
A scientific study has established that there is no “gay gene” - jkuria
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2019/08/31/a-scientific-study-has-established-that-there-is-no-gay-gene
======
scarface74
I’ve never understood why we need to find a gene to explain people’s gender
sexual preference. No one looks for a gene to determine why some men like
short women with big butts and other men like skinny women.

~~~
crimsonalucard
Why did we need to know what it's like to send a human to the moon?

This is science and science is asking questions about the reality we live in.
That is there are a set of people who deviate from the norm in that they are
interested in other people of the same sex. This also deviates from the theory
of evolution in that natural selection would supposedly eliminated this trait
eons ago, yet it is quite prevalent today.

It is worth asking this question and it is worth asking the question why some
men like fat women and some men like skinny and what are the biological
implications of it? Yes it is.

A bigger question is why in the world would you question this research into a
gay gene over the billions of dollars spent on getting the man to the moon
(with little economic results to show for it).

I think I have an answer. Because our society has become so politically
correct and so afraid of racial inequality that ANYTHING even remotely
suggesting things are unequal is attacked. The truth of the matter is, we are
all unequal and we are all different. That is a reality that is staring us in
our faces yet we choose to ignore it because we have become afraid of
inequality under all circumstances. Life is unequal. And it is worth studying
the differences. A counterpoint to your analogy: we study why men have penises
and why women have vaginas, or in other words sexual dimorphisms... why not
study sexual preference?

~~~
scarface74
_Because our society has become so politically correct and so afraid of racial
inequality that ANYTHING even remotely suggesting things are unequal is
attacked._

It’s just the opposite. People have been arguing that being gay “is not a
choice” so society shouldn’t discriminate against gay people just like they
shouldn’t discriminate against short people.

I’m saying that it shouldn’t matter whether it is “a choice” or not. Just
treat everyone equally. I’m also saying that they could find a whole bunch of
gay genes and it wouldn’t matter to religious conservatives who think it is a
“sin”. It wouldn’t change their belief system. If they still “don’t believe
in” evolution and think the earth is only 7000 years old as well studied as
evolution is, why do people think they will accept a gay gene and change such
deeply held beliefs in how wrong it is?

Just like we ignored them and struck down laws against miscegenation. We
should continue to ignore them and treat everyone equally regardless of sexual
preference.

------
yay_cloud2
If I remember the study correctly, the scientists actually stated that it is
clear that there is not one single "gay gene", but that (like many other
traits) instead there are likely a number of genes that work in concert to
produce sexuality outcomes.

This title seems like unethical clickbait.

~~~
xandery
To paraphrase The Economist's own words, the headline might instead have been:

Human sexuality is a complex interplay of genes and environmental factors

------
mrburton
Opinion Warning: I'm no scientist; this is just my opinion.

I know several people who are gay and what's very interesting is most of the
people I know, is there are people in their family,
sisters/brothers/uncles/etc. That are also homosexuals. I suspect there might
not be "one gene" that makes a person a homosexual, but a collection of genes
that increase the odds of someone being homosexual.

That being said, I feel like search for such a gene is to combat religious
beliefs that homosexuality is wrong.

I'm still confused with why so many people are obsessed with the sexual
orientation of another person?

I remember one time, I attended a meetup that was focused on LGBT startups. In
the elevator, there were four people; two other men, a woman and me.

One guy who was apparently by himself and didn't read the agenda of the meetup
asked the "couple" next to him how difficult it was to start a company and be
in a relationship. The man replied "We're not a couple, I'm gay." then the
women laughed and said, "I'm also gay, and this meetup is the LGBT community
raising capital for their company."

The guy then turned to me and asked: "Are you also gay?" I replied: "No, but
that headband you're wearing might be." Everyone but he laughed, and I thought
that would ease the mood. This guy seemed very concerned about being a
straight man in a gay meetup. I told him to relax and explained I was there to
join a couple of friends who were speaking at the meetup.

I understand that some people feel uncomfortable being around people they are
not used to being around; sexual orientation, race, income status, etc. They
just haven't had that experience. Hopefully, that guy was able to feel more
comfortable around none heterosexuals. They make _amazing_ wing men and women
:)

~~~
edoceo
You're right. No one should care who fucks who, when all parties are
consenting. And it's completely irrelevant from ones ability to be awesome.

~~~
mrburton
I agree - what I find terribly concerning in this day and age, we're not
letting the actions of people to define a person. MLK talked about that and
it's simply ignored. I guess it requires more energy to look at each person
you meet and now they treat you vs. just saying "All gays are...", "all whites
are...", "all blacks are...", "al women are..", "all men are..", etc..

¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

It all seems so childish and intellectually lazy. At least it gives people
something to argue about endlessly on social media lol

------
mark-r
This seems self evident if you know anything about evolution. In order to pass
on your genes you need to have relations with the opposite gender.

------
aaron695
Great, that means Conversion Therapy works then right?

~~~
mrburton
Who said anything about "Conversion Therapy"? I'm lost to what this comment is
in reference to?

~~~
flomble
The idea is that if your sexuality is not innate, then it can be changed.
There's long been a desire to prove that homosexuality is genetic in order to
counter the claim of bigots that they can turn people straight through shame
and abuse.

It's frustrating on several levels. One, there is an element of the
naturalistic fallacy; many people feel that homosexuality being "natural"
(e.g. occurring in many animal species or being immutably determined by genes)
is a strong defence of it (as opposed to the preferable argument of "it's not
hurting you, so you have absolutely zero grounds to object to it"). Two, many
people want to be able to point to a single gene as the causative factor, when
genetics is rarely so simple, and other prenatal factors may contribute (e.g.
something that happens during gestation).

~~~
taffer
Just because something is not determined by genes does not automatically mean
it is not innate. Some traits are determined by hormones and there might be
many other mechanisms that determine our physical and behavioral traits.

~~~
flomble
Yes, absolutely!

In particular there's evidence for:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_birth_order_and_male...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_birth_order_and_male_sexual_orientation)

