Notices
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: a gay gene?

  1. #1 a gay gene? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1
    hi

    i know this topic is well, debated in society. but interestingly enough, a study in italy found that it would seem that a gay gene is passed along the maternal line... i am conducting a study, which is one of the first, into whether this is apparent in a UK population, as it is known that the uk has a lower percentage of bigger families.

    i need as many gay and straight men as i can get to fill in a quick questionnaire which can be sent to you via email. please do help as this is my thesis and i would love to contribute the the extensive research conductedinto sexuality. there is one condition though, you must be living in the uk to participate. thank you

    claire

    claireorrells93@hotmail.com


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    74
    No, homosexuality has nothing to do with genes. It has more to do with chemicals in the food and the water we drink according most proffessional studies.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 ... 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    47
    I think gay people are just straight people in denial :P
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by latehorn
    No, homosexuality has nothing to do with genes. It has more to do with chemicals in the food and the water we drink according most proffessional studies.
    According to a delusion you just had? Maybe the Praise The Lord show?

    As for gays being straights in denial, tell it to the endless examples in the animal kingdom. Those ego-dystonic penguins for example must really want a member of the opposite sex, but after watching Brokeback Mountain they converted, right?

    The maternal gay gene theory has been around for a while I think, but the latest studies suggest the environment while still in the mother's womb plays a big part, at least with men, but not necessarily women.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    651
    Quote Originally Posted by NotBob
    Quote Originally Posted by latehorn
    No, homosexuality has nothing to do with genes. It has more to do with chemicals in the food and the water we drink according most proffessional studies.
    According to a delusion you just had? Maybe the Praise The Lord show?

    As for gays being straights in denial, tell it to the endless examples in the animal kingdom. Those ego-dystonic penguins for example must really want a member of the opposite sex, but after watching Brokeback Mountain they converted, right?
    Don't you accept the well-known fact that gay penguins are in denial? Also, don't knock the Praise the Lord show. Many people get all of their scientific information and results of "professional" studies from there.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Guest
    In theory, there are a wide number of possibilities. A certain arrangement of genes, the condition of the womb, the emotions of the mother and behavior. The most important when it comes to development though, would be as you reach the childhood phase of your psychological development as opposed to being a baby. What you watch, read, hear, see, think, etc, plays insanely high roles on determining if you will be straight or gay.

    Now, later in life, there are social conditions that can also bring out a "homosexual" in the most "straight" of men. Even having a male friend, or a guy which you SOMEHOW, through denying it contintually to yourself, still fall in love with (every theist I've met denies the idea that homosexuals feel real love, and instead are lustful hellspawn. Haha). It also depends upon how the males act, the females act, and how YOU act around both parties that will eventually define if you're gay or not preference wise.

    Unfortunately, few people become Bisexual or Homosexual simply out of mental choice. In one idea, the more intellectually advanced you become, in all areas including psychology, the better you will control your own mind and urges. Thus, one can *MAKE* yourself gay, or bi, or completely straight again out of choice given enough time to make the adjustment.

    Personally, I'm bisexual out of choice. A persons sexual organs don't mean much to me, although the holding BELIEF of bisexuals tends to be "I. MUST. FUCK. EVERYBODY." so that doesn't build up my image too well. Haha
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    651
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht
    Unfortunately, few people become Bisexual or Homosexual simply out of mental choice. In one idea, the more intellectually advanced you become, in all areas including psychology, the better you will control your own mind and urges. Thus, one can *MAKE* yourself gay, or bi, or completely straight again out of choice given enough time to make the adjustment.
    I hope that you do not believe this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Guest
    Eh, so far in observations, it appears logically correct. Unless your a theist, it's not too hard to deduce. Especially since there are so many possible methods or outcomes. However I'm not saying *EVERYBODY* can, with some people, regardless, they'd rather stay *STRAIGHT*.

    And when you eventually know enough about how your own mind works, you can do anything from making yourself gay to making yourself motivated. You just need to learn your own mental patterns. Self analasys is the key.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    651
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht
    Eh, so far in observations, it appears logically correct.
    Logic is the easist way to fool people, isn't it? Logical correctness is irrelevant.

