I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. In all sincerity, your post to Alisa had me shaking my head in disbelief, because you just described yourself to a “T”. You have been so brainwashed by your religious/cultural beliefs that you literally find it impossible to consider any amount of objective evidence that contradicts those beliefs, even when every single major mental health and medical organization in the world has done the research, and reached conclusions different from your own.
Spin all you want dude, but you will never get away from the fact that every major medical and mental health organization in the world says you are WRONG.
Just one point, as it really annoys me when people claim it as i am a geneticist.
There is simply NO hard evidence that homosexuality has its roots in genetics.
Those who say otherwise lie.
The one study that got alot of attention was done in 1991 by Bailey and Pillard. Look it up.
The reasons given were many but the major one and one which is increasingly becoming apparent is:
“Could be politically usefull”
That’s an actual quote from their study, you will have to buy the article so get 3 dollars ready.
Then later on in the States a study began in 2005, but did not actually fully get into action till 2007. It was one of the biggest tests ever performed and it included as part of the tests Identical Twins one of whom was homosexual.
The report concludes:
So please stop saying Homosexuality is genetic, it’s NOT and please do not waste your time attempting to quote “so and so” who are 99.9% like to have done it for biased reasons. That study was the last one done, that was 100% non-biased to any opinion.
Q.E.D.
References for further study:
Whitehead, NE; Whitehead,BK (1999): My Genes Made Me Do It! Huntington House, Layfayette, Louisiana. See also www.mygenes.co.nz.
Bailey, JM; Pillard,RC (1991): A genetic study of male sexual orientation. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 48, 1089-1096.
Bailey, JM; Pillard,RC; Neale,MC; Agyei,Y (1993): Heritable factors influence sexual orientation in women. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 50, 217-223.
Hershberger, SL (1997): A twin registry study of male and female sexual orientation. J. of Sex Research 34, 212-222.
Bailey, JM; Dunne,MP; Martin,NG (2000): Genetic and Environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. J. Pers. Social Psychology 78, 524-536.
West, DJ (1977): Homosexuality Reexamined. 4th ed. Duckworth, London.
Bailey, NM; Pillard,RC (1995): Genetics of human sexual orientation. Ann. Rev. Sex Research 6, 126-150.
Kendler, KS; Prescott,CA (1998): Cocaine use, abuse and dependence in a population-based sample of female twins. Brit. J. Psychiatry 173, 345-350.
Rhee, SH; Waldman,ID; Hay,DA; Levy,F (1999): Sex differences in genetic and environmental influences on DSM-III-R attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J. Abnorm. Psychology 108, 24-41.
Green, R (1987). The “Sissy Boy Syndrome” and the Development of Homosexuality. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.
Bell, AP; Weinberg,MS; Hammersmith,SK (1981): Sexual Preference: Its Development In Men and Women. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana.
Spin all you want dude, but you will never get away from the fact that every major medical and mental health organization in the world says you are WRONG.[/quote]
Apparently the say you’re wrong too, Unless you’ve changed your position on reparative therapy that is.
[quote]SmallToBig wrote:
Just one point, as it really annoys me when people claim it as i am a geneticist.
There is simply NO hard evidence that homosexuality has its roots in genetics.
Those who say otherwise lie.
The one study that got alot of attention was done in 1991 by Bailey and Pillard. Look it up.
The reasons given were many but the major one and one which is increasingly becoming apparent is:
“Could be politically usefull”
That’s an actual quote from their study, you will have to buy the article so get 3 dollars ready.
Then later on in the States a study began in 2005, but did not actually fully get into action till 2007. It was one of the biggest tests ever performed and it included as part of the tests Identical Twins one of whom was homosexual.
The report concludes:
Identical twins have identical genes. If homosexuality was a biological condition produced inescapably by the genes (e.g. eye color), then if one identical twin was homosexual, in 100% of the cases his brother would be too. But we know that only about 38% of the time is the identical twin brother homosexual. Genes are responsible for an indirect influence, but on average, they do not force people into homosexuality. This conclusion has been well known in the scientific community for a few decades but has not reached the general public. Indeed, the public increasingly believes the opposite.
Will continuing research eventually find some overwhelming biological influences to produce homosexuality, or find that added together, all the biological influences are overwhelming? No. The twin studies prove that future research will never discover any overwhelming biological factors which compel homosexuality.
So please stop saying Homosexuality is genetic, it’s NOT and please do not waste your time attempting to quote “so and so” who are 99.9% like to have done it for biased reasons. That study was the last one done, that was 100% non-biased to any opinion.
