In a scientific investigation on human homosexuality, there is an ongoing debate over the claim, “being gay is innate.” The debate is raised due to the unequal sense of the term, innate, in scientific discourse. As well as undetermined scientific evidence on how being gay arises. To understand why, and to lead us on to some of the scientific researches done around this, we will firstly evaluate the meaning of innateness. Then pick out a particular component out of those meanings and critically examine two main studies to conclude with the most plausible view on this unsettled debate.
Multiple meanings of innateness
Firstly, the concept of innateness is a very dubious term when used in debates about whether a particular trait is innate or
…show more content…
Handful of challengers to biological explanations have been tested and examined. One of the famous neuroscientists, Simon LeVay conducted a study on, “A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men.” LeVay’s main claim was that, a difference in brain structure (the anterior hypothalamus which participates in the regulation of male-typical sexual behaviour) correlates with sexual orientation. He hypothesised that that INAH 3 in homosexual men to be smaller than presumed heterosexual men and the presumed heterosexual women would be similar in size. And as a result, he hypothesised that INAH 3 is dimorphic and suggests sexual orientation has an underlying biological factor. He brought the idea of the anterior hypothalamus being involved in sexual behaviour of a typical male through a study on nonhuman primates, which showed that lesions in this region in male monkeys damage heterosexual behaviour but excluding sexual drives. The study took three subject groups who died in California and New York and the brain tissue from presumed homosexuals have only been available from AIDS epidemic. Six subjects were presumed heterosexual women, where one woman died of AIDS and others died of other causes. Sixteen subjects were presumed heterosexual men where six died of AIDS and others died of other causes. And nineteen homosexual men who all died of …show more content…
Hamar illustrates this through family tree studies and the X chromosome. Where, rates of homosexuality in maternally related males were shown in family trees of male sexual orientation compared to the insignificant rates in paternal relatives. Which brought up the chances of the implication in the X chromosome. As males have an X and a Y sex chromosome, a trait inherited from the mother’s side (X chromosome) might be influenced by a gene on one of her X chromosomes. Moreover, there’s been further experiments that demonstrated the effect of X chromosome, Xq28, being shared by a number of gay brothers. (Simon LeVay and Dean H. Hamar, 1994) Conversely, we should question about the confounding variables that can play a role in the biological aspect. According to paper on, “Sexual Orientation of Adult Sons of Gay Fathers,” there are at least three possible environmental transmission routes. Firstly, children may pick up their sexual orientations by imitating their parents. By this concept, a child may acquire the desired love preferred by his same-sex parent. Secondly, when trying to remove the associations of homosexuality to those who are inclined to become homosexual, it rather increases the rate of homosexuality. However, this point is only an opinion in journals concerning this issue and not from academic journals. And
He contradicted the argument that homosexual behaviour is related to genetic, hormonal or biological disorder. To abolish these views, the author mentions that ‘no school of medicine, medical journal or professional organization has ever recognized such claims (p. 2) - at least at the time he wrote the article in 1994.
Mentioned is the chromosome Xq28 which is the region where scientists believe plays a key role in determining orientation, they found that 33 out of 40 brothers who were gay had similar inherited genes for chromosome Xq28. However, Bailey 's study on inherited genes is variable and limited, it does not explain the entirety of how sexual
Another research suggests that sexual orientation is impacted by a gene or genes found on the X chromosome. Though genetic tendencies for homosexuality may be passed from mothers to their children (Rahman & Wilson, 2003). During human evolution, homosexuality was developed to minimize competition between males for a limited number of potential female mates (Schulling, 2004).
A pattern emerges where the scholarly literature exploring this topic is largely focused on males. Reason being is that it appears that males are the sex who are predominantly homosexual in their orientation (LeVay & Baldwin, 2012). However, the sensitivity within the discourse of sexual orientation arises when it is debated upon whether one 's sexual preference is innate at birth, hence a force of nature or biology, or if it is a result of culture, nurture or environmental factors (Emmanuele et al., 2010). Furthermore, an experimental design will be proposed to further examine this topic. Comparing the three chosen studies, it is evident that a biological and endocrinological perspective does account for sexual orientation (Kraemer et al., 2006; Manning et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2008). Of the studies that currently exist on this topic, data shows that prenatal testosterone levels are indicative of sexual orientation (Kraemer et al., 2006; Manning et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2008). This paper addresses a topic that is relevant in today 's society; a topic that has, for the most part, been written off as having any scientific roots (Emmanuele et al., 2010). This paper counters that belief and in reading this essay, it will be evident that biology and endocrinology have a much stronger influence on sexual orientation than previously thought.
