sexual behavior and orientation - like all human behavior, mediated by culture and childhood circumstance.

Perhaps it's because that if there was a gay gene, it would be inherited, which homos fail to pass on

Homosexuality - same sex arousal and orientation - is too common and too consistently present in human communities for that presumption to be likely.

Without at least some knowledge of mechanism there is little information to be had from genetic correlations of any kind - certainly the assumption that the alleles correlated with homosexuality are not preferentially passed on in a human community because homosexuals presumably do not generate children of their own is dubious to the point of foolish (for starters, it appears to overlook female orientation entirely. It also overlooks the contribution of nonbreeding individuals to the survival and reproduction of their genetic kin, and several other factors of human growth and development.)

Theorists used to wonder at the presence of grandmothers and other post-menopausal women in human communities on those same grounds (menopause and lifespan obviously both genetically influenced features of the species) - then somebody thought to observe what they did all day.

 

[EgalitarianJay]

Thanks - a useful summary, on a subject I saw in the news but had not bothered to read about. The best things about this is that it does not give the ghastly, axe-grinding identity politics people anything much to pick up and run with, nor does it give the homosexuality-can-be-cured neanderthals anything either!

So we can all just get on with life......

If genetic influences are at play then gay people can say that they are born gay or at least there is a genetic component to their behavior. This supports the agenda to gain social acceptance for the gay community. Those of us who don't care can rest easy but the homophobic bigots who hate gay people and think being gay is a choice will miss many hours of sleep thinking about how this research impacts their view on homosexuality. Of course even if they accept it they will still hate gay people.

There is a historical record in many cultures of people thinking of homosexuality as a sexual perversion in the same way we think of pedophilia, incest and bestiality as perversions today. Some people think that those other behaviors will be considered innate attributes of the mind that someone is born with and I've even heard considerations that they are. People who have argued against gay marriage have asked "If we are going to allow that why not polygamy?"

The research also indicates that there are environmental influences. Child molestation is considered a major influence. If there can be environmental influences why not cultural influences such as promotion of homosexuality in the media? Can a person be encouraged in to homosexual behavior? I don't think homosexuality can be "cured" but I also wonder if all LGBT identities are determined by genes. Can something like being transgender really be said to have a genetic component? I guess if you are attracted to the same sex because of hormones imbalances you could feel that you are a woman trapped in a man's body. I've heard there is research in to the idea of a lady brain and discoveries of structural differences in the brains of transgenders although I don't know how good the science is on that. I think getting a sex change including cutting off your penis and getting hormone injections to make yourself look more feminine, not grow facial hair or make yourself more masculine in the case of transgender males born female as well as wearing clothing of the opposite sex is clearly influenced by culture.

Then of course for the people who want to cure homosexuality as if there is something wrong with them there is the argument that even if they are born gay they can research gene therapy to cure it. James Watson who made news for his belief in Scientific Racism once stated that if doctors can find the genes for homosexuality and a pregnant woman doesn't want to give birth to a gay child she should be able to have an abortion. So you still have the issue of bigotry towards the LGBT community even with research on a genetic component for homosexuality.

 

[iceaura]

I don't think homosexuality can be "cured" but I also wonder if all LGBT identities are determined by genes.

If such identities are found to be wholly determined by specific genetic code, they would be the first and probably only such human behavioral traits found to be so determined. Not the way to bet.

Meanwhile, we know that a large majority of gay people trace their identity so far back into their childhood and so irrevocably established by puberty as to make complete genetic determination an initially plausible hypothesis for some - that suffices to head off persecution for "choice" and vulnerability to involuntary "conversion", if firmly backed, without peremptory dismissal of the role of nurture in growth and cultural expression.

The obvious suspicion is that research into the role of same sex attraction in human civilization and evolutionary development will turn up stuff somewhat analogous to what was found in researching the influence of grandmothers on reproductive success and other Darwinian benefits of having them around.

 

[iceaura]

Can something like being transgender really be said to have a genetic component?

By standard presumption all human behavioral traits have genetic components. That one would be unusually solid employment of the presumption - the physical adjustments and differences in brain wiring and neurological formations would almost have to be fundamental and pervasive.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

If genetic influences are at play then gay people can say that they are born gay or at least there is a genetic component to their behavior. This supports the agenda to gain social acceptance for the gay community. Those of us who don't care can rest easy but the homophobic bigots who hate gay people and think being gay is a choice will miss many hours of sleep thinking about how this research impacts their view on homosexuality. Of course even if they accept it they will still hate gay people.

I just read that paragraph and thought of this:

 

[EgalitarianJay]

By standard presumption all human behavioral traits have genetic components. That one would be unusually solid employment of the presumption - the physical adjustments and differences in brain wiring and neurological formations would almost have to be fundamental and pervasive.

I think by genetic component people mean that someone is biologically compelled towards a behavior in the same way that they are compelled to eat or drink water. I can't think of any reason for example that someone wanting to have sex with a dog would have a genetic component. What evolutionary mechanism could possibly make you biologically compelled to do that? You could say that people in to bestiality are mentally ill and there may be some evidence from brain structure to support that which is a claim they are making about pedophiles.

But wanting to have sex with small children or animals is a choice that I believe is derived from psychological disturbance rather than biology. People used to say that about homosexuals and some still believe that by genetic research indicates that they are born with this desire as in no matter their upbringing or culture they grew up in they would always think this way.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

clearly influenced by culture

what may be very hard to track is Body dysmorphic disorder as a state of psychiatric gender actualization as a process of sexual orientation.
i am not anti sex change fyi
i think it should be approached very carefully and with great professionalism(as i have been told it is by professionals ... by sexual health workers and community outreach people).
science has a long way to go in what we already conceive to be very complex situations.
The massive amount of psychological trauma that most transgender people go through as they sexually & socially develop ... combining possible normal mental health issues on top makes it very complicated.

