The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019) • Hacker News Board

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#161

Post by Pet_Ant » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 9:55 PM UTC

bsder wrote: post #155

est31 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that one shouldn't support the genetic predetermination theory of sexuality just as a defense for oppression. That's not how science should be done. That being said, I still doubt that people really have a choice over their sexuality. Otherwise there would be far more stories from people who have "successfully" turned straight or something, instead of stories from people who have tried to suppress their true…

> That being said, I still doubt that people really have a choice over their sexuality. My response to people who argue about this is generally: "So, when did you decide you liked long legs more than large breasts?" Choose whatever pairing of sexual characteristics drives home the choice to the person involved. Like so many things about "sexuality", at some point we notice them, but rarely do we actively choose them.

> My response to people who argue about this is generally: "So, when did you decide you liked long legs more than large breasts?" Choose whatever pairing of sexual characteristics drives home the choice to the person involved. I feel like there is a clear middle ground. I cannot choose to believe in God, but I wouldn't call it in in-born either. It seems like some things develop through a myriad subtle interactions and subconscious inferences that in their totality add up to a sexuality.

I know my taste in women has definitely changed without a change in DNA.

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#162

Post by h_anna_h » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 9:55 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #159

est31 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that one shouldn't support the genetic predetermination theory of sexuality just as a defense for oppression. That's not how science should be done. That being said, I still doubt that people really have a choice over their sexuality. Otherwise there would be far more stories from people who have "successfully" turned straight or something, instead of stories from people who have tried to suppress their true…

You don't have a choice about anything you like. The closest you can get to choosing what you like is to decide that you want to like something, and expose yourself to it enough that it starts to grow on you (i.e. you find something in it you like and use that to reinterpret the rest that you were negative or indifferent towards.)

I would say that the same goes for beliefs.

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#163

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 9:56 PM UTC

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #94

People latched onto the idea that sexuality is genetically determined because it seemed like the only viable way to defend themselves against rampant religious bigotry and oppression. It was a rope dangling into the well you were trapped in, and the well was filling with acid, but if you could just manage to climb that rope then you'd make it out. The reasoning went something like "if I can prove that sexuality is ge…

[deleted]

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#164

Post by lostphilosopher » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 9:56 PM UTC

Brian_K_White wrote: post #145

ohduran wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Say I'm shortsighted, and still a potential mating partner due to a variety of other traits (being a billionaire, or looking suspiciously similar to Ryan Gosling). In that case, I would be able to transmit my genes to my eventual offspring. The case with gay genes is different. Regardless of any other trait, I'm genetically prone to not have any offspring. Thus, eventually my genes would be less and less…

Incorrect. All that's required for a trait to persist is that it benefits the pool. If the pool benefits from have 1% of members being blind, then so they shall be. We don't have to understand the benefit for it to exist either.

I'm assuming you're right since I don't know much about this subject, but how does that mechanically work? How does a trait, even if it is beneficial to the community, get passed down if the members that have that trait don't have offspring?

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#165

Post by drocer88 » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

hajile wrote: post #136

ravi-delia wrote: post #58

I'd definitely be surprised if a significant portion of homosexuality wasn't environmental, but to my knowledge there is a degree of heritability shown in twin studies. Actually reading the article shows that they found several genes that each contribute, but no single gene. That shouldn't be surprising to anyone, considering that almost every complex trait is somewhat affected by a huge number of genes each tweaking…

Identical twin studies point away from genetics very hard. Pretty much all genetic anomalies will affect both identical twins 100% of the time. The fact that it's less than 40% points much more to environmental effects rather than genes.

From the link: "Research from the 1990s2 showed that identical twins are more likely to share a sexual orientation than are fraternal twins or adopted siblings."

Study here : https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9549243/

"We present an overview of behavioral genetics research on homosexual and heterosexual orientation. Family, twin, and adoptee studies indicate that homosexuality and thus heterosexuality run in families. "

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#166

Post by pessimizer » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

klmadfejno wrote: post #142

bonoetmalo wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I acknowledge this is the prerequisite a lot of people need to justify queer peoples' existence. > wouldn't you want their existence to be justified In my ideal world, I would want my existence to be justified even if I 100% chose to be bisexual, gay, trans, etc. So yes, I do want it to be justified, but I don't want genetics to be the justification.

Hmm, maybe this is a pointless semantic argument, but being justified by a choice sounds like its just passing the ball to justification for the choice. In a world where identity is proven to be 100% just a choice, that sounds like its not justified, and while not deserving of discrimination, to some extent committed to being non-normative. This paper suggests genetics control at least 25% of variance in sexual orien…

If pedophilia turns out to be 26% determined by genetics, would the existence of pedophiles be more "justified" than the existence of homosexuals?

The reason we should be tolerant of homosexuality is because it's as healthy and harmless as heterosexuality, not because it's some sort of handicap.

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#167

Post by Animats » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

It's known that birth order matters. "The more older brothers a male has from the same mother, the greater the probability he will have a homosexual orientation."[1] Interestingly, this occurs only in right-handed males.

See [2]: "Mothers of gay sons, particularly those with older brothers, had significantly higher anti-NLGN4Y levels than did the control samples of women, including mothers of heterosexual sons." There's something going on during pregnancy, and it's starting to be identifiable, but it's not understood yet.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_birth_order_and_male...

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5777026/

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#168

Post by Udik » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:00 PM UTC

Aeronwen wrote: post #143

Udik wrote: post #60

> The study authors also point out that they followed convention for genetic analyses by dropping from their study people whose biological sex and self-identified gender did not match. As a result, the work doesn’t include sexual and gender minorities (the LGBTQ community) such as transgender people and intersex people. I don't get it, isn't this the whole point of the study? The G in LGBTQ stands for "gay", did they…

Narrowing things down is easier when you control for one aspect instead of multiple ones. If, hypothetically, being trans inverted the expression of the gene for being gay, you'd have a harder time finding the gene until you accounted for it. By eliminating the possibility, you make it easier to find the gene you're looking for. If you can't find the gene in the smaller pool of subjects, you weren't going to find it…

> If, hypothetically, being trans inverted the expression of the gene for being gay

That, although always possible, seems pretty far-fetched.

> If you can't find the gene in the smaller pool of subjects, you weren't going to find it in the larger one.

Except that here the larger one includes precisely the community of people that has the highest incidence of same-sex attraction. Imagine trying to determine the influence of genetics on skin colour after having removed from your study everyone who self-identifies as black.

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#169

Post by LudwigNagasena » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:04 PM UTC

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #94

People latched onto the idea that sexuality is genetically determined because it seemed like the only viable way to defend themselves against rampant religious bigotry and oppression. It was a rope dangling into the well you were trapped in, and the well was filling with acid, but if you could just manage to climb that rope then you'd make it out. The reasoning went something like "if I can prove that sexuality is ge…

> But that's always been a fucked up idea. It shouldn't matter whether it was predetermined or otherwise not in your control.

Yep, that’s why I simply don’t care anymore what rhetoric modern social movements use. Not only usually it makes zero sense, they are ready to ditch it anytime it benefits them.

There is no point in having a serious discourse with anyone who treats it only as a weapon to achieve their goals.

Re: The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality (2019)

#170

Post by bostonsre » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:06 PM UTC

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #94

People latched onto the idea that sexuality is genetically determined because it seemed like the only viable way to defend themselves against rampant religious bigotry and oppression. It was a rope dangling into the well you were trapped in, and the well was filling with acid, but if you could just manage to climb that rope then you'd make it out. The reasoning went something like "if I can prove that sexuality is ge…

> People shouldn't be oppressed for their sexuality full stop, regardless of reason.

Completely agreed. I don't think we should shy away from trying to understand and explain it though. It's been a puzzling question that people have tried to grapple with for a long time now. I think it would be interesting to understand humans better.

And.. if it is definitively proven that it is nature and not nurture, it might make the lives of individuals easier by not having to deal with as many attacks from those that were intolerant but have changed their minds when exposed to the science. I agree that ideally, those individuals wouldn't be discriminated against in the first place, but that's not the world we live in right now. I would argue that if anyone could do anything to alleviate some of that discrimination with science, it would be an incredibly worthwhile endeavor.