Posted on 10/19/2015 11:29:26 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Can someone really be “born” gay? Is there a “gay gene”? Does biology equal destiny?
Clearly, the controversy over this issue is huge in our culture. While pro-gay activists and their allies want us to believe people are “born gay” and that sexual orientation is an unchangeable characteristic like race or eye color, a closer examination of the scientific evidence reveals that the “nature vs. nurture” debate over homosexuality is far from settled.
At best, the evidence for a genetic and/or biological basis to homosexual orientation is inconclusive. In fact, since the early 1990s, numerous studies attempting to establish a genetic cause for homosexuality have not proven to be valid or repeatable – two important requirements for study results to become accepted as fact in the scientific community.
Because of this, the current thinking in the scientific community is that homosexuality is likely caused by a complex interaction of psychosocial, environmental and possible biological factors. And the two leading national psychiatric and psychological professional groups agree that, so far, there are no conclusive studies supporting any specific biological or genetic cause for homosexuality. (1)
In sum, there is no scientific or DNA test to tell us if a person is homosexual, bisexual or even heterosexual for that matter. And since nobody is “born gay,” it’s clear that sexual orientation is, at its core, a matter of how one defines oneself – not a matter of biology or genes.
But what about the studies I’ve heard about in the media that say people are born gay?
While the media’s headlines and reporting of these studies have given the impression that science is closing in on a “gay gene,” it’s important to note that each study suffers from significant problems and limitations. And what the researchers themselves have said about their own work is important. Specifically, you should know that their comments have never been fully reported in the press.
Some examples:
• From the 1991 Hypothalamus (Brain) Study, Simon LeVay, who self-identifies as gay, said: “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.” (2)
• And from the 1991 Twins Study, Richard Pillard – also a gay man – admits: “Although male and female homosexuality appear to be at least somewhat heritable, environment must also be of considerable importance in their origins.” (3)
• And from the 1993 X Chromosome Study, Dean Hamer – also a gay man – said: “…environmental factors play a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay…I don’t think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay.” (4)
• And from the 2005 Fruit Fly Study, Barry Dickson, the lead researcher, admitted that the understanding of how innate behaviors are genetically determined is “rudimentary at best.” He also admitted that the male-male courtship behaviors they observed probably involved “environmental and social stimuli” and that the female-female courtship behavior was abnormal – missing some key steps. (5)
• And what about the 2005 male and 2006 female pheromone studies from Sweden that gay activists claimed were more evidence of a biological basis to homosexuality? (Pheromones are chemicals that can be smelled and are known to influence animal behavior. However, their role in humans is unknown.) Here, it is significant that Ivanka Savic, the lead researcher, said that the 2005 study had nothing to do with proving homosexuality to be biological. And regarding the 2006 study, she said “it is very important to make clear that the study has no implications for possible dynamics in sexual orientation.” (6)
• More recently, Dr. Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, summed up the research on homosexuality saying that “sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations” (italics added). (7) As a comparison, Collins indicates that the potential genetic component for homosexuality is much less than the genetic contribution that has been found for common personality traits such as general cognitive ability, extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, openness, aggression and traditionalism. (8)
Clearly, the case for a “gay gene” has not been made.
So, do all gay people believe that sexual orientation is “fixed” and unchangeable?
Not by a long shot. While it’s true that many homosexuals and their allies believe that people are “born gay” and cannot change, there exists a surprising – and not insignificant – minority of gays and lesbians who recognize that sexual orientation is, in fact, flexible. For example, Kate Kendell, director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, argued in the gay magazine Frontiers that sexual orientation is not fixed. And lesbian columnist and psychotherapist Jackie Black has said that sexuality is not static. Further, lesbian author Camille Paglia argues that homosexuality is not normal and that it is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.
Most recently, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force spokesperson Roberta Sklar admitted in an ABC news story that today’s young lesbians and bisexuals have a “more flexible view” about sexuality and see it as “a fluid thing.” (9)
Thus, while no one knows for sure what causes a homosexual identity to develop, recent research confirms that substantial change is, indeed, possible. Pro-gay ally Dr. Robert Spitzer of Columbia University published results from a study of 200 gay men and lesbians who had sought “re-orientation” therapy. Spitzer found that most were able to achieve fulfilling heterosexual relationships. While his research shows that such change often involves a long and difficult journey, it is nevertheless possible for highly motivated individuals. (10)
Even more recently in 2007, a landmark study was published by Drs. Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse which concluded that it is possible for homosexuals to change their physical attractions and that such efforts to bring about change do not appear to be psychologically harmful. Entitled Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation, this groundbreaking research has been hailed by experts from both sides of the debate as being the most methodologically rigorous to date. (11)
And as more evidence of the fact that people can and do change their sexual orientation, Exodus International, a group of more than 150 Protestant Christian ministries in the United States and around the world, represents literally tens of thousands of people who have made the choice to walk out of their homosexual and bisexual identities. Similar organizations exist for Roman Catholics (Courage), Mormons (Evergreen), Jews (JONAH) and Muslims (StraightWay). (12)
Even in the secular cultural arena we see evidence of well-known people who have clearly changed their sexual orientation. Examples of formerly gay-identified celebrities who reportedly have become involved in relationships with people of the opposite gender include actors Anne Heche and Julie Cypher. Apparently, the reality that people can change their sexual identity isn’t just a right-wing Christian thing.
Clearly, pro-homosexual advocates and their allies aren’t dealing with all the evidence in their insistence that people are “born gay” and cannot change.
Caleb Price is a research analyst for CitizenLink, an affiliate of Focus on the Family.
Endnotes:
(1) “Fact Sheet on Gay Lesbian Bisexual Issues,” the American Psychiatric Association, May 2000; and “American Psychological Association Online: Answers to Your Questions/Topic – Sexuality/What causes a person to have a particular sexual orientation?,” www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html.
(2) David Nimmons. “Sex and the Brain,” Discover Magazine. March 1, 1994. http://discovermagazine.com/1994/mar/sexandthebrain346
(3) http://www.narth.com/docs/senatecommittee.html
(4) N. Mitchell, “Genetics, sexuality linked, study says,” Standard Examiner, April 30, 1995.
(5) Ebru Demir and Barry Dickson, “fruitless Splicing Specifies Male Courtship Behavior in Drosophilia,” Cell, Vol. 121, 785-794, June 3, 2005.
(6) Nicholas Bakalar, “Link is Cited Between Smell and Sexuality,” New York Times, May 16, 2006, and http://www.drthrockmorton.com/article.asp?id=146, with quote by researcher Ivanka Savic from Chicago Tribune, May 9, 2005.
(7) http://www.narth.com/docs/nothardwired.html; see also Francis S. Collins, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, 2006 (Free Press), p. 260.
(8) Ibid., p. 258, 260.
(9) www.abcnews.go.com/US/LifeStages/story?id=3484082&page=1 and www.townhall.com/columnists/KevinMcCullough/2007/08/19/radical_gay_activist_we_lose?page=full&comments=true.
(10) R. L. Spitzer, “Can some gay men and lesbians change their sexual orientation?” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32(5), 403–417, 2003, and R. L. Spitzer, “Psychiatry and homosexuality,” Wall Street Journal, May 23, 2001.
(11) Stanton L. Jones and Mark A. Yarhouse, Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, 2007. www.ivpress.com/media/exgays-pr-09042007.php; www.bpnews.net:80/BPnews.asp?ID=26429
Too bad it got ruined.
Then work to fix it. I started using the alliteration "geh," like the now-common exclamatory "meh!" to express disinterest, to differentiate men who like to have sex with men from the term that means cheerfully happy.
Give it a try.
Let’s say that it is true that gays are born that way.
What if you could detect that in the fetus prior to birth?
Would the mother be criticized for choosing to have an abortion by the liberals if she made it known she did not want a gay child?
No, but I’m sure that two lesbians through invetro could abort a straight child.
It would be a birth defect. Abort!!(snark)
no it is not a gene or born that way.
the “born” myth is a political tool to allege a recreational behavior as an immutable trait and thus subject to special rights.
This mandates acceptance by enforcement of law.
a selected or preferred behavior has no right to enforcement by law.
(that is also why the word was changed from “preference” to “orientation”)
HOMOSEXUAL, because there’s nothing GAY about it.
I've seen "ghey", too.
Nope. Homosexuality seems to be a learned experience. Nothing genetically make a homosexual be flamboyant or talk with a lisp. That is learned behaviors.
I do not support gays, and do believe that there are environmental, as well as aberrant choices, that allow the creation of a gay person living a gay lifestyle.
Having said that, I do believe that science will eventually find that gay tendencies, like many other aberrations from the norm, have some basis in genetic errors. Chromosomal abnormalities are at the root of tons of developmental disorders, both physical and mental.
They can’t be bred out, as they are random breakdowns in an otherwise normal system. They can be identified, and possibly treated in the future, if social opinion allows.
Still, choice and environment do play their part. Some people have the so called “serial killer gene”, but turn out fine. Same for a host of other issues. I believe genetic research is in it’s infancy. We don’t know what we don’t know.
PS: This is my humble opinion, and I’m not looking for a debate today, so I won’t respond to trolling. ;)
Yeah, that will work, too. As long as it’s a concocted word for a concocted “identity.”
Behaviors can be modified how? Torture?
Theater class can do that to you.
The question is too simple.
Just as some people are born with physical defects and other develop physical defects because of traumatic events, people can be born with same-sex attraction (SS) and others can develop SSA because of circumstances.
Is it really that hard to understand?
Opinion:
I happen to think that sometimes the brain gets miswired such as with insane people, psychotics, sociopaths, psychopaths, manic-depressive people, etc.....then the same holds true for homosexuals/’gays’/lesbians. In other words, they are all insane.
Is it not still referred to as Same Sex Attraction DISORDER? (SSAD) It is a DISORDER. It is not normal and should be treated as such. It used to be.
“Theater class can do that to you.”
LOL! Nice!
The flower power generation had it removed in 1974.
If there is a “gay” gene— they better hope not— because the neo-marxist socialists German model, Hitlery is all FOR genetic testing to determine where one should go in life— for life assignment.
And, for the the experienced nazis— this is a simple test and step to go from “defective” “gay genes” to defective people (which they are in every psychiatric assessment prior to DSM III (which removed homosexuality as a deviant behaviour)-— they can then be “removed” as they were in the camps. Think about it ultra liberals. The Margaraet Sanger treatment for queers. And oh, how she would FOOL them in to voting for her— she being a superior type of queen queer== and evil incarnate.
I’d have to say that “born gay” seems to fit with my observations in life. At least sometimes.
A few times, sadly, I have seen someone “come out” after a very normal, loving, Christian upbringing with no apparent dysfunction that I could observe. Yet, somehow, in the early to mid-20’s, these individuals had a combination of no success with and/or no interest in the opposite sex.
Then they would come out.
Strange, and tragic, and heartbreaking.
Moreover, I’m not convinced that the culture encouraging or celebrating this actually gives them a better life. I’m not so sure that being shamed and in the closet was all that bad. Obviously for them it wouldn’t be perfect, but I don’t think just embracing it always works out very well, either.
I don’t know either.
I just know it is very sad.
Yes, the study took 408 pairs of twins in which one was gay. Of those, there were NO twins in which were both gay.
I used to think “Gaye” was a pretty name for a girl. I just thank God I never had a daughter and named her that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.