Gay DNA found

[Fausto]

Not that anyone here will stop arguing long enough to read it, but here's the full text of the article.

PDF format.

 

[Fausto]

Author's summary for you Ritalin kids.

FAQ



Q. Did you find the ?gay gene.?

A. For several reasons the answer to this question is no. First, sexual orientation is such a complex phenotype that no one gene could ever explain it. Instead, our best guess is that multiple genes, acting and interacting with environmental influences, explain variability in sexual orientation. Therefore, a better question is, ?did you find one of the genes that influence male sexual orientation??

Second, this study took a positional approach. That means we were looking for regions of the human genome that are likely to include genes that influence sexual orientation. Here?s an analogy: if you are looking for a doctor somewhere in a town with 40,000 people in it you could take one of two approaches. You could take a guess that she probably lives in a 6 bedroom, red brick house (this would be the ?candidate gene approach?) and only go to few houses that meet this criteria. If she doesn?t live in this type of house then you did not find her and there is nothing more you can say.
Alternatively, you could go to every street in the town and knock on one door in the neighborhood and ask them if a doctor lives on their street. We used this second approach and narrowed it down to a few streets that are likely to have a doctor on them. When we say ?chromosomal regions,? it is akin to the street. The next step is to identify which specific gene, within these newly discovered chromosomal regions, is related to sexual orientation.



Q. Does your study prove that homosexuality is genetic?

A. We found 3 new chromosomal regions that showed some linkage to male sexual orientation. This suggests that within these chromosomal regions are genes that influence male sexual orientation. If genes did not influence male sexual orientation it is unlikely that we would have found linkage to these regions. Our study builds upon previous twin and family studies which have consistently found evidence for genetic influences on sexual orientation. As with all scientific research, it is important that our results are replicated in another lab with a new sample of participants to guarantee that they are not due to unlikely random chance. At this point, the best evidence suggests that genes play an important role in determining if a man is gay or heterosexual.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
people go with their desires, desire is not a choice

choice is this: when i was in the McD's bathroom today, I saw this sexy visitor from Boston (his baggage tag gave it away), and his penis as he took a piss in the nearby stall. I wanted to suck him off, but I chose not to because I want to remain faithful to my boyfriend.

That is a choice, but my desire still remains for dick.

Do you always do that? Thats sort of disturbing...

All this graphic stuff is not helping your cause at all here gay people. In fact it is probably getting the more conservatives here even more unwelcoming of your lifestyle.

 

[petrek]

The purpose was not to find "a" gay gene. No scientist beleives there is a single gay gene. The purpose of the study was to identify genetic correlates, and possibly genetic determinates, of sexual orientation in males.

The purpose of the study was to find gay genes, gay dna.

We refer to a gene that is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer as a "breast cancer gene". Similarly, it is legitimate and reasonable, IMO, to refer to a DNA sequences associated with homosexuality as "gay DNA".

It is silly to expect 100% of gay people to carry this "gay DNA". Most genes work their effects in terms of increasing, but not guaranteeing, the probabilities of certain biological outcomes, there are very few single genes that will produce a guaranteed, black or white, externally visible outcome like blue eyes versus green eyes.

DNA was examined from families with 2+ gay brothers. There were no control families with no gay children in the study. So it is not clear at what level these sequences of identical DNA occur in the population. If these DNA sequences occur in the population at levels of 20% or 5%, would you then feel comfortable labelling these DNA sequences as "gay DNA" I wonder?

The study is ground breaking because
1) it's the first in this area to look at the entire genome
2) DNA segments on chromosomes other than the sex chromosomes (X, Y) are found to be associated with sexual orientation. All the other research in this area has looked at the X chromosome to date.
So the study is not "just like other studies" at all.

The study is only groundbreaking on the surface. It was a study to find gay dna/genes using a knowingly pliable scientific method, with NO control group, and unconfirmed results. It is unreasonable to expect anyone who isn't looking for a scientific excuse for their behavior to believe an unconfirmed study who's intent was to find gay dna/genes using a knowingly pliable scientific method, with no control group.

Yes.

Proper research first.

Dave

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Codewiz

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Gaard
I think if I could know in advance if my child was going to be gay, and if I were given the power to make it so that he was born straight, I would do so. I think he would have a better chance at having a happy life if he were straight. Not that he couldn't be happy if he were gay, but I think the chances of happiness would be greater if he weren't. I could be wrong.

And I should probably say this to clarify, the reasons for opting to alter any gay gene would have absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality being 'immoral'.

I guess that's a more acceptable form of eugenics, you don't have to liquidate gay people, just prevent them from being born in the first place. it will be far easier to eliminate homosexuality, than to eliminate homophobia, no doubt.

Damn dude you are blind. What did you stated earlier, you would WANT your kids to be gay. Have you thought about why? People generally want to be around other people like themselves. It is a fact of life. You want a kid that is LIKE YOU!!!!!!!

Same for hetrosexuals. They want children that are like themselves.

The above comment was a sarcastic "joke". Sure people like people who are similar to themselves. I would be hypocritical if I reserved the right to have gay children myself, but didn't support the right of heterosexual parents to have heterosexual kids. Gaard's main reason for prefering a heterosexual child was that the child would, in his opinion, have a better shot at happiness. I guess you could make the same argument for having a white child over a black child. Racism is as much a problem as homophobia, more so in terms of numbers of people affected, and unlike with homosexuality, black skin is always externally noticeable. Perhaps African-American families should be given the option of genetically engineering their kids to be white skinned/ caucasian-appearing? The dna contained in the eggs/ sperm could be "ethnically cleansed" to remove the distinctive racial characteristics (black skin, facial characteristics) that mark African-Americans as targets for racists. Would this be a desirable thing, I wonder?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

I don't think that is what he was saying.

So you guys don't follow the "Looking Straight Ahead" rule while peeing in a public bathroom?

Obviously not...guess common courtesy isn't something that is considered when it comes to checking out someones hogan.[/quote]

Well, all gay people are not alike. I'm sure most gays don't make a habit of checking out your "hogan" in the rest room. Some do, apparently. A related question is to what extent do heterosexual men follow common courtesty when checking out women. Some guys are polite, some guys are slobbering pigs. I'd guess you would find a similar spectrum of politeness to rudeness in gay men as straight men.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
people go with their desires, desire is not a choice

choice is this: when i was in the McD's bathroom today, I saw this sexy visitor from Boston (his baggage tag gave it away), and his penis as he took a piss in the nearby stall. I wanted to suck him off, but I chose not to because I want to remain faithful to my boyfriend.

That is a choice, but my desire still remains for dick.

Do you always do that? Thats sort of disturbing...

All this graphic stuff is not helping your cause at all here gay people. In fact it is probably getting the more conservatives here even more unwelcoming of your lifestyle.

Oh well.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Infohawk
In a lot of places now they have non-communal showers. It's a good solution.

And the difference between the Cindy Crawford and gay situation is that Cindy Crawford doesn't have to put up with guys in her rooms whereas straight guys have to put up with gay guys in their rooms.

Whatever. If you are uncomfortable, then you're going to have to find some way of dealing with that yourself. Use a cubicle instead of the urinal. Go home from the gym without showering. (lol) I will continue to take pleasure in looking at the naked bodies of the sexy men in the gym change rooms, including checking out their ass, c0ck, pecs, face, and anything else takes my fancy. I will of course continue to ignore the ugly, the elderly, the obese, the otherwise unappealing naked men in the gym change rooms. Like it or not, Infohawk, if you enter my line of vision and I find you appealing, you are to some extent a sexual object for me. Tough sh1t for you, if you are going to worry about that. And no, I don't think it is immoral to "ogle" at someone, it is merely rude. I don't ogle, at any rate, I simply take an appreciative sidelong glance. Where's the harm? They (you) don't even know I am looking at them (you). If you feel discomfort at the thought of that, remind yourself that that discomfort is of your own creation. What is interesting to me is that some straight guys apparently don't have a problem with being looked at in the gym, they seem to enjoy it in fact, wandering about naked, their c0ck flapping in the breeze, taking endless showers as they display their sexy, well-toned bodies. These guys are to some extent mild exhibitionists, perhaps.

Infohawk: I'm really disappointed you have dropped out of this discussion. Please come back and call me a jerk for writing the above.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Infohawk
In a lot of places now they have non-communal showers. It's a good solution.

And the difference between the Cindy Crawford and gay situation is that Cindy Crawford doesn't have to put up with guys in her rooms whereas straight guys have to put up with gay guys in their rooms.

Whatever. If you are uncomfortable, then you're going to have to find some way of dealing with that yourself. Use a cubicle instead of the urinal. Go home from the gym without showering. (lol) I will continue to take pleasure in looking at the naked bodies of the sexy men in the gym change rooms, including checking out their ass, c0ck, pecs, face, and anything else takes my fancy. I will of course continue to ignore the ugly, the elderly, the obese, the otherwise unappealing naked men in the gym change rooms. Like it or not, Infohawk, if you enter my line of vision and I find you appealing, you are to some extent a sexual object for me. Tough sh1t for you, if you are going to worry about that. And no, I don't think it is immoral to "ogle" at someone, it is merely rude. I don't ogle, at any rate, I simply take an appreciative sidelong glance. Where's the harm? They (you) don't even know I am looking at them (you). If you feel discomfort at the thought of that, remind yourself that that discomfort is of your own creation. What is interesting to me is that some straight guys apparently don't have a problem with being looked at in the gym, they seem to enjoy it in fact, wandering about naked, their c0ck flapping in the breeze, taking endless showers as they display their sexy, well-toned bodies. These guys are to some extent mild exhibitionists, perhaps.

Infohawk: I'm really disappointed you have dropped out of this discussion. Please come back and call me a jerk for writing the above.

cindy crawford is at risk of rape. power imbalance of sexes. raping a man? oh thats a bit harder. the gays tend to be the ones getting beaten

 

[LordMagnusKain]

I seriously doubt many Lesbians (Homosexuals) participate in Anal Sex but the do participate in Homosexual sex if they have sex with the same gender.

lesbians have a higher rate of cervical cancer depression and to a lesser extent all other cancers.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Well, all gay people are not alike. I'm sure most gays don't make a habit of checking out your "hogan" in the rest room. Some do, apparently. A related question is to what extent do heterosexual men follow common courtesty when checking out women. Some guys are polite, some guys are slobbering pigs. I'd guess you would find a similar spectrum of politeness to rudeness in gay men as straight men.

Difference is that Heterosexual men cannot by law or whatever follow women into the bathroom to oogle them whereas homosexual men can....

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

I seriously doubt many Lesbians (Homosexuals) participate in Anal Sex but the do participate in Homosexual sex if they have sex with the same gender.

lesbians have a higher rate of cervical cancer depression and to a lesser extent all other cancers.

Link?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Well, all gay people are not alike. I'm sure most gays don't make a habit of checking out your "hogan" in the rest room. Some do, apparently. A related question is to what extent do heterosexual men follow common courtesty when checking out women. Some guys are polite, some guys are slobbering pigs. I'd guess you would find a similar spectrum of politeness to rudeness in gay men as straight men.

Difference is that Heterosexual men cannot by law or whatever follow women into the bathroom to oogle them whereas homosexual men can....

I guess you'll have to find some way of dealing with that. For example, if you notice someone ogling your genitals, you could say "Please stop ogling my genitals".

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Well, all gay people are not alike. I'm sure most gays don't make a habit of checking out your "hogan" in the rest room. Some do, apparently. A related question is to what extent do heterosexual men follow common courtesty when checking out women. Some guys are polite, some guys are slobbering pigs. I'd guess you would find a similar spectrum of politeness to rudeness in gay men as straight men.

Difference is that Heterosexual men cannot by law or whatever follow women into the bathroom to oogle them whereas homosexual men can....

I don't think a homosexual man will find himself in good company in a women's restroom.

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Well, all gay people are not alike. I'm sure most gays don't make a habit of checking out your "hogan" in the rest room. Some do, apparently. A related question is to what extent do heterosexual men follow common courtesty when checking out women. Some guys are polite, some guys are slobbering pigs. I'd guess you would find a similar spectrum of politeness to rudeness in gay men as straight men.

Difference is that Heterosexual men cannot by law or whatever follow women into the bathroom to oogle them whereas homosexual men can....

I guess you'll have to find some way of dealing with that. For example, if you notice someone ogling your genitals, you could say "Please stop ogling my genitals".

Please stop oogling my..oh it's you aidanjm. Please continue.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Zysoclaplem

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Well, all gay people are not alike. I'm sure most gays don't make a habit of checking out your "hogan" in the rest room. Some do, apparently. A related question is to what extent do heterosexual men follow common courtesty when checking out women. Some guys are polite, some guys are slobbering pigs. I'd guess you would find a similar spectrum of politeness to rudeness in gay men as straight men.

Difference is that Heterosexual men cannot by law or whatever follow women into the bathroom to oogle them whereas homosexual men can....

I guess you'll have to find some way of dealing with that. For example, if you notice someone ogling your genitals, you could say "Please stop ogling my genitals".

Please stop oogling my..oh it's you aidanjm. Please continue.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I guess you'll have to find some way of dealing with that. For example, if you notice someone ogling your genitals, you could say "Please stop ogling my genitals".

If a man was caught by a woman ogling her genitals, she would beat the hell out of him.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
having homosexual sex is still a choice.

There are also alcoholic genes, doesn't mean that it's right to be a drunk.

That's a pretty ridiculous comparison.

well supported argument you've got there.

No argument needed. Your point was self-evidently imbecilic. You are a bigot though, so you are blind to what is obvious. You carry the unconsciously biased opinion that homosexuality is bad in the same objective way that being a drunk is physically dangerous. There is safe homosexual sex and no safe drunkenness. You don't want to be conscious of the notion of safe homosexual sex cause it reveals your bigotry.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

I guess you'll have to find some way of dealing with that. For example, if you notice someone ogling your genitals, you could say "Please stop ogling my genitals".

Why should I have to deal with worrying about that?? and where will it stop? will we ultimately be forced to either create seperate restrooms and changing areas for Homosexual men and Hetero, or possibly stalls in every rest room instead of urinals?

 

[LordMagnusKain]

I love you moonie.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: conjur
I don't think a homosexual man will find himself in good company in a women's restroom.

ahh another display of your idiocy, I think my point was pretty transparent even if I didn't word it correctly.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

If a man was caught by a woman ogling her genitals, she would beat the hell out of him.

either that or the guy would be tossed in the clink no time short and or sued....good luck getting a homosexual man thrown in jail for checking out your johnston and god forbid you smack him in the face for it....you'd be likely to end up with a hate crime lawsuit.

I for one would like to piss in peace, and this guys comments about checking out guys jocks as they are whipping it out to drain the lizard just seems wrong on so many levels....

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: aidanjm

I guess you'll have to find some way of dealing with that. For example, if you notice someone ogling your genitals, you could say "Please stop ogling my genitals".

Why should I have to deal with worrying about that?? and where will it stop? will we ultimately be forced to either create seperate restrooms and changing areas for Homosexual men and Hetero, or possibly stalls in every rest room instead of urinals?

Because the world doesn't revolve around you, me, or anyone else. That's why I have to deal with traffic in the morning that I don't like. Alot of people don't like a lot of things. I don't like it when people are judged on sexual orientation. But it happens. Should there be a law against everything I don't like?

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
having homosexual sex is still a choice.

There are also alcoholic genes, doesn't mean that it's right to be a drunk.

Having heterosexual sex, for whatever reason, is a choice as well. But being heterosexual is not. You are what you are.

 

[Zysoclaplem]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

If a man was caught by a woman ogling her genitals, she would beat the hell out of him.

either that or the guy would be tossed in the clink no time short and or sued....good luck getting a homosexual man thrown in jail for checking out your johnston and god forbid you smack him in the face for it....you'd be likely to end up with a hate crime lawsuit.

I for one would like to piss in peace, and this guys comments about checking out guys jocks as they are whipping it out to drain the lizard just seems wrong on so many levels....

Wrong. Guys oogle at women all the time. The difference is it's accepted. Why do you think women wear revealing clothing? I have seen women walk around almost busting out of their tops, and skirts so short, well, you get the picture. Guys jaws will literally drop open at the site.

Piss in peace, and take it in stride that at least someone find you attractive, even if you aren't interested.