Male Sexual Orientation Is Connected with Genes

Many scientists have a difficult time understanding homosexuality on the evolutionary aspect. They believe a human beings’ main purpose is reproduction, which makes the sexual relationship between two males a confusing concept for most evolutionary thinkers (McKnight 1). Evolutionary thinkers believe that the less desirable genes are removed from the system when they are not breed as often, but this cannot be said for homosexual males who have been a continuing presence in most societies over numerous generations (McKnight 1). These evolutionary thinkers, like most humans, have a need to place others into

The article dives into the 'gay gene’; a gene where individuals had hoped that would be the answer to peoples orientation. While scientists have found some new information regarding chromosomes and genetics, there still is no simple answer that reassures anyone that there is a single 'gay gene ' that defines their orientation.

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.

A highly debated issue concerning homosexuality is whether sexual-orientation is biologically determined or if it is a socially learned behavior. One case study done about this topic gathered that “the homosexual desire seems in most cases to be implanted in those who develop an unusually strong attachment for one parent” (Cory 1951:67). This seems to suggest that homosexuality can be influenced by family structure or other sociological elements. On the other side of this argument, there is the belief that people are born either gay or straight. Even though there is no scientific or genetic evidence to prove this, there have been many studies done and most homosexuals interviewed take this view-point. McIntosh states, “[homosexuality] is still commonly seen as a condition characterizing certain persons in the way that birthplace or deformity might characterize them” (1968:182). To support their cause and to fight for acceptance in society, it would be beneficial to convince people that sexual orientation is biologically determined. “Research indicates that people who believe that homosexuality is a choice are more likely to condemn it than are those who believe gays and lesbians are born that way”

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).

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.

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

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

There is much debate that homosexuality is a developmental problem caused by a weak bond between a father and son during one’s childhood. A failed relationship with one’s father can lead the boy to not fully internalize male gender identity and develop homosexually (Baird & Baird, 1995). Consider the gender development of identity. Infants indentify with their mother who is the first and primary source of nurturance and care. As girls age, they continue to identify mostly with their mother and boys shift towards their father. Through a father-son relationship, masculine identification is attained which is necessary if the boy is to develop a normally masculine personality (i.e. heterosexuality). This development task helps explain why boys have more difficulty than girls in developing gender identity and may also explain the higher ratio of male to female homosexuality (Baird & Baird, 1995). It is important that

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.

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,

Many people now believe the reporting of many popular newspapers and magazines report of the "discovery" of a link between a certain gene and homosexuality, but hasn't it been considered a choice for such a long time? Is homosexuality a choice rather than genetic? To answer this question we'll start off by revealing some myths of homosexuality. The next part will explain the difference between a behavioral trait and a genetic trait. Finally I'll end be unveiling the truth behind the "homosexual gene."

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.