The gay gene

I don’t believe in the whole gay gene either.

There is actually a good amount of scientific proof that their is a gene related to homosexuality. Do I think everyone who says they are gay has…no but it is passed down due to over population and lack of females. In many other societies being “gay” is a natural part of culture, especially when there is a shortage of women. It is also common in animals. The rabbit for example will have sex with

the rabbit of the same sex in cases of of over population.

This is totally wrong, but I do appreciate your thoughts. I know many people who knew they were gay long before their “home situation” or “parent situation” could have any time to even affect them. I babysat for a boy who, at 8 years old, just KNEW that he was gay. And years later, he did in fact come out while he was in high school. I myself am gay and can’t say that anything in my childhood hadanything to do with it at all. I have two loving parents. Also, a friend of mine is a twin. Both twins are gay – and this is where the gay gene/no gay gene argument gets interesting.

I disagree. Freud was a big cock head. I like Carl Jung better. I met people who were born gay. They have even tried having sex with women to try and fit in but it makes them puke. It would be like the same reaction you would have if you tried to kiss or have sex with a guy.

Never mind what the detractors of your entry have to say- they’ve been ****ed, in every orifice, by the gay agenda. Sexuality has everything to do with how a person related to his or her parents and peers during adolescence. And you’ll find many similar character flaws within the gay community. Particularly neuroticism. And this is all coming from a bisexual man, by the way.

I think that when people want answers for why they are the way they are – and the LGBTQ community is under intense pressure to provide an explanation for their differences – people will dig through their histories, seize upon this or that collection of memories, and decide that those particular experiences are their “answer.”

it is a theory, as everything always is and can be proven or disproven. but there is a lot of indication to the gene in men only. women tend to be a traumatic experience. but not always. you usually see women have the ability to waiver.

What about straight people who have had “some kind of memorable oddity with a parent or both parents [f]rom horrible life altering abuse to overcompensation for lack of a male/female influence.”? If being gay is a product of some sort of parental abuse/neglect, then why doesn’t it affect everyone who has suffered parental abuse/neglect?

Actually, there are scientific studies showing that gays, male and female, have certain small differences in their brain structure, suggesting a congenital — therefore possibly genetic — predisposition to being gay. The jury is still out, but I would tend to give more credibility to science than Freud.

It exists. It exists in myself as well. It’s called Xq28. It’s a chromosome band and genetic marker.

I don’t feel it has to be parental influence. I think being gay develops as part of one’s personality, which sometimes has to do with parental interactions. And just as someone can’t choose to be naturally outspoken or shy, I believe it’s possible they also can’t choose which gender they’re attracted to. But I agree it seems unlikely that it has anything to do with genes.

WOW! I can’t belive you truely belive that.No one wakes up on a tues.morning and thinks gee I am going to be gay today.It’s not in the “genes”.You are born gay.It does not have anything to do with family or being sexually abused.

I’m a queer woman who thinks the “gay gene” idea is a bit silly, but only because I think sexuality is very very complicated and likely arises from a confluence of many factors, some biological, some social, some cultural, ect. But are all queer people survivors of childhood trauma? I doubt it. Did all straight folks manage to avoid childhood abuse?

Why does it matter? I believe its just preference. I prefer black cars over red ones, cats over dogs, and men over women.

Admittedly the number of unsigned notes on this entry disturbs me. I honestly don’t understand why most those diarists didn’t sign their notes…? *shakes my head* I believe that both your stance and the one you are critiquing is incorrect. For one, human sexuality is far too complex to have only one “cause.” Furthermore, it is statistically IMPOSSIBLE that EVERY homosexual experienced some extreme environmental factor, such as some form of childhood abuse or another form of trauma (such as a broken household) to “make” them gay or lesbian or bi-sexual. By the same token, even if homosexuality is genetic in nature, that does not make it predetermined. Many people carry genes that are never expressed or activated. Many genes require an interaction with the environment in order to activate. So the answer could (and likely is) “all of the above.” There IS likely a genetic or biological component to whether someone is homosexual or heterosexual. But there doesn’t HAVE to be. Likewise, environment and experience MAY play a crucial role, but again…it doesn’t HAVE to. It could be one, the other, or both.

Gay individuals certainly do reproduce, and quite frequently! Homosexuality is seen in species besides humans (see: penguins). There may not directly be a gay gene, but for example, perhaps there is a genetic trait causes a release of hormones at certain times in fetal development that influences sexual preference.

“unsigned” notes is the way to go on this topic. The diarist here is far more ‘correct’ than ‘wrong’, as these unsuccessful scientists (and certain advice columnists) have been searching for “The Gay Gene” for many, many years – with zero success. I can’t believe someone cites an eight-year-old as someone who already “KNEW” he was gay, as any sort of evidence to refute the point.

For it would be most probable that the sexual abuses most prominent in turning-on the gay reaction would happen much earlier than age 8. Probably much earlier than age 5 as well. Unfortunately society cannot research such stimuli fully when those who would be the data (are probably caused by others to) feel shame and guilt for merely being the true data in such would-be studies.

It’s just true… that society renders anyone who has gone through many of the mentioned memorable oddities as an outcast, and so those oddities continue to remain hidden. The latest trend is for those with the memorable oddities to be first to create what are self-made memorable oddities about their appearances as if they are merely following style evolution…

P.S. Just because someone doesn’t breed, does NOT mean that the genes they carry cannot be passed on. Look at albinos. They CANNOT reproduce in most cases, but they continue to exist. Albinos are caused by either a gene or gene mutation that gets passed down through the FAMILY, not from one individual albino to another. I have a rather rare expression of a mental illness that has proven to be genetic (four generations of women in a single family with the same exact rare diagnosis SCREAMS genetic inheritence). I may not be able to reproduce, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be a fifth generation, because any of my five siblings may have a daughter that carries the gene. Genetics are not as cut and dry as many people seem to think they are.

shared by giant subsets of society as a whole, thus seeming to somehow camoflage the telltale signs of the aforementioned memorable oddities. In this way it is quite possible that the subset of humanity that is gay collectively hinders better world-wide understanding of themselves by the very nature of their own reactions to (what shall now be termed ‘the mysterious link’)

Because modern society has (what we’ll call) “advanced” in so many ways, it seems more and more probable with each passing day that the (sacrifices we all make, for the speed and seeming ‘ease’ with which we zoom through childhood and adulthood too) are, ultimately, the causes of sexual preference considerably in the minority. Back in the days of, say, Little House on the Prairie, there was…

… “family structure”, as well as plenty of time for each member of a family to determine and know clear roles he/she would play within that structure. These days it is far too easy to woo one or the other parent away from what used to be the backbone of family life. There is every reason to feel that those imbalances (or offshoots there of) are prominent sources for minority sexual pref.

I certainly wouldn’t state that “abuse” is flat-out the only cause… but once you include alcoholism/addiction in a parent (esp. from a kid’s young age), and possibly significant mental illness in a parent… then you’ve got a significant nucleus of “memorable oddities” from which to draw. In a perfect world we could access untainted data and cross-reference same-sex preference…

… with a finite set of “memorable oddities” in order to learn much more. And honestly, if such a data comparison yielded truly no correlation, then I would alter my thinking as described above. At any rate, I do not in any way perceive same-sex preference to be a “choice” that anybody makes. The polarity between straight and gay hinders understanding to considerable extent.

1. Freud = full of ****. You can’t normalize your own issues by telling everyone else they have them too. 2. Twins. Every child experiences the life in their household differently, but why are twins more likely to share the same sexuality? 3. Gay people CAN and DO reproduce. I thought it was funny that you said they can’t. 4. Biology. Most traits have to do with more than one gene/mutation combo.

Did you know that biologists aren’t even sure yet which/how many genes determine the color of our eyes? And yet, you expect no clear and definitive finding of a specific “gay gene” to mean that it has nothing to do with genetics? Despite this, there have been several preliminary findings that suggest that genetics does, indeed, play a role. So, those are my counter-arguments.

It’s not that your belief is so horrible, really, but the mindset of “nurture over nature” can be dangerous, especially with the relationship between the child and its parents. It actually isn’t the parents’ fault if their child turns out to be gay. And you don’t have to beat homophobia into your children’s heads to make sure they’re not gay. It won’t work, but it can make them repressed as hell.

Personally, I think it’s a combination of many factors. Genetics, relationships (not just with parents, but with other adults, and peers), exposure to different things. Just like anything else in life, we are the product of everything that goes into us- internal AND external. The internal sets a foundation for the external to work on. Anyway, take care.

Gay or straight, either way, I’ll **** it.

Apparently not a whole lot of you actually took the time to read this before assuming I was a bigot and spouting rants about how I am 100% wrong.

Phoenix Seraph – Did you think that POSSIBLY someone who was noting on this might not actually be out yet, and did not want to publicly out themselves on this site? And the sexual abuse/physical abuse/alcohol addiction/drug addiction/divorced parents or whatever other “memoral oddities” argument is ridiculous. If this were the case, 80% of the world would be gay.

…Which would be exactly why I stated that the surrounding and such weren’t ALL BAD. You people need to learn how to read articles fully.

To the clueless person 2 anonymous notes up: IT is FAR more probable that various combinations of life experiences post-womb bring about same-sex preference than it is that some mythical “gay gene” dictates sexual preference. Once again, the problem is the data set, which feels so shamed by their classification, that they won’t even represent ‘accurate data’ for the sake of learning.

… that in much the same way that you can’t realistically approach some fool who has a permanent tattoo of a swastika in the center of his forehead, and expect him to afford you clear understanding as to whether he was abused as a child, or whether his parents were substance abusers. He is too self-conscious to be a part of the data set which would afford greater understanding to everyone.

ahoj mamco

i love it when straight people try to explain why gay people are gay. it’s so mind-numbingly entertaining in its ignorance and bigotry. it never gets old. AND you’re referencing Freud? seriously?

It all makes sense now… Gay marriage and marijuana being legalized on the same day. Leviticus 20:13 – “if a man lays with another man he should be stoned.” We’ve just been interpreting it wrong all along!

ryn: it wasn’t about my “gayness”. i’m a straight ally. and i’m the mother of a gay son. he was gay-bashed – which is considered a hate crime, here in Canada, under the Criminal Code and as part of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. what you’ve written here is precisely the attitude that contributes to hate crimes. use some critical thinking skills and do some reading before you spout these ideas.

Genes and their expressions are insanely complex so while there may not be a gay gene per se there are indicators of genetic influences that predispose someone toward same sex attraction. That’s not to say we should discount environmental influences but there’s clearly a genetic component – kind of like how some people are genetically predisposed to diabetes but don’t get it while others with no predisposition may get it just from the environment in their bodies (food choices, etc). Freud’s theory of psychosexual development is not utilized by mental health professionals. You might have better luck exploring Erikson but he doesn’t neatly explain everything like Freud. I think that’s why people still cop to Freud even though his theories are out of practice – it makes us feel safe to have pat answers. The fact is that even ONE person who is gay without the influences you describe proves that he is incorrect. Beware of confirmation bias as well. Anyway, hope that’s food for thought. P.S. Good entry – one that generates conversation is always a good entry. 😀

ry-other-n: well, we raised him pretty much the same way we raised our other two kids – both of whom are straight. same environment, same parenting style and methodology, same philosophy and same world-view. this is who he IS and who he always WAS. thinking it’s all “environmental” is a pretty simplistic way of looking at it. try to keep an open mind. and here’s two questions: why does it even matter? will you sleep better at night, once it’s been proved or disproved?