Black Relationships : Born this way?

On to something? Or "on one"?


  • Total voters
    11
There is not "a" gay gene, it is much more complicated than that. But, there is a correlation to multiple genes, heredity, hormones, and biology, according to many researchers.

I think some of the very information that I found to support the genetics of sexuality,
Clyde is citing to DIScredit genetic sexuality, if I understand correctly.


306995
HOMOSEXUALITY 1; HMS1



Alternative titles; symbols
SEXUAL ORIENTATION, MALE



Gene-Phenotype Relationships


1845227] [Full Text]" Bailey and Pillard (1991)

1887219] [Full Text]" LeVay (1991)

8332896] [Full Text]" Hamer et al. (1993)

Hamer (1994)

7581447] [Full Text]" Hu et al. (1995)

10213693] [Full Text]" Rice et al. (1999)

9156085] [Full Text]" Blanchard and Klassen (1997)

15645181] [Full Text]" Mustanski et al. (2005)

16369763] [Full Text]" Bocklandt et al. (2006)


http://www.omim.org/entry/306995#9



Not true, Clyde is not citing to discredit genetic sexuality, only reporting that the body of science has not reached conclusiveness on the question of whether or not folk are born gay.

For example, looking at the Abstract of the first source you shared, it remains inconclusive:


Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1991 Dec;48(12):1089-96.
A genetic study of male sexual orientation.
Bailey JM1, Pillard RC.
Author information

Abstract
Homosexual male probands with monozygotic cotwins, dizygotic cotwins, or adoptive brothers were recruited using homophile publications. Sexual orientation of relatives was assessed either by asking relatives directly, or when this was impossible, asking the probands. Of the relatives whose sexual orientation could be rated, 52% (29/56) of monozygotic cotwins, 22% (12/54) of dizygotic cotwins, and 11% (6/57) of adoptive brothers were homosexual. Heritabilities were substantial under a wide range of assumptions about the population base rate of homosexuality and ascertainment bias. However, the rate of homosexuality among nontwin biological siblings, as reported by probands, 9.2% (13/142), was significantly lower than would be predicted by a simple genetic hypothesis and other published reports. A proband's self-reported history of childhood gender non-conformity did not predict homosexuality in relatives in any of the three subsamples. Thus, childhood gender nonconformity does not appear to be an indicator of genetic loading for homosexuality. Cotwins from concordant monozygotic pairs were very similar for childhood gender nonconformity.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1845227


In your research, did you find any undisputed and conclusive scientific evidence that gays are born that way?

...
 
...

Are you saying or thinking that I embrace Eugenics? If so, you are dead wrong. The whole world knows the fallacy of Eugenics.


...

... Clyde, is there a specific reason why you continue to totally ignore my question underlined above with regard to the so very comprehensive manner in which Scientific Racism/Eugenics has been BURIED/totally debunked by scientists /SCIENCE, whereas what can anyone do about the somewhat RETARDED DIMWITS who continue to embrace it other than avoid them as much as possible? Well Clyde?

Isn’t ANYONE who genuinely believes they are not programmed
graphically illustrating that their programming is COMPLETE?
 
Not true, Clyde is not citing to discredit genetic sexuality, only reporting that the body of science has not reached conclusiveness on the question of whether or not folk are born gay.

For example, looking at the Abstract of the first source you shared, it remains inconclusive:


Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1991 Dec;48(12):1089-96.
A genetic study of male sexual orientation.
Bailey JM1, Pillard RC.
Author information

Abstract
Homosexual male probands with monozygotic cotwins, dizygotic cotwins, or adoptive brothers were recruited using homophile publications. Sexual orientation of relatives was assessed either by asking relatives directly, or when this was impossible, asking the probands. Of the relatives whose sexual orientation could be rated, 52% (29/56) of monozygotic cotwins, 22% (12/54) of dizygotic cotwins, and 11% (6/57) of adoptive brothers were homosexual. Heritabilities were substantial under a wide range of assumptions about the population base rate of homosexuality and ascertainment bias. However, the rate of homosexuality among nontwin biological siblings, as reported by probands, 9.2% (13/142), was significantly lower than would be predicted by a simple genetic hypothesis and other published reports. A proband's self-reported history of childhood gender non-conformity did not predict homosexuality in relatives in any of the three subsamples. Thus, childhood gender nonconformity does not appear to be an indicator of genetic loading for homosexuality. Cotwins from concordant monozygotic pairs were very similar for childhood gender nonconformity.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1845227


In your research, did you find any undisputed and conclusive scientific evidence that gays are born that way?

...

No, there is no exact information if that's what you mean. But like in this study here, there is a pattern. The closer the subjects were genetically, the higher the likelihood of similar sexual preference was, right?

Ok, so actually they thought they had found a genetic basis in their first study. But, their later studies disproved their initial findings.

Biology and sexual orientation[edit]
Bailey is well known for research involving biology and sexual orientation. In the early 1990s Bailey and Richard Pillard coauthored a series of twin studies which examined the rate of concordance of sexual identity among monozygotic twins (52% concordance), dizygotic twins of the same sex (22%), non-twin siblings of the same sex, and adoptive siblings of the same sex (11%).[9][10] More recent research by Bailey et al. on twins however found much lower concordance rates for monozygotic twins regarding homosexual orientation of only 20% for men and 24% for women pointing to a significant contribution of environmental factors in sexual orientation; Bailey suggests an explanation for the much lower concordance rate among monozygotic twins in this study as opposed to previous studies: In those previous studies, twins deciding whether to participate in a study clearly related to homosexuality probably considered the sexual orientation of their co-twins before agreeing to participate.[11

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michael_Bailey
 
...


Yes, it is exactly what I mean ... Until they are able to say conclusively, the jury is still out and the debate continues.

From the research I did, its extremely complex and all exploration.



No, there is no exact information if that's what you mean. But like in this study here, there is a pattern. The closer the subjects were genetically, the higher the likelihood of similar sexual preference was, right?

Ok, so actually they thought they had found a genetic basis in their first study. But, their later studies disproved their initial findings.

Biology and sexual orientation[edit]
Bailey is well known for research involving biology and sexual orientation. In the early 1990s Bailey and Richard Pillard coauthored a series of twin studies which examined the rate of concordance of sexual identity among monozygotic twins (52% concordance), dizygotic twins of the same sex (22%), non-twin siblings of the same sex, and adoptive siblings of the same sex (11%).[9][10] More recent research by Bailey et al. on twins however found much lower concordance rates for monozygotic twins regarding homosexual orientation of only 20% for men and 24% for women pointing to a significant contribution of environmental factors in sexual orientation; Bailey suggests an explanation for the much lower concordance rate among monozygotic twins in this study as opposed to previous studies: In those previous studies, twins deciding whether to participate in a study clearly related to homosexuality probably considered the sexual orientation of their co-twins before agreeing to participate.[11

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michael_Bailey
 
...


Yes, it is exactly what I mean ... Until they are able to say conclusively, the jury is still out and the debate continues.

From the research I did, its extremely complex and all exploration.

It may be a very long time before science can nail all the details. But, they have found that male homosexuality is more common in certain families that are linked by maternal bloodlines. They have found patterns in the size of the brains. They are making just enough headway to convince me that one day they will be able to decipher these genetic codes precisely.
 

Donate

Support destee.com, the oldest, most respectful, online black community in the world - PayPal or CashApp

Latest profile posts

HODEE wrote on Etophil's profile.
Welcome to Destee
@Etophil
Destee wrote on SleezyBigSlim's profile.
Hi @SleezyBigSlim ... Welcome Welcome Welcome ... :flowers: ... please make yourself at home ... :swings:
Back
Top