You arent gay born
“Born That Way” No More: The Brand-new Science of Sexual Orientation
Late last month, a team of MIT and Harvard scientists published a landmark study of the genetic basis for sexual orientation in the journal Science. The examine, which was based on an examination of the genetic material of almost half a million individuals, definitively refutes the idea that being gay is an innate condition that is tamed or largely compelled by one’s genetic makeup.
The study contained two key findings. First, it initiate that the consequence of the genes we inherit from our parents (known as “heritability”) on same-sex orientation was very weak, at only .32 on a scale from 0 (none) to 1 (total) heritability. This means that a person’s developmental environment—which includes diet, family, friends, neighborhood, religion, and a host of other life conditions—is twice as influential on the probability of developing same-sex habit or orientation as a person’s genes are.
Second, rebutting decades of widespread doctrine, the study established that “there is certainly no unattached genetic determinant (sometimes referred to as the ‘gay gene’ in the media)” that causes lgbtq+ sexual behavior. On the contrary
Massive Study Finds No Available Genetic Cause of Homosexual Sexual Behavior
Few aspects of human biology are as complex—or politically fraught—as sexual orientation. A clear genetic link would suggest that gay people are “born this way,” as opposed to having made a lifestyle choice. Yet some fear that such a finding could be misused to “cure” homosexuality, and most research teams own shied away from tackling the topic.
Now a recent study claims to dispel the notion that a single gene or handful of genes make a person prone to lgbtq+ behavior. The analysis, which examined the genomes of nearly half a million men and women, create that although genetics are certainly involved in who people choose to acquire sex with, there are no specific genetic predictors. Yet some researchers ask whether the analysis, which looked at genes paired with sexual activity rather than attraction, can trace any real conclusions about sexual orientation.
“The message should remain the same that this is a complex behavior that genetics definitely plays a part in,” said study co-author Fah Sathirapongsasuti, a computational biologist at genetic testin
Is a person ‘born gay’, or is being lgbtq+ a learned behavior?
Being queer is not a option for people. Instead, it appears to be a fundamental part of who someone is. It is not a learned action. Which also means that people cannot “unlearn” their sexual orientation.
Of course just because we know it isn’t usually a learned behavior, that doesn’t denote that we have a good explanation for what is going on biologically. We don’t.
What we undertake know is that there isn’t one single gene that explains homosexuality. Something as complicated as sexual orientation is going to involve lots of genes. And not only that, but it will involve the environment too.
Now by the environment I don’t just mean an overprotective mom or a domineering dad. “Environment” is a catchall for everything that isn’t a gene. For instance, what the fetus experienced while in the mother’s womb can alter its development and alter behavior later on in life.
So even though you might expect that the environment only causes temporary changes, that’s not always the case. The environment can cause brains to be wired in a certain way as it develops. This wiring can’t be changed easily.
Right now the
A few years ago I was giving a seminar on issues around sexuality at New Wine summer conference. During the questions at the end of the seminar, someone proximate the back asked ‘Are people born gay?’ I was aware that this can be a loaded question, so I offered a very careful respond, highlighting what I knew of research but also pointing out that the answer to that scrutinize (in either direction) did not offer an immediate answer to questions of sexual ethics, and that for many people (on all sorts of issues) the question of ‘Am I born this way?’ is personal, loaded and sensitive. I thought I had done a fair job—until the end of the seminar when I woman pushed through the group waiting to speak to me and started shouting, waving her hands. ‘I brought a organization of gay teenagers here from my church—and you have told them God hates them!’ I hadn’t done that at all—in fact, quite the opposite—but it confirmed to me that the question of causation is one that is felt strongly and personally within this debate.
So, at one level, it was not that surprising that there was quite a bit of coverage of a piece of research published in August 2019 in Sc
Other liberation movements possess rejected the concept that biology is destiny. So why should gay rights depend on it?
Last month, the US Supreme Court affirmed the rights of same-sex couples to marry. The judgment was a major achievement for a liberation movement that began nearly half a century ago. Throughout the strife for marriage equality, supporters drew parallels with the oppression of African Americans, be that anti-miscegenation laws or legalised segregation. Yet one stark difference between these civil rights movements has escaped notice.
African-American activists aggressively called out arguments about genetic and biological differences as legacies of racist, Nazi science. By contrast, the marriage-equality movement has embraced biological determinism. Same-sex attracted and lesbian activists have led the way popularising the idea that individuality is biologically determined.
The proffered perspective is that sexuality is not a option, but a way we are born. Getting Americans to believe this was a struggle. In 1977, according to the first Gallup poll on the question, only 13 per cent of Americans believed people were born male lover. Even in 1990, only 20 per cent thought of sexuality as bio