Study: Sexual identity hard-wired by genetics

[melon]

The main reason for this study, it appears, was to help perfect techniques for proper gender assignment for pseudohermaphrodism, where an individual is born with both underdeveloped testicles/penis and ovaries/uterus.

Study: Sexual identity hard-wired by genetics


LOS ANGELES, California (Reuters) --Sexual identity is wired into the genes, which discounts the concept that homosexuality and transgender sexuality are a choice, California researchers reported on Monday.

"Our findings may help answer an important question -- why do we feel male or female?" Dr. Eric Vilain, a genetics professor at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine, said in a statement. "Sexual identity is rooted in every person's biology before birth and springs from a variation in our individual genome."

His team has identified 54 genes in mice that may explain why male and female brains look and function differently.

Since the 1970s, scientists have believed that estrogen and testosterone were wholly responsible for sexually organizing the brain. Recent evidence, however, indicates that hormones cannot explain everything about the sexual differences between male and female brains.

Published in the latest edition of the journal Molecular Brain Research, the UCLA discovery may also offer physicians an improved tool for gender assignment of babies born with ambiguous genitalia.

Mild cases of malformed genitalia occur in 1 percent of all births -- about 3 million cases. More severe cases -- where doctors can't inform parents whether they had a boy or girl -- occur in one in 3,000 births.

"If physicians could predict the gender of newborns with ambiguous genitalia at birth, we would make less mistakes in gender assignment," Vilain said.

Using two genetic testing methods, the researchers compared the production of genes in male and female brains in embryonic mice -- long before the animals developed sex organs.

They found 54 genes produced in different amounts in male and female mouse brains, prior to hormonal influence. Eighteen of the genes were produced at higher levels in the male brains; 36 were produced at higher levels in the female brains.

"We discovered that the male and female brains differed in many measurable ways, including anatomy and function." Vilain said.

For example, the two hemispheres of the brain appeared more symmetrical in females than in males. According to Vilain, the symmetry may improve communication between both sides of the brain, leading to enhanced verbal expressiveness in females.

"This anatomical difference may explain why women can sometimes articulate their feelings more easily than men," he said.

The scientists plan to conduct further studies to determine the specific role for each of the 54 genes they identified.

"Our findings may explain why we feel male or female, regardless of our actual anatomy," said Vilain. "These discoveries lend credence to the idea that being transgender --- feeling that one has been born into the body of the wrong sex -- is a state of mind."

Melon

 

[najeena]

Makes sense to me.

 

[Blacksword]

Well that doesn't preclude that sexual identity can be rewired by negative life experience. I would say the whole transgender thing by its very nature is genetic. But homosexuality is a somewhat different phenomenon. The geneder identity can be pretty much intact. You have males or females who still behave largely as males or females (some more than others) and think of themselves as male or female. Their difference is that they prefer their own gender sexually, not that their whole gender notion differs from their physicality. Definitley a cerain percentage of homosexuals are as they are due to genetics. However the number of children who are sexually abused who grow up to be homosexual indicates that genetics isn't the only cause. Unless you suppose that say male sexual predators are able to identify only homosexual boys as their victims.

 

[melon]

However the number of children who are sexually abused who grow up to be homosexual indicates that genetics isn't the only cause.

There are plenty of children who are sexually abused and turn out perfectly heterosexual (and, if you don't believe me, I live in Boston, the land of the Roman Catholic sex abuse scandals, and all the news reports featuring abuse victims are now married men). This is, scientifically, a weak argument, and, by sheer probability, it is certainly likely that sexual predators have victimized individuals who were going to be homosexual anyway.

Melon

 

[Blacksword]

Until a proper set of studies are done we can't be sure. Also keep in mind different people respond to teh same event very differently. I'm not saying that sexual abuse automatically equals homosexuality. I personally find it less likely that sexual predators would only home in on gay boys. What about the hockey coach instances where much of the team are abused. In the end we don't know yet. But I find gaydar a tad improbable for all cases.

 

[melon]

Until a proper set of studies are done we can't be sure. Also keep in mind different people respond to teh same event very differently. I'm not saying that sexual abuse automatically equals homosexuality. I personally find it less likely that sexual predators would only home in on gay boys. What about the hockey coach instances where much of the team are abused. In the end we don't know yet. But I find gaydar a tad improbable for all cases.

I think you're making up these things to reflect your own personal biases. Most sexual abuse victims grow up heterosexual, reflective of the general population. Do some victims grow up homosexual? Yes. But is it likely that they would have grown up homosexual regardless, like all the other non-abused homosexuals in the world? Probably.

Anyway, this is not what this study was concerned with.

Melon

 

[bonoman]

"Study"

I am not talking directly about this case. But "Study" to me has lost its meaning. There is a study for everything in this world. If i were to believe gays had a higher probability to commit sexual abuse i could probably find someone to do an Study to prove me right. Studies to me are meaningless.

This is not particular to this case but to all cases. There are too many people with motives in this world to really believe anything anyone says.

Sorry but a "study" wouldnt make me change my mind on anything.

 

[Blacksword]

I'm all in favour of studies, so long as their done by third parties and there are several done on the same thing to avoid fluke results and biases. It's like a scientific experement, there needs to be repeatablity of results to prove anything. I just want more data. I would like to see the stats on percentages of sexuall-abused children who do grow up homosexual. I do have somewhat of a bias, and that's one reason why I'd like more data to see if my reasoning flawed or not.

 

[diamond]

"Study"

I am not talking directly about this case. But "Study" to me has lost its meaning. There is a study for everything in this world. If i were to believe gays had a higher probability to commit sexual abuse i could probably find someone to do an Study to prove me right. Studies to me are meaningless.

This is not particular to this case but to all cases. There are too many people with motives in this world to really believe anything anyone says.

Sorry but a "study" wouldnt make me change my mind on anything.

I agree w/this.
I think a lot of "studies" are agenda-oriented and motivated, the same w/polling..

My question is ..if we are all hard wired to be straight or gay where do the Bi-Sexuals fit in, or the Bi-Curious crowd fit in?

Are the people who possess these genes have genes that are too sexy for themselves..?

Apparently there are no easy answers.

DB9

 

[Basstrap]

there are such things as 'good' studies.

one can determine themselves whether a study is good or not by analyzing the methods

 

[melon]

Jesus...take a fucking college-level genetics class. It would do many of you a world of good. There's a reason why they don't craft studies around personal bigotry, and you're ignoring one simple fact: the intersexed (a.k.a., pseudohermaphrodism, "hermaphrodites") *do* exist, and all the willful blindness in the world isn't going to change that.

But go back to reading your Bibles then; I'm *really sure* that people 2500 years ago knew *much* more than we do now.

Melon

 

[Blacksword]

The problem is that people, the meida especially take one study as authoritative just because it says something new, or shocking. People need to be educated on the scientific method, where repeatability is key. No study's findingsshould be published without being independently verified and it's results checked by subsequent studies carried out by different people. The problem is people are impatient and they want some answere now, before any of the data has been verified. If studies were done more scientifically they'd get more respect.

Human sexuality is somethign far too complex to be resolved in a single study. It is going to take decades for us to get anything approaching a solid understanding, starting from almost complete ignorance as we did. That's one thing I applaud my church for, it has an ongoing commitee on human sexuality which makes reports every four years as more data comes in and has kept the issue open for debate rather than making any final decisions. I'm not making any final decisions either. I don't have en ough data.

 

[Basstrap]

the only studies which can maybe be overlooked immediately are those funded by a corporation who is seeking certain results.

this study does not appear to be one of those

however, I agree that many more studies finding similar results will be needed before it can be deemed credible.

I have a biochemistry degree and I know that one study can find something completely the opposite of another.
it's all in the method

 

[melon]

Human sexuality is somethign far too complex to be resolved in a single study. It is going to take decades for us to get anything approaching a solid understanding, starting from almost complete ignorance as we did. That's one thing I applaud my church for, it has an ongoing commitee on human sexuality which makes reports every four years as more data comes in and has kept the issue open for debate rather than making any final decisions. I'm not making any final decisions either. I don't have en ough data.

"Your Church." Call me skeptical off the bat, but if you think scientists are biased, then you've seen nothing yet with churches.

But I would be interested to know what church you are referring to.

Melon

 

[melon]

My question is ..if we are all hard wired to be straight or gay where do the Bi-Sexuals fit in, or the Bi-Curious crowd fit in?

There are 54 genes and multiple combinations. Do the math.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

It strikes me that the reporter is making conclusions not intended/supported by the study. Even the the doctor conducting the study merely speculated that the findings "may explain" transgender issues.

To then extend this to sexual orientation, based on this study alone, is speculation upon speculation.

I hope these studies do help the medical community in ambiguous genitalia at birth cases.

 

[Angela Harlem]

I dont like these studies much as they can lend to the 'lets fix this' issue in the long run. That is more for, in this case, the homosexuality aspect. I'd guess with the transgender part there is something there that could possibly be explained scientifically. I have to admit I am overall ignorant of the whole transgender issue having only known one person who went through this. With her (now him) there was definately more than just a psychological battle going on and after he had his surgery and endless and ongoing hormone therapy he was more man than a lot of blokes I know. It was (again I hate to admit) a fascinating process to watch him go through. From knowing him as 'Samantha' to eventually a pretty blokey 'Nick' was very interesting. Took a lot more than guts to go through it too.

 

[Blacksword]

Geeze I coulda sworn I made apost here a few hour ago... oh well just have to make it again.

The writer of the article has drawn additional conclusions. The scientific study in the article deals with gender identity. While sexual orientation is related to gender identity the two are not one and the same. What this study indicates that gender identity and thus the condition of being transgender is genetic. While this opens up the possibility that sexual orientation is also defined this way, that is beyond the scope of this study.

My church Melon is the Presbyterian Church in Canada. This year the comitee of the study of human sexuality decided to uphold the judgement that practicing homosexuals cannot be ordained. But it did hold up that homosexuals could hold other possitions within the church and that homosexual persons were to be accepted into the church community and given equal ataus within the church. Scriptural interpretation yeilded that to our present understanding as a church homosexual sexual union is a sin. However it was decided that that sexual orientation is innate and not a decision or a "lifestyle choice". It also recommended against conversion programmes. The report also recoomeded that study continue, this was accepted. That's what i got in quick read of the report, you can find it here as a pdf file http://www.presbycan.ca/documents/r...xuality"&order=dd&id=607948514444087c&cmd=xml

Basically the church is stuck at the point I am. One of the main reasons for avoiding a truly definite finding was that such a finding either way would inevitably produce a schism in our church, or explode it the way the United Church did. So basically the finding was, lets practice love and tollerance while keeping th estaus quo until we know more. Hardly the best solution but he one decided to cause teh least friction or immediate damage to the community.

 

[RavenStar]

or maybe we are all bisexual but choose to only accept the hetero/homosexual parts of us. You never know. We never know anything. Thats why I dont like studies. I dont need all these answers. That sounds very hypocritical coming froma girl who stays up night wondering about where light goes when you turn the flashlight off.

 

[anitram]

Sorry but a "study" wouldnt make me change my mind on anything.

So, in other words, all the cancer, AIDS, diabetes, Alzheimer's, mental illness, MS, etc, etc studies don't tell you anything? You're not convinced that more women suffer from AD than men or that juvenile diabetes is on the rise?

What the heck is the scientific community doing all those studies for? Fun?

 

[melon]

Geeze I coulda sworn I made apost here a few hour ago... oh well just have to make it again.

The writer of the article has drawn additional conclusions. The scientific study in the article deals with gender identity. While sexual orientation is related to gender identity the two are not one and the same. What this study indicates that gender identity and thus the condition of being transgender is genetic. While this opens up the possibility that sexual orientation is also defined this way, that is beyond the scope of this study.

My church Melon is the Presbyterian Church in Canada. This year the comitee of the study of human sexuality decided to uphold the judgement that practicing homosexuals cannot be ordained. But it did hold up that homosexuals could hold other possitions within the church and that homosexual persons were to be accepted into the church community and given equal ataus within the church. Scriptural interpretation yeilded that to our present understanding as a church homosexual sexual union is a sin. However it was decided that that sexual orientation is innate and not a decision or a "lifestyle choice". It also recommended against conversion programmes. The report also recoomeded that study continue, this was accepted. That's what i got in quick read of the report, you can find it here as a pdf file http://www.presbycan.ca/documents/r...xuality"&order=dd&id=607948514444087c&cmd=xml

Basically the church is stuck at the point I am. One of the main reasons for avoiding a truly definite finding was that such a finding either way would inevitably produce a schism in our church, or explode it the way the United Church did. So basically the finding was, lets practice love and tollerance while keeping th estaus quo until we know more. Hardly the best solution but he one decided to cause teh least friction or immediate damage to the community.

Thanks for the explanation.

Melon

 

[Basstrap]

what I find odd is that some christians allow that being homosexual in and of itself is acceptable but then they oppose their union.

this seems contradictory to me

 

[BVS]

what I find odd is that some christians allow that being homosexual in and of itself is acceptable but then they oppose their union.

this seems contradictory to me

It's just a mask. You can't truly "accept" people and then deny them rights.

 

[bonoman]

So, in other words, all the cancer, AIDS, diabetes, Alzheimer's, mental illness, MS, etc, etc studies don't tell you anything? You're not convinced that more women suffer from AD than men or that juvenile diabetes is on the rise?

What the heck is the scientific community doing all those studies for? Fun?

In my opinion this study is something that i think is a choice. Not genetics. Others think differently. A study wont change my mind.

Also, Melon, because some of us havