Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 495 posts

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

#201

Post by suizi »

tgb wrote: post #172
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…

There's also the other side: if someone is a homicidal psychopath due to their genetics, then I still do not want them to roam free. So genetically predetermined is not a good argument to use in favor of gay rights. People should be allowed to determine their own sexuality, regardless of whether that determination was preset by their genetics or not, just as people should not be allowed to commit murder regardless of…

There's another side. Conversion therapy of any form is inhumane. It makes someone deny their very identity. It may even drive them to suicide. And for what, so someone doesn't get offended by their existence?

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

#202

Post by jm__87 »

rickdeveloper wrote: post #87
coding123 wrote: post #39

I'm curious if they instead focused on a simple neural net that is fed genes + gay/straight flag if the NN would actually successfully predict it.... in other words, NN's don't care about "finding" that specific gene, they kinda include everything and it "finds" the gene without actually pointing it out. That's very different from the human approach which is to try to find something specific. I mean compare it to blo…

This is an interesting idea. I wonder if we could then use something like [0] to trace back "gay-ness" as well as other "personality features" (I'm not sure what the correct term is here) to the exact genes. One potential issue I see is that the DNA of any person has an arbitrary length, which poses some challenges in the design of a neural network. Traditionally, this has been solved with LSTMs or RNNs, but as far I…

Or.. there is no such thing as a gayness gene. Genetics are generally not a strong predictor for human behavior. Gestational environment, what sort of environment you grew up in, whether or not you've suffered any head injuries or have another developmental disorder, internal hormonal environment, the culture you live in... these are all much better predictors.

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

#203

Post by InitialLastName »

klmadfejno wrote: post #190
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…

I read this as well intentioned but ultimately poor reasoning. Things that are intrinsic about a person are a good baseline, no-question quality that we should not antagonize people for. Sexual orientation, race, disabilities, gender, appearance etc. These seem like important issues to get right on civic protections. Saying we must offer respect to everyone's choices is just wrong. We certainly don't want to ensure s…

To go further, Veteran status is a choice, but we choose to protect it in order to encourage that choice.

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

#204

Post by meibo »

throwanem wrote: post #182
meibo wrote: post #177

Makes me wonder if there was a lot of thought given to ethics when planning this study. If we've learned anything, we should know that people will be terrible enough to want to "cure" homosexuality or detect it before birth, like trisomy 21, if it ever will become possible - and research like this will lead to that.

What they're describing is a very broad range of variations across multiple genetic loci with subtle effects that do not predict, only relatively vaguely correlate with, sexual behavior. They say as much, too, although at much greater length and complexity. I get the concern for potential risk around selective abortion, IVF, etc; I was around for the "gay gene" debate in the 90s. This isn't that. This disproves that.…

That's interesting, thanks - will read up on that. I'm gay but I sadly wasn't existing enough in the early 90s to have caught it live :)

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

#205

Post by suizi »

klmadfejno wrote: post #198
tgb wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also the other side: if someone is a homicidal psychopath due to their genetics, then I still do not want them to roam free. So genetically predetermined is not a good argument to use in favor of gay rights. People should be allowed to determine their own sexuality, regardless of whether that determination was preset by their genetics or not, just as people should not be allowed to commit murder regardless of…

That's cheating. A person is only a homicidal psychopath after they have committed homicide. Locking up a psychopath who has committed no crimes is just as fucked up as locking up someone for being gay.

I presume they meant ones who have committed crimes, rather than ones who roughly fit a profile of who might commit homicide.

I agree that profiling someone like this could lead into some serious Minority Report territory where you try to arrest someone "before they commit a crime", which will inevitably sweep up a lot of people who wouldn't have committed such a crime.

Having such a deficit in empathy could be considered a disability, like many others, although not one the individual would necessarily be able to recognise, because to them, an absence of empathy would be "normal".

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

#206

Post by NoImmatureAdHom »

rayiner wrote: post #194
imnotlost wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a huge difference between "policing of social norms" and equal rule of law for all regardless of who they choose to have sex with. Maybe you can argue that it's fine for someone to choose not to be friends with gay people but it shouldn't be OK for the government withhold rights/law/healthcare/social security/education/electricity/water/etc because of it. Who cares if it's genetics or a choice.

Neither of those things is okay, because sexual orientation is immutable, not a choice. As to things that are choices, such as polygamy and adultery, the government can certainly punish people for those, even in western countries. It could set the age of consent to 25 if it wanted to--it would certainly have a rational basis for doing so. That's true even in the west, much less anywhere else.

It's not clear that the drives that lead to polygamy or adultery are any more mutable than those that lead to homosexuality.

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

#207

Post by danbruc »

rayiner wrote: post #194
imnotlost wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a huge difference between "policing of social norms" and equal rule of law for all regardless of who they choose to have sex with. Maybe you can argue that it's fine for someone to choose not to be friends with gay people but it shouldn't be OK for the government withhold rights/law/healthcare/social security/education/electricity/water/etc because of it. Who cares if it's genetics or a choice.

Neither of those things is okay, because sexual orientation is immutable, not a choice. As to things that are choices, such as polygamy and adultery, the government can certainly punish people for those, even in western countries. It could set the age of consent to 25 if it wanted to--it would certainly have a rational basis for doing so. That's true even in the west, much less anywhere else.

What is wrong with polygamy? And how do we know that this involves more free choice than to which sex one feels attracted?

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

#208

Post by causality0 »

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 have very strong feelings about self-categorization, whether or not the person's feelings are "accurate". We struggled with accepting gay people. We're struggling now with accepting transgender people. In twenty years the big culture war might be about people who think they were born the wrong ethnicity, or otherkin, or some other area in which our failure to produce an indiscriminate society runs up against the rules of behavior to which we've limited them.

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

#209

Post by suizi »

dwohnitmok wrote: post #192
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…

The big question that this viewpoint misses is what to do with fears that certain things "turn people gay" and the flip side of that fear: that the straight community might use successful conversion therapy to eliminate the gay community. All of a sudden both of those camps have ammunition for their points. Saying that it's "genetically determined" (or at least innately determined) very nicely sidestepped that. To th…

I don't think it is possible to turn someone who is straight gay, anymore than it is possible to turn someone who is gay straight. The exception would be where they're bi, but they would already have had some interest in the same sex, and it wouldn't have come from social conditioning.

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

#210

Post by suizi »

klmadfejno wrote: post #190
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…

I read this as well intentioned but ultimately poor reasoning. Things that are intrinsic about a person are a good baseline, no-question quality that we should not antagonize people for. Sexual orientation, race, disabilities, gender, appearance etc. These seem like important issues to get right on civic protections. Saying we must offer respect to everyone's choices is just wrong. We certainly don't want to ensure s…

Is there any reason they shouldn't have adoption rights? What's the harm in that?
Post reply on HN