[Virginia-American]

Evolution would have "selected out" homosexuality in a couple of generations through natural selection, nothing genetic about it imo.

Not necessarily. It could be the effect of having two copies of a recessive gene.

Think of sickle-cell. If you have two sickle-cell genes, you get anemia. But if you just have one, your're resistant to malaria.

So it's **possible** that the "gay gene" is recessive, does something good in heterozygotes, and makes homozygotes more likely to be gay (or to respond that way to environmental influences).

[EricT.]

So it's **possible** that the "gay gene" is recessive, does something good in heterozygotes, and makes homozygotes more likely to be gay (or to respond that way to environmental influences).

"Possible" doesn't cut it. There's no proof that a "gay gene" exists. It's a sexual fetish that has been morphed into a lifestyle, and is attempting to be made into a protected minority status.

[MillerCreek]

There IS NO "GAY GENE."

Did you read these studies, this thread? Because, you're presenting potential discussion based upon your assumption that there is "a gay gene" and then you suggest other postulations to consider.

There IS NO "GAY GENE."

If and when you find one, there are a lot of people who would like to know about it so please make sure and include your research here when you locate that errant "gene."