    Unless your a theist, it's not too hard to deduce.
    It is as easy to deduce as the ideea of flying spagetti monsters, and equally difficult, at least for me, to accept as valid.

    Especially since there are so many possible methods or outcomes. However I'm not saying *EVERYBODY* can, with some people, regardless, they'd rather stay *STRAIGHT*.
    So you think that it is basically a lifestyle choice for everyone to make?

    And when you eventually know enough about how your own mind works, you can do anything from making yourself gay to making yourself motivated. You just need to learn your own mental patterns. Self analasys is the key.
    Sure.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Raglan Road
    Posts
    34
    Attraction isn't a choice.

    Ever.
    Let me warm up first....don't want to pull a hammy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Raglan Road
    Posts
    34
    you can do anything from making yourself gay to making yourself motivated

    I nominate this for most ridiculous quote of the year.
    Let me warm up first....don't want to pull a hammy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Guest
    Heh, so, quote one line of what I say, and ignore the rest. Very nice. Anyway, the whole point about making yourself motivated or anything, or even forcing yourself to feel some emotions, is self analasys. You can really do a near unlimited number of things if you only know how your brain structure works. Psychologically, this is not impossible, as it's how many people have their problems corrected. Because the therapist (or whoever else) can figure out how their mind works and thus correct the issue by doing so.

    I really don't see the issue with it as long as you introduce the correct circomstances. Now, granted, you can't make yourself ATTRACTED specifically to a certain person who is beyond all what you'd originially find attractive, but in theory once you realize a few details about how your mind works in that area you can change it to become attracted to that person. It's not a surefire thing, but the adaptability of your brain makes it possible and even probable.

    Also, lifestyle isn't a choice everyone can make, since few people actually make an attempt to understand themselves. There are also precious few that even attempt to monitor their thoughts in specific instances, in order to gain a realization of their thought patterns toward a specific thing. This is why, as I said, it's more like a theory brought on by observation. And considering how the brain works on those levels, it's really possible for it to be a CHOICE rather than some odd chemical reaction you have no control over. When you get right down to it, there is no reason for it NOT to be possible or even probably to accomplish. Unless of course, there is some mounting evidence against it I was never notified of. In which case, do give some links.

    EDIT: rather than flood the place by writing an entirely different post I'll just add some links about the psychology of homosexuals.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual#Psychology

    And here's something slightly against me on this one, but it doesn't really go all the way. I hope you'll use some reasoning when reading it: http://archives.thedaily.washington....ayAchoice.html

    And another link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice_...al_orientation

    If you want more, find them yourself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    651
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht
    Unless of course, there is some mounting evidence against it I was never notified of. In which case, do give some links.
    Not a bad idea, if that is your game. Please cite studies of people who have consciously made the decision to become homosexual.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Guest
    Sorry for reviving this dead topic, but I believe that it should come to a close that has actual studies.

    To wrap this up, recent studies prove there isn't a gay gene (and this is surprising...how?). Commen sense already told me and many others that a gay gene is logically impossible, especially due to how genes are passed down. Not to mention it's a psychological trait, as well as a physical-adjustable one (one can change ones sexual preference by choice. This is proven with born-agains that are no longer homosexual, sexually abused children, etc).

    http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

    is one website (you can google for a million others). While many people, homophobes and theists ESPECIALLY would strongely disagree, I do believe our knowledge of how the body works sexually seems to suggest it's by choice. Ones psychological state is highly linked towards your physical state and visa versa, so it's logical to assume ones sexuality is chosen.

    Under the proper conditions, even the strongest homosexual would probably become straight again (and visa-versa). Although in the less-strongly defended, it may be as easy as changing the environment you are in. For example, pornography of either preference (although to be honest that's a fairly...bad way to go about it).

    Ultimately, I could have posted an entire thing about defining bi, gay, straight, etc, explaining everything, but it'd be of little use. More like a waste of typing. So you can settle for this and some links.

    http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/satinover.html
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/325979.stm
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=12969

    Conclusion: Sexual preference is psychological choice. It can be influenced by anything. More severely sexual abuse at young ages. But you get the jist.

