You can purchase an autographed copy of Anything But Straight by sending a $35 check or money order to:
-------------------------
Wayne Besen
PO Box 25491
Brooklyn, NY 11202
One has to feel bad for the increasingly ridiculous "ex-gays," who continue to fight nature. A new study by Swedish researchers reveals that lesbians' brains react differently to sex hormones than those of heterosexual women. An earlier study of gay men also showed their brain response was different from straight men - an even stronger difference than has now been found in lesbians.
FACT: Sexual orientation is neither a choice, nor is it something that can be changed through prayer or therapy. All attempts to do so are rooted in shame, religious bigotry, political propaganda and ignorance.
6 Comments:
These latest findings will have no impact on people who still think the universe is only 5000 years old and that fossils and evolution are satanic tricks or God's way of testing their faith, or more accurately, their stupidity, ignorance, and gullibility. B. Queer
posted by Anonymous, at
5/09/2006 9:07 AM
Ultimately, it should not matter if homosexuality is caused by nature or nurture. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is simply wrong, period.
I fear the day, however, when prenatal genetic testing becomes available that can screen for sexual orientation. Will decisions to abort or not abort be made on the basis of a fetus' genetic composition? I'm pro-choice, but the thought is scary.
For the record, I believe entirely that homosexuality is of physical biological origin, and I disbelieve utterly in the "nurture" theories of the "reparative therapy" mob.
But those who espouse the latter will simply claim that the observed brain differences in this new study are due to nurture, not nature. They will say that the brain responses have BECOME different because of adherence to a lesbian identity and 'lifestyle'.
Imagine, for example, measuring the brain responses to a page of text, of people who had never been taught to read, and those who had. The responses will undoubtedly be different, yet no-one would claim that some are born Readers and some born Non-Readers!
As one additional small piece of evidence, however, this new study is interesting. Far too slight a foundation, though, upon which to build an edifice of any solidity.
For those who wish to read about the mass of evidence that has been accumulating on this topic over the last ten to twenty years, I recommend the book "Born Gay, The Psychobiology of Sex Orientation", published by Peter Owen press 2004.
It's written by two 'heavyweight' respectable academics. The entire trend of the studies of the last twenty years is pointing to Nature not Nurture.
posted by Anonymous, at
5/09/2006 1:39 PM
A new and widely reported Swedish study that suggests that lesbians respond differently from heterosexual women when exposed to sex hormones has been seriously misinterpreted, one of the researchers says.
The Associated Press story noted that a similar study was done last year on men, and that with the new female study, "the findings add weight to the idea that homosexuality has a physical basis and is not learned behavior."
In response to an e-mail inquiry from Grove City College Professor of Psychology Dr. Warren Throckmorton, researcher Dr. Ivanka Savic of the Stockholm Brain Institute said of the AP interpretation of her work, "This is incorrect and not stated in the paper."
The study was published in the May 9, 2006, edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, although the link to the piece was not available at the academy's website as of yesterday.
The AP report was carried widely in major newspapers and on television and radio. Most reports cited the study as more "evidence" for a genetic or biological cause for homosexuality without noting that no credible study suggesting direct biological causes has ever been replicated and that many have been refuted.
The Swedish study merely found that lesbians respond differently, not that their brains were hardwired that way before any sexual activity. Recent brain research also shows that brain patterns may emerge in response to certain activities.
"It's reasonable to believe that prior sexual behavior would predict future sexual responses," Throckmorton said.
Here is Monday's posting on Dr. Throckmorton's blogsite. In italics is the e-mail he sent to Dr. Ivanka Savic about the study of lesbians' response to putative pheromones. Her responses to each of his queries follows in capital block letters:
Dr. Savic:
The Associated Press story came out today about your study and I think they have reported it incorrectly.
First I am wondering if you can help me understand things more clearly. I am enclosing a link to the AP report:
First, in the report the reporter writes: "It's a finding that adds weight to the idea that homosexuality has a physical underpinning and is not learned behavior."
THIS IS INCORRECT AND NOT STATED IN THE PAPER
As I understand your article in PNAS, you specifically offer learning as a hypothesis for your findings. Isn't this true? I believe the reporter is misleading on that point.
THIS IS VERY UNFORTUNATE; AND YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT
Second, the AP report says: "In lesbians, both male and female hormones were processed the same, in the basic odor processing circuits, Savic and her team reported." I understand that the study did show that AND (male condition) was processed akin to other odors by lesbians. But wasn't there also some hypothalamic processing of EST (female condition) by lesbians?
YES! AND ALSO CONJUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS SHOWED A COMMON HYPOTHALAMIC CLUSTER IN THE HYPOTHALAMUS
It was weaker and apparently not in the anterior hypothalamus but didn't you also find dorsomedial and paraventricular hypothalamic activation? So it would be inaccurate, would it not, to say "both male and female hormones were processed the same?"
YOU ARE FULLY CORRECT
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HOW DO I ACCESS THE AP REPORT??
Dr. Throckmorton told Concerned Women for America's Culture & Family Institute yesterday that he had just sent the correspondence to Associated Press yesterday morning and was in dialogue with a reporter about it.
A common flaw in interpreting "gay gene" studies is the supposition that supposed differences in the brain are genetic in origin rather than the result of behavioral change.
Dr. Savic "did not want to create the impression that the study proves sexual response is not learned. In fact, [the Swedish research team] seems pretty open to plausible interpretations. However, at present, from this study, nothing definitive can be concluded," Throckmorton said.
The trend in research suggesting the idea that homosexuality is inborn began in 1991, with the publication in the journal Science about differences in the hypothalamus portion of the brain. Authored by Salk Research Institute's Dr. Simon LeVay, it became a media sensation.
LeVay evaluated the brains from the corpses of 35 men – 19 homosexuals and 16 alleged heterosexuals – and found that a set of nodules in the hypothalamus was generally larger in the "straight" men than in the homosexual men. However, LeVay noted many exceptions to the finding, and later admitted that he had no way of determining the "sexual orientation" of the heterosexual sample, six of whom were white men from the San Francisco Bay area who had died of AIDS-related causes. He said he designated the "heterosexual" sample as such because most people are straight. He also issued this warning after the media declared his study as proof that people are born "gay":
It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain .... Since I looked at adult brains, we don't know if the differences I found were there at birth, or if they appeared later.
Similarly, all the subjects in the Swedish study were sexually experienced, Throckmorton noted. So any differences could have developed as a result of exposure to certain behaviors rather than constitute evidence of cause.
For more information on the claims of "gay gene" research, see the Culture & Family Institute Special Report "Born or Bred: Science Does Not Support the Claim that Homosexuality Is Genetic."
Robert Knight is director of the Culture & Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America.
posted by Anonymous, at
5/10/2006 10:12 AM
as the anonymous person who posted the entire WND article points out, this study does not PROVE a biological basis to orientation.
True. But it is yet one more study that draws correlations between orientation and brain function. My favorite, because it cannot be dismissed as being a result rather than cause based relationship is the observations of chromosomes in the MOTHERS of gay men.
At some point you have to begin saying to the no-gay-gene crowd "it looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, it walks like a duck, yeah maybe I can't absolutely prove it's not really a kangaroo but I'm betting on duck"
I think the important thing to remember is that when the ex-gay groups say that homosexuality is a choice, what they really mean is that homosexuality is a SIN.
posted by Anonymous, at
5/16/2006 1:25 PM
