Why gays are gay?

[blaise]

The sermon of Anthony of Padua to the fishes
Translated from The Youth's Magic Wonder Horn, where it was titled Des Antonius von Padua Fischpredigt

At sermon time Anthony finds the church empty, so he goes to the river and preaches to the fishes. They flaps with their tails, they glint in the sunshine.

The carp with all their roes have all congregated, their mouths all gawping, they are so intent on listening. Never before did a sermon so please the fishes.

Sharp-snouted pike that fight all the time, they swam up in a hurry to hear the holy man.

And those strange creatures that fast all the time (I mean the dried cod) appeared for the sermon. Never before did a sermon so please the dried cod.

Good eels and sturgeon that fine folks relish, even they take the trouble to attend the sermon.

Crabs too, and turtles, usually slowpokes, rise quickly from the deep to hear this voice. Never before did a sermon so please the crabs.

Big fish, little fish, noble and common, raise their heads like intelligent persons at God's command to listen to the sermon.

The sermon completed, each one turns away. The pike remain thieves, the eels great lovers. The sermon pleased them all, but they remain as they always were.

The crabs go backward, the dried cod remain dried, the carp gorge themselves, the sermon's already forgotten. The sermon was a success but they stay as they were.

Now what does this all have to do with why gays are gay? You'll soon find out.

[blaise]

An interesting article by Dr. Ivanka Savic and colleagues at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm appeared in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and discussed by Nicholas Wade of The New York Times on May 10. The researchers reported that homosexual and heterosexual men respond differently to odors that may be involved in sexual arousal and that gay men respond to these odors in the same way as women. This was demonstrated by imaging blood flow in the brain, a surrogate for neural activity.

One odor, which derived from an estrogen-like compound, activated an area on the hypothalamus and thus the adjacent pituitary gland (the body's master gland, which oversees the body's hormonal state). This odor had a lesser effect in women, activating only the olfactory pathway (neurons devoted to the sense of smell) and not the hypothalamus and pituitary.

The other odor, derived from male sweat, activated the hypothalamus in women and the olfactory pathway in men.

The scientists also performed their experiment on another group, homosexual men. These subjects had the same responses as the women.

Dr. Savic interpreted the results to mean that the response of the hypothalamus to pheromones (present in animal species and suspected but not yet confirmed in humans) is determined not by biological sex but by sexual orientation.

The Times article pointed out that in 1991 Dr. Simon Levay had reported that a specific hypothalamic region is twice as large in straight men as in women or gay men. This observation, like the one from Sweden, suggests that the organization of the hypothalamus is related to sexual orientation.

Could there be a gene for homosexuality? The incidence of male homosexuality in nonidentical twins is said to be 22% while it is 52% in identical twins.

It could be argued that since gay men have fewer children than straight men, which suggests that the prevalence of the homosexuality gene, if it exists, would dwindle over time. However, Dr. Dean Hamer at the National Institutes of Health suggests that such genes could persist despite Darwinian natural selection. Natural selection seemingly would tend to eliminate such a genetic variant because although it reduces the number of descendants in menit increases the fertility of women, who would then bequeath the gene to their offspring (males do have one X chromosome).

Now what does this have to do with the sermon of Anthony to the fishes? The moralists who insist that male homosexuality is a matter of free will and a depraved departure from God's will and natural law can preach all they want to homosexuals. A homosexual man would respond to the moralists as the fish did to Anthony of Padua: He might listen to the sermon out of amused curiosity but would remain the same.

[PTH]

Homosexuality actually sometimes has some advantages in terms of reproduction, when looking at an entire group. Having more adults around to keep a smaller number of families (with more children per family) might be advantageous (and it's easier, biologically, to have people be gay than to just kill off their sex drive).

In other words, if I'm gay, I might not have any kids, but my brother might have kids, and they'll have a better chance of making it because his kids will have 2 parents along with an uncle available to raise them.

[blaise]

pth said:

Homosexuality actually sometimes has some advantages in terms of reproduction, when looking at an entire group. Having more adults around to keep a smaller number of families (with more children per family) might be advantageous (and it's easier, biologically, to have people be gay than to just kill off their sex drive).

In other words, if I'm gay, I might not have any kids, but my brother might have kids, and they'll have a better chance of making it because his kids will have 2 parents along with an uncle available to raise them.

That's an interesting thought, but having nephews doesn't do anything for the persistence of any homosexual gene(s), which (if it truly exists) is undoubted linked to one of the 45 X chromosomes acquired from either parent rather than to the single Y sex-determining chromosome peculiar to the father. The Y-chromosome, by the way, is relatively small and contains far less genetic information than the corresponding X sex chromosome. A male is born with 23 pairs of chromosomes, 23 contributed by each parent, for a total of 46. The uncertainty is compounded by the fact that individual genes or lengthy DNA segments can cross over from one chromosome to its cvomplementary chromosome. The researchers don't know which chromosome might harbor the gene that might be responsible for conditioning the hypothalamus to respond preferentially to certain odors.

[franko]

I have no doubt that genetics plays a role in the makeup of sexual identity in some instances (perhaps most, perhaps few). As has been said, one would suspect that no one would choose to be gay.

The danger of this study is that it raises the possibility of prenatal genetic manipulation -- parents having germline therapy performed in utero to prevent the possibility of a "gay gene" developing, "protecting" the child-to-be.

The Council for Responsible Genetics points out

Proponents of germline manipulation assume that once a gene implicated in a particular condition is identified, it might be appropriate and relatively easy to replace, change, supplement or otherwise modify that gene. However, biological characteristics or traits usually depend on interactions among many genes, and more importantly, the activity of genes is affected by various processes that occur both inside the organism and in its surroundings. This means that scientists cannot predict the full effect that any gene modification will have on the traits of people or other organisms.

further, germline therapy modifies embryos to what someone determines to be "appropriate" and "acceptable". Who decides? Who knows! What is appropriate and acceptable? Same answer. Which leads to the ultimate question of germline manipulation -- once it begins can it be stopped (the slippery slope argument) -- who is to say that the technology might just be used to create create the perfect blue-eyed blond yet highly intelligent person? Or perfect society? (laughs manically). At least somatic gene therapy is a corrective surgery, treating a developed problem post-birth.

it is not my intent to derail this thread to a discussion on genetics (nor on Bush ); I just point out that the discussion will arise! I can hear the voices of people in my more traditional/conservative corner now, arguing about what is best: using technology to heal the gayness/disease vrs using the evil manipulative science to play God. Interesting days ahead.

[Tattac]

A bit off topic:

Have you noticed that sometimes when you recall something interesting or do something unusual for you, suddenly everything starts revolving around it?

I've just come back from Spain. For a variety of reasons we had to stay in a town called Sitges. It turned out to be a so called gay capital of Spain (maybe even Europe). Now everything I do or hear revolves around gays.
It was an interesting experience by the way.

[blaise]

There's an old saying that birds of a feather flock together, so it's not surprising that people who constitute a somewhat outcast minority congregate at resorts that welcome their business.

[Tattac]

blaise said:

There's an old saying that birds of a feather flock together, so it's not surprising that people who constitute a somewhat outcast minority congregate at resorts that welcome their business.

No, it's not surprising at all. I guess it's good to have a place where they are not afraid to show their true self.

[blaise]

With respect to Franko's post about in utero genetic manipulation, it may not be as simple as that (ifsuch treatment could ever be considered simple). The underlying mechanism may not consist of a variant gene. I can think of an alternative explanation. The developing fetus may be influenced heavily by the uterine environment, i.e., the mother's hormonal state during the period of gestation, which might see a "rush" of estrogen. The finding that 22% of nonidentical twins and 52% of identical twins who gravitate to homosexuality later in life tends to support my hunch (I wouldn't go so far as to term it my hypothesis). The difference between identical and nonidentical twins might result from differences in the number of estrogen receptors in the brains of the respective fetuses.

Of course, this is not to say that the development of homosexual preferences is totally predetermined at the time of birth. Environment certainly plays a role. However, the subtle changes must occur early in life, long before a boy is ready for sexual activity.

All of this is a long-winded way of saying that the priests and preachers probably are not candid when thy boast of how they "convert" gays to straights by invoking Jesus and the bible. We sometimes hear about these conversions but we don't hear about the relapses later in life or about the converted who lead double lives. These conversions may even be harmful because they produce psychological conflicts and great stress in the converted. That was why I prefaced the report about the experiments with the fragment about St. Anthony's sermon to the fishes. I suppose the same would apply to behavioral therapy.

[PTH]

blaise said:

pth said:

That's an interesting thought, but having nephews doesn't do anything for the persistence of any homosexual gene(s), which (if it truly exists) is undoubted linked to one of the 45 X chromosomes acquired from either parent rather than to the single Y sex-determining chromosome peculiar to the father.

I'm not quite following you on the chromosomes, my point was that, if I'm gay, my brother has strong odds of having the same "gay genes" (or whatever combination makes people gay) as I do, though they might have been activated in him (ie, recesive genes, or genes that haven't gotten the required stimulus to be activated). So in helping his genes to live on, I'm also helping many of mine. Maybe the numbers work out better if he's a she, though.

[blaise]

pth said:

blaise said:

pth said:

That's an interesting thought, but having nephews doesn't do anything for the persistence of any homosexual gene(s), which (if it truly exists) is undoubted linked to one of the 45 X chromosomes acquired from either parent rather than to the single Y sex-determining chromosome peculiar to the father.

I'm not quite following you on the chromosomes, my point was that, if I'm gay, my brother has strong odds of having the same "gay genes" (or whatever combination makes people gay) as I do, though they might have been activated in him (ie, recesive genes, or genes that haven't gotten the required stimulus to be activated). So in helping his genes to live on, I'm also helping many of mine. Maybe the numbers work out better if he's a she, though.

It's possible but the odds are much lower if the brother is not a twin. If a man is homosexual, his identical twin may also be homosexual in 52% of cases, but his fraternal twin has only a 22% chance (22 vs. 52, or 42% of the odds of identical twins). The odds that two nontwin brothers will both be homosexual are reduced still further. I am well acquainted with a family in which the parents (neither homosexual and neither with brothers, sisters, parents, grandparents, aunts, or uncles who were homosexual) have three sons. All three sons were brought up in a similar environment. One turned out to be homosexual and the other two strictly heterosexual. When you consider the total number of relatives involved (from the four generations I mentioned), you can see that the gene (if that is the cause) is not so easily passed and that it would require a large family for it to be expressed more than once in the same generation. Otherwise, male homosexuality would be a lot more common than it is. Kinsey estimated a prevalence of 10%, but that figure has been contested as been exaggerated.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

blaise said:

Kinsey estimated a prevalence of 10%, but that figure has been contested as been exaggerated.

Probably too low.

*

But I could be wrong.

An interesting link to (always disputable) data;
answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=271269

*

[blaise]

Whatever the prevalence (and I don't have any idea), there would be a lot of people to preach to about changing their sinful lifestyles and not enough preachers to preach to them. Besides, the preachers would enjoy a success rate not much different than that of Anthony of Padua addressing the pike, carp, and dried cod.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

Because the necrophilia club was full and they were dying to get in?

Seriously it is both a predeliction and a choice. While some people like to urinate and others like to be tied up with silk ribbons, exactly why an individual likes a particular activity is not material.
Why do we like hockey more than golf? We weren't born that way.
You have the choice of following your inclination and perversions or resisting the urge.
What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom is none of our business, however....
If you like pedophilia, you better resist or we'll come down hard on you. Abuse of children is where I draw the line.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

blaise said:

...the pike, carp, and dried cod.

Mmmm, floured, sweet-butter pan-fried pike filets, smoked carp, and tomato-onion-olive oil-garlic stewed bacalao...all served with fresh baked French or Italian bread...get me to a tabernacle, hostie...

[blaise]

mrbozo said:

blaise said:

...the pike, carp, and dried cod.

Mmmm, floured, sweet-butter pan-fried pike filets, smoked carp, and tomato-onion-olive oil-garlic stewed bacalao...all served with fresh baked French or Italian bread...get me to a tabernacle, hostie...

Beaux-Eaux, those fish were St. Anthony's parishioners! You sound like Hannibal Lecter. for shame!