SCIENCE
This section covers some research and scientific studies on various arguments provided by the LGBTQAI+ activists. It strives to answer the question of whether we are born gay or if we are made that way.
Most researchers who study sexual orientation think that both genetic and environmental factors play a role, but the relative contributions of each remain unclear. A new study of Swedish twins reinforces earlier findings that environmental influences including the environment in the womb may play a greater role than genes. To try to get around these problems, a team led by Niklas Langström, a psychiatrist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, recruited subjects from the Swedish Twin Registry, the world's largest. All 43,808 twins born in Sweden between 1959 and 1985 were invited to participate in a Web-based survey that comprised a wide range of questions about personal behaviors and experiences. The team ended up with a sample of 3826 twin pairs, of which 2320 were identical and 1506 fraternal. Of that sample, roughly 5% of men and 8% of women reported sexual activity with a member of the same sex at least once during their lifetimes. Then they plugged the survey responses into a standard mathematical model for comparing identical and fraternal twins. The results confirm earlier findings that identical twins are more concordant for same-sex behaviors than fraternal twins are but only modestly so: In men, genetic effects appeared to explain 34% to 39% of the differences between the two twin groups, whereas in women, genetics accounted for only about 18% to 19% of the difference--a finding consistent with other research showing that sexual orientation in women is not as rigidly determined as it is in men.Jonathan Beckwith, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, says that the new work fails to overcome a number of problems faced by previous twin studies. He notes that the final sample included only 12% of the males in the Swedish registry, leaving open the possibility of recruitment bias. And Beckwith says that the failure to control for family environment could inflate estimates of genetic influence.
NIH’s gay gene study questioned:
Geneticist Dean Hamer of the National Cancer Institute published a study of 40 pairs of brothers – all gay – reporting that their sexual orientation was influenced by their genes. Family pedigree data had indicated that the men had inherited a factor for gayness from their mothers. Hamer and his team zeroed in on the X chromosome (passed to males only from their mothers) scanning it for genetic markers that the gay men might have in common. Based on these linkage studies Hamer concluded he had found a gay genetic factor at the tip of the X chromosome. This report offering the first molecular evidence that human sexual orientation might be determined genetically sparked controversy and lots of it. But in recent months Hamer’s work has begun to face more serious technical questions – one in a confidential setting, the other in public. One former junior member of Hamer’s lab who coauthored the paper with him challenged the unspecified methods of data selection. The allegation was that Hamer selectively reported his data. The second technical question raised was on the linkage studies on the X chromosome. Another study conducted at the University of Ontario on the same sample size of 40 pairs of gay brothers brought no conclusive evidence that gayness is passed from mother to son ‘not even a trend in favor of X linkage.
Resource: https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.7604252
There is no gay gene:
Nearly half a million genomes reveal five DNA markers associated with sexual behaviour but none with the power to predict the sexuality of an individual. The largest study to date on the genetic basis of sexuality has revealed five spots on the human genome that are linked to same-sex sexual behaviour but none of the markers are reliable enough to predict someone’s sexuality. The findings, which are published on 29 August in Science and based on the genomes of nearly 500,000 people, shore up the results of earlier, smaller studies and confirm the suspicions of many scientists: while sexual preferences have a genetic component, no single gene has a large effect on sexual behaviours. “There is no ‘gay gene’,” says lead study author Andrea Ganna, a geneticist at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Ganna and his colleagues also used the analysis to estimate that up to 25% of sexual behaviour can be explained by genetics, with the rest influenced by environmental and cultural factors — a figure similar to the findings of smaller studies.
A need for more data : Scientists have long thought that someone’s genes partly influenced their sexual orientation. Research from the 1990s showed that identical twins are more likely to share a sexual orientation than are fraternal twins or adopted siblings. Some studies suggested that a specific part of the X chromosome called the Xq28 region was associated with the sexual orientation of people who were biologically male although subsequent research cast doubt on those results. But these studies all had very small sample sizes and most focused on men, says Mills. This hampered scientists’ ability to detect many variants associated with sexual orientation.
In the recent study, Ganna and his colleagues used a method known as a genome-wide association study (GWAS) to look at the genomes of hundreds of thousands of people for single-letter DNA changes called SNPs. If lots of people with a trait in common also share certain SNPs, chances are that the SNPs are related in some way to that characteristic. The researchers split their study participants into two groups — those who reported having had sex with someone of the same sex, and those who didn’t. Then the researchers performed two separate analyses. In one, they evaluated more than one million SNPs and looked at whether people who had more SNPs in common with each other also reported similar sexual behaviours. The scientists found that genetics could explain 8–25% of the variation in sexual behaviour.
