Yet Another Study Indicates Genes Influence Sexual Orientation

Despite the protestations of the Christofascists that sexual orientation is "a choice" and subject to change, another study - this one of gay brothers - again indicates that genes play a role in the determination of sexual orientation.  While not conclusive and identifying specific genes, the study adds to the past research which indicates that one's sexual orientation is anything but a "choice."  As noted many times, if any thing is a choice, it is religious belief and affiliation.  Applying the Christofascists' standard, there should be no non-discrimination protections based on religion whatsoever since all religious affiliation is a choice.  But I digress.  Here are highlights from Huffington Post:

A large study of gay brothers adds to evidence that genes influence men's chances of being homosexual, but the results aren't strong enough to prove it.

Some scientists believe several genes might affect sexual orientation. Researchers who led the new study of nearly 800 gay brothers say their results bolster previous evidence pointing to genes on the X chromosome.

They also found evidence of influence from a gene or genes on a different chromosome. But the study doesn't identify which of hundreds of genes located in either place might be involved.

The new evidence "is not proof but it's a pretty good indication" that genes on the two chromosomes have some influence over sexual orientation, said Dr. Alan Sanders, the lead author. He studies behavioral genetics at North Shore University HealthSystem Research Institute in Evanston, Illinois.

The work was published Monday by the journal Psychological Medicine. The National Institutes of Health paid for the research.

The researchers say they found potential links to male homosexuality in a portion of chromosome X and on chromosome 8, based on an analysis of genetic material in blood or saliva samples from participants.

Chromosome X is one of two human sex chromosomes; the other is chromosome Y, present only in men.

The study authors note that animal research suggests a gene located in one region of chromosome X may contribute to some sexual behavior; it's one of the same regions cited in the new study.

Specific causes of homosexuality are unknown. Some scientists think social, cultural, family and biological factors are involved, while some religious groups consider it an immoral choice.

Study participant Dr. Chad Zawitz, a Chicago physician, called the research "a giant step forward" toward answering scientific questions about homosexuality and helping reduce the stigma gays often face.

Being gay "is sort of like having certain eye color or skin color — it's just who you are," Zawitz said. "Most heterosexuals I know didn't choose to be heterosexual. It's puzzling to me why people don't understand."

Is Conservative/Religious Extremism Genetic?

The Christofascists refuse to believe that sexual orientation is genetic and not a choice.  Now, new research suggests that perhaps religious extremism and adherence to conservative dogma may somehow be genetic/hereditary.  One of the aspects of the far right and the Christofascists in particular is - at least in my view - an almost sick need for  what some describe as order, structure, closure, certainty, and dogmatism.  And anything that threatens this need - e.g., gays suggesting that the Bible is wrong about homosexuality - is enough to cause these folks to go into hysteria.  A column in the New York Times looks at this new area of research.  Here are excerpts:

It’s been a key question of American politics since at least 1968: Why do so many poor, working-class and lower-middle-class whites — many of them dependent for survival on government programs — vote for Republicans?

The debate over the motives of conservative low-income white voters remains unresolved, but two recent research papers suggest that the hurdles facing Democrats in carrying this segment of the electorate may prove difficult to overcome.

In “Obedience to Traditional Authority: A heritable factor underlying authoritarianism, conservatism and religiousness,” published by the journal Personality and Individual Differences in 2013, three psychologists write that “authoritarianism, religiousness and conservatism,” which they call the “traditional moral values triad,” are “substantially influenced by genetic factors.” According to the authors — Steven Ludeke of Colgate, Thomas J. Bouchard of the University of Minnesota, and Wendy Johnson of the University of Edinburgh — all three traits are reflections of “a single, underlying tendency,” previously described in one word by Bouchard in a 2006 paper as “traditionalism.” Traditionalists in this sense are defined as “having strict moral standards and child-rearing practices, valuing conventional propriety and reputation, opposing rebelliousness and selfish disregard of others, and valuing religious institutions and practices.”

Working along a parallel path, Amanda Friesen, a political scientist at Indiana University, and Aleksander Ksiazkiewicz, a graduate student in political science at Rice University, concluded from their study comparing identical and fraternal twins that “the correlation between religious importance and conservatism” is “driven primarily, but usually not exclusively, by genetic factors.” The substantial “genetic component in these relationships suggests that there may be a common underlying predisposition that leads individuals to adopt conservative bedrock social principles and political ideologies while simultaneously feeling the need for religious experiences.”

From this perspective, the Democratic Party — supportive of abortion rights, same-sex marriage and the primacy of self-expressive individualism over obligation to family — is irreconcilably alien to a segment of the electorate. And the same is true from the opposite viewpoint: a Republican Party committed to right-to-life policies, to a belief that marriage must be between a man and a woman, and to family obligation over self-actualization, is profoundly unacceptable to many on the left.

If these predispositions are, as Friesen and Ksiazkiewicz argue, to some degree genetically rooted, they may not lend themselves to rational debate and compromise.

There are many scholars who challenge the quality of the evidence amassed to date linking genes, politics and values. The field is highly controversial, to say the least. But let’s take a look.

The three psychologists found evidence that they believe demonstrates that authoritarianism, religiosity and conservatism are “different manifestations of a single latent and significantly heritable factor,” the tendency to follow conventional authority “in attitudes toward the structure of family and society, toward religious conventions, and toward conventional attitudes on political issues.” They argue that each of these traits is shared to a substantially greater degree among identical twins than among nonidentical twins

Everett notes, the need for “order, structure, closure, certainty, dogmatism, and discipline are often shown to be more central to the thinking of conservative proponents, whereas higher tolerance of ambiguity and complexity and greater openness to new experiences appear to be associated with liberal cognitive styles.”

New Research Confirms Genetic Component of Homosexuality

UPDATED VERSION: There's yet more bad news for the Christofascists and their "ex-gay for pay" puppets who strive to keep alive the myth that sexual orientation can change and that being gay is a "choice" this time in the form of new research out of Italy.  The study confirms that sexual orientation is genetic - even while it seems counter intuitive - and is offset in family genetic lines by the increased fertility of women who carry the homosexual gene.  Thus, the argument of the Catholic Church and the Christianists that homosexuality goes against "natural law" - a concept developed in the 13th century, a time of abject ignorance on matters of science, biology and genetics - is false when the countering benefit for perpetuation of the species is factored in.  Indeed, the Catholic Church's anti-gay arguments based on "natural law" rank right up there with condemnation of Galileo.  Not that the Church ever seems to learn from its enormous number of past mistakes. Here are excerpts from Think Progress:

 

Italian researchers have made a new discovery that solidifies the understand that homosexuality — at least in men — has a strong genetic component. Though this study does not identify a specific gay gene, which probably does not exist, it does demonstrate what role genetics play.

Andrea Camperio Ciani at the University of Padova discovered that the mothers and maternal aunts of gay men tend to have significantly more offspring than those of straight men. Tthere seems to be at least one gene on the X chromosome that creates a trade-off in men and women. The men turn out gay (and hypothetically less likely to reproduce), but the women’s fecundity increases, making them more likely to have more offspring. In a sense, the gene makes men more attracted to men, but the women more attractive to men. Not only are they more fertile and have less complications during pregnancy, but these women are also more extroverted and have few family problems and social anxieties.

This is called the “balancing selection hypothesis,” and it effectively demonstrates how male homosexuality —as documented not only in humans but hundreds of species — does not actually contradict expectations that evolution favors reproduction.  Still, homosexuality is clearly not determined by a single factor. Studies have shown, for example, that exposure to certain levels of hormones in the womb can play a role in sexuality.  .  .  .  .  But this research may help explain why female sexuality tends to be more fluid while men’s tends to be more fixed; this “trade-off” gene may just not be playing the same role.

Scientists may never fully identity what complex combination of factors determines sexuality, but there is still plenty of evidence to conclude that it is natural and healthy part of human diversity. With each new discovery about the nature of homosexuality, discrimination against people for being gay becomes more repugnantly indefensible.

British Study: Sexual Orientation in Women is Genetic

More bad news for the flat earth crowd in the Roman Catholic Church and "ex-gay" myth supporters in the Christian Taliban such as Michele Bachmann and her lisping, mincing husband: a new study out of the UK finds that sexual orientation in women has a genetic basis. That's right, it's more proof that sexual orientation is not a choice and is not changeable. Therefore, folks going to "ex-gay" ministries might just as well be giving their money to a snake oil merchant or witch doctor. Of course these new findings will likely do little to change the minds of in my view mentally disturbed far right Christians or folks laughing their way to the bank like Marcus Bachmann. The study was conducted at Queen Mary University in London. Here are highlights from a university release on the findings:

*
Sexual orientation and ‘gender conformity’ in women are both genetic traits, according to new research from Queen Mary, University of London. It is well recognised that there consistent differences in the psychological characteristics of boys and girls; for example, boys engage in more ‘rough and tumble’ play than girls do.
*
Studies also show that children who become gay or lesbian adults differ in such traits from those who become heterosexual – so-called gender nonconformity.
*
Dr Andrea Burri and Dr Qazi Rahman from Queen Mary’s School of Biological and Chemical Sciences report that a shared set of genes and shared set of random environmental factors is partially responsible both for gender nonconformity and female sexual orientation.
*
[T]here is an association between these psychological traits and sexual orientation because they all develop under common biological drivers; like the development of brain regions under the influence of genes and sex hormones.”
*
Dr Rahman is mindful that the results may carry the risk of stereotyping, adding: “Stereotypes like ‘sissy’ or ‘mannish’ have not been helpful in promoting respect for gay people, and those who don’t match those stereotypes may find it hard to accept they are gay or lesbian."
*
But he believes the team’s findings are increasingly important to researchers concerned with the mental health of sexual minorities. Dr Rahman concludes: “We know that gay people who are strongly gender nonconforming report more anxiety and depression symptoms.
*
“Poor mental health in gay populations is partly due to societal stigma and victimisation. Our results suggest that being gender nonconforming and lesbian comes from ‘within’; there is little you can do about it. So gender nonconformity does not cause mental health problems, but it may trigger negative reactions from other people (like parents and peers) leading to mental health problems.”

Biological Traits Tied to Homosexuality

More bad news for the bat shit crazy Christian fundamentalist and Mormon set as yet more evidence shows that sexual orientation is not a choice. Daddy D's dishonest "Love Won Out" snake oil show and Exodus International can peddle all the lies they want, but the day is coming when hard scientific evidence will confirm what every LGBT individual already knows - one's sexual orientation is NOT a choice. I sincerely hope that as the deliberate lying of these "ex-gay" organizations and those organizations that fund them eventually becomes widely know both groups will wither a die as they justly deserve. Here are some highlights from a Ft. Meyers News-Press article:

*

SAN JOSE, Calif. — Compared to straight men, gay men are more likely to be left-handed, to be the younger siblings of older brothers, and to have hair that whorls in a counterclockwise direction.Researchers are finding common biological traits among gay men, feeding a growing consensus that sexual orientation is an inborn combination of genetic and environmental factors that largely decide a person’s sexual attractions before they are born.

*

[S]cientists say the political and moral debate over same-sex marriage frequently strayed from established scientific evidence, including comments by vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin that homosexuality is “a choice” and “a decision.”

*

“In the past decade, I think the pendulum has swung more toward biological theory and biological causes,” said Richard Lippa, a psychology professor at California State University-Fullerton. Sven Bocklandt, a geneticist at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, is bewildered by the argument that people choose their sexual attraction. He said that virtually every animal species that has been studied has a small minority of individuals who demonstrate homosexual activity.“I really believe the reason most humans are straight is the same reason that most crocodiles are straight, and the same reason most whales are straight,” Bocklandt said. “Nature would not leave something so important for reproduction, for the survival of the species, to coincidence.”

*

Long discredited are theories that parenting — one mid-20th century theory held that boys raised by a domineering mother with a distant father were more likely to be gay — has anything to do with sexual orientation.

Wingnuts Continue to Lie About True Science and Homosexuality

As I have noted numerous times, the professional gay-haters of the "Christian" Right have a real problem when it comes to telling the truth. Especially when it comes to distorting legitimate scientific research that undermines their quest to maintain the "choice myth" as I call it. And once one Christianist organization tells the lie, others jump on the band wagon and parrot the untruth over and over again, hoping, apparently, that if the lie is repeated enough times it will some how become true.

*

A case in point is the manner in which wingnuts who are crazed by gospel singer Ray Boltz's coming out are misquoting - I dare say intentionally - statements by noted geneticist Francis S. Collins. For example, both the Baptist Press in Bob Stith's monthly column on homosexuality and the even less reliable OneNewsNow, a "news" arm of the American Family Association have engaged in the dissemination of patently untrue information. Here are highlights of what Ex-Gay Watch (to which I have contributed in the past) reported on these lies:

*

Working with the New Jersey Family Policy Counsel and speaking to the American Family Association’s (AFA) One News Now, ex-gay Greg Quinlan made statements on behalf of noted geneticist Francis S. Collins that were untrue — specifically that his work on the human genome project had led to the “fact” that homosexuality was 100% nurture, with absolutely no genetic component.

