Alot of people I know who fall into the category of "sexual orientation minority" couldn't care less what "studies" say about them.

Trust me, after 50 years of electroshock, brainwashing, recrimination and shame, X-gays and LDS, people with two brain cells to rub together already figured out that homosexuality is physiological and not behavioral. People have been trying to beat the gay out of us for so long they've forgotten to take a look and realize IT DOESN"T WORK.

So continue to fiddle with your cute little studies; I overcame my shame ten years ago. And I plan on continuing my shameless decent into indifference this weekend during the Pride celebrations.

Science that supports the physiological origins of homosexuality is useful to offer to the fundie types who declare it an abomination. Of course, those types are good at ignoring reality at every turn, so it may not actually help any of them deal with it but at least it can be used to keep them from getting all the anti-gay laws and amendments passed that they peddle from year to year.

"Science that supports the physiological origins of homosexuality is useful to offer to the fundie types..."

And see - that's where we make a mistake. We should ram it down their throats that we don't CARE why we're gay, and even if it WERE a choice - it's OUR choice to make - not THEIRS.

Their delusional belief system is only there for THEM to follow - not for those who don't subscribe to them. They want to not have gay sex? FINE! They don't have to. If they want to lock their children up in a box so they don't bump into one of us in public - FINE! But we're still going to be in public - doing our thing - whatever that thing is.

I say we stop trying to justify our lives - and just LIVE and stomp on anyone who gets in the way of that. That's what being an American is - after all! That's what our Founding Fathers did - and quite frankly, if it was good enough for them, it's good enough for me!

It doesn't matter what fundies or anyone else thinks about the social implications of the research. The question is whether or not the study addresses a meaningful scientific question, not whether it promotes or confounds a given agenda.

I would argue that it does, because it broadens our understanding of what it means to be evolutionarily fit.

As you say, religion and facts have an estranged relationship as of late.

I guess I'm sick of reading about all these studies coming out (coincidentally) during Pride month, and their "implications".

We are so far beyond "implications" of studies in terms of our fight for recognition and reconciliation with society as a whole. Is the fact that I'm gay because my mom's uterus made me that way going to make Jake Schmoley less creeped out when I kiss my boyfriend or hold his hand? NOPE. So who cares?

or you wouldn't be so eff-ing p o'd that some obscure Italian researcher cranked some numbers that fit his pet theory. The Italians barely procreate any way (average woman has about 1.18 kids, and there are about 3 times as many grandparents as grandchildren in Italy). So the Italians had better embrace increased fecundity where ever they find it. or in another hundred years we'll decide the Punic Wars were really won by the Carthaginians' decendants.

You make a very basic mistake: you assume that we care about your feelings. We don't.

We who?

Well, I care about how the media treats these issues, that's true. And it does incense me that part and parcel with these research findings are speculations about how we could possibly "cure" homosexuality and would that be "good or bad?"

But the point was, I don't effing care about how I came to prefer men to women. Honestly, I don't understand why people would research it at all; it is a moot point. The people against which LGBT folks struggle are beyond-the-pale irrational and no number of "studies" will change their minds or even neutralize them.

So that should clarify my issue for you—

That hurts my feelings.

upsidedownpoint:

Honestly, I don't understand why people would research it at all; it is a moot point.

People who become scientists have never grown out of the asking, "Why?" stage. They want to know how things work, even if the average layperson isn't interested.

I agree with physicsgirl... research is currently being performed on virtually every area of science... why not study the causes of homosexuality? Some here seem to believe that the mere study means that judgement is being handed down or a cure is being sought. I find it unlikely that is how the scientists see their work, so calm down. Research into this question could help us to understand other areas of genetics and evolutionary biology more; after all, on the surface homosexuality would seem to have a negative affect on the raw numbers game that drives natural selection. Why it continues to exist in several species is interesting. Making any judgements on the lifestyle is unnecessary and not connected to the research. Now, if this was funded by someone with an anti-gay agenda, or specifically wanted to know how to stop more homosexuals, that's another issue. But as far as I can tell, that isn't the case.

I agree with both of you; my language was ill-considered, and my scientist mother would have my hide if she read the Fray.

My real issue lies with the media's treatment of the issue and the inevitable attempts to apply the knowledge to the real world. A better conceived statement would have been:

"Honestly, I don't understand why the media is reporting this at all; it is a moot point, and not that revelatory."

that provide GRANTS to fund their research. Homosexuality (or hey, any kind of sexuality) will be somebody's pet cause (either side of any issue, somebody will be looking to prove their pet theory) so it is a field ripe (pun intended) for research.

Stop-truth-decay:

But they mostly research things that provide GRANTS to fund their research.

Research requires money, just like anything else. But there are many grants available which are not tied to a particular subject. If a scientist is interested in something, she can pull in a more generic grant.