    P.S: This isn't to say some wont just find it heart-wrenchingly disguisting, but under the proper conditions there will still be an adaptation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15 Gay Genes. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6
    No offense, but that has got to be the biggest load of nonsense I have read so far on "choosing" homosexuality. YOU seem to think that these individuals are SUPER human and get to choose a sexual preference.

    Jeremy...when did YOU choose to be straight? Mom...are'nt you proud of me...I just choose to be sexual aroused by girls..go tell Dad...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Guest
    *sigh* the following is some speculation to tease your mind with.

    Alright, there are two plausible theories: Neurological and psychological. So far, it's proven to be a little combined effect of both.

    Now, hormone and brain wise, genes could have some effects. Like perhaps leaning one towards one orientation more than the other. However as a total effect the hypothesis is utter bogus.
    Also it fails to take into account psychological abuse victims. It suggests it isn't neurology as much in these cases, since a sexual orientation switch can occur well after much of the brain development is complete.

    Ones brain and psychological state is in a rather constant state of flux (depending on how much you learn at one time), depending on ones environment one can develop numerous traits both sexually, physically, etc.

    The neurology suggestion came from a rather closed-to-alternative colleagued of mine, and it doesn't really tie in fully with how sexual orientation can switch in psychology cases.
    I could list "born agains" as a perfect example, but personally I believe a lot of them are lying to themselves (as most act like it). However the overall intelligence of these people tend to be low, so naturally they'd know little of controlling their desires.

    Changing ones orientation is far from a "super human" feat. Largely I believe it's a sociological function. If, for example, a society shunned heterosexual conduct and preferred homosexuals (lets ignore the obvious lack of children as a result), it's a high chance that the majority would be homosexual.
    However, this is where the neurology explanation can sort-of tie in. During the early years of childhood ones brain is literally shaping to what you learn. Neurological paths that are used continually are improved, while those never used are removed. After this initial period (which some say peaks around 5), it's natural for ones behavior to entirely shape around the culture one is raised in.

    However this has little effect on the more older groups (say around 20). This is true because after that age people become majorly opposed to any change, and few of them are really open to new ideas (or cultures). This is possibly due to both social and neurological influences, since ones brain pretty much stops shaping so rapidly to what you learn. However I'm not entirely sure about the social influence regarding ones open mindedness around that age, as I've not completed much study on it.

    However, one last thing, why is it you provided no rebuttal? I highly doubt "this is utter bullshit" counts as a logical rebuttal. Neither, for that matter, does your ad-hominems.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17 gay gene 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6
    Jeremy,
    Using your own statement, "Changing ones orientation is far from a "super human" feat. Largely I believe it's a sociological function. If, for example, a society shunned heterosexual conduct and preferred homosexuals (lets ignore the obvious lack of children as a result), it's a high chance that the majority would be homosexual," and using your own logic, one could also say that if a society shuns homosexual conduct and embraces heterosexuality, its a high chance that the majority would be heterosexual. If this is so, then why would anyone "choose" to be in the homosexual minority and have to endure the majorities disdain for homosexuals. Surely no one would choose to be reviled and stigmatized just for the purpose of being different.
    Your other statements would seem to indicate that you view the human brain as somewhat malleable until around 5 is probably correct. But, I doubt that heterosexual parents repeatedly showing their young children erotic pictures or letting them view images from televison of the opposite sex is going to ensure their childrens heterosexuality, or that repeatedly showing them pictures of the same sex would cause them to be homosexual.
    You seem to be saying that perhaps we are all Pavlov's dog and have been "conditioned" by our parents and society at a young age to be attracted to a certain sex. While studies have proven that children and young babies are cognizant of a handsome or pretty human face, I doubt anyone under 5 could be conditioned intentionally or UNintentionally to become sexually attracted to anyone.
    Adults who can "change" their attraction to another sex must surely be BIsexual. I have read of no reputable studies of nonBisexuals ever being "conditioned" or "re-programmed" to be aroused by an opposite sex--even of those who truly WANT to be "re-programmed."
    There is an interesting book that comes to mind, "As Nature Made Him." I am sure you may have heard of it. Although not definitive on the matter, it does provide good evidence that regardless of the individual's wishes or the society's wishes, sexuality is set in the brain during embryonic development and is not malleable at a whim--at least for non-bisexuals. Of course family and society can influence the "trappings" that are asscociated with sexuality--like if the child is taught to act "macho" or "maudlin" those characterics are malleable to a degree. I hate to enclose links in any correspondence, but thought you may want to give it a read... http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/02/2...20angiert.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18 Re: gay gene 
    Guest
    nngh...bad day to be dealing with poorly written horribly long walls of benighted text...however looking back I _really_ should work on expressing myself better. Bleh.

    Quote Originally Posted by freestateofmind
    and using your own logic
    Bam! You fail instantly! It's improbable for you to use my logic, since you fail to understand the premises of which it was attained due to the fact you aren't me, are my teacher, know how my mind works, my personality, etc.

    And, as it appears down below, you *really* didn't use my logic at all. Does this bit even have a point? Yes. Don't try it again.

    one could also say that if a society shuns homosexual conduct and embraces heterosexuality, its a high chance that the majority would be heterosexual. If this is so, then why would anyone "choose" to be in the homosexual minority and have to endure the majorities disdain for homosexuals.
    ...and? You aren't saying it's impossible, or unlikely, you just diverge a little and ask "why would anybody want to."

    However, lets use something similar to the logic presented (to the best that I can copy it) to ask questions of a similar level: Why would anybody choose to not vote? Why would anybody choose to not pay taxes? Why would anybody choose to walk instead of drive? Why would anybody do anything the majority doesn't do or is opposed to doing?

    The answer differs vastly for every person that goes against majority thought and action.

    Surely no one would choose to be reviled and stigmatized just for the purpose of being different.
    ...this is a man that has not heard of those annoying as hell Goths and Emo's that spring up everywhere. However it's not simply for the purpose of being different, as I stated above, the purpose would differ amongst the people.

    But, I doubt that heterosexual parents repeatedly showing their young children erotic pictures or letting them view images from televison of the opposite sex is going to ensure their childrens heterosexuality, or that repeatedly showing them pictures of the same sex would cause them to be homosexual.
    ...I don't believe there is a loud enough microphone in the universe that allows me to call "STRAW MAN TACTICS" loud enough. Try to use some amount of rational thought before you decide to make cheap-jabs at the main idea someone is presenting. It makes you appear to be less of an asshole.

    Anyway, I'll rephrase it (again): A childs mind is most changable from the ages of birth to 5, and it gets progressively lower at later stages in life. As evolution makes obvious, the default sexuality is heterosexuality. Naturally most children would develop along these lines if they suffer no trauma or anything else that would turn them away from the opposite sex (this is normally common for those 100% homosexual. Although not always).

    Naturally a parent wouldn't be required to do anything of the sort, and the pornography bit was a very poor example (as I conceded in the original post that mentioned it). However I did not state, either, that one "chooses" from birth. In fact I do recall saying something to the affect of "a person can change what they started out with." And many people do, just not on sexuality levels. The trauma bit was an example of a possibility along those lines, since it's already a proven phenomenon.

    When one is developing in the womb, the body is constructing itself based on genes and the surrounding environment (also things concerning the mother). As evolution has obviously shown, the conditions are perfect for a number of things including sexual orientation. It's a probable thing to consider that during this construction a number of things can (and do) go "wrong." Generally, sexuality being least likely, but it can swing either way given the right condition.

    Now, following the above scenario, the child is thrust out into the world. Depending on how strongly the childs sexuality is set, and what happens in it's early years, it may revert to heterosexuality or stick the course (or visa versa). This would be, again, an environment factor as well as sociological.
    During this period, a majority of factors lie strictly on the parents (and still do through most of the kids life). The affection (or lack thereof) received from one or both of the parents does sway things a bit, as well as the friends (or lack thereof) one makes with either gender. There are an infinite amount of factors to consider, yet none of them say for sure what will be what. They only point someone in a direction.

    I could go on, but I highly doubt I have to. I'm quite sure you would be capable of following along yourself.

    You seem to be saying that perhaps we are all Pavlov's dog and have been "conditioned" by our parents and society at a young age to be attracted to a certain sex.
    Well, "condition" is a fairly strong word. I'd advise it be more of a "placed in a certain environment." However, as we all know, it's both environment AND heredity (the end of that long-assed debate). Which ties in with the expectations.

    While studies have proven that children and young babies are cognizant of a handsome or pretty human face, I doubt anyone under 5 could be conditioned intentionally or UNintentionally to become sexually attracted to anyone.
    Allow me to shed some light on the subject: A child is still very vulnerable mentally from ages 5 until puberty. Then a third mental development stage happens (puberty), and they become far less susceptible.
    Lastly, after the third stage, the fourth stage (which is, arguably, around 16-20) pretty much ensures nobody changes much at all. Especially since your brain starts to shape less and less to what you learn (most people agree it becomes harder to learn new things after a certain age). Of course I'm using the "stages" loosely, as I disagree with all stages presented by psychologists thus far, and I can't provide accurate ones myself.

    Sufficed to say, depending on a large array of factors including the supposed "stages" mentioned, it only becomes harder. Not impossible. of course, one is working against evolution during the process, so it might as well be. I can't guarantee it's a surefire thing, since it depends on the person knowing themselves well enough to make such changes in the later stages. And few people, aside from certain meditation groups, would be capable of it.

    Even then, it isn't surefire, since there are still other factors to consider. But the point is, it's possible.

    Adults who can "change" their attraction to another sex must surely be BIsexual. I have read of no reputable studies of nonBisexuals ever being "conditioned" or "re-programmed" to be aroused by an opposite sex--even of those who truly WANT to be "re-programmed."
    That's because nobody has bothered to try. At least to my knowledge. It's like asking how much energy the body generates during one breath (in watts). I was unable to find an answer, because the only studies were done on one input: Proteins.

    And, sufficed to say, they could very well be latently bisexual. I can't prove that impossible, since it's largely plausible. However this coincides with my original claim to begin with, especially in relation to stages. I see no contradiction.
    Furthermore, those that want to be "reprogrammed" tend to be homosexual. They turn to god, and whammy, the majority become heterosexual overnight because god spoke to them and told them to come back to him!

    It's psychological cases like that which make me cringe.

    There is an interesting book that comes to mind, "As Nature Made Him." I am sure you may have heard of it. Although not definitive on the matter, it does provide good evidence that regardless of the individual's wishes or the society's wishes, sexuality is set in the brain during embryonic development and is not malleable at a whim--at least for non-bisexuals. Of course family and society can influence the "trappings" that are asscociated with sexuality--like if the child is taught to act "macho" or "maudlin" those characterics are malleable to a degree. I hate to enclose links in any correspondence, but thought you may want to give it a read... http://www.nytimes.com/books/00/02/2...20angiert.html
    It's generally considered bad nature to reference to a book in a debate, since the opponent cannot and will not waste his/her time refuting the entire book if it's incorrect.

    And, also, the book description hints at nothing which disproves my general idea. It only proves your interpretation of my idea incorrect. Which isn't surprising.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Bachelors Degree charles brough's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    joplin MO USA
    Posts
    425
    You all seem to assume we each fall into a single category: straight, bi-sexual and gay. It is not as simple as that. Most straight men have some feminine traits. Most women have some masculine traits. This is reflected in what interests them. For example, a man my be fascinated by the male dancers at a Flaminco Dance demonstration, watching the masculine dancer in his tight, pants! Yet, his wife may be actually watching the female dancers more. There may be subtle eroticism to this that neither are aware of, however. We are not naturally self-conscious about this sort of thing. It is normal. No one does not ever want to see performers only of their own sex except macho alpa males and high-status females.

    The way I interpret the scientific evidence is that alpha males in society are the small percentage of the population which is genetically and exclusively masculine or feminine. These are the totally straight. At the other end are the totally gay people. Together the totally gays and straights comprise something like 20% of the total population. The rest are all genetically in various stages in between. Whether a man, for example, takes cognizance of the femininity in some of his interests or not has something to do with what he wants in life and his childhood environment. He may decide to emphasize them and play the libertine bi-sexual role. Or, he may be fully influenced by coming from a good, straight, family environment and chose to ignore the feminine traits and live a normal straight, convention life---which most men do and which makes for a more stable societ.

    charles, http://humanpurpose.simplenet.com
    Brough,
    civilization-overview (dot) com

    --------------------
    There are no accidents, just someone taking too much risk. . . (CB)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman thirdeye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    9
    Well, I think first off, how "masculine" or "feminine" a person is, does not really determine his/her sexual orientation, IMO. These are simply gender roles (which are socially constructed). For instance, if a man is expressing his "femininity" he is being seen as "sexually deviant" only because socially, most are not used to this because most societies have developed roles which a man must conform to, which include 'masculine' traits. ie. courage, protectiveness etc. In other societies and/or cultures there is a "grey area" of gender, which exists mainly of androgyny. (there are less specific gender roles, or often times the women take on more "masculine" roles which are defined by what most commonly see in a Westernized view).

    Sexual orientation has to do with who a person is attracted to, not necessarily how he/she is conditioned to act (as a certain gender). However, this is easily debatable due to the "nurture"/environmental argument regarding homosexuality. This is not a valid hypothesis anymore, but Freud tampered with the environmental theory via the Oedipus complex. (If a young man does not identify with his father and adopt his values, thus becoming a man. He will not get over the fact that he is in constant struggle to identify with his father, and will be stunted sexually. OR, if he is raised by solely the mother, he will be attracted to men, because he already has access to the mother, therefore avoiding the conflict entirely) hah! Okay, so Freud was full of inuendos and was a homophobe, but the point is that environmental factors *could* very well influence how a person looks and views other people. ie. who he/she is attracted to sexually and how much. (not everyone fits into one "gay" or "straight" label...sexuality is a spectrum with a lot of grey in the center).

    There has been a lot of biological theories floating around also. For instance, yes the 'gay gene' or the hormone theory. The latter of the two basically suggests that when a mother becomes stressed while pregnant her hormones fluctuate, which may lead to an increase in testosterone. This could affect how a person behaves after he/she is born. Although I know that some will add that testosterone may make someone more "masculine" however the traits that are correlated with masculinity, (ie. courage, strength etc.) are abstract concepts.

    I think whether or not one argues "nature" or "nurture" the real fact is that homosexuality is not a choice, in my opinion. I think gay and lesbian people (whether they have a biological imperative, or are conditioned a certain way) do not control who they are attracted to, the same way that people are attracted to blondes as opposed to brunettes. Can one really explain *why* he/she is attracted to blondes? Or what one person sees as beautiful is different to another?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    23
    Just to add another bit of research here. Researchers noticed some time back that the male and female brain were physically different, even in fetuses. The female brain has a noticeably larger intra-brain communications pathway between the two halves of the brain than in male brains. (Meaning that females use both halves of their brain more frequently than do males, who generally have specialized skills in one half or the other.)

    A test was done where students with no particular knowledge of brain structure, but just given the above info, were asked to determine if a particular brain was male or female. They guessed right 90% of the time. In the other 10%, the brain had either an in-between structure -- neither male nor female -- or, the brain was in the "wrong" body, i.e., a male-structured brain in a female fetus, or vice versa.

    Draw your own conclusions.


    -----
    www.freethinkertools.com/forum
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22 Re: a gay gene? 
    Forum Professor leohopkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Dulwich, London, England
    Posts
    1,418
    Quote Originally Posted by clerval
    hi

    i know this topic is well, debated in society. but interestingly enough, a study in italy found that it would seem that a gay gene is passed along the maternal line... i am conducting a study, which is one of the first, into whether this is apparent in a UK population, as it is known that the uk has a lower percentage of bigger families.

    i need as many gay and straight men as i can get to fill in a quick questionnaire which can be sent to you via email. please do help as this is my thesis and i would love to contribute the the extensive research conductedinto sexuality. there is one condition though, you must be living in the uk to participate. thank you

    claire

    claireorrells93@hotmail.com
    Here's food for thought.

    How would these "gay genes" be passed on ??

    Erm...... :?
    The hand of time rested on the half-hour mark, and all along that old front line of the English there came a whistling and a crying. The men of the first wave climbed up the parapets, in tumult, darkness, and the presence of death, and having done with all pleasant things, advanced across No Man's Land to begin the Battle of the Somme. - Poet John Masefield.

    www.leohopkins.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •