Tuesday, March 14, 2006
(Weekly Column)Gay men are limp-wristed and may have a Queen Gene, according to a controversial segment on
CBS's 60 Minutes, "The Science of Sexual Orientation." The show suggests that gay men are prissy and prance and wear lavender pants while they lisp and dance. Which can certainly be true, in some cases, but is this just crass stereotyping masquerading as science?
The segment featured two sets of twins. The fist pair - Adam and Jared - was nine years old. Jared was tough as nails and had a collection of G.I. Joes, while Adam painted his nails and dreamt of pantyhose.
Steve and Greg, the second pair of twins, were adults. Steve, who is straight, grew up playing sports, while gay Greg "liked helping out in the kitchen."
The idea of studying identical twins is to show that upbringing has nothing to do with the outcome of sexual orientation. Indeed, one has to be
a dolt with
an agenda to still believe the outdated myth that homosexuality is caused by bad parenting.
"Psychologists used to believe homosexuality was caused by nurture - namely overbearing mothers and distant fathers - but that theory has been disproved," reporter Leslie Stahl authoritatively said. "Today, scientists are looking at genes, environment, brain structure and hormones. There is one area of consensus: that homosexuality involves more than just sexual behavior;
it's physiological."
Identical twins with differing sexual orientations suggest that there are other factors at work than just genes.
"There's also the environment that happens to us while we're in the womb," said Northwestern University researcher Michael Bailey in the segment. "And scientists are realizing that environment is much more important than we ever thought it was."
Michigan State University's Marc Breedlove drove home this point by showing Stahl how he can take a rat that scurries and make him sashay with a shot of hormones or castration.
"I wouldn't call these gay rats," explained Breedlove, who has the perfect name for a vermin sex researcher. "But I would say that these are genetic male rats who are showing much more feminine behavior."
The show also pointed out that for every older brother a man has, his chances of being gay increase by one-third. Additionally, Bailey addressed the lie that gay men are more promiscuous by nature. He said both gay and straight men are "shallow" and tend to focus on looks, but gay men simply have more opportunity.
"They're [gay men] just more successful at it, because the people they're trying to have sex with are also interested in it," Bailey said.
I applaud this dose of truth, because anyone who has spent five minutes around straight men, know that they are just as frisky as their gay counterparts. The only people who deny this are uptight fundamentalists. And they are really no different, except they have hang-ups and feel guilty after the sex.
Whether Bailey has hit the scientific jackpot or is a
crackpot is open for
debate. Many people bristle, for example, when he claims that gay people walk and talk differently. True, one's gaydar does not have to be finely tuned to figure out Richard Simmons or Clay Aiken is gay. Oh, wait, is Clay gay?
Before Bailey makes such
broad assumptions, however, he should put on football pads and collide with former NFL player
Esera Tuaolo. This might rattle him out of his one-dimensional mind-set and lead him to expand his research to include gay and lesbian people who are not borderline transgender.
There are
also critics who rightfully question Bailey's potentially
dark motives. He once told
The New York Times that if it became possible for parents to determine sexual orientation in the womb than, "selecting for heterosexuality seems to be morally acceptable....Selection for heterosexuality may tangibly benefit parents, children and their families and seems to have only a slight potential for any significant harm."
"His research is highly questionable," said Lisa Mottet, a transgender rights attorney with the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force."Bailey's work is simply not credible." NGLTF has criticized his research on transgender people and bisexuals calling it shoddy and filled with unscientific assumptions.
Still, the 60 Minutes segment, as a whole, was very helpful to the gay rights movement. It brusquely dismissed the inane pseudo-science of our opponents. But in the process of neutralizing the right, it neutered gay men. While we are cheering the segment, Bailey should know that most of us aren't using pompoms.
VIDEO LINK
42 Comments:
Interesting.
George W. Bush, when essentially asked "Why do people become gay" (in his debate with John F. Kerry in '04) said: "I don't know".