If sexuality is developed at an early stage in a person’s life, then how does homosexuality occur? Homosexuality in Darwin’s selection theory doesn’t even exist. (Roughgarden, 2009, 127) Some say that it’s based on the person’s surrounding environment and influences while others say that it’s purely genetic. There has been substantial evidence that points to both genetic and environmental factors in developing homosexuality, but no one factor that clearly pushes over the top to define the origins of homosexuality. Statistically if a male is straight then there is a 4% percent chance that his brother might be gay, but if the male himself is gay, then the percentage jumps to 22%. (Roughgarden 2009: 247) These statistics simply show that gay males tend to group in families, it doesn’t necessarily point out anything specific about the environment’s effects or the male’s genetic makeup. (Roughgarden, 2009, 247)
In one article by Marcia Malory, “Homosexuality & Choice: Are Gay People ‘Born This Way’”, she goes into multiple studies on the genetics of a gay child's parents. A study conducted in 1993 the “gay gene” matter arose when it was looked into the homosexual children's parents having a different X chromosome marker. Nonetheless genes do not control our behavior completely as does environment. The brain may also play a role in sexual preference, like the study in 1991 showing the difference in neurons and pituitary glands. Later in the 2000s more studies showed that gay men have more symmetrical hemisphere and amygdala resembles that of women's. The brain develops in the womb and continues through late adulthood. When did a fetus choose its
Even though there are many studies that are reliable, there are some studies aren't reliable. Researcher Dean Hamer of the National Cancer Institute did a behavioral trait study using a common linkage study where it looks for a link between a behavioral trait and a certain genetic structure. The results for his study concluded that there was a link on the "q28"region of the X chromosome in homosexual males. Then a while
In 1991, Simon LaVey published scientific findings, that suggested: “sexual orientation has a biological substrate” (par 22). According to his research, the nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH-3), is considerably smaller than those seen in heterosexual men. In 1993, a study done by Dean Harmer found if there are more gay relatives on the mother’s side than the father’s side, the X chromosome can influence a male to become straight. This gene, Xq28, was found in 33 out of 40 gay brothers, therefore influencing a future sexual orientation. However, there have been other studies shown that there is no X gene connecting the sexual orientation of males. Another issue in the scientific community is not being able to agree what homosexuality is in the first place. The search for the Xq28 gay gene assumes that homosexuality is not a default, almost like a genetic mutation for a maturing human. The assumption that something awkward happened when humans were developing in the womb. The search for the gay gene could be an excuse for the cure for homosexuals. Not only that, but parents could design their babies to not be
Dr. LeVay did a research and study about the brain to figure out the cause and the differences in the sexual orientation of the different people (LeVay &Valente, 2006). The main focus of his study was the brain of the homosexual and heterosexual individuals. Dr. LeVey’s research was
The world has come very far with all the dramatic changes we have faced over the years. Wouldn’t you agree? As much change as the world has been through there are still numerous social problems that still exist in society today. Amongst those numerous social problems, sexual orientation and inequality stand out to me. Research from biology, psychology, and sociology is where our understanding of sexual orientation comes from. There are two hypothetical theories researchers have discovered examining the biological basis toward sexual orientation. One concept is the neurohormonal theory, biologist contend that homosexuality is caused by abnormal sex hormone levels in utero. The alternative theory is based on behavioral genetics, determining the source and magnitude of genetic impact on sexual orientation. This theory suggested the concept that gay men were genetically female. Later this theory was proven to be false. Homosexuality was considered as a pathology or mental illness. Not every psychologists agreed with that perspective. A researcher by the name of Havelock Ellis stated that homosexuality was congenital and for that reason it could not be considered as a disease. Sigmund Freud another theorist had the concept that everyone is born bisexual and that either homosexuality or heterosexuality is developed through social and personal experience. Ellis and Freud both concurred that homosexuality was not a mental illness. Despite these researchers’ opinions in 1973,
