Apparently being gay is not genetic?

NZT73

New Insight into the (Epi)Genetic Roots of Homosexuality

Apparently being gay is not genetic (not there was ever proof of a gay gene) according to researchers at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis. It’s caused by how genes are expressed by influences in the environment and this is called Epi-genetics.

According to research Epi-genetic marks can affect hormone sensitivity while the fetus is in the womb. Epi-genetic marks can sit on DNA and effect how active or inactive it is. Because of this Epi-genetic marks can regulate how a fetus responds to testosterone. For a female fetus the Epi-genetic marks can protect against high levels of testosterone in the womb and for a male fetus Epi-genetic marks can help by up regulating receptors that bind to the hormone (ensuring normal fetal development even in the absence of high levels of testosterone).

Normally the Epi-genetic marks are not passed from generation to generation but in the case of homosexuality these Epi-genetic marks can be passed from mother to son or father to daughter. So in the case of a male fetus this can lead to an under sensitivity to testosterone.

Here is a link to an article if you want to read about it yourself:
healthland.time.com/2012/12/13/new-insight-into-the-epigenetic-roots-of-homosexuality/

To make it easier for some people to understand here is a link to a video with an explanation:
youtube.com/watch?v=Uq5nmUTx6eI#t=99

MagicMarker

Hi poster with very little posts, I trust you and your youtube link completely.

bodice ripper

Good.

Even if it were proven to be a choice, that shouldn't make it less valid.

dont bother

probably some truth in it... but then, what about the likes of so-called "lipstick lesbians" or really masculine "bear" type gays who are "manlier" than some straight men? hardly lacking in either testosterone in the bears, or oestrogen in the lipstick lesbian?

Duggy747

My looks turn people gay :cool:










Turn women gay, that is.....

Wacker The Attacker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3wFHEm33Aw

RGDATA!

welcome to boards NZT73, are you interested in any subjects other than gay marriage?

NZT73

dont bother wrote: »

probably some truth in it... but then, what about the likes of so-called "lipstick lesbians" or really masculine "bear" type gays who are "manlier" than some straight men? hardly lacking in either testosterone in the bears, or oestrogen in the lipstick lesbian?

It's probably more complicated.

For example you can identical twins and yet one of them is straight and the other gay.

NZT73

bodice ripper wrote: »

Good.

Even if it were proven to be a choice, that shouldn't make it less valid.

The article is not about choice. The article suggests there are Epi marks passed from one generation to the other and from mother to son when they shouldn't be. The Epi marks affect your behaviour whether you make a choice or not.

Nodin

NZT73 wrote: »

The article is not about choice. The article suggests there are Epi marks passed from one generation to the other and from mother to son when they shouldn't be. The Epi marks affect your behaviour whether you make a choice or not.

Aha. And.................?

AlanS181824

Being gay is and always will be something you're born with, it isn't a choice.

Oh and welcome to Boards!

NZT73

Nodin wrote: »

Aha. And.................?

You're not very clever

Nodin

NZT73 wrote: »

You're not very clever

Brilliant deduction. Now -

The article is not about choice. The article suggests there are Epi marks passed
from one generation to the other and from mother to son when they shouldn't be.
The Epi marks affect your behaviour whether you make a choice or not.

...what's the significance?

NZT73

AlanS181824 wrote: »

Being gay is and always will be something you're born with, it isn't a choice.

Oh and welcome to Boards!

I agree you are born with it.

But the article suggests there are Epi marks passed on that shouldn't be passed that cause homosexuality

Menas

Nodin wrote: »

Aha. And.................?

And...the OP has joined boards and started two thread. This one (which I am still trying to work out the point of) and another one quoting some doctor about gay marriage.

OP, who are you affiliated with?

Nodin

NZT73 wrote: »

I agree you are born with it.

But the article suggests there are Epi marks passed on that shouldn't be passed that cause homosexuality

But they are passed on (in some cases at least) so what, exactly, is your point....?

NZT73

Trigger Happy wrote: »

And...the OP has joined boards and started two thread. This one (which I am still trying to work out the point of) and another one quoting some doctor about gay marriage.

OP, who are you affiliated with?

I'm just a citizen mate

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Jeez OP, 14 posts and all on the one topic. You need to broaden your horizons.

Timberrrrrrrr

NZT73 wrote: »

I'm just a citizen mate

Does your countries name start with the letter

I

and is it


ON

A

island?

Menas

NZT73 wrote: »

I'm just a citizen mate

Obviously you are a very concerned citizen about the subject of gays. Why not just state your agenda and stop all this pussy footing around the subject?

ancapailldorcha

I'd rather see an actual genetic/epigenetic study with a large sample size, sound methodology and proper statistical analysis than a random Youtube link thank you very much. That goes double when said video consists of morons bleating in front of a camera.

galljga1

Trigger Happy wrote: »

And...the OP has joined boards and started two thread. This one (which I am still trying to work out the point of) and another one quoting some doctor about gay marriage.

OP, who are you affiliated with?

The Iona Institute

hairyslug

Does it really make a difference, really does someone being gay affect you in any way.

And while we are here, touching on your other post, how does 2 people of same sex or opposite sex getting married affect your life.

Or is it a case of "won't somebody think of the children?"

mikom

NZT73 wrote: »

New Insight into the (Epi)Genetic Roots of Homosexuality

Apparently being gay is not genetic (not there was ever proof of a gay gene) according to researchers at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis. It’s caused by how genes are expressed by influences in the environment and this is called Epi-genetics.

According to research Epi-genetic marks can affect hormone sensitivity while the fetus is in the womb. Epi-genetic marks can sit on DNA and effect how active or inactive it is. Because of this Epi-genetic marks can regulate how a fetus responds to testosterone. For a female fetus the Epi-genetic marks can protect against high levels of testosterone in the womb and for a male fetus Epi-genetic marks can help by up regulating receptors that bind to the hormone (ensuring normal fetal development even in the absence of high levels of testosterone).

Normally the Epi-genetic marks are not passed from generation to generation but in the case of homosexuality these Epi-genetic marks can be passed from mother to son or father to daughter. So in the case of a male fetus this can lead to an under sensitivity to testosterone.

Here is a link to an article if you want to read about it yourself:
healthland.time.com/2012/12/13/new-insight-into-the-epigenetic-roots-of-homosexuality/

To make it easier for some people to understand here is a link to a video with an explanation:
youtube.com/watch?v=Uq5nmUTx6eI#t=99

In other news.... Gay scientists have discovered the gene that makes people Catholics.

The Diabolical Monocle

Its caused by a swelling in the fabulous membrane, can be caused by being in proximity to retro clothes, antiques or glitter.

Icepick

NZT73 wrote: »

I agree you are born with it.

But the article suggests there are Epi marks passed on that shouldn't be passed that cause homosexuality

Why shouldn't they be passed.

NZT73

It's an interesting topic and you're going mad because it doesn't agree with you.

It's funny how you claim to be about love and respect and rights until something comes along that you don't like.

conorh91

This thread is hilarious.

People have been incorrectly inferring that the new research meant that homosexuality was a choice, or environmental, and not congenital.

Everyone therefore rounds on the OP... "who are you affiliated with?!" etc

Actually, the OP's post demonstrates that homosexuality is more likely to be congential, and not the outcome of the environment or choice, after birth.

Time to row back a bit on the OP, geniuses.

Mint Aero

I think the gays shelter themselves a bit too much from discussions like this. I mean like it's probably an imbalance of a chemical or something in the brain that makes you gay. Like the rugby player who had a head injury then became gay and took up hairdressing. At the end of the day we're all just chemicals and I say imbalance because obviously it's not the balance of the majority if the gay people are in a minority percentage wise.

The other explanation is "you're just born that way" which yes of course you are but why. Same way you'd ask why you'd have blue eyes for examples. There's a biological reason.

Lakefrio

bodice ripper wrote: »

Good.

Even if it were proven to be a choice, that shouldn't make it less valid.

Why are you brining up the validity of homosexuality? No one questioned it's validity.

mikom

Mint Aero wrote: »

Like the rugby player who had a head injury then became gay and took up hairdressing.

Convenient..........

Mint Aero

mikom wrote: »

Convenient..........

I don't follow. It's what happened. Are you insinuating he used that episode as an appropriate time to come out?

NZT73

Icepick wrote: »

Why shouldn't they be passed.

Ok has anyone read the article?

The Epi marks are supposed to ensure a normal healthy hormonal state for the fetus in the case of there being two much or too little testosterone. When Epi marks are passed from mother to son this would mean a male fetus would not absorb enough testosterone, making him gay.

The article suggests this is not supposed to happen.

You can carry on attacking me but I didn't write the article.

bb1234567

I hate people who believe homosexuality is caused by environmental factors rather than genetics because in the vast majority of these cases the people pushing the theory are basing it off the pathetic stereotype that gay men act effeminately.

evolving_doors

is there proof that being straight is genetic?

conorh91

AlanS181824 wrote: »

Being gay is and always will be something you're born with, it isn't a choice.