Isn't that pretty much what this 60 minutes piece said as well?
Weird thing...Dr. Kenneth Kendler did research on identical twins where at least one is gay. In his results (released in 2000), he concluded that if you're gay and an identical twin, your identical twin has a less than 1/3 of a chance to be gay. It might have made for a much stronger segment had they interviewed two identical twins rather than non-monozygotic fraternal ones.
posted by , at
3/14/2006 1:03 PM
"I dont know" is the most accurate thing george bush could say about anything and everything!
And kurt you can start signing your name again, we know it's you because you almost always start every post with that annoying 'interesting' or 'fascinating'. Neither of which you are.
Bitchard Queer
posted by , at
3/14/2006 2:04 PM
What I took away from the piece was continuing respect for scientific study as opposed to religious lunatics with a god hates Adam and Steve agenda.
Also in terms of scientific study, the piece lent confirmaiton to ideas of genetic and in-the-womb determination, clearly long before any opportunity to (shudder!) "choose the gay lifestyle."
posted by , at
3/14/2006 2:12 PM
I agree with you, how do you define a gay guy. they can be very masculine or feminine. you can not tell if a guy is gay or not?? We all look alike!!
posted by , at
3/14/2006 4:01 PM
Who are you people kidding?? I can spot a damn queer anywhere. They stand out like a sparkler on a dark country night. That is why are they called FLAMERS.Get it???
Red -- Alabama
posted by , at
3/14/2006 5:11 PM
" 'Psychologists used to believe homosexuality was caused by nurture - namely overbearing mothers and distant fathers - but that theory has been disproved,' reporter Leslie Stahl authoritatively said."
With all due respect. I'm not sure who disproved this theory - not that I'm happy in using the word 'theory' at all!
I blog on Evolution but one of my other interests is in the evolutionary origins of psychological trauma which originates within the 'old mammalian brain' - and thereby gives an indication of how long it has been part of Man's heritage.
I know 'homosexuals' who are self-aware of the psychological harm they acquired during childhood and I also know homeophobes who are unaware that their hatred stems from mal-adjustment to an acquired psychological history of their own!
posted by John Latter, at
3/14/2006 5:25 PM
Besen sez, "The idea of studying identical twins is to show that upbringing has nothing to do with the outcome of sexual orientation. Indeed, one has to be a dolt with an agenda to still believe the outdated myth that homosexuality is caused by bad parenting."
What about good parenting? Why jump to the assumption that if a particular sort of parenting did cause homosexuality, that parenting would be bad parenting? Now who's homophobic?
posted by , at
3/14/2006 6:58 PM
How stupid is the previous poster? Besen is not stating his opinion, but what the right wing says about homosexuality.
Some people have about two brain cells. I'm always amazed by how obtuse some fools are.
Fred
Seattle
posted by , at
3/14/2006 8:17 PM
Gender identity and stereotypically "gay" behaviours occur in the hetero population as well as the gay population. One of my best friends actually is one of the "gayest" acting heteros I know, and he is 110% hetero. One cannot pinpoint gender behaviours or mannerisms and link those to orientation. Orientation is a much more complex physiological phenomenon that goes beyond what we see on the outside. Same with the millions of same sex oriented humans who exhibit ultra masculine (men) or ultra feminine (women) behaviours. Family dynamics do not in any way, affect a complex physiological response as sexual attraction. The over-bearing mother/distant father hypothesis may affect some areas such as self-esteem or motivation, but sexual attraction, I highly doubt that. I find that people who do believe this to be the cause of sexual orientation require some basic education in physiology and sexual response. They also need to get out there and actually talk to gay people instead of being an armchair critic without any first hand accounts. Listening to the likes of Jerry Falwell and James Dobson is not the way to become educated about anything, other than financial matters (giving away hard-earned dollars to greedy, power hungry phonies).
posted by , at
3/14/2006 9:32 PM
John Latter -- I wouln't call it a theory either...