 

[EgalitarianJay]

what may be very hard to track is Body dysmorphic disorder as a state of psychiatric gender actualization as a process of sexual orientation.
i am not anti sex change fyi
i think it should be approached very carefully and with great professionalism(as i have been told it is by professionals ... by sexual health workers and community outreach people).
science has a long way to go in what we already conceive to be very complex situations.
The massive amount of psychological trauma that most transgender people go through as they sexually & socially develop ... combining possible normal mental health issues on top makes it very complicated.

While I understand the connection I don't think that transgenderism can be associated with body dysmorphic disorder. I recently saw an Instagram model who announced to her fans that she had gotten breast implants and she was so happy with them. She is stunningly beautiful and clearly thinks so herself. She simply was uncomfortable with having such small breasts. Body Dysmorphic Disorder is a whole other animal. These people hate the way they look. We're not talking about being 300 pounds and wishing you were skinny. They obsessed over their hair, their figure and their facial features like something is horribly wrong with them.

I had a friend who told me she had Body Dysmorphic Disorder. She told me that people like her with this condition can not accept compliments from others. They always feel something is wrong with them. She was studying to become a Psychologist last time I talked to her. She said that Michael Jackson was a good case of someone with Body Dysmorphic Disorder. Some believe that MJ was transracial and bleached his skin a long with getting a lot of plastic surgeries. Can someone who is transgender have body dysmorphic disorder? Absolutely. But once they get their sex change many of them see themselves as looking fabulous. Once that girl on Instagram with the A-cups got her implants she loved her boobs. People with Body Dysmorphic Disorder seem to never be satisfied. That is the difference between someone getting an extreme makeover and having a mental condition where they always hate the way they look no matter what they do to improve their appearance.

 

[billvon]

Perhaps it's because that if there was a gay gene, it would be inherited, which homos fail to pass on.

Unless such a trait provided survival benefits to society as a whole.

 

[iceaura]

I think by genetic component people mean that someone is biologically compelled towards a behavior in the same way that they are compelled to eat or drink water.

Then they should correct their misunderstanding, rather than attempt further confusion of others.

Unless such a trait provided survival benefits to society as a whole

It would need to provide benefits to the specific genetic code that abetted it, as it inhabited individuals within the society. Society as a whole does not inherit genetic code.

 

[billvon]

It would need to provide benefits to the specific genetic code that abetted it, as it inhabited individuals within the society. Society as a whole does not inherit genetic code.

Nope. Phenotypes that result in the greater survival of the group/society/species are conserved as well as phenotypes that benefit only the individual and their offspring. Indeed, these are retained even if a genotype causes serious problems for some individuals carrying that genotype.

For example, sickle cell anemia is a genetic disease that cripples anyone who is homozygous for it. (So roughly 1/4 of a well mixed population expressing the genotype.) But it is conserved in areas with malaria, because if someone is heterozygous for it (roughly 1/2 of the population) it provides some protection against the disease. So evolution conserves a trait that is harmful to some individuals, thus reducing their chance of reproducing - because it confers a benefit to other people in that society.

Keep in mind that evolution seeks to conserve genes, not the organisms themselves. The organisms are merely the vehicle by which the genome is propagated. Thus a gene that may cause an individual to not reproduce may be conserved because it has other benefits.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Phenotypes that result in the greater survival of the group/society/species are conserved

rape gangs ...

 

[TheFrogger]

...may produce reproduction, passing on the rape gene...

 

[billvon]

rape gangs ...

And people too stupid to figure out birth control, yes. (Including people who push abstinence and the removal of sex ed)

 

[TheFrogger]

There are various news-reports about this RainbowSingularity.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

...may produce reproduction, passing on the rape gene...

not quite so finessed...
my point is any gene that drives violent behaviours

i am suggesting that collective associations of actions may have influence to genetic outcomes for groups
i was more pointedly postulating very loosely the early age of conception and if that had any genetic on flow to cause any consequential genetic effect
the increased breeding cycle may influence outcomes.
conjointly converse...
it might be more of an environmental issue with genetic degradation via environmental pollution
things that influence DNA like estrogen simulating compounds, heavy metals etc etc...

gene mutation ... and optimal times for reproduction etc
do rape gangs(extreme example but maybe localized enough to potentially gather data) have higher rates of testosterone and pass on genes that have a higher rate of testosterone production, thyroid over activity etc etc...
how does that contrast against age of conception and environmentals etc etc..

cultural influence defines age of conception mostly
how does that rate with genetic outcomes and intellectual inheritance via innate genes contrasted with lower quality educational environments etc.

Africa is probably a very good point for some investment into the developing state of higher quality education and greater medical access and immunizations etc etc ...

i wasn't posting for the tinfoil hat brigade.
though i was being very minimalist

apologies ...

please give your opinion

p.s last glaring obvious example and quite sad
the clothing industry and how they pollute new born babies with heavy metals and all sorts of god-awful chemicals

does that influence genetics in the breeding cycle ?

ok last one and probably a bit of a political hot potato
farmers and exposure to all sorts of mutating chemicals sprays etc,...
how does that effect their children ?
adjunct/conjoint .... does it have any effect on massively high rural suicide rates etc ...