Genetics may explain up to 25% of same-sex behavior, giant analysis reveals

Yappi

Yappi

Go Buckeyes
Neale’s team examined DNA markers and data from surveys of sexual behavior filled out by nearly 409,000 UK Biobank participants and about 69,000 customers of 23andMe, the consumer testing service; all were of European ancestry. The UK Biobank survey asked: “Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone of the same sex?”; the 23andMe survey featured a similar question. The team found five genetic markers significantly associated with answering yes to those queries. Two markers were shared by men and women, two were specific to men, and one was found only in women.

One of the genetic variants was near genes associated with male baldness, suggesting a tie to sex hormones such as testosterone, and another was in an area rich in smell genes, which have been linked to sexual attraction. When the researchers combined all the variants they measured across the entire genome, they estimate that genetics can explain between 8% and 25% of nonheterosexual behavior. The rest, they say, is explained by environmental influences, which could range from hormone exposure in the womb to social influences later in life.
Click to expand...

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org www.sciencemag.org

The study is located here:

AAAS

science.sciencemag.org science.sciencemag.org
 
Last edited:
 
Interesting study, but I don't think it proves anything more than a potential correlation. The study was based off of self-reporting, which can be flawed from people both over and under reporting. They had a wide range of genetics explaining 8-25% of same sexual behavior, but didn't really say in how many people or outcomes was it closer to 8% and how many was it closer to 25%. Likely somewhere in the middle and 25% was simply the max of the range. Also it states that a lot of the people that self-reported same sex encouters also had other common personality traits. Is it really a genetic predisposition to homosexual tendancies or is it the other traits that may predispose someone to homosexual tendancies with the right environmental pressures isn't really clear.
 
Gh0st said:
Interesting study, but I don't think it proves anything more than a potential correlation. The study was based off of self-reporting, which can be flawed from people both over and under reporting. They had a wide range of genetics explaining 8-25% of same sexual behavior, but didn't really say in how many people or outcomes was it closer to 8% and how many was it closer to 25%. Likely somewhere in the middle and 25% was simply the max of the range. Also it states that a lot of the people that self-reported same sex encouters also had other common personality traits. Is it really a genetic predisposition to homosexual tendancies or is it the other traits that may predispose someone to homosexual tendancies with the right environmental pressures isn't really clear.
Click to expand...

OhioBobcatFan06 said:
Pretty obvious at this point the “gay gene” exists... it’s just multiple genes not a singular one...
Click to expand...

And it's pretty obvious that "epigenetics" are a thing. If someone chooses to let another guy use his prostate for a punching bag, hormone reactions are far different and can have profound effects on things that some people apparently like to pretend have been written in stone from birth because it fits their desired narrative. We don't work that way, at all.

All this study and selective data gathering is just "fun facts to know and tell!!" until studies are done tracking people through their life spans that start with the same genes and live differently.
 
cabezadecaballo said:
And it's pretty obvious that "epigenetics" are a thing. If someone chooses to let another guy use his prostate for a punching bag, hormone reactions are far different and can have profound effects on things that some people apparently like to pretend have been written in stone from birth because it fits their desired narrative. We don't work that way, at all.

All this study and selective data gathering is just "fun facts to know and tell!!" until studies are done tracking people through their life spans that start with the same genes and live differently.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I like your phrase “selective data gathering.” I’m very good with data. I can twist it to say whatever I please.
 
OhioBobcatFan06 said:
I’m very good with data.
Click to expand...

SSdOve1.png

f4Vwjyk.png







GoA24aE.png
 
Homosexual behavior exists because people are human. We want to do what we like to do and don’t want to hear we are wrong. It’s pretty dam simple when you accept that our human base nature is sinful.
But of course this explanation is consider complete hogwash today.

So we need to have a excuse for our actions. Genes make me do it. You can apply this to anything. Very convenient.
 
Yorktown said:
Homosexual behavior exists because people are human. We want to do what we like to do and don’t want to hear we are wrong. It’s pretty dam simple when you accept that our human base nature is sinful.
But of course this explanation is consider complete hogwash today.

So we need to have a excuse for our actions. Genes make me do it. You can apply this to anything. Very convenient.
Click to expand...
This guy must secretly enjoy some hang down.
 
I remember when I decided to be straight. On the eve of my 12th birthday, I sat down with a list of pros (societal acceptance, easier to dominate partners) and cons (pregnancy, lack of male gspot stimulation) and decided to go with straight.
 
Thinking back to another similar study from a couple years ago that may have been discussed on here - the gist of it seemed to be that women with children who were genetically predisposed to have a higher than normal number of male sexual partners (apparently there is a gene for that), AND whose baby daddies were not present were more likely to produce homosexual boys.

Not sure that's the result they were looking for, or that it's one the "Yes, there is a gay gene" crowd would like to promote because of the stereotype it implied. Trying to locate that study, I'll post if I can find it. but it's probably like many other studies - nothing conclusive or definite.
 
Prop Joe said:
I remember when I decided to be straight. On the eve of my 12th birthday, I sat down with a list of pros (societal acceptance, easier to dominate partners) and cons (pregnancy, lack of male gspot stimulation) and decided to go with straight.
Click to expand...
The logic is not sound. Just because one didn’t choose something doesn’t necessarily make it genetic.

The article itself said that it is at least 75% environmental, meaning how someone was raised, etc. The person still didn’t “choose” it, but doesn’t mean that genetically they were going to be no matter what happened growing up.

One doesn’t choose to be depressed or have anxiety, but 99% of the time those mental diseases are environmental and not genetic. The same is probable for sexual orientation that is “out of the norm” (not heterosexual).

Don’t take this the wrong way and believe that I am saying degrading or treating the LGTBQ community wrong should be tolerated or is “ok”. I am just saying that this study shows that it isn’t NECESSARILY genetic. It is AT LEAST 75% environmental.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top