Scientific explanation of Homosexuality

Aurongroove

http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/epigenetics-underpins-homosexuality/81247763/

A scientific team from the University of Tennessee-Knoxville, University of California, Santa Barbara, and Uppsala University in Sweden reports the completion of a research project indicating that homosexuality may be the result of epigenetic influences on sexual development. According to the study, published online today in The Quarterly Review of Biology, sex-specific epi-marks, which normally do not pass between generations and are thus "erased," can lead to homosexuality when they escape erasure and are transmitted from father to daughter or mother to son....

and so fourth via the link


Sounds important. I think I'll read it more then once before commenting.

fillefatale

I didn't read the actual article but i hate all of this stuff trying to "prove" homosexuality scientifically because it just underscores the idea of queerness as deviance.

Homosexuality isn't a puzzle for straight folks to find a scientific basis for, we're not rubix cubes.

Aurongroove

jees, these guys are scientists not "straight people underscoring something".

I though your post was needlessly defensive and dismissive as well as short sighted and lazy,
The least you could've done was read the article before moaning about it and accusing people of underscoring things.

Captain Graphite

study wrote:

The Quarterly Review of Biology, sex-specific epi-marks, which normally do not pass between generations and are thus "erased," can lead to homosexuality when they escape erasure and are transmitted from father to daughter or mother to son....

So it's my mother's fault then? I'll remind her of that next time I want something..... :pac:

fillefatale wrote: »

I didn't read the actual article but i hate all of this stuff trying to "prove" homosexuality scientifically because it just underscores the idea of queerness as deviance.

Homosexuality isn't a puzzle for straight folks to find a scientific basis for, we're not rubix cubes.

Why do you assume only straight scientists worked on this study? Or that only straight people are interested in finding a scientific reason for different sexual orientations? This study is about scientific curiosity, not about finding a cure to eradicate our "deviant" behaviour! Can't speak for anyone else but I'd love to know the scientific reasons for my "queerness".

Annasopra

I think I can see where fillefatale is coming from on this - why do scientists need to find out why homosexuality exists?

Is there a danger that if they discover why then some new form if eugenics will be promoted by extreme consevatives?

stephen_n

The ultra conservatives spent years trying to prove that homosexuality didn't exist and was a deviance. This is if anything going to prove that to be a lie. However the thought of gene therapy to avoid homosexuality would defenitely be a risk with this although, I can't see that being ethically approved in most western countries!

CdeC

Quote : e.g., some affect the genitals, others sexual identity, and yet others affect sexual partner preference.

That's quite a statement to make. I would imagine that they have discovered this mechanism of gene regulation and they are now theorising about homosexuality.

I believe that homosexuality is genetic but also I believe that there is not one switch or mechanism as in the genetic variability that made one man gay is very different to the mechanism that made another man gay and it's not just as simple as hormone exposure in the womb.

Also evolution shows us that desirable traits are persistant in a population. Homosexuality was obviously seen as an advantage to have in a family as siblings with no offspring provide for their nieces and nephews.

seamus

There's no specific problem with this kind of research. Science is about the how and the why, so naturally it's going to take a look at sexuality to try and determine what causes it, and whether there's any genetic link to it. The same as they do when trying to figure out why some people are exceptionally tall, or appear exceptionally skilled at maths, etc.

Also evolution shows us that desirable traits are persistant in a population. Homosexuality was obviously seen as an advantage to have in a family as siblings with no offspring provide for their nieces and nephews.

There was new research a few months back which determined there was a genetic link for homosexuality, where the sisters of homosexual men it was found on average tended to have more children than those without a homosexual sibling. It was believed that genetic traits in the woman made her more appealing to men, but they may have the side-effect of increasing the liklihood of homosexuality in male siblings. Thus, the "gay gene" would be propagated.

So I wouldn't take any research paper as definitive anything about homosexuality. Since sexuality is a mentally-driven process, it's most likely a confluence of a large number of factors from many different genetic and epigenetic sources, and possible even some early developmental ones.

Reports on research papers which "link" homosexuality with X are usually a lot less definitive than the media make them out to be, and simply serve as statistical curios that provide grounds for further investigation.

Ziphius

fillefatale wrote: »

I didn't read the actual article but i hate all of this stuff trying to "prove" homosexuality scientifically because it just underscores the idea of queerness as deviance.

Homosexuality isn't a puzzle for straight folks to find a scientific basis for, we're not rubix cubes.

They're not trying to "prove" homosexuality scientifically they want to explain how and why it occurs.

From the perspective of evolutionary biology the prevalence of homosexuality is a puzzle. How can a trait that lowers your number of offspring persist in a population. That homosexuality is so common in human societies across times and in the rest of the animal kingdom it suggests that it posses some evolutionary advantages in certain environments.

Studying human behavior scientifically doesn't take people dignity away or cast them as deviants.

EugeneOnegin

But seriously, this is could be scientifically useful. I'll have a look at the paper and will upload if anyone is interested in reading it?

Also, I would advise all to actually read what's going on in the published work before jumping to erroneous conclusions.

Lyaiera

I can see the scientific merit in this and I can understand how people want to know why they are the way they are. In my day to day life I wish it wasn't an issue though. Part of a lot of my trying to understand the way I am is because I see myself as different to the "norm." If there was absolutely no issue (a long way away) then I could see myself not caring in the slightest about why I am a certain way. It'd be a passing thought similar to "Both my parents have black hair why am I ginger?"* i.e. a scientific question that's probably interesting but one that has absolutely nothing to do with day to day life. And the only people who would get really caught up with such questions would be people interested in that particular type of science.

To me it's the general question of it that's used in every which way by both regular people and bigots. It's an important question because it's trying to explain something that's obviously and noticeably different. If society was truly tolerant it would be neither obvious or noticeable. It would just blur into mundane life and be relegated to a scientific and general curiousity rather than something people use to beat drums over.

And in general it's used in the whole "lifestyle choice" argument. My general attitude to people talking about "lifestyle choices" is "So fcuking what?" Even if people did choose to be attracted to and have relationships with people of the same sex what difference does it make to anything else? There is no logical reason for this to be considered anything other than a positive thing. "Oh no! Two people love each other!!!** That's just not right!"




*I am neither adopted nor ginger.
**Or are friends with a very friendly late night relationship.

MicraBoy

mango salsa wrote: »

I think I can see where fillefatale is coming from on this - why do scientists need to find out why homosexuality exists?

Is there a danger that if they discover why then some new form if eugenics will be promoted by extreme consevatives?

Scientists try to understand why things are the way they are, and why they are not different. This understanding is never a bad thing, only how some choose to use it for their own purposes.

The study in some ways doesn't introduce a new theory, rather it explains the mechanism of how already existing theories might work.

I think this study is also very interesting as it would seem to address the issue of why some gays are so effeminate and others are ehem "straight-acting".

Aurongroove

mango salsa wrote: »

I think I can see where fillefatale is coming from on this - why do scientists need to find out why homosexuality exists?

Is there a danger that if they discover why then some new form if eugenics will be promoted by extreme consevatives?

so what if there is? so what if they do? why do scientists need to find out if the earth was flat or not? why do scientists need to understand evolution?

There will always be quests for understandings and there will always be people who argue about ****e.


I don't get the tone of defence. Who cares if people discover how homosexuality happens? it doesn't make you as a person any less valid.