The hypothesis that family dynamics (specifically, bad ones) caused homosexuality was a direct result of psych. professionals applying their anti-homosexual minds during an anti-homosexual era. They didn't question that the people they saw in their clinics were indeed mentally ill / had poor childhoods etc but unrepresentative of gay men and women as a whole.
Bell and Weinberg effectively destroyed the hypothesis some 30 years ago with the publication of Homosexualities.
As the title suggests, they deliberately sought out a range of people and expressions. They found no connection to family dynamics. The study is not useful for wider application (as it examined the bar culture of 1970's San Francisco...), but would have been able to find common family-nurture heritages etc if such things had existed.
Apart from all that -- why do some seem to insist that gender and sexual attraction are one and the same thing? They may instead be viewed as an intersect of two different traits.
Even if one was to find, as example, that gay men are indeed less or more "masculine" than straight men (and a mirror for lesbians) this does not address the fact that both gay and straight men display a full range of gender-typical attributes. That alone questions assumptions about direct linkage between gender non-conformity and sexual attraction per se.
posted by grantdale, at
3/14/2006 10:39 PM
It's a bit odd to mention one study done in the late 1970s as absolute proof that there is no connection between family dynamics and sexual preference. It's reasonably well known that different studies often produce different results. Presumably then one needs to consider the results of more than a single study?
Take a look at the summary of the state of sexual orientation research on Simon LeVay's home page (http://members.aol.com/slevay/page22.html). LeVay mentions several studies that showed that homosexual men did tend to have close mother/distant father type family relationships. LeVay 's comments on this point show that it's an open question whether or not family dynamics are a cause.
Anyone who wants confirmation on this can ask LeVay himself, and if you ask politely I'm sure he'll respond.
posted by , at
3/14/2006 11:52 PM
Anonymous, perhaps is you'd actually read LeVay's page you would know that he has compiled a list. It's a history page.
Read what he really thinks down the end of the page. It is dishonest to present LeVay otherwise.
Bell and Weinberg (and Hammersmith) were merely the first to conduct such a large study on the subject and use pathway analysis. That was both innovative (for the soft sciences) and much repeated since. The weight of literature supports the findings.
The fact the study was available nearly 30 years ago, and has been accepted ever since, simply indicates that those who continue to cling to claims about "family nurture" are slow learners. Or deliberate.
posted by grantdale, at
3/15/2006 12:38 AM
Anonymous stated: LeVay mentions several studies that showed that homosexual men did tend to have close mother/distant father type family relationships
Even if that statement were factual, it is rather erroneous to conclude that it has causation. As many heterosexual people experience some of those same dynamics in families as gay s who experience a balanced parenthood between mother and father. Family relationships do not determine sexual orientation, genetics and hormonal influences do. Sexuality is largely a phyiological response involving hormonal influence on blood flow patterns to the sexual organs. Arousal comes from stimuli and in gay people, it comes from sexual attraction to others of the same gender. It is complex and is not completely understood. Supression of those arousal patterns will not make them go away or "cure" them as groups such as exodus and focus on the family (love won out) mislead the public into believing and exploit the fears of vulnerable people. Especially parents, who these dishonest people usually blame for sexual orientation patterns in their offspring. It is like blaming parents for giving their offspring an undesirable (whatever that is) bodytype or hair colour. More often than not, accounts from actual gay people who really are the only "experts" in this debate, are very similar: awareness of same sex orientation goes back as far as the development of rational thought. This is prior to the influx of negative stereotypes or the negative influence of centuries old/hopelessly outdated and culturally biased religious beliefs. The 60 minutes show was unique in that accounts from actual gay people were cited rather than biased politically driven doctrine of religous hate groups.
posted by , at
3/15/2006 12:59 AM
Anonymous stated: LeVay mentions several studies that showed that homosexual men did tend to have close mother/distant father type family relationships.
Which would make these gay men just like the vast majority of hetero men. The distant-father thing is so typical as to be virtually an archetype.
posted by , at
3/15/2006 2:53 AM
In response to grantdale - I have to suggest it's you who has a reading comprehension problem, not me.
posted by , at
3/15/2006 3:25 AM
Again, Anonymous:LeVay mentions several studies that showed that homosexual men did tend to have close mother/distant father type family relationships.
It is erroneous to draw conclusions in regards to family dynamics having causation in sexual orientation (it is not preference as you stated earlier). Read some factual information about human physiology to understand human sexual stimulus-response patterns. It is ludicrous to suggest that parental relationships could possibly influence this complex physiological phenomenon in people. Please stop blaming parents for the physiology of their offspring. Thankyou.
posted by , at
3/15/2006 8:27 AM
"Which would make these gay men just like the vast majority of hetero men. The distant-father thing is so typical as to be virtually an archetype. "
Weird thing...I've never read a biography of a gay man who had a close relationship with his father.
Whereas on straight men I've seen some very close relationships with their dads, even in some cases I didn't expect it, such as Alice Cooper and his father who was a fundamentalist minister.
posted by , at
3/15/2006 9:15 AM
"Weird thing...I've never read a biography of a gay man who had a close relationship with his father."
What a joke. You obviously don't read very much. On this very web-site, Wayne has discussed many times his close relationship with his father.
Time to wake-the-fuck-up!
posted by , at
3/15/2006 9:40 AM
Weird thing...I've never read a biography of a gay man who had a close relationship with his father.
Sit back, relax, anonymous, the first sentence of my biography: Throughout my life, my father has been a central figure, a man I always admired, a man who always, in many ways, showed his unconditional love for his son.
There you have it...
posted by , at
3/15/2006 9:44 AM
Well, aren't some people childish. It's astounding that anyone can seriously claim that your relationship with your parents can't possibly influence your sexual preference, because sexuality is physiological! Guess what: because we don't have disembodied minds, everything we do and are is 'physiological.' So, therefore, by that reasoning, your relationship with your parents couldn't influence anything. See the problem?
I am homosexual myself, by the way, for the benefit of those of you who told me to ask a gay person about homosexuality. I have first hand experience of what I am talking about.
Some of you other gay people may disagree with me about this issue, but it's possible that different gay people are gay for different reasons. Alternatively, some of us may have better insight into our own psychologies than others. Gee, I wonder which.
posted by , at
3/16/2006 10:44 PM
Wow, ok people, this is supposed to be a scientific discussion. i read through these and i find people sniping at one another. god people how bout a little emotional maturity? you'll be better people for it i assure you.
Now then, as to the issue at hand:
As far as I am able to discern in my little microcosm (my high school is a sociologists dream. its very diverse in many fascinating ways) i have been able to determine this.
(please don't hate me this is just an observation)
I have observed that stereotypes are true about 59% of the time. now, I myself am an androginous (i think i spelled that right...) open gay student. a vast majority of my friends are gay or bi (one of thems even a drag queen!).
Now for example, some of my male gay friends. they are (and i say this with endearment) gay as a spring rainbow with flying glitter. Ironically, most of my lesbian friends act VERY feminine. (well, they DO watch football, but no flannel or anything lol).
Oh, and another thing is that its impossible for it to be a psychological "problem" (Felps thinks its a problem, but who gives a crap about him anyway) because A. that would mean its reversable through therapy, which it doesnt (despite claims from a minute and highly publicized faction of "ex-gays")and B. that things such as parenting ARE in effect of a childs developing sexual identity. which is NOT true! as early as 3 i remember having some "gay" qualities. (i thought my mothers clip on earrings were the best toys in the universe & wore my mom's big pajama shirt regularly but hey it was comfy) and i didn't even feel any strong attachment to my mother until after she passed away shortly before my 7th birthday (hell of a present eh?)
so yeah, lots of theories, yet no one really knows what causes it. why worry about it?