Q.E.D.
References for further study:
Whitehead, NE; Whitehead,BK (1999): My Genes Made Me Do It! Huntington House, Layfayette, Louisiana. See also www.mygenes.co.nz.
Bailey, JM; Pillard,RC (1991): A genetic study of male sexual orientation. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 48, 1089-1096.
Bailey, JM; Pillard,RC; Neale,MC; Agyei,Y (1993): Heritable factors influence sexual orientation in women. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 50, 217-223.
Hershberger, SL (1997): A twin registry study of male and female sexual orientation. J. of Sex Research 34, 212-222.
Bailey, JM; Dunne,MP; Martin,NG (2000): Genetic and Environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. J. Pers. Social Psychology 78, 524-536.
West, DJ (1977): Homosexuality Reexamined. 4th ed. Duckworth, London.
Bailey, NM; Pillard,RC (1995): Genetics of human sexual orientation. Ann. Rev. Sex Research 6, 126-150.
Kendler, KS; Prescott,CA (1998): Cocaine use, abuse and dependence in a population-based sample of female twins. Brit. J. Psychiatry 173, 345-350.
Rhee, SH; Waldman,ID; Hay,DA; Levy,F (1999): Sex differences in genetic and environmental influences on DSM-III-R attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J. Abnorm. Psychology 108, 24-41.
Green, R (1987). The “Sissy Boy Syndrome” and the Development of Homosexuality. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.
Bell, AP; Weinberg,MS; Hammersmith,SK (1981): Sexual Preference: Its Development In Men and Women. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana.
[/quote]
Great Post, let’s see how the kiddies around here handle it.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Great Post, let’s see how the kiddies around here handle it.
[/quote]
Also, lets be clear i have no agenda here.
I am neither for or against Homosexuality, to each his own.
But increasingly i’m hearing this and it pisses me off no end, as it’s been accepted for many years that there is absolutely no possibility there’s a gene for Homosexuality.
As i said it’s my job lol, it’s like a mechanic being told you can drive a car with flat tires no problem ! Simply is not true.
Cripes this thread is full of mis-information in regards animals showing/doing homosexuals acts.
I draw your attention to this article written not long ago.
Okay, Zeb, here’s my last post on the subject and I’ll try to be thorough.
Reparative therapy: There has been no clinical trial showing a statistically significant level of effectiveness. Royal College of Psychiatrists (This is from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Britain’s main psychiatric association. The article itself cites peer-reviewed studies on the issue: one that shows effectiveness in a small percentage of subjects, who could be regarded as bisexual before therapy, and the other shows no effectiveness and significant psychological harm.)
Again, from the American Counseling Association: http://www.counseling.org/PressRoom/NewsReleases.aspx?AGuid=b68aba97-2f08-40c2-a400-0630765f72f4
A literature review concluded that there is no empirical evidence that reparative therapy is effective in changing sexual orientation.
More detail: http://www.drdoughaldeman.com/doc/ScientificExamination.pdf examining the fallacies in studies that claim reparative therapy has an effect.
Whether it’s right or wrong to do so, Zeb, is a different question, but apparently it doesn’t even work. (“Work,” in the clinical sense – verifiable, statistically significant results.)
STD’s:
Why are the rates higher? I don’t know. Go ahead and spill your suspicions.
As I understand, safe sex has declined (tragically) due to premature celebrations over the “end of AIDS.” Andrew Sullivan Declares the 'End of AIDS' - Again | HuffPost Life
(This is statistical, of course – no offense intended to people who behave responsibly.)
The problem is surely compounded by the total lack of social incentives (such as marriage) for stable partnerships. Yes, people make their own decisions, but culture matters. But this is an issue I’m not qualified to sum up completely.
Gay men having sex with women:
I apologize if I forgot, but I don’t think you’ve cited that statistic. And I think the answers that have been suggested before are reasonable.
Genetics and homosexuality:
Asking why science hasn’t discovered something yet is generally not a useful question; they haven’t discovered a gay gene because identifying genes for traits is really hard to do. (Consider cancer, or aggression, or male-female behavioral differences.)
This is a good exposition of the history:
The results are shaky. Hormone changes have an effect on sexual behavior in rats, but most gays didn’t have abnormal fetal hormone levels. A single gene will make male fruit flies copulate with other males, but there doesn’t seem to be anything similar in humans. What is uncontroversial is that, according to a celebrated twin study, homosexuality is partially heritable. This isn’t cell biology or physiology, it’s family trees; somehow, by an unknown mechanism, individuals who share genes with a gay person are more likely to be gay. That’s a long way from understanding the etiology.
