Posted on 03/13/2006 10:27:46 AM PST by DBeers
(CBS) There are few issues as hotly contested — and as poorly understood — as the question of what makes a person gay or straight. It's not only a political, social, and religious question but also a scientific question, one that might someday have an actual, provable answer.
The handful of scientists who work in this under-funded and politically charged field will tell you: That answer is a long way off. But as Lesley Stahl reports, their efforts are already yielding tantalizing clues. One focus of their research is twins.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bedrooms of 9-year-old twins Adam and Jared couldn't be more different. Jared's room is decked out with camouflage, airplanes, and military toys, while Adam's room sports a pastel canopy, stuffed animals, and white horses.
When Stahl came for a visit, Jared was eager to show her his G.I. Joe collection. "I have ones that say like Marine and SWAT. And then that's where I keep all the guns for 'em," he explained.
Adam was also proud to show off his toys. "This is one of my dolls. Bratz baby," he said.
Adam wears pinkish-purple nail polish, adorned with stars and diamonds.
Asked if he went to school like that, Adam says, "Uh-huh. I just showed them my nails, and they were like, 'Why did you do that?'"
Adam's behavior is called childhood gender nonconformity, meaning a child whose interests and behaviors are more typical of the opposite sex. Research shows that kids with extreme gender nonconformity usually grow up to be gay.
Danielle, Adam and Jared's mom, says she began to notice this difference in Adam when he was about 18 months old and began asking for a Barbie doll. Jared, meanwhile, was asking for fire trucks.
Not that much has changed. Jared’s favorite game now is Battlefield 2, Special Forces. As for Adam, he says, "It's called Neopets: The Darkest Faerie."
Asked how he would describe himself to a stranger, Jared says, "I'm a kid who likes G.I. Joes and games and TV."
"I would say like a girl," Adam replied to the same question. When asked why he thinks that is, Adam shrugged.
"To me, cases like that really scream out, 'Hey, it's not out there. It's in here.' There's no indication that this mother is prone to raise very feminine boys because his twin is not that way," says Michael Bailey, a psychology professor at Northwestern University and a leading researcher in the field of sexual orientation.
Bailey says he doesn't think nurture is a plausible explanation.
Psychologists used to believe homosexuality was caused by nurture — namely overbearing mothers and distant fathers — but that theory has been disproved. Today, scientists are looking at genes, environment, brain structure and hormones. There is one area of consensus: that homosexuality involves more than just sexual behavior; it’s physiological.
Bailey and his colleagues set up a series of experiments in his lab at Northwestern University. In one study, researcher Gerulf Rieger videotaped gay and straight people sitting in a chair, talking. He then reduced them visually to silent black and white outlined figures and asked volunteers to see if they could tell gay from straight. The idea was to find out if certain stereotypes were real and observable.
Based on physical movement and gestures of the figures, more often than not, the volunteers in the study could tell a difference.
"So, is the conclusion that gay people do in fact move differently?" Stahl asked Rieger.
"Yeah, absolutely," he replied.
It's not true 100 percent of the time; it is true on average. The researchers also studied the way gay and straight people talk, and they found differences on average there too.
This research is controversial. Some say it is reinforcing stereotypes. But to Bailey, the stereotypes suggest there's a feminizing of the brain in gay men, and masculinizing in lesbians. Ironically though, when it comes to their sex lives, he says gay and straight men actually have a lot in common.
"Straight men tend to be shallow in terms of focusing on looks. Gay men are shallow, too. Straight men are more interested than straight women in having casual, uncommitted sex. Gay men are like that, too," says Bailey.
"One has the impression that gay men are much more inclined toward casual sex than straight men," Stahl said.
"They're just more successful at it, because the people they're trying to have sex with are also interested in it," Bailey explained.
"But don't you find this interesting that the one big area where gay men are more like straight men is in sex? I mean, that is…both amusing and odd," Stahl said.
"It suggests that whatever causes a man to be gay doesn't make him feminine in every respect. There must be different parts of the brain that can be feminized independently from each other," Bailey replied.
But how and when does this feminizing occur? If the differences were already apparent in childhood, that would point to an early, perhaps even genetic origin — and that's what Bailey and Rieger are testing in a new study using childhood home movies.
In the study, volunteers were asked to rate each child's femininity or masculinity. Stahl took the test and rated two girls highly feminine.
When shown video of a toddler girl running a truck off of a table, Stahl observed, "She's really not girly. Isn't that interesting? She’s not girly."
She also observed differences in two boys, one of whom would grow up to be straight, while the other is now gay.
If you can spot a child's future sexual orientation before the child even knows he or she has one, doesn't that prove it's genetic? Studies have shown that homosexuality runs in families. So genes must be the answer. But then the researchers tell you identical twins can have different sexual orientations.
