Step by step, researcher looks for sexuality clues

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

You mean that this guy is finally trying to prove the the "establishment" that this is the way people are born? I don't think there has ever been another study of this magnitude done by anyone quite as respectable.
Where you see an enemy, I see someone trying to scientifically prove to religious hegemonics tht this is indeed biological.

I dont think you choose your sexuality, nor do I think its in your DNA. Sexuality is a "soul" thing IMO and science will NEVER find a "gay gene". That said, I'd rather see the current trend of scientific searching continue, if for no other reason than that it puts a monkey wrench in the funditard's toolbox.

[seeker007nmss]

Reminds me of the germans in the 1930's measuring noses to find signs of Jewish blood. History just keeps repeating....

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

How 'bout an official poll of hair whorls among the gay male Ledgies (i.e., all of the guys on here ) Are you clockwise or counterclockwise? I can't tell my own direction since it's shaved off. So what about all of the other idiosyncratic behaviors exhibited by gay men? A predilection for Barbra Streisand, Madonna, Stevie Nicks, Joan Crawford and Liza Minnelli? A tendency to enjoy shopping and attend cultural events? A tendency to speak with a certain cadence and walk with a certain stride? A tendency to have exquisite taste?

I personally think this kind of research is rather dangerous. So let's say, theoretically, that somebody somewhere has found the X-factor that determines gay sexuality. Inevitably this will lead to all kinds of research (funded by the Christian right) to eventually diagnose and eradicate this X-factor. Who's to say whether amniotic fluid will be tested and babies will be aborted if the X-factor is detected? Of course they will condone, even encourage aborting a baby that would grow up to be gay. Don't get me wrong; I think it's great that genetic research is being conducted to determine risk factors and to treat life-threatening genetic diseases. But hunting for the gay gene is just unnecessary when there are so many nobler pursuits.

I love your sig! Not making light of your post though.

To me it's just common sense that people are born with their sexual orientation. But I've come to learn my sense isn't as common as I wish it were.

[mikeschmike]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

But I've come to learn my sense isn't as common as I wish it were.

That's sig worthy.

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by mikeschmike

That's sig worthy.

totally.

on topic, isn't there some better way to spend this time & money? aids, cancer, injured soldiers ... i admire that someone wants to prove once and for all that sexuality is inherent, but people will believe what they want to believe anyway, even if they have all the evidence in front of them. this guy's spinning his wheels.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by seeker007nmss

Reminds me of the germans in the 1930's measuring noses to find signs of Jewish blood. History just keeps repeating....

Hardly. The Germans had a specific purpose in the 30's. This is not a government backed research project.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

I love your sig!

I couldn't figure out what it was until you mentioned it amd made me look at it again. I'm sure that could sell on eBay for at least $200.

[mikeschmike]

Originally Posted by carrie721

totally.

on topic, isn't there some better way to spend this time & money? aids, cancer, injured soldiers ... i admire that someone wants to prove once and for all that sexuality is inherent, but people will believe what they want to believe anyway, even if they have all the evidence in front of them. this guy's spinning his wheels.

I suppose you're going to say something smart about all those morons who buy into that whole evolution mess.

Seriously though, you have a point. People laugh in the face of proven scientific facts and will never buy into any of this. God made the earth, it's 10,000 years old, Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve, etc. Why waste the effort?

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by mikeschmike

I suppose you're going to say something smart about all those morons who buy into that whole evolution mess.

Seriously though, you have a point. People laugh in the face of proven scientific facts and will never buy into any of this. God made the earth, it's 10,000 years old, Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve, etc. Why waste the effort?

exactly. they'll say it was a conspiracy, it's the liberal media, blah blah. it's a shame someone even felt this kind of research was necessary.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

I couldn't figure out what it was until you mentioned it amd made me look at it again. I'm sure that could sell on eBay for at least $200.

Especially since it would come with a Certificate of Authenticity! Now where is that leftover French toast I had for breakfast...

[amber]

If people "are going to think what they always thought anyway", and no one ever changes their mind, then society would have the same viewpoints as it did 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago. Our society's opinions have actually grown and changed very fast in this century, alone, regarding various types of human rights issues.
So, to say that studying something is useless and that everyone will think what they were going to think anyway is simply not true. Society's attitude towards gay people has changed remarkably just in the past 30 years. That didn't happen in a vacuum, it happened because of learning and the spread of information. Some studies and information are more compelling than others, but I would hardly call studies "useless". If no one ever looked for things, studied things, and shared the information, where would gay people be today? Or anyone?

[mikeschmike]

Originally Posted by amber

If people "are going to think what they always thought anyway", and no one ever changes their mind, then society would have the same viewpoints as it did 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago. Our society's opinions have actually grown and changed very fast in this century, alone, regarding various types of human rights issues.
So, to say that studying something is useless and that everyone will think what they were going to think anyway is simply not true. Society's attitude towards gay people has changed remarkably just in the past 30 years. That didn't happen in a vacuum, it happened because of learning and the spread of information. Some studies and information are more compelling than others, but I would hardly call studies "useless". If no one ever looked for things, studied things, and shared the information, where would gay people be today? Or anyone?

Hmmm, that wasn't quite the point I was trying to make. I realize the advances that have been made in the acceptance of gay culture, I do. In a perfect world, maybe this study would have a lot more relevance. All I'm saying is that genocide, war, poverty, global warming, AIDS epidemics, corporate greed and crooked politicians are everyday normal news for our world. There are plenty of other places where this money and these resources can be applied.

You know, like coming up with the ten commandments of driving

[AliceLover]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/26...ity/index.html

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Can you tell whether someone's gay just by the way he or she walks?

David Sylva wants to know. He straps bright red lights to people's bodies and videotapes them walking in the dark. He then shows the videotape to observers (who won't be biased by clothing or hairstyles since the walker is in the dark) and asks them to guess the walker's sexual orientation.

Sylva's observations focus on the physical characteristics of the individual's stride, such as the closeness of the knees.

Why does Sylva, a graduate student at Northwestern University, care so much about how gay people walk? Because he's one of a growing number of researchers who think sexual orientation may be as basic as how you walk, something inborn that you don't choose.

His premise reflects a growing belief among Americans, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll. For the first time a majority of respondents -- about 56 percent -- said they don't believe a person can change his or her sexual orientation. In a similar poll in 2001, 45 percent said orientation couldn't change. In 1998, 36 percent held that belief. The sampling error for Wednesday's results is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

A growing number of psychologists and geneticists are working on the "nature versus nurture" question -- a question that's set off a highly charged political debate about whether people choose to be gay, or whether gayness is determined by their DNA.

Take Richard Lippa, a professor of psychology at California State University at Fullerton. His studies show that gay people are twice as likely to be left-handed. He also collects photos of hair whorls -- those circular swirls you see atop a man's head. He says about 10 percent of the general population have whorls that rotate counter-clockwise, but about 20 percent of gay men have counter-clockwise whorls.

Lippa acknowledges that studying hair patterns sounds strange. "It sounds a little like the 'Twilight Zone' or voodoo science," he says. But to Lippa, a link between sexual orientation and something that's clearly inborn (like handedness or the way hair grows) speaks volumes. His theory: You can't choose your whorl, and you can't choose your sexuality, either.

"You're born with either a clockwise or a counter-clockwise hair whorl. It's fixed, it's biologically determined. No one's going to argue that your hair whorl is influenced by learning or culture," he says.

Lippa says his next step is see whether there are specific genes that control sexual orientation.

Douglas Abbott thinks Lippa won't find a thing.

"There is no evidence of a 'gay gene,' " says Abbott, professor of child and family studies at the University of Nebraska.

Abbott points to studies that look at the sexual orientation of the offspring of gay people. "If homosexuality was caused by genetic mechanisms, their children would be more likely to choose same-sex interaction," he says. "But they aren't more likely, so therefore it can't be genetic."

For Abbott, the answer to the nature-vs.-nurture question is very clear. "I think the primary causes of same-sex behavior are environmental and personal choice and free agency," he says. "Can someone change their orientation? The definitive answer to that is, "yes.' "

That makes Gerulf Rieger laugh. "Ask a bunch of straight guys [if they could switch to being gay] and they would tell you, 'Are you kidding me?' " says Rieger, a lecturer in psychology at Northwestern University. "So the other way around doesn't work either."

In his research, Rieger shows videotapes of men and women talking about the weather. Observers have been able to predict with great accuracy whether the person talking is gay or straight. "Even within seconds, people are pretty good at figuring out who's gay and who's not," he says.

Like Sylva with his illuminated walkers, Rieger thinks his research points to genetics, and not choice, as the source of sexual orientation.

"It doesn't seem to be the social environment, it doesn't seem to be the parents or peers that make you gay," he says. "It seems to be something that comes from within."

That little quote right there made me squirm. Theres no way I could be straight. Vaginas??? Ewwwwww.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by amber

If people "are going to think what they always thought anyway", and no one ever changes their mind, then society would have the same viewpoints as it did 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago. Our society's opinions have actually grown and changed very fast in this century, alone, regarding various types of human rights issues.
So, to say that studying something is useless and that everyone will think what they were going to think anyway is simply not true. Society's attitude towards gay people has changed remarkably just in the past 30 years. That didn't happen in a vacuum, it happened because of learning and the spread of information. Some studies and information are more compelling than others, but I would hardly call studies "useless". If no one ever looked for things, studied things, and shared the information, where would gay people be today? Or anyone?

Yes, society does evolve and mindsets do change. But social evolution has never been engineered by science, empirical data and null hypotheses. It's been about appealing to people's emotions, saying certain buzzwords and "spreading the gospel" via the mainstream media. People just tend to think with their guts, data be damned. I think TV shows like "Will and Grace" have more power to change perceptions than any scientific studies, and they provided a more sympathetic image for the gay community as much as they perpetuated the annoying gay stereotypes. Through TV shows like this, society as a whole realized that gays are not all crack smoking pedophiles dying of AIDS. Rather, they are also your harmless, wisecracking (but prancing) next-door-neighbors. Unfortunately, we still hate 'em, but on an individual basis, yeah, some of 'em are alright.

My feeling about research into the determinants of sexuality is that it does more harm than good because it's a losing battle either way. If they have identified the gay gene, they will waste more time and money on ways to treat it/prevent it (meanwhile the polar ice caps are melting, people are starving, people are dying from cancer, etc.). Someone with an axe to grind with you at work can swipe your coffee cup, run a DNA test and then out you to the entire world if you are positive for the gay gene. Conversely, if some kook determines, in a persuasive manner, that sexuality is a choice, you'd better believe that there will be a push for repealing any legal protections that gay people have been able to eke out over the past few decades. Accordingly, gay rehab facilities will spring up like weeds. We have to keep in mind that it was not very long ago that homosexuality was considered a disease in the DSM.

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Yes, society does evolve and mindsets do change. But social evolution has never been engineered by science, empirical data and null hypotheses. It's been about appealing to people's emotions, saying certain buzzwords and "spreading the gospel" via the mainstream media.\

yes! thanks for saying exactly what i was going to.