For their second analysis, Ganna and his colleagues wanted to see which particular SNPs were associated with same-sex sexual behaviours, and found five that were more common among those individuals. However, those five SNPs collectively explained less than 1% of the variation in sexual behaviour. This suggests that there are a lot of genes that influence sexual behaviour, many of which researchers haven’t found yet, says Ganna. An even larger sample size could help to identify those missing variants, he says. But Ganna cautions that these SNPs can’t be used to reliably predict sexual preferences in any individual, because no single gene has a large effect on sexual behaviours.
Resource:
No gay gene : Resources : The 'Gay Gene' Is A Myth But Being Gay Is 'Natural,' Say Scientists https://www.forbes.com/sites/dawnstaceyennis/2019/08/30/the-gay-gene-is-a-myth-but-being-gay-is-natural-say-scientists/?sh=afe52097fa72
Massive study homes in on genetic basis of human sexuality: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02585-6
Ask this question, and you will probably receive one of two responses:
Yes. People choose to be gay. They are making an immoral choice, which government should discourage. Or
No. Sexual preference is biologically determined. Government should protect gay people from discrimination because homosexuality is an unalterable aspect of their identity.
These two answers have something in common: With both of them, the science conveniently supports the moral decision.
Gay activists and the liberal media have actively encouraged the idea that homosexuality is inherited and unchangeable, and researchers have diligently sought scientific evidence to back up that claim.
The controversy began with the work of Simon LeVay, M.D. In 1991, LeVay tested the brains of 41 cadavers and noted differences between homosexual versus heterosexual males. The hypothalamus, an area believed to regulate sexual activity, was smaller in homosexual males than in heterosexuals. Dr. LeVay believed the differences proved a biological basis for homosexuality, but he failed to consider a variety of reasons, other than genetic, that the brains were different. First, all 19 of the homosexual cadavers had died of AIDS, a disease known to affect the neurological system. It could be that the disease had shrunk the hypothalamus. Second, scientists who study brain biochemistry know that the way a person thinks affects the way his brain functions; specifically, it affects the neurochemicals released in the brain and the way certain pathways grow and change. Could the structural brain differences have started with the difference in thoughts between homosexuals and heterosexuals, rather than with genetics? Third, there is no proof linking hypothalamus size with homosexuality, either as a cause or effect.
In 1993, Dr. Dean Hamer, a pro-gay activist, made the astounding claim in his research that there may be a gene for homosexuality. His team of researchers began a series of gene linkage studies, in which families with several homosexuals underwent genetic analysis to determine if any chromosomal variants could be found in the family and if the variant correlated with those individuals who displayed the homosexuality. Although Hamer’s study sample was very small, he found a significant linkage between gays and a marker on the maternal X chromosome, Xq28. Additional studies with larger sample sizes produced conflicting results in the linkage to Xq28. It is important to note that Hamer’s experiments have never been validated; in fact, other groups of researchers have discredited Hamer’s work as non-replicable or even fraudulent. Even if there were some genetic commonalities among homosexuals, associated characteristics do not prove a causal link.
There are many researchers who cite environmental factors as major contributors to homosexual feelings. They strongly believe that negative early childhood experiences in an unloving or non-supportive home environment are a critical part of this process. Common elements seem to include an emotionally withdrawn or physically absent father and an overbearing, fawning, or over-protective mother. In many cases, there are reports of physical, sexual, or emotional abuse. Disruption of gender identification may contribute to the development toward homosexuality. This process begins between ages two and four. During this phase, children move from their primary connection with the mother to seek out deeper attachments with the parent of the same gender.
Peer attachments with same-sex friends also play a role in developing gender identity. Eventually, after years of interaction and bonding with same-sex peers, children enter puberty and begin to pay attention to the opposite sex. When this natural process is disrupted, it feels natural for a child to love and crave the attention of those of the same sex.
Most researchers have concluded that sexual orientation is a complex, multi factorial issue in which biological, social, and psychological factors combine to play a role in the ultimate sexual orientation of an individual.
Although it may be easier, psychologically, for a homosexual to believe that homosexuality is inborn, the accumulated scientific evidence suggests otherwise. Homosexuals may have a genetic predisposition, but human choice is still a factor.