*

As noted in that previous post, we contacted Dr. Collins last May and printed, with permission, his correction of what was falsely being credited to him by NARTH. In this latest challenge, Quinlan has accused XGW of fraud, claiming that quote was not accurate. While this accusation is absurd at best — XGW has never been seriously accused of fraudulently posting anything, let alone has this ever been shown to be the case — it seemed prudent to seek public validation of the quote’s veracity.

*

Collins has now confirmed this to Warren Throckmorton, who has posted about it on his own blog. For the record, here is a message I received from Collins yesterday, after making him aware of the challenge to what we had quoted:

*

Dear David, Thanks for the heads up. I am truly sorry to hear that there is a continuing effort by Mr. Quinlan and others to distort this information about genetic factors in homosexuality. The facts have not changed since the e-mail message I sent you on May 20, 2007.
Regards, Francis Collins

*

The dishonesty of these self-styled "Godly Christians" never ceases to amaze me. They act as if the Commandment against false witness and lying did not exist. It demonstrates their actual contempt for the Bible they claim to worship.

A Genetic Theory of Homosexuality

Slate, msn's online magazine, has an article that looks at some new research that indicated homosexuality may have a genetic basis and, moreover, it may play a roll in enhancing the fertility of women who have gay relatives. No doubt, Porno Pete LaBarbera, Daddy Dobson, and Robert Knight, among others, will be having violent fits and splattering spittle all around them at this news. God, forbid, gays might have a role in God's plan. Oh, but I forgot - the Christianists don't believe in science or evolution. Here are highlights from the Slate story:

*

Gay couples can't have biological kids together. So if homosexuality is genetic, why hasn't it died out? A study published last week in PLoS One tackles the question. It starts with four curious patterns. First, male homosexuality occurs at a low but stable frequency in a wide range of societies. Second, the female relatives of gay men produce children at a higher rate than other women do. Third, among these female relatives, those related to the gay man's mother produce children at a higher rate than do those related to his father. Fourth, among the man's male relatives, homosexuality is more common in those related to his mother than in those related to his father.

*

The theory is called "sexually antagonistic selection." It holds that a gene can be reproductively harmful to one sex as long as it's helpful to the other. The gene for male homosexuality persists because it promotes—and is passed down through—high rates of procreation among gay men's mothers, sisters, and aunts. . . . it does explain the high similarity of sexual orientation between identical twins, as well as patterns of homosexuality in families. It's also plausible because sexually antagonistic selection has been found in other species. And many scientists who think environmental and prenatal factors influence homosexuality also believe that genes play a role.

*

I don't know to what extent this theory will end up explaining male homosexuality. But its emergence threatens to change our thinking about gay men in several important ways.

*

The full scientific article can be found here.

Gay Men Navigate in a Similar Way to Women

Yet another research study has indicated that something more than mere "choice" as claimed by the Christianists is going on with gays. This UK study once again shows that there are basic inherent differences between gays and straights and in my view further underscores the fact that sexual orientation has some genetic or physiological basis. Here are highlights from 365gay.com's coverage (http://www.365gay.com/Newscon08/01/010308drive.htm):

(London) Gay men navigate in a similar way to women, according to a new study from researchers at Queen Mary, University of London.

In a new study published this week in the journal Hippocampus, Dr Qazi Rahman, from Queen Mary’s School of Biological and Chemical Sciences used virtual reality scenarios to investigate if spatial learning and memory in humans can be linked to sexual orientation.Differences in spatial learning and memory - our ability to record and recall information about our environment - are common between men and women. It has been shown that men consistently outperform women on tasks requiring navigation and discovering hidden objects; whereas women are more successful at tests which require them to remember where those objects lie in a particular space.This is the first study to investigate if those differences are also true for gay, lesbian and straight individuals.

Dr Rahman explains: “Not only did straight men get started on the MWM test more quickly than gay men and the two female groups, they also maintained that advantage throughout the test. This might mean that sexual orientation affects the speed at which you acquire spatial information, but not necessarily your eventual memory for that spatial information.