There are several problems with news stories such as this that attempt to translate complex work of scientists into language that a layperson can understand. I do not believe that these learned men and women in lab coats are suggesting for one minute that my life partner and I, two muscular masculine aggressive sports-playing, family-oriented and 'out' gay men share ANY behavioral characteristics that our culture would identify as feminine.

I have no doubt that there must be some biological explanation for the 'cause' of homosexuality just as there is for increased intelligence, reasoning skills, complexion, longevity, and a host of other attributes.

Can I make a request that the next scientific study of brain formations look into a biological explanation for pathological hatred and xenophobia fostered by religious intolerance? Perhaps parents can one day screen their future children against the risk of being indoctrinated into bizarre mystical cults that teach brutal suppression of the basic human rights of others is the true path to spiritual fulfillment? Of course, this puts the majority of the worlds religions in danger of losing membership....

I agree! As a gay man this sends chills down my spine. There's enough intollerance in the world.

So are you two saying that you don't think that there is any biological componant to sexuality? Does that mean that it is strictly a choice? What do you believe causes a person to be straight or gay (or in between)?

(just in case anyone takes this the wrong way, I am not in any way trying to be sarcastic, I really am curious what you think here- I'm a married woman; I don't think that I have any real basis by which to form an opinion either way.)

I thought I made it quite clear in my post that I firmly believe sexual orientation is an attribute as determined by biological factors exactly as my blue eyes. All scientific research ever conducted in history reaffirms this position to varying degrees.

I question the value of this research however, and wish more time would be spent on determining why some humans need so desperately to hate that which they don't understand, that which has no impact on their own lives and are so willing to cede control of their own spiritual development to sanctimonious, often-hypocritical, bible-wielding bigots.

I should also point out that for the past 30 years homosexuality has not considered a disease or a 'condition' at all whereas homophobia is recognized by every credible psychiatric organization as a treatable mental illness.

I'm not convinced of the biological basis argument. But I'm also not convinced that it's a choice in the sense that avoiding fatty foods or dyeing one's hair are choices.

My personal theory is that the bulk of the variation could be explained by environmental and developmental factors that exist during the early years of life. I suspect that if it were possible to catalogue and standardize these influences for study, one would find a good correlation with adult orientation.

It's already been casually posited that we're attracted to specific types of partners (for example, a strong woman vs. a meek woman vs. a nurturing woman) because of the impressions that were made upon us while we were young. I don't really have any reason to think that sexuality, which doesn't really manifest itself until 10-12 years after birth anyway, isn't similarly influenced by environmental factors.

You may very well be correct - there are recent discoveries in the field of epigenetics that indicate our understanding of genes is rather simplistic and cannot account for the wonderful diversity in our species.

All this navel-gazing isn't really productive however - I was only half-joking when I asked that research be focused on why pure irrational hatred is such a feature of some humans (against blacks, gays, lesbians, trans-gendered, indians, etc) and not others. Some good basic research is being done right now on the subject of allophilia, trying to find out why differences excite and delight some humans and horrify and threaten others.

This is a far more interesting topic to me since if we could learn ways to effectively treat homophobia and racism, this entire topic of 'gay choice' would be moot.

The main point is do we want to spend millions of dollars researching where gay comes from? or do we maybe want to use that money on some science we can use like alternative energies or batteries? green technologies etc? please name me one useful technology that comes from this research other than the degay my baby-probe.?!? i mean why don't we study why we dont have another or less finger?

jacquescas:

The main point is do we want to spend millions of dollars researching where gay comes from? or do we maybe want to use that money on some science we can use like alternative energies or batteries? green technologies etc?

Given how much money we as a society waste, I don't feel that using some money to do research on topics that aren't "useful" is a problem. First of all, it's extremely hard to determine what research is going to yield "useful" results. Secondly, what one person thinks is useful another may feel isn't. We spend more in Iraq in one day than they spent on their research....