As for bisexuality, it also seems to be heritable, and to be linked to having female relatives who have many children; that is, one could hypothesize an X-linked genetic factor for being unusually attracted to men, present in both men and women. Bisexuality passed on by 'hyper-heterosexuals' | New Scientist
So: partial heritability is established, and there’s suggestive research about X-chromosome genetic factors. Nobody is claiming it’s 100% genetic, like eye color; it’s more like height, where some of the variability cannot be explained by genetics. Maybe we need to soften the claim that it’s fully innate and immutable, but it’s partially attributable to inheritance.
[quote]SmallToBig wrote:
Identical twins have identical genes. If homosexuality was a biological condition produced inescapably by the genes (e.g. eye color), then if one identical twin was homosexual, in 100% of the cases his brother would be too. But we know that only about 38% of the time is the identical twin brother homosexual.[/quote]
If you bothered to read the thread, you would see that I said exactly this earlier when I referenced the Bailey studies (not just one study, contrary to what you said).
The research proved that there is a genetic COMPONENT to sexual orientation, beyond what would be expected by chance alone. Otherwise, identical twins would not be more likely to both be gay compared with fraternal twins, which in turn would not be more likely to both be gay compared with siblings.
The research also proved that genetics are not the ONLY component to sexual orientation, otherwise identical twins would both be gay if one was gay, with perfect concordance.
As I have consistently argued, the evidence supports the conclusion that BOTH genetics and environment play a role in determining sexual orientation. It’s extremists like Zeb who insist that only environment plays a role, and that genetics are irrelevant.
[quote]forlife wrote:
SmallToBig wrote:
Identical twins have identical genes. If homosexuality was a biological condition produced inescapably by the genes (e.g. eye color), then if one identical twin was homosexual, in 100% of the cases his brother would be too. But we know that only about 38% of the time is the identical twin brother homosexual.
If you bothered to read the thread, you would see that I said exactly this earlier when I referenced the Bailey studies (not just one study, contrary to what you said).
The research proved that there is a genetic COMPONENT to sexual orientation, beyond what would be expected by chance alone. Otherwise, identical twins would not be more likely to both be gay compared with fraternal twins, which in turn would not be more likely to both be gay compared with siblings.
The research also proved that genetics are not the ONLY component to sexual orientation, otherwise identical twins would both be gay if one was gay, with perfect concordance.
As I have consistently argued, the evidence supports the conclusion that BOTH genetics and environment play a role in determining sexual orientation. It’s extremists like Zeb who insist that only environment plays a role, and that genetics are irrelevant.[/quote]
Oh stop with the hissy fit forlife, I’ve stated that genetics may play a small role. However, there is overwhelming evidence, which I’ve posted many times, that indicates that environment plays the major role.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Oh stop with the hissy fit forlife, I’ve stated that genetics may play a small role. However, there is overwhelming evidence, which I’ve posted many times, that indicates that environment plays the major role.
[/quote]
Give me a recent peer reviewed study showing that environment plays the “major role” and that at best genetics “may play a small role”.
The Bailey studies show genetics playing a significant role, contrary to your claim. How do you explain this?
[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Okay, Zeb, here’s my last post on the subject and I’ll try to be thorough.
Reparative therapy: There has been no clinical trial showing a statistically significant level of effectiveness.[/quote]
(eye roll)
Okay, I’m done reading your thread and you’ve once again toed the party line congratulations. You’re not even trying are you? You don’t want real answers you want politically correct answers.
For example, you didn’t explain how EVEN ONE person can drop their same sex attraction and remain happily married to someone of the opposite sex if homosexuality was genetic.
How can one black man turn caucasion? Here’s a clue: It doesn’t happen. That Junior is GENETIC.
All you did with the rest of your post was once again toe the party line. No real answers just dodges: “Well I don’t know but…” “I suppose this could be it…” “bla bla bla”
You are a disappointment kid. I thought for just a split second you would actually say something different than the umpteen other 18 to 25 year old college geniuses, but nope. How does it feel to be part of the big politically correct cog?
[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Oh stop with the hissy fit forlife, I’ve stated that genetics may play a small role. However, there is overwhelming evidence, which I’ve posted many times, that indicates that environment plays the major role.
Give me a recent peer reviewed study showing that environment plays the “major role” and that at best genetics “may play a small role”.
The Bailey studies show genetics playing a significant role, contrary to your claim. How do you explain this?[/quote]
How do you explain reparative therapy working for some people? If it were genetic it could NOT work. Does a black man have the ability to change the color of his skin?
How do you explain the APA stating that reparative therapy can do no harm and may very well work for some?
How do you explain that there is no proof that there is a genetic cause for bisexuals?
How do you explain that 87% of all homosexual men have had and continue to have sex with WOMEN?
Why do 87% males who claim they are gay have sex with both men and women? Think about this, how many men who claim to be heterosexual have sex with other males? And don’t give me that prison nonsense no one is locking up gays in order for them to have sex with women. If they are genetically programmed to be attracted to other men then how can so many of them become aroused with a woman?
[/quote]
Well, that is indeed an interesting question. Do we have an on/off switch, or do we have a switch that leaves both routes open? It is possible that there are more states than simply homo and hetero. Who knows?
As a lefthanded person I want homos to have the right to marry other homos, just as I want to be able to marry an other lefthanded adult, homo or female.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
For example, you didn’t explain how EVEN ONE person can drop their same sex attraction and remain happily married to someone of the opposite sex if homosexuality was genetic.
[/quote]
Asked and answered many times.
Shocking as it may sound, it’s possible for gay men to stay married to women due to religious beliefs and cultural pressures. People can and do act contrary to their sexual orientation as a result of these pressures.
Bisexuals exist. Really.
As noted earlier from the Wikipedia on reparative therapy:
[quote]In 2001, Dr. Ariel Shidlo and Dr. Michael Schroeder found that 88% of participants in reparative therapy failed to achieve a sustained change in their sexual behavior and 3% reported changing their orientation to heterosexual. The remainder reported either losing all sexual drive or struggling to remain celibate. Schroeder said many of the participants who failed felt a sense of shame. Many had gone through reparative therapy programs over the course of many years. Of the 8 respondents (out of a sample of 202) who reported a change in sexual orientation, 7 were employed in paid or unpaid roles as ‘ex-gay’ counsellors or group leaders, something which has led many to question whether even this small ‘success’ rate is in fact reliable.
Schroeder and Shidlo found that the large majority of respondents reported being left in a poor mental and emotional state after the therapy, and that rates of depression, anxiety, alcohol and drug abuse and suicidal feelings were roughly doubled in those who underwent reparative therapy.[/quote]
[quote]ZEB wrote:
How do you explain reparative therapy working for some people? If it were genetic it could NOT work. Does a black man have the ability to change the color of his skin?
How do you explain the APA stating that reparative therapy can do no harm and may very well work for some?
How do you explain that there is no proof that there is a genetic cause for bisexuals?
How do you explain that 87% of all homosexual men have had and continue to have sex with WOMEN?
[/quote]
Sorry buddy, but no more answers for you until you offer answers to my questions. I’m tired of playing your game.
[quote]forlife wrote:
ZEB wrote:
How do you explain reparative therapy working for some people? If it were genetic it could NOT work. Does a black man have the ability to change the color of his skin?
How do you explain the APA stating that reparative therapy can do no harm and may very well work for some?
How do you explain that there is no proof that there is a genetic cause for bisexuals?
How do you explain that 87% of all homosexual men have had and continue to have sex with WOMEN?
Sorry buddy, but no more answers for you until you offer answers to my questions. I’m tired of playing your game.[/quote]
Well, I feel the same way. You have an agenda and I think you’ll pretty much say anything to promote it.
[quote]quidnunc wrote:
For those of you just tuning in:
Number of relevant peer reviewed studies linked by the decent people in this thread: roughly 50
Number linked by the bigots: 0.[/quote]
Good for you junior you didn’t let me down. I just PM’d someone and said the next post from quidnunc will be an insult. You have no more ideas so you resort to name calling. It was an easy call in your case.
Good job kid!
Oh and still no admission about the ridiculous statement that I caught you on. Again it takes two things you don’t have: Character and maturity. (It was worth repeating)
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
I go away for a couple of days come back and I see that this thread is winding down…more or less.
The one point that stands out to me is this, how can anything that’s actually genetic be reversed? So if there have been homosexual men who have been through reparative therapy and are now happily married to women that shoots the genetic theory all to hell.
[/quote]
You turn the light switch off and promise to never enter that room again. Some can keep their promise, some don’t. You can only guess to reasons why they failed.
I say that is because they are homo, you say that they just think they are homo.