OH and another thing, those people that are so against research that could lead to a "cure", why are you so against this? we have no idea WHY we are gay. if it IS a problem, then ok! fix it & move on. if it isnt a problem, SAME FREAKIN ADVICE!
Love
-Tommy
posted by , at
3/17/2006 12:11 AM
My earlier comment:The over-bearing mother/distant father hypothesis may affect some areas such as self-esteem or motivation, but sexual attraction, I highly doubt that.
Anonymous: Take the time to read posts before commenting. See above aspects that parenting does impact. Parenting cannot influence a person's physiology. Sexual arousal and experience is part of that physiology.
posted by , at
3/17/2006 8:23 AM
Red in Alabama - you can't "spot (a gay man) anywhere". My husband's cousin is gay and he's a big burly truck driver who acts and talks... like a big burly truck driver. I also have a straight male friend who is sort of feminine... but he's absolutely straight. Pull your stereotypes out of your ass and get a clue.
posted by , at
3/17/2006 10:37 AM
Yes, BC WaterBoy, I know what you think. You're repeating something you already said, but repeating it does not make it true. You don't have an argument.
You're only making assertions.
posted by , at
3/17/2006 3:17 PM
Anonymous: You don't have an argument.
I have a very valid argument that is based on scientific fact. Family influence on sexual orientation is based on assumption only and is biased to suit a religious-politically based agenda.
posted by , at
3/18/2006 1:14 AM
Waterboy, I believe your 'argument' was something about how there are two different components to human beings, one 'physiological' and the other 'psychological'. Since our minds are part of our bodies, this is a quite mistaken idea, and you should give it up.
posted by , at
3/18/2006 1:45 AM
Anonymous stated: Since our minds are part of our bodies, this is a quite mistaken idea, and you should give it up.
No, if you re-read what I said, sexuality is largely a physiological stimulus response mechanism and is not influenced by parental upbringing. Various parts of our personalities are, such as motivation and self-esteem. What I am refuting is that a person is gay because of his or her upbringing. I do not believe that those various theories are correct. If valid studies existed of family structure, one would find no difference in the sexuality of people regardless of the type of relationship one has with his or her parents. The sole purpose of the continued existance of those theories is to advance the religous-political idea that gays can and ought to change. That is completely false.
posted by , at
3/18/2006 8:57 AM
The entire human body is "a physiological stimulus response mechanism." What else do you think it is?
posted by , at
3/18/2006 3:15 PM
So I take that to mean that you buy into the absurd theories of Dr. James Dobson et al that gay people are the result of "bad parenting"? Other than that "anonymous",you really are not making any kind of a point.
posted by , at
3/18/2006 3:20 PM
Feel free to change the subject when you have been out-debated, Waterboy. You are only making a fool of yourself.
posted by , at
3/18/2006 3:27 PM
You call this a debate? You haven't answered a single post intelligently or provided any insight into what you are talking about.
posted by , at
3/18/2006 3:47 PM
No, I'm not calling this a 'debate.' It was you, not me, who used that word. I answered your argument, such as it was, but you didn't notice. Too bad.
Let me make another point to you - if sexual orientation (not 'sexuality', please, because that lumps together so many different things) is purely 'biological' (leaving aside the question of what difference there is supposed to be between the 'psychological' and the 'biological') then why is it that it can sometimes shift?
I ask because my sexuality some time ago shifted from exclusively homosexual to midway between homosexual and heterosexual. As per your theory, what happened? Do you think my hypothalamus suddenly changed shape? Did my genes spontaneously mutate? I have asked this question before, and no one has ever been able to answer it intelligently.
posted by , at
3/18/2006 11:13 PM
Anonymous:
I would suggest that you do some research on your own. There are a lot of great resources out there, one that deals with a myriad of health and science issues is medline plus, google them, and look up gay and lesbian health. They have some straight forward, unbiased information. Also, the American Psychiatric Association and American Medical Association have great resources as well. Stay away from the "family-values" websites because much of their information originates from the discredited homophobe, Paul Cameron and most of it is pure bullshit.
