I always found it interesting the fact (UL?) that left-handed people are more creative, more likely to suffer from depression/commit suicide, and have shorter lifespans than right-handed people. And likewise (male?) homosexuals as a group have these traits. Both groups estimated at around 10% of the population.
Not to make a link, but a parallel: in years past, left-handed people were outcast, “sinister”, even the second half of this century left-handed children were forced to write with their right hands, causing often untold other problems and complications. Today, we realise they’re born that way, there’s nothing wrong with it, and there’s no stigma.
Ditto homosexuality. The treatment of gay people has of course been far worse, but today, the stigma (at least in some societies) is easing, and in more open societies we no longer try to “re-educate” gay people as straight.
Hemophilia is carried through the female line, but expressed in male offspring. Before modern times, hemophiliacs seldom lived to adulthood to father children of their own. But their sisters passed along the genetic trait to their children. Male homosexuality could have a similar genetic operation, and that is why it has not been “bred out”.
(Singing)
“Born Gay, as Gay as the wind blows
as Gay as the grass grows
born Gay to follow your heart.”
I think it’s insulting to assert that people are born that way and have no choice. It’s like suggesting that it is a hereditay illness or a biochemical compulsion. I also have to wonder how many really want to be parents in the first place. My guess is, not many.
>Does exposure by a pregnant mother to certain chemicals have any effect on the sexual orientation of the child?<
Sounds like a Superhero origin: “Bitten by a homosexual during her pregnancy, she gives birth to 'Gayman!” Why not Gamma or Cosmic Rays?:rolleyes:
Political correctness about sexual orientation, an expression of which is seen here, has done a lot to stifle research in this field. The idea of doing research, and following the evidence to whatever conclusion it may lead, even if it contradicts one’s political beliefs on the issue, is an anathma to some.
Now THAT is insulting. Suggesting that it is something you are born with is not. I was born with brown eyes. It is not “hereditay [sic] illness.” It is a combination of my genes. I was born with brown hair. I don’t consider this an illness.
Science is still arguing over nature/nurture for almost everything, including sexual orientation. I don’t think there is yet a definitive factual answer.
Well, that would certainly be less insulting than to first claim that it was a choice and then insist that the choice was a bad one, thereby implying that all those people who discovered that they were homosexual (with no choice in the matter) are really “choosing” to be “bad.”
However, opinions on such subjects are more appropriate to the Great Debates Forum. This thread is simply seeking a factual answer to the question of how any association (if there is one) betweem homosexuality and heredity would be passed on through genetics.
Look at social animal colonies: ants, bees and such. The overwhelming majority of individuals in such a colony have no chance of breeding at all. Why haven’t worker bees been bred out of existence? Because there is more to spreading your genes than having babies.
Social colonies are not only in the insect world, there is the naked mole rat among mammals.
Right, because ALL heretidary traits are illnesses – eye color, hair color, body type, creativity… :rolleyes:
Do you actually have a cite or even a reason for this assertion? (Actually, am I being whooshed or is it not even really relevant to this discussion?) Just what is this guess of yours based on? I don’t see why wanting children/not wanting them would be a “gay-linked” trait anymore than it’s a “straight-linked” one. Some people want kids. Some people don’t. There are gays and straights in both of those groups.
Right, cause exposure to foreign substances NEVER has any effect on a fetus. Boy, won’t all those kids with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome be relieved to hear that…
There are hundreds of chemicals, man made and naturally occurring, that are considered “endocrine disruptors”. Some have been shown to have effects at very low levels. Scary stuff, mostly focusing on thyroid and reproductive health of both sexes.
For example, Soy phytoestrogens (isoflavones) are a fairly hot topic in medical research now. Depending on who you listen to (or perhaps which way the wind is blowing), they may be causing or curing all types of diseases. Soy baby formula (a relatively new development in human history) is naturally high in these compounds.
Hmmm, so a positive trait like softball prowess could be linked to a negative like listening to Chris Williamson overandoverandover? At last, an explaination of my X!
heredity is not a big deal, anyway… we can percieve every interaction as if it had hereditary component to it… every feature who we are is defined partly by our genetic makeup and partly by enviroment where we are living… i can imagine homosexual leaning being caused not by sexual genes but genes that primarily causes some special mental ability or lack of ability in memory or musicality… quite high occurence of homosexuality may be, geneticaly speaking, caused by need to “understand” oposite sex…