In a time of social change and modernity, homosexuality has become a more talked about social topic, and it has evolved into its own culture. With growing numbers and heavy legality and morality surrounding it, homosexuality has faced an uphill battle all throughout the world. Part of the “problem” people see with homosexuality is not understanding its origins. Homosexuality is an unusual trait in the sense that it is not one that you would expect to persist evolutionarily as it does not directly contribute to reproduction, and yet it has persisted for at least thousands of years, tracing back to the ancient Greeks and Romans in recorded history (Verstraete, 1977). Its continued appearance in each successful generation, even though it seems counterintuitive from an evolutionary perspective, provides strong reasoning to suggest some mechanism is helping to maintain it as a trait. Clearly homosexuality is a complex characteristic that involves genetic, cultural, and environmental factors. Many interpretations of these factors exist, so this paper will piece together the factors of homosexuality to allow for better understanding of how homosexuality has persisted as a genetic trait. Evidence regarding the birth order affect and the maternal stress theory will also be analyzed. The importance of this topic lies in the individuals themselves. Getting to the bottom of this question and showing the genetic factors surrounding homosexuality would illuminate the
It has long been debated where our sexual orientation comes from, particularly whether its biological or social forces driving these behaviors. In regards to homosexuality and bisexuals, some have argued that it may be a choice that these individuals are making.(Levay 2012: 41)Some have even said it is a mental disorder that one can recover from, but there is plenty of data that says otherwise.(Levay 2012: 41)(Levay 2012: 65) I believe diverse sexual orientations develop in humans due to sex hormones during fetal life, gene influences, and other effects such as birth order influences. I’ve come to this conclusion based on the narrative provided via Dr. Simon LeVay’s book Gay Straight, and the Reason Why, and the research that has been compiled showing strong influences from a multitude or reasons. I will also be looking at a research paper by Francesca Iemmola and Andrea Camperio Ciani, who looked into genetic factors influencing sexual orientation in men. It is clear there are gender differences between men and women, and this is probably one of the strongest indicators that hormones can affect the outcome of variations in gender traits.
The question of what causes some people to be sexually attracted to members of their own gender generates many different answers. In recent years, startling new research (Barinaga, 1993, p.17) has indicated that homosexuality is possibly inherited and determined by biological differences in Brain structure and genes. This study raises an interesting question: If homosexuality is hereditary, is there any basis for societal discrimination against something innate? If it is nature, it is good. If it is good, it should be accepted. A genetic component in sexual orientation would send a message to homosexuals and the society that homosexuality is not a fault, and not the fault of anyone other than nature. Gays and lesbians are born in nature, just like some people who are inherited left-handed gene from their parents.
If the argument of homosexual animals is not convincing enough, one must also consider the possibility of genetics. There is research suggesting that certain genetic markers on the x-chromosome are associated with homosexuality: “Using genetic mapping, the team found that a set of five genetic markers at the tip of the long arm of the X chromosome were identical in 33 of 40 pairs of homosexual brothers” (Journal Watch). This does not positively conclude that a person will be gay if he or she has these markers, but it does suggest that there are genetic factors at play rather than sexuality being merely a choice. Much of this research was done in 1993, and: “The same year, a study of twins found a significantly higher correlation of sexual orientation between identical as opposed to fraternal twins” (Bernstein 34). Two people with the same genetic makeup are more likely to both be gay or both be straight than two people with similar but not quite identical genetics.
Even though there have been a lot of studies that indicate the biological bases of homosexuality, there are adequate evidence that prove that homosexuality might be base on nurture. Studies conducted by Kinsey in the 1940s imply that homosexuality is a learned behavior [3]. This study stipulate that homosexuality can be influence by your environment and early homosexual experiences. It can also be cause by family abnormality. Most social theorists believe that a child’s play pattern, early peer interaction, and familial patterns can determine sexual orientation. Social theorists such as Jean Foucault believe that homosexuality is a sexual preference.