Male Sexual Orientation Influenced by Genes?

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/feb/14/genes-influence-male-sexual-orientation-study

According to the article, while the exact mechanism is still unclear, scientists have pinpointed an area of a certain gene, which can only be passed down by the mother, that affects male sexual orientation. Interesting study, but not really an issue for me. Lifestyle choice or genetics, homosexuals deserve equal rights under the law.

 

I would expect such a crap study from a psychologist. If 29 regions of the chromosome have been found and you do a study with a 95% confidence interval you should get at least 1 false positive probably 2.

This was the same problem with the falsified study mentioned in the article.

They have no proposed mechanism. They simple looked at 29 regions for correlation and found 1 when 2 should correlate by chance alone.

 

You may be right, I don't know. I'm not an expert in all subjects like many other people. I just thought this might generate some interesting debate (so far so good). It's soon to be published, so I'm sure the experts will have plenty of opportunity to discredit it. Either way, it's a non-issue to me.

 

Yes, it could be chance, it could not be chance. The article doesn't mention whether or not they actually found other correlations that were eventually dismissed as false positives. This is why we have peer reviews.

 

Not necessarily, if the gene is of sexual benefit to females, such as increased fertility or increased sexual desire towards males, it may continue to pass on in spite of the fact that it also creates increased desire toward males in men.

 

Well,unless the child has ambiguous genitalia, then having a penis and testicles means it's a boy and a vagina is a girl. By default (and correctly so) we would assume that boys will be male gender and girls will be female gender. If we do discover that "gender identity" is determined genetically and a test is developed, then certainly it should be an optional test. If the test should ever become ridiculously cheap then throw it in as part of routine infant testing.

As far as attitudes about sexuality, I don't give a rat's rear quarters what or who anyone sleeps with...I am just sick and tired of every gay mofo wanting/needing their 15 seconds of fame to make sure the entire world knows they're gay.

 

They are influenced by skinny genes.

- - - Updated - - -

And heterosexuals releasing their sex tapes to get famous. Ok I kinda don't mind that one.

 

What does child and animal rape have to do with homosexuality?

Why do you guys always try to equate being gay with pedophilia or bestiality? It's pathetic.

 

Sure, isn't it well established that 'homosexuality' runs in families?? Aren't there 'correlations' (causal? dont know) of homosexualty prevalence in birth order of boys??

I guess we need to know this?? Or not! Is the intent to ERDICATE homosexuality or, simply enlighten the world so we don't spend another 250 years TORTURING these folks, literally and figuratively.

 

You're right. We probably don't need to know this. The whole conservative lifestyle choice counterargument isn't really working out well for them anyway.

 

Mental illness influenced by genes?
That is not news.

 

What mental illness?

 

Two homosexual can't produce offspring. That is Biology 101. So how can one who is gay claim that they are gay from genius? Now, are they going to say that their gay because something happened or didn't happen well their were in utero? Maybe, but it isn't flat out genic, it can't be.

 

I think you misunderstand- people with brown hair can pass on blond genes- if there is some genetic connection regarding homosexuality, the gene itself could be passed on through as passive genes.

- - - Updated - - -

You appear to be posting in the wrong thread.

 

Well said. File this under another junk science study with no proof and another failed theory.

Homosexual advocates have nothing but these unproven theories which is why they hate to talk about the proven science which doesn't support anything they claim.

 

Being gay could quite possibly be due to a genetic predisposition. It would explain why two or more members within a single family are gay while other families might not have any gays in them.

 

Actually, I don't like to see those freakish gays who go walking around in dirty costumes, either. In fact, I don't like anyone who feels any need to get in my face about anything. You know, like a lot of Christians. But you're entitled to think, and say, whatever you want about me (even if you are technically breaking the forum rules by focusiing on members and going off-topic). I couldn't care less. "Your side" is still losing.

It's a shame for you that scientific proof is apparently not necessary in this gay rights debate.

 

Like I already said in this thread, because if that same gene in women also increased fertility or increased sexual desire in towards males, it could continue to pass on among such women. The article does state that the specific gene in question is only passed down from the mother.

 

Biological parents arent preferred because they are not homosexuals, but instead because they are the only two people in the world, obligated by the birth of a child to provide and care for that child. There is no discrimination against homosexuals.

 

Gender identity wouldn't be determined by any genetic test. Gender identity is defined normally by culture and of course the individual.

 

So gun loving is genetic according to your theory.

 

Proven lie

 

Joker: " Lifestyle choice or genetics, homosexuals deserve equal rights under the law."

I didn't think much of the article or the argument. All Americans deserve equal protection of the law.That's part of the 14th Amendment. While the feds are big on exempting themselves from laws, which they did in this case, the courts have held that this clause in the 14th Amendment applies equally to the federal government.

So, all Americans have a constitutional right to equal protection of the law. Not more. Not less. Equal.

As for the science, there seem to be somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 genes in the DNA. I would have thought the holy of holiest, the scientists, would have narrowed it down to perhaps a slightly more specific number. You know, like with global warming.

 

I have no idea why you think that is relevant to my post

I think whether or not people are attracted to the same gender because of genetics, or because of epigenetics, or because of exposure to Fox News is really irrelevant- there is no reason to discriminate against a person because he or she happens to be attracted to people of the same sex..