60 Minutes found identical twins Steve and Greg Lofts in New York. They had the same upbringing, have the same DNA — and yet Greg is gay and Steve is straight.
When people meet the twins and find out one of them is gay, Greg says people have asked if he's sure, and how it can be. "Everyone is curious about that," he says.
There were signs, even when they were little kids. Their mother told Stahl that Steve loved sports and the outdoors while Greg liked helping out in the kitchen. But it wasn't until high school that Steve became convinced Greg was gay.
Asked if he said anything to his brother, Steve says, "I did actually. And I think the way I worded it was something like, 'You know, Greg, if you're gay, it's OK with me. And I'll still love you the same.' And he gave a very philosophical answer. He said something like, 'Well, I love the soul of a person and not the physical being.' And in my mind, I was like, 'Yep, he's gay.'"
"I wasn't ready just yet," Greg added.
Does this prove that it's not genetic?
"What it proves is it's not completely genetic. They have the same genes," says Bailey.
Asked if that brings us back to the mother and the father, Bailey says no.
"But that's environment," Stahl said.
"That's environment. But that's not the only environment. There's also the environment that happens to us while we’re in the womb. And scientists are realizing that environment is much more important than we ever thought it was," Bailey explained.
A newborn rat pup in the lab of Dr. Marc Breedlove at Michigan State University, may, oddly enough, hold important clues to what happens in the womb.
Dr. Breedlove says he can take a male rat and make it behave like a female for the rest of its life, and vice versa for a female, just by altering the hormones it's exposed to at birth. Because rats are born underdeveloped, that's roughly the same as altering a third-trimester human fetus in the womb. But first, he said, Stahl would need a crash course in rat sex.
Dr. Breedlove explained that male rats, including one he showed Stahl called "Romeo," will mount any rat that comes their way. In the mating process, the female performs something called lordosis, where she lifts her head and rump.
If Romeo goes after a male, Dr. Breedlove says the male will seem profoundly indifferent.
But Breedlove says he can change all that. He gave a female rat a single shot of the male sex hormone testosterone at birth. Now grown up, she will never perform lordosis.
But a male rat did. He was castrated at birth, depriving him of testosterone.
"So you created a gay rat?" Stahl asked.
"I wouldn't say that these are gay rats. But I will say that these are genetic male rats who are showing much more feminine behavior," he explained.
So the answer may be that it's not genes but hormones.
"That's exactly the question that we're all wondering. This business of testosterone having such a profound influence. Does that have some relevance to humans?" Breedlove said.
While biologists look at hormones for answers about human sexuality, other scientists are looking for patterns in statistics. And hard as this is to believe, they have found something they call "the older brother effect."
"The more older brothers a man has, the greater that man's chance of being gay," says Bailey.
Asked if that's true, Bailey says, "That is absolutely true."
If this comes as a shock to you, you’re not alone. But it turns out, it’s one of the most solid findings in this field, demonstrated in study after study.
And the numbers are significant: for every older brother a man has, his chances of being gay increase by one third. Older sisters make no difference, and there's no corresponding effect for lesbians. A first-born son has about a 2 percent chance of being gay, and the numbers rise from there. The theory is it happens in the womb.
"Somehow, the mother's body is remembering how many boys she's carried before," says Breedlove. "The favorite hypothesis is that the mother may be making antibodies when she sees a boy the first time, and then affect subsequent boys when she carries them in utero."
"You mean, like she's carrying a foreign substance?" Stahl asked.
"And if you think about it, a woman who's carrying a son for the first time, she is carrying a foreign substance," Breedlove replied. "There are some proteins encoded on his Y chromosome that her body has never seen before and that her immune system would be expected to regard as 'invaders,'" he added.
It’s still not a proven theory and it gets even stranger.
"One of the things we've only found out lately is that older brothers affect a boy only if the boy is right-handed," Breedlove said. "If the boy is left-handed, if his brain is organized in a left-handed fashion, it doesn't matter how many older brothers he has, his probability of being gay is just like the rest of the population."
You can give yourself a headache trying to apply all the theories to real people. Greg and Steve Lofts both are right-handed, and they do have an older brother, so maybe that's why Greg is gay. But they also have several gay relatives, which suggests it could be in the genes, except where does that leave Steve?
Adam and Jared, fraternal twins, have older brothers, but they're ambidextrous.
Then there's the question of how something in the womb could affect one twin but not the other. There are many more questions at this point than answers, but the scientists 60 Minutes spoke to are increasingly convinced that genes, hormones, or both — that something is happening to determine sexual orientation before birth. Adam has come up with his own theory.
"I was supposed to be a girl in my mom's stomach. But my mom wished for all boys. So, I turned into a boy," Adam explained.
Asked if he wished he was a girl, Adam nodded.
"Do you think there was anything that you could have done that would have changed Adam?" Stahl asked Adam and Jared's mom Danielle.
"I could have changed Adam on the outside to where he would have showed me the macho boy that I would want as a boy. But that would not change who he is inside. And I think that would have damaged him a lot more," she said.
Stahl asked both boys if they are proud of the way they are, and both boys gave her big nods.
"Yup," Adam replied.
Your idea of religion has nothing to do with God, so why bring it up?
Every monotheist religion in the history of the world, and some that aren't, have laid down the same exact guidelines for sexual behavior. The only slight difference being one man marrying (not screwing randomly - marrying) more than one wife, as in the OT and primarily ancient Hinduism.
Other than that, the basic rules are:
1. No sex before marriage.
2. One marriage only with a lifelong partner. Opposite sex, obviously.
3. No sex outside of marriage.
4. No sex with: same sex people, children, animals or inanimate objects.
Simple.
You want to change "religion" to suit your mental ideas or personal sexual desires? The height of arrogance and selfishness. Your verbiage reminds me of what people call "Satanism" - they claim they want enlightenment and knowledge.
Personally, my spiritual understanding and the ancient holy texts I study have no Satan. And in my understanding of the Bible "Satan" represents our own rebellion and envy. No outside influence "makes" us bad. So if (just supposing) you are a Satan worshipper, you would be worshipping your own illusions only.
Not a good thing to worship.
Try DU -they will nurture and protect the homosexual agenda you promote here and probably agree with the propaganda you post here.
You may be on the wrong Forum? What Free Republic is all about:
Statement by the founder of Free Republic
As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.Free Republic is private property. It is not a government project, nor is it funded by government or taxpayer money. We are not a publicly owned entity nor are we an IRS tax-free non-profit organization. We pay all applicable taxes on our income. We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. We sell no merchandise, product or service, and we offer no subscriptions or paid memberships. We accept no paid advertising or promotions. We are funded solely by donations (non tax deductible gifts) from our readers and participants.
We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.
I think he's a seminar poster. Sent here to do his duty.
Like you, I don't buy your co-worker's theory - homosexuality has been documented for about as long as sexuality has been, and as has been pointed out by other posters, it exists in the animal kingdom as well, where societal pressures don't exist. The idea that homosexuality is a relatively new phenomenon is not one that I have heard anyone espouse and seems pretty unlikely to me.
Like I said before, the entire issue has become so politicized, that I doubt the answer will definitively be found, at least in my lifetime.
Yup - totally agree with this...
A little more thoughtful and intelligent response to this article than most. Bravo! But unless you are in the habit of rejecting all legitimate science due to religious beliefs (oh now THAT would be a RARE thing here, eh???), then you must keep your mind open. It is the scientifically appropriate thing to do. Whether homosexuality and genocide are to be treated equal, however, is entirely up to you.
I guess the problem is in how we define legitimate. Science can take a legitimate stab at what causes homosexual desire. But science is being dishonest to deny the anatomy of a person in the process of analyzing the data. A woman with a womb, ovaries, etc. is obviously not born homsexual. She may have sexual thoughts and desires towards other women, but to interpret those desires as normal is "science" ignoring science.
DBeers
In response to yours or the other gentleman's accusations:
I not a "he" nor am I under the age of 20. But thank you for wiping out the years in such a broad swipe! :o) I am not a liberal and belong to no such group.
If I have abused the privilege of posting on FreeRepublic, then I do apologize to the owners of this site for using their forum to ask questions.
I wonder why it is acceptable that you preach your own beliefs in attack against me when you refuse me expression of my own devout beliefs in which I find guilt in condemnation of any one group.
I find it sad that those who are most anxious to have a perfect world, refuse to try and seek answers to the question of homosexuality - and even more important - sit in judgment against certain members of our species of human.
Again, what if it isn't choice - but nature's serendipity??
You are a good man to defend FreeRepublic however and as I also value them, I will drop the subject. It appears it will never be discussed here as long as the core few here refuse a podium to the issue.
Let's pretend it just doesn't exist and then we will not be troubled by it.
Jeremiah...
You comment: "I think he's a seminar poster. Sent here to do his duty."
Naughty naughty - I didn't bring up the topic - only joined it with a question or two.
I have no issue to provoke the membership here - but as I value the intellect of the membership I was hoping to get my questions asked. Most people of high intelligence are able to put aside their deep-seated repugnance for a topic in order to have a level discussion, certainly not to oppose discussion of it to the point of censure.
Freedom of speech runs in tandem with freedom to query does it not?
Sorry, their gear still works. Many homosexuals (both male and female) do reproduce.
Not sure exactly what you said. However, you are making some assertions: 1) someone is not born homosexual - while this is true to the extent that people are not born expressing a sexual preference (either way), it contradicts the current data on genetic and environmental exposures in utero in determining to some extent sexual preference. This is not to deny environment or choice, of course; but this is not to say what I think you were trying to say. 2) science decides what is "normal" - this assertion is also questionable; a good scientist does not use the term "normal" as I think you used it.
The SCEINTIFIC answers are already here. There is no gene. period.
This is is 100% political "teach the controversy" to buy time. If the homosexuals were intelectually honest they would be pushing a persons right to choose to engage in homosexual sex.
But recreational sex choice does not equal federal funding or special rights.
This article is nothing more than placating the homosexuals who do not want to accept personal responsibility for their sexual fetish.
all anecdotes which have incomplete information.
Seems the adults reinforced the boys acting like girls (see the book "sissy boy syndrome").
If anything these anecdotes prove children ARE influence by their surroundings with regards to sexual orientation. It this were not the case the homosexuals would not be so adamant about setting up GLSEN and GSA dating clubs(recruiting) on high school campuses.
Agreed. And this is where I see my nephew headed. My SIL bought him a ?baby? Elmo or some such nonsense. It's a baby doll for all practical purposes. Kid is 2 1/2. He is a sweet boy naturally. With his mom's unnatural influence, I am frightened that he will be gay.
Wish I could do something, but it's not my kid and I'm the minority opinion in my family. I'm debating sending him a toy gun next Christmas. Not sure if I want to deal with the liberal whining from my family though. Sigh... Is there a magic pill I can feed my family to get them to wake up?
I am being respectful. Just not of his factfree biased opinion.
Some people desire sex with children. Some guy in the news a few days ago enjoyed sex with sheep. Some get their jollies from forced sex. Obviously desire can be counter to what is acceptable.
One 'belief' that I hold is actually a reality that homosexual agenda activists and scientific 'researchers' completely and intentionally ignore.
The title alone of the referenced article posted here should clue in any 'critical' thinkers to the complete fallacy premising the science supposedly being done on this subject.
Let me break it down for you:
It is fact that there are claims that there is supposedly objective research being done to determine cause(s) of 'sexual orientation'...
It is also fact that there is no test to objectively identify 'sexual orientation'. In fact, 'sexual orientation' is at this time and I would imagine for all time something that is completely subjectively determined -a self-declared proclivity...
So, how can a person objectively discriminate against let alone condemn a 'group' that they can not identify? Better yet, how can science determine causes or cause for something science can not measure?
The answer is quite simple -it is all about sexual activity and feelings. In the case of condemnation here -people reject or embrace activities only. In the case of science here -the 'scientists' (homosexual agenda academic cheerleaders) are actually doing nothing objectively scientific as there is no innate human characteristic called 'homosexual' or 'sexual orientation' -nothing that be measured and as such NOTHING that causes or causes can be attributed to...
That which identifies the homosexual disorder has not been found. The military does not test for homosexuality -the don't ask don't tell policy by default necessarily implies no objective science on the subject is even possible. How can one even hope to state objectively that X causes Y when Y is an unknown not objectively measurable?
It is all Junk premised science, Junk premised equality, Junk premised rights -JUNK, JUNK, JUNK...
Flowery platitudes do not mask the foul odor permeating the junk that is peddled by the left in this regard...
All these supposed scientists push agenda and or fallacy -- These scientists will no more determine any objective cause or causes for those who choose to practice homosexual activity then they will determine any objective cause or causes for those that choose to practice religion.
It all boils down to one thing and it is all about one thing -chosen activities some which society rejects, some which society accepts; some which are constitutionally guaranteed and protected, some which are not REGARDLESS the supposed 'science' premised upon fallacy that attempts to turn reality on its head ...
Absolutely true that desire can be counter to what is acceptable. Oral sex was against the law in places, wasn't it? Does that mean that what is unacceptable to some majority is unnatural or has no biological foundation? Homosexuality has a biological foundation, but to what extent differs among individuals! It also has environmental components, but that is subject to individual variation also. As far as whether or not it is "acceptable," homosexuality is not my cup of tea, personally, but I would suggest that (like oral sex) what two people do legally and consentually in private is their business. It doesn't mean the article or the science is flawed because a few lame brains a personally disgusted. Those who criticize homosexuals the most fervently are more likely to be latent homosexuals themselves, or so the old wisdom states.
The funny thing is that it seems only in the USA (and perhaps kanduh and the UK) is this born propaganda taken seriously.
It seems in other contries, the popular culture has no problem with the learned behavior or trauma cause fo homosexuality.
People forget the "homosexual lifestyle" was created in the last 50 years. But this is politics not science.
Just look at the reportereettee
Leslie Stahl.
look at the network
CBS
not exactly reputable sources.
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.