I'm actually a little surprised that you took such offence to my posts. I thought I was being succinct and straightforward, not offensive. I work in the health care field so I do know a bit about life science and didn't think that your personal attacks were warranted. The basis of my point of view is that sexuality is largely a physiological stimulus response and I do not believe: (1) that it is determined by parenting, (2) that is can be permanently changed as per the fraudulent ex-gay/pseudo christian movement, (3) that same sex orientation is shameful/sinful/taboo/unnatural. Yes, some sexual orientation is on a continum, but, that does not mean that your core orientation will or ought to change.
Good Luck with your research.
posted by , at
3/19/2006 9:35 AM
That was just a 'blah blah' type post to cover over the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
It really doesn't make sense to just repeat the same claims over and over and ignore obvious problems with and objections to those claims.
posted by , at
3/19/2006 2:43 PM
Anonymous, if you don't like what I have to say, don't read it.
posted by , at
3/19/2006 4:49 PM
A few questions Waterboy - when you say 'some sexual orientation is on a continuum' what are you saying? Are you acknowledging that change in sexual orientation may occur or are you just using a vague expression to avoid that question? Is a change from homosexual to bisexual 'a change in core orientation' or not? How do you define 'core orientation'? Finally, how the hell would you know about what might or might not occur to my sexual orientation in future?
posted by , at
3/19/2006 11:22 PM
Anonymous, go away. I don't really care about your orientation. I have my opinion, you have yours. Go back to praying the gay away if it works for you.
posted by , at
3/20/2006 8:55 AM
Your pathetic inability to defend your stupid dogmas when challenged is morbidly amusing.
posted by , at
3/20/2006 3:23 PM
Whatever.
posted by , at
3/20/2006 6:45 PM
ugg shoes
ugg boots
ugg
ugg sale
fake ugg
ugg store
ugg discount
men's ugg
womens ugg
buy ugg boots
ugg cardy
replica ugg
cheap ugg
ugg classic
Ugg Amelie Suede
UGG Bailey Button
UGG Classic Cardy
UGG Classic Crochet
UGG Classic Mini
UGG Classic Short
UGG Classic Tall
Ugg Gypsy Sandal
Ugg Halendi Sandal
UGG Hammond Slipper
UGG Infant's Erin Baby
UGG Layback Slipper
UGG Locarno
Ugg Matala Sandal
Ugg Napoule Sandal
UGG New style
UGG Nightfall
Ugg Persephone Sandal
Ugg Skimmer
UGG Sundance
Ugg Tasmina
UGG Ultra Short
UGG Ultra Tall
UGG Women's Coquette
UGG Women's Knightsbridg
UGG Women's Mayfaire
posted by Unknown, at
12/21/2009 9:19 PM
Do you know how to convert avi to iphone? here, i would like to recommend you this ultra AVI to iPhone converter, which can help you convert any avi file to iphone format easily and quickly, you can download it and have a wonderful try! you may also interested in iPhone to Mac Transfer and iPhone to Computer Transfer.
posted by Titanic, at
5/05/2010 1:37 AM
Video to iPad Converter is a very powerful DVD to iPad Converter tool. It can rip almost any kind of DVDs to iPad MP4 and convert DVD audio to iPad music MP3 file.
Video to iPad Converter converts any type of video file format, including DivX, XviD, MOV, rm, rmvb, MPEG, WMV, AVI, dvr-ms, MP4, TiVo, .mkv, etc., to iPad video format.
DVD to iPad Converter
Convert AVI to iPad
MKV to iPad
MPEG to iPad
MTS to iPad?
FLV to iPad?
WMV to iPad
VOB to iPad
posted by iPad Video Converter, at
11/11/2010 9:43 PM
<< Home