Studies also indicate: Homosexuality has a strong cultural component. If people were “born gay,” we would not see such a large increase, in such a short time span, in identification as homosexual or bisexual.
Resource:
Genetics: There is evidence to show that there is a genetic contribution to sexual orientation but that orientation does not cement your entire sexual lifespan but pushes its development in a certain direction. In 1993, a study published in the journal Science showed that families with two homosexual brothers were very likely to have certain genetic markers on a region of the X chromosome known as Xq28. This led to media headlines about the possibility of the existence of a “gay gene” and discussions about the ethics of aborting a “gay” fetus. But there was not much evidence presented through this study as the sample size was inadequate and so this study was shelved.
We know, from many twin and adoption studies, that sexual preference has a genetic component. A gay man is more likely than a straight man to have a (biological) gay brother; lesbians are more likely than straight women to have gay sisters. There have also been headlines about an “alcoholism gene”, which makes people become alcoholics, and a “warrior gene”, which makes people unusually aggressive. Genes can’t control behavior completely, though. Genes regulate the production of amino acids, which combine to form proteins. The existence or absence of a protein can have an effect on things like alcohol tolerance or mood.
A Study on genetics and sexuality placed forth 3 arguments.
1. Genetics only plays a small role in determining sexual orientation
2. Genetics cannot predict whether a person is gay or straight
3. Sexuality is not who you are, its how you are
Resource : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aagFTlK_XsI
Environment & culture: Like genetics, the environment also plays an important role in how our behavior develops. Your environment affects your sexual and romantic relationships. Throughout history, marriages have been influenced by family relations and by economic needs. People adhere to cultural constraints of monogamy despite being attracted to people other than their spouses. Your culture affects your views on homosexuality. In some societies, homosexuality is accepted, in others, it is frowned upon but tolerated, in yet others, it is a serious criminal offense, possibly punishable by death. Your upbringing can influence what you find desirable and what you find repulsive.
The brain : The structure of the brain might influence sexual preference. A large amount of brain development takes place during childhood, when you are learning many new things – including how your family and the adults around you believe you should feel about things and what they believe is acceptable behavior. The education you receive as a child strongly affects how your brain will develop as you grow. For example, children who are given musical training experience changes to areas of the brain associated with hearing and motor control.
Resource: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/is-homosexuality-a-choice/
A Meta-Analysis of Disparities in Childhood Sexual Abuse, Parental Physical Abuse, and Peer Victimization Among Sexual Minority and Sexual Nonminority Individuals
Findings
2011, Behavioral and community health professor Mark S. Friedman and colleagues conducted a meta-analysis of 37 studies from the United States and Canada examining sexual abuse, physical abuse, and peer victimization in heterosexuals as compared to non-heterosexuals. Their results showed that non-heterosexuals were on average 2.9 times more likely to report having been abused as children (under 18 years of age).
Read more : https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2009.190009
The prevalence of sexual assault against people who identify as Gay, Lesbian or Bisexual in the United States: A systematic review
Findings
This article systematically reviews 75 studies that examine the prevalence of sexual assault victimization among gay or bisexual (GB) men, and lesbian or bisexual (LB) women, in the United States. The authors reviewed the reported prevalence of lifetime sexual assault victimization (LSA), and where available, childhood sexual assault (CSA), adult sexual assault (ASA), intimate partner sexual assault (IPSA), and hate crime-related sexual assault (HC). Examined 75 studies (25 of which used probability sampling) involving a total of 139,635 non heterosexuals. Prevalence estimates of LSA ranged from 15.6–85.0% for LB women, and 11.8–54.0% for GB men. Considering the median estimates derived from the collective set of studies reviewed, LB women were more likely to report CSA, ASA, LSA and IPSA than GB men, whereas GB men were more likely to report HC than LB women. Across all studies, the highest estimates reported were for LSA of LB women (85%), CSA of LB women (76.0%), and CSA of GB men (59.2%). Although the study was limited by not having a heterosexual control group, it showed alarmingly high rates of sexual assault, including childhood sexual assault, for this population.
Read more : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3118668/
Does Physical Abuse, Sexual Abuse, or Neglect in Childhood Increase the Likelihood of Same-sex Sexual Relationships and Cohabitation? A Prospective 30-year Follow-up
Findings
2010, psychologists Helen Wilson and Cathy S. Widom published a prospective 30-year follow-up study in children who underwent abuse or neglect during childhood between 1961-71 and were "followed up 30years later", along with non-maltreated counterparts. And the data shows a high correlation between childhood sex abuse and later same-sex relationship in "men" (than in women)
Readmore : https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19130206/
The Dubious Assessment of Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Adolescents of Add Health.
Findings
Surveys suggest that sexual desire may be fluid for a considerable number of individuals, especially among adolescents as they mature through the early stages of adult development. In this regard, opposite-sex attraction and identity seem to be more stable than same-sex or bisexual attraction and identity. This is suggested by data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (the “Add Health” study discussed earlier). This prospective longitudinal study of a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents starting in grades 7 – 12 began during the 1994 – 1995 school year, and followed the cohort into young adulthood, with four follow-up interviews (referred to as Waves I, II, III, IV in the literature). The most recent was in 2007 – 2008, when the sample was aged 24 – 32. Same-sex or both-sex romantic attractions were quite prevalent in the study’s first wave, with rates of approximately 7% for the males and 5% for the females. However, 80% of the adolescent males who had reported same-sex attractions at Wave I later identified themselves as exclusively heterosexual as young adults at Wave IV.
Read More : https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-013-0219-5
Sexual orientation is defined as ‘An inherent or immutable enduring emotional, romantic or sexual attraction to other people.’ Gender identity is one's innermost concept of self as male, female, a blend of both or neither – how individuals perceive themselves and what they call themselves. One's gender identity can be the same or different from their sex assigned at birth.
While sexual orientation is about who you want to be with, gender identity is about who you are. Humans have both a sexual orientation and a gender identity. It’s a common misconception that gender identity and sexual orientation are connected. If someone is transgender, for example, many people automatically assume that they must also be gay. That, however, is not the case. Gender and sexuality are different, and it’s an important distinction to understand.
Resources:
1.https://www.hrc.org/resources/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-terminology-and-definitions
3.https://ijrcenter.org/thematic-research-guides/sexual-orientation-gender-identity/
4.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-difference-between-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/
Currently, the world likes to consider gender (based on a social construct) as having nothing to do with sex (based on physicality), but the Bible makes no such distinctions.
• There are many who advocate a gender neutral society. There are others who feel they are stuck in the wrong kind of body. So is it true that a person is indeed born with the wrong gender?
• We acknowledge that a person can be born with a combination of male and female organs although one’s true, biological sex can be determined through medical tests. But apart from that many studies show that it is based on feelings of being born with a wrong gender rather than a play of genes or being born that way. Mismatch between biological sex and gender identity, culminating in its severest form as gender dysphoria, has been ascribed to mental disease, family dysfunction and childhood trauma. Our existence in a sin-filled and fallen world means that the distinction of what was once clear has now become ambiguous.
• Fundamental to our understanding of human sexuality is that God created two (and only two) genders. Satan attempts to deceive us and urges us to question God’s plan. One of the devil’s ploys is to make us dissatisfied with how God made us. To some he whispers, “You’re fat and ugly.” To others, “You’re stupid and clumsy.” And to still others, “You look like a boy, but you’re really a girl.” In each case, the underlying message is the same: “God messed up on you.”
• Each of us faces a different set of battles. Yet Christ sets us on the path to victory. Hebrews 12:1–2 states, “Let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” The cross is key. Jesus pioneered our faith, and He will perfect it. His victory will be ours as well.
Links :
1. https://www.gotquestions.org/born-wrong-gender.html
2. https://theconversation.com/how-genes-and-evolution-shape-gender-and-transgender-identity-108911
This discussion between Dr. Jordan Peterson and Dr. Miriam Grossman brings out the true story behind the Reimer twins. For those of you who are wondering what this case is all about David Reimer was a Canadian man born male but raised as a girl following medical advice and intervention after his penis was severely injured during a botched circumcision in infancy. The psychologist John Money oversaw the case and reported the reassignment as successful and as evidence that gender identity is primarily learned. Reimer's realization that he was not a girl crystallized between the ages of 9 and 11 year and he was back to living as a male by age 15. Well known in medical circles for years anonymously as the "John/Joan" case, Reimer later went public with his story to help discourage similar medical practices. At age 38, he committed suicide after suffering severe depression.
This story is being told so people can realize the serious mistakes that can be made by medical practitioners that can harm and scar a person for life. Sometimes medical mistakes are passed on as new theories and evidences without truly checking facts and reexamining victims.
Link to the discussion:
The monster behind gender theory and the lies it was based on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Zw1EdRKocI
Resources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer