Once Gay, always Gay?

Once straight do you become homosexual? The same in the opposite.

 

I am gay and a forensic geneticist. While I do not know much about non-forensic genetics, I do know that there are many "gay gene" studies in the literature. Considerable heritability of homosexuality has been demonstrated in multiple studies, and specific genetic variants have been identified as associated. Has 100% of the heritability been genetically explained?? No, but neither has the heritability of other complex traits, such as hair or eye color. This fact that the underlying genetics are not totally understood is not evidence for the nurture side of the Nature v. Nurture debate!

What do these Christian counseling centers who strive to "cure homosexuality" believe? Do they acknowledge the genetic component of homosexuality? Or do they deny that it exists since it is not totally understood? Do they strive to overcome the individual's inborn tendency to be gay, or to (more simply) change a learned behavior?? The concept as a whole is ridiculous, but it seems exceptionally preposterous if they are willing to admit that sexual orientation is an innate feature of the human condition.

On the topic, I saw a t-shirt on this topic at Dallas Pride and LOVED it...there's a write up on the design at http://www.fwweekly.com/index.php?option=com_wordpress&... . I bought one from their website (www.touchmytees.me )!

 

Oh thats just nonsense to compare hair color and sexuality. Making such a statement, I would question your claim that you are a geneticist. Genes determine hair color. In these "gay gene" studies they claim to have found correlations. Say for instance in gay brothers, 67% had genetic similiarities while only 50% of all brothers would be expected to have these simliarities. Many of these studies were duplicated by others that found no differences. Many found differences, but not even statistically significant difference. At MOST, there is evidence that genetics might INFLUENCE sexuality, not determine it. While hair color is determined by genetics.

 

Some folks are bisexual.

 

Say, for instance you quit acting like you have an aptitude for science ?!

 

LOL!! Amen!

 

I was simply making an analogy to another condition that is not totally understood from a purly genetic standpoint. That might have been an overly provocative choice. I should have chosen a comparison with late onset Alzheimer's disease (although I am in NO way implying that homosexuality is a disease), in which the heritability has proven very difficult to explain by genetics alone; results from genetic studies (GWAS and MZT) have shown large varibility. Do you discard the evidence for the genetic factors of AD? Of course, experiential and environmetal factors exist. I'm not arguing that.

I agree that the reproducinolity of MZT studies in the literature is spotty, and our understanding is far from complete. However, I personally feel that there is compelling enough evidence that genetics AND/OR epigenetic factors are
playing a significant role. Either way, in my opinion, it is not purely a choice. People are very quick to disregard evidence for this subject matter because of the implications. Likewise, my own bias (or my ineptitude for science) makes me skeptical of the religious skeptics who too redily use lack-of-evidence-for as their positive-evidence-against.

Sounding admittedly cliche, I have experienced the hardships of being gay...why would anyone choose that? I know in my mind that this was not my choice; the simplest explanation is that genetics is playing a significant role, for which there is evidence.

 

All babies are BORN straight...All Male babies are born that way. With no homosexual thoughts. Thoughts is what makes a homosexual, not DNA. These days young children are being bombarded with gay images all over cartoons, news and media. Family Guy promotes homosexuality to children as young as 3 years old. And they grow up thinking this is a normal behaviour.


So the answer is yes. Society can influence & change the outcome of the child's brain development.

 

That would be our self proclaimed gay geneticist doing that.

 

Ok...to be clear I am a self-proclaimed FORENSIC geneticist, as clearly stated in my original post. I am just here trying to have an intelligent conversation on a controversial issue. Seems obvious now that this is not the forum for that, with all of the personal and catty attacks. It's a shame.

 

All I am saying is that if folks are going to make claims about science then they need to present something that resembles science or at least make a scientific argument of some kind, or relate personal experience that has bearing on the topic in a valid manner.

Naked claims such as :

dont cut it.

 

Well, we know what you think of Jedi's post. Got anything relevant to the post of mine YOU chose to respond to?.....I didnt think so.

 

Amen to that!

 

SuzEQual, please do not judge the forum membership by the posts of JediMiller and Dixon. I make no personal comment about either member, but they are not necessarily typical of the majority of the membership - not even of the conservative membership.

 

Fine .. we will pick apart your post. Here is what you were responding to first:

What is invalid about the comparision? You give no supporting evidence for your claim.

If you are going to say something is nonsense and have nothing to back up that claim, then what you are saying is nonsense.

The whole question here is heritiability. Hair color is an inherited trait.

The poster claims that specific genetic varients have been associated with homosexuality.

If this is the case then homosexuality is inherited (in the genes) and is then related to hair color (also in the genes).

The point you should have picked out, if you disagree and had scientific aptitude, was the claim made by the poster in relation to specific genetic varients/Genes.

Either the claim to have found corrolations is true, is not true, or is still undecided.

Your "for instance" is not a great attempt at explaining statistical corrolation in relation to the issue at hand.

This is a case of battling opinions .. neither has produced, or quoted from, any real studies.

Bottom line .. Heritability of traits such as hair color can indeed be compared to heritability of sexual preference if indeed it there is a genetic component.

Your claim that it is nonsense to compare the two is then nonsense because you have not given any valid support that there is not a genetic component.


I have serious doubts that you have ever read the Journal articles or studies you are referring to. (This is what those who have an aptitude for Science do).

You likely went to an anti gay website and are quoting their claims in relation to some studies.

The poster even says that many aspects of heritability are not well understood. This is something someone who has a clue what they are talking about might say. Scientists speak like this.

How they dont speak is "That is nonsence" when they know something is unclear.

If a Scientist, or someone with an aptitude for Science, Philosophy, or Logic, does not have a clear idea whether or not sexuality is heritable, they do not make "absolute" claims in relation to heritability.

Like you did.

 

You have choices about your actions. Not about your feelings.

Not necessarily. If your feelings change (unlikely but not impossible) conversion either way could occur.

Based on what I have heard from MANY straight people, sexuality is not a choice. All of my straight friends are pretty insistent that they never chose to be straight. Are they all lying?

 

Are they doing it because they prefer it or are they doing it because they are desperate?

If you have to fantasize about a woman while having sex with a man, you're not gay. It isnt the act that makes you gay. Its your feelings.

A gay man that remains a virgin his entire life will die a gay man.

Exactly. They would need to fantasize about an opposite gender experience in order to get off.

They are not really converting to anything if they still have the same preferences.

LOL

 

Interesting commentary.

On a similar note:

Smell is a component of sexual preference. One does not choose what smells good. You either like the smell, of a parfume for example, or you do not.

Just like when you go to a buffet and choose grapes over watermelon.
One makes a choice whether or not to eat grapes over watermelon but one does not get to choose whether one likes grapes better than watermelon.

You either like watermelon or you dont.

Tastes for food can change over time, sometimes not. Perhaps sexuality is like that for some people.

What I am clear on is that I am for the freedom for people to choose things that they like over things that they dont. I want that choice for myself so I should accept that others should be free to choose as well.

What I am not clear on is what justifies me taking that choice away from another person.

 

You cannot choose what you are attracted to. It is not only us saying this...Straight people say the exact same thing.

http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/174880-poll-straight-people-only.html

According to who? Are all these straight people lying? What makes your word better than theirs?

I'd like to know your source for all these assumptions. You dont seem to really have anything to back them up except your own personal opinion.

 

Your feelings shouldn't control you. Everyone feels things inside that they never act on. Like hitting a wife. I FELT like slapping my wife one time for cooking me a bad dinner. Just last week I felt like I wanted to comit suicide...I didn't do it.

Feelings don't control your actions, if they do when you are weak and need to seek treatment.

Whenever you are motivated by feelings and act upon them you are giving up your principles.

 

So according to your theory.

Sight is a component of sexual preference too. What If I look at a black woman and I'm not attracted to her? does this mean I have RACIST DNA now?


You see, I've OWNED everyone here on this section over and over the years. I always prove my points with logic.

 

Your friends remember what their sexuality was when they were born? I doubt it.


Sexuality is a choice. You either choose to put your penis in another man or in a vagina. it's a choice. It's interesting, how gay people keep blaiming its in their GENES and there has never been any scientific fact of that. Its time to stop blaiming your birth for the wrong things you doing in life.

Change can HAPPEN in all life events. In politics, in marriage, in sexuality, in children at work. etc.

I went from democrat to republican. Or maybe I was born with a republican gene, but was confused all my life.

 

Jeddi. Do you like good looking women?

 

Jed, I do not know if they are born that way, or if it's a mental thing,,but so what. If that is who they are attracted to then who are we to say...
Let them live their lives in peace, and hope they are happy,,,that's the way I see it...

Happiness is a hard thing to come by, if they have found it.....great!

 

Um...thats kinda the point.

None of them ever "decided" to be straight. They just were.

So how come none of these straight people ever "chose" to be straight?

That is an action, not a feeling. You control actions. You do not control feelings.

If a gay man forced himself to stuff his penis in a woman's vag, he would not suddenly become straight. LOL!

It is even more interesting that you ignore all evidence that does not support the conclusion you want.

According to who?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-06-26-brothers_x.htm

Maybe you were just lying to yourself about your real beliefs and were a Republican all along?