That is exactly what the OP's link states.

Any minute now, people who originally ridiculed the OP will suddenly change their mind about the research...

househero

Mint Aero wrote: »

I think the gays shelter themselves

Probably unintentional, but it would be better to say 'gay people' rather than something you would hear a bigot say... 'The blacks' 'the pakis' sounds unintentionally racist.

bb1234567

Gebgbegb wrote: »

is there proof that being straight is genetic?

I would assume its genetic as it is necessary in order for our species to survive.

mikom

Mint Aero wrote: »

I don't follow. It's what happened. Are you insinuating he used that episode as an appropriate time to come out?

He had a stroke and a broken neck, not a head injury.
And yes I believe he was gay all along.

Nodin

NZT73 wrote: »

Ok has anyone read the article?

The Epi marks are supposed to ensure a normal healthy hormonal state for the fetus in the case of there being two much or too little testosterone. When Epi marks are passed from mother to son this would mean a male fetus would not absorb enough testosterone, making him gay.

The article suggests this is not supposed to happen.

...............

But it does. What s your point?

NZT73

Nodin wrote: »

But it does. What s your point?

What's my point?

Sharing information about interesting stuff like lots of people do on this forum.

Everything I've said comes from the article if you don't like it talk to the author.

bb1234567

Why do people care so much whether its genetic or not? If it turns out its not what will that change? There will still be gay people here regardless or will people feel less bad about themselves if they harass a gay person knowing they chose to be gay rather than being born that way

Nodin

NZT73 wrote: »

What's my point?

Sharing information about interesting stuff like lots of people do on this forum.

Everything I've said comes from the article if you don't like it talk to the author.

Of course you are. You just happen to post only on the topic of homosexuality and against gay marriage but this is TOTALLY SEPERATE to that agenda, and has no ulterior motive behind it.

I believe ye.







Really.

arayess

AlanS181824 wrote: »

Being gay is and always will be something you're born with, it isn't a choice.

Oh and welcome to Boards!

I disagree that a person is born gay or straight, I think we develop our ways as we grow.

I'm hetrosexual but my own sexuality has developed over the years. My sexuality hasnt been set in stone once puberty kicked in.
Why is it any less reasonable to apply that to sexual orientation.

I always wonder why people get so hung up on demanding people are "born like that". who cares?

It doesn't make gay people any less of a person if sexuality is developed rather than a given at birth.

Eugene Norman

It wasn't believed to be genetic until very recently. Choice or genetic or epigenetic nobody else's business.

true567

Heres the things after 3 pages, not a single person has actually addressed the poster. I find it funny that your only arguments against him is defaming him. But anyway...

Also, I have recently begin to think about this question. So genes are passed on through reproduction, but then how could a gay gene ever be passed realistically throughout time?

The only way that could occur would be if gays have had kids throughout time at a consistent and continuing rate. It is about as ridiculous as a biblical story if you understand basic genetics. Some may argue it could be a genetic mutation but mutations occur at a much more infrequent rate (i.e. gigantism).

conorh91

Does it mean that lesbians "inherit their homosexuality" from their father?

Like if a woman had seven lesbian aunts on her mother's side (and yes, lets assume for these purposes they're hot) she would be no more or less likely to be a lesbian herself. It all depends on her Dad, and how his body reacted to testosterone in the uterus?

Is that correct?

Pocoyo

Being gay isnt a choice,I dont believe you can choose to get aroused by another man,If you are gay thats swell i just hope all these 'gay' threads end after the vote i wasnt arsed voting in that referendum but now i will vote yes just so i dont have to hear anymore about it.

HugsiePie

Hoosexuality is not 100% genetic anyways, if it was, identical twins would share the same sexuality, no matter what. That doesnt mean its a choice though.

true567

Pocoyo wrote: »

Being gay isnt a choice,I dont believe you can choose to get aroused by another man,If you are gay thats swell i just hope all these 'gay' threads end after the vote i wasnt arsed voting in that referendum but now i will vote yes just so i dont have to hear anymore about it.

They aren't saying it is a choice.

They are saying people are attracted to their same sex due to the environment and not genetics.

Tarzana2

I'm interested in the womb hormonal stuff. Don't necessarily believe it, but don't NOT believe it. Just need more information.

BUT even if it is down to epigenetics, that doesn't matter, it doesn't make someone less gay.