I'm a lesbian, and frankly I'm not interested in knowing the almighty why behind being gay. If we find a reason it could be used to try and reduce the numbers of gay and lesbians in the world. What if they could identify a 'gay gene' in the womb? Would someone who didn't want a gay child then abort the baby? There are so many ways that this could become a negitive.

i'm uncomfortable with the idea that they're trying to prove genetic cause to being homosexual: what if they try to do something to change it? fucking eugenics?

curses, beat to the punch!

[Edited on Feb 25, 2006 by horatios_dreams]

Interesting. Seems unlikely. Exhibit A:

It is true that when a cell has two X chromosomes, one of the chromosomes will compact entirely into heterorchromatin, which is predominantly unexpressed. It is also true that when the blastocyst begins differentiation each cell will randomly decide which X chromosome to compact (see Calico cats)...so the odds of the same X chromosome compacting in ALL of the cells is, indeed, slim.

HOWEVER, when a human cell undergoes meiosis (the generation of germ cells...or egg cells in the case of the woman see figure here...since the above is too big :-) ) eggs will be created with only the compacted X chromosome, and eggs will be created only with the non-compacted chromosome. I.E. One cell divides into 4 germ cells. Regardless of which X chromosome is compacted, two eggs with the non-compacted X chromosome will be created (one with the original, and one with a copy) and two eggs will end up with the compacted X chromosome (one original and one copy.)

So, at the time of fertilization it is random as to which X chromosome one will end up with.

However, it could be that whatever mechanism may have influenced the same X chromosome to have compacted in all of a woman’s cells, might have an effect on a male sexuality...but since the male will have inherited half of all his chromosomes from the mother it is premature to assume the X chromosome has anything to do with it at all.

At best it could be an indicator, and not a cause.

The reason you have never heard of it is because there is a small percentage of Gay men who’s entire identity revolves around being gay (if not for their entire lives, then for a small “post coming out” period) during which their “Gayness” is their only observable personality trait.

But for the rest of (and large majority of) Gay men...it is just who they like to have sex with. So you have no idea that 10% of the males you work with are gay...because they are not running around grabbing each other’s dicks.

It’s the same reason that a teeny fraction of dickheads like Pat Robertson makes the world hate the other 99% of Christians who just want to be left the fuck alone and don’t care who you fuck.

Precisely. If someone wants to hate you...they will hate you. If it’s a choice, you are a pervo freak...if it’s genetic, you are an abomination from nature/the devil/whatever.

The more interesting question is the psychology behind why people give such a fuck who you fuck. Now THAT’s interesting (to start the discussion...note that the 7 deadly sins are basically everything that humans are biologically programmed to do.)

[Edited on Feb 25, 2006 7:57PM]

Here here! Men are raised to be assholes. My roomate/best friend(she's a lesbian) is harassed daily by men who think it appropriate to invade her personal space, grab her ass, whisper disgusting shit. WTF!? She works at a mall. Guys in general are kinda jerks, gay or straight. Like they say "woman is the nigger of the world".

Hey, since when am I a feminist?

Seriously. About three times in my life I've had older, creepy guys come up to me and try it on. All three times they were really full-on and made me really uncomfortable. And all three times I remembered that girls sometimes have that happen to them three times a night... or more. Some gay guys are really creepy. Some heterosexual guys are really creepy. And there are even some creepy gay and heterosexual girls out there!

If you can't handle guys having a crack at you - and I'm going to guess it's not very commonplace anyway - then you shouldn't leave the house. It happens.

I always seem to be crashing in the same car I didn't mean to offend. I was being overdramatic for the sake of silliness since much of this thread is discussion about things other than the genetics study. I apologize.

BINGO! Gay men are men. What's more, the usual targets of their affections are usually just as oriented towards sex as they are (they're also guys!).

The real reason straight males have a tendency towards homophobia is that they tend to fear being treated the way we tend to treat women. As in aggressively pursued.

I'm hopelessly hetero I guess. Yeah, I was probably a good bit homophobic in my teens, but I got over that (back then there was a fair bit of overlap between the gay scene and the punk scene). I've had gay friends.

Some of you really ought to get over your fear and discomfort around gay men. Just think of it, it can be like when Grandpa had to get used to working with the "niggers" during the Korean War. Or when your Dad had to start dealing with "broads" at work.

Yeah, what an odd phenomenon - treat a group like shit and they rally together.

One small up side to this. Some churches have put on hold the question of the acceptance of gay people 'til this point is resolved. The thinking being that if people are born gay then that's how God made them.

Theologians, odd lot.

Yes because debate Nature versus Culture should be closed since a long time. We know most of our behaviours are social.

Second. Science has some protocols to respect. 97 and 103 mothers just show the lackness of the study. This poor number of mothers just show how the study is laughable.
With these sorts of studies we discredit science.

Third. Science has to be neutral ; she has not to obey to some personal views, personal feelings. When you say "gay genes" exist, you are not neutral. Maybe if we read "gay gene" AND "heterosexual gene" exist, it will be more neutral. This study tries to show us (between lines) gay genes can be cured.

Four. This study is also ethnocentric. We know male homosexuality was very common in 16th in Italy and in Antiquity. So how these scientists can show the gene doesn't grow with time ? If lots of ancestrors were gays, we should be all gays.

Five. I'm not sure of this point. In france gay is used for male homosexuals, not for women. If it is the same in USA we can also show this study is lesbianphobic.

Six. as you said they did not speak about bisexuals.

SEven. Psychanalism said a too protective woman made some gay son. We showed it was bullshit. So some people try another way with some science. "mother always guilty".

I'm just going to go out on a limb here and guess that the scientists think it's interesting and worth looking into. That's what scientists do. They figure out why shit happens for the sake of figuring out why shit happens.

My guess is that some people want to find a genetic problem so they will be able to "fix" it.