From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew Solovay)
Subject: Re: Heredity of homosexuality
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 19:50:04 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Summary: "Nature Made Me This Way"

In article <1992Aug28.225002.9703@athena.mit.edu> chromos@athena.mit.edu (Wesley Y Miyazaki) writes:
>In article <78584@ut-emx.uucp> zeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mark Gansle) writes:
>>
>>There is in fact little evidence to support the idea that homosexuality
>>is hereditary ("nature made me this way").  The best anyone can come up
>>with is a statistical *correlation* between the size of a gland in the
>>brain and homosexuality.  There is no evidence for causation in any
>>form.  Also, a twins study with about 50% match-up of homosexual twins
>>is often cited as evidence, but of course that fifty percent is not a
>>very strong indicator of heredity.  Even if we assume heredity, we're
>>left with the conclusion that a large percentage were anle to *choose*
>>not to be homosexual.
>>
>>And therein lies the difference between racism and discrimination
>>against homosexuals.  One is proven to be hereditary and so cannot be
>>changed and is not a subject for ridicule.  The other seems very likely
>>to be a personal choice, and like all personal choices, is subject to
>>judgment. 
>
>Yuck. As a geneticist-soon-to-be, I hate it when people try to use
>pseudo-genetics to 'prove' a point. 
>
> [WYM makes lots of very good points]
>
Well, here's my $0.02:

Many people (e.g. Mark Gansle) are confusing two separate issues. One
is whether homosexuality has a genetic basis (i.e., whether one can be
genetically predisposed to homosexuality). The other is whether it is
a "choice" that can be changed. These issues are entirely separate.

For example, one reason the recent brain studies (like Le Vay's) were
interesting is that they indicated a possible physical basis for
(male) homosexuality. Now, even if it could be proven that the
physiological differences were the cause of homosexual orientation and
not the effect, this still would prove nothing about whether
homosexuality had a genetic basis. The brain thingy could be the
result of ewnvironment (whether social environment in childhood, or
hormonal environment in utero). Nevertheless, even if the physical
change were environmentally caused, it would be valid to claim that
"nature made me this way."

On the other hand, even if there was clear evidence of a gene which
predisposed its bearers to homosexuality, there would always be choice
involved. The majority of us are attracted (at least in some degree)
to both sexes. F'r'instance, when I was religious (Orthodox Jewish), I
knew that I was attracted to both men and women. I accepted that I
would be unable to act on some of that attraction. Now that I am no
longer religious, I don't have to limit myself. Of course, there are
the occasional extreme cases (for example, there must have been *some*
entirely straight men in classical Athens), but one can always choose
celibacy. We should not hide behind the "nature made me this way"
argument.  Or contention ought to be that it's nobody else's business
who we have sex with, and the government ought not to set up standards
of behaviour. I *did* choose this life (or "lifestyle"); you got a
problem with that?
-- 
Andrew M. Solovay       "Work is the curse of the drinking class."
solovay@netcom.com			--Wilde

#include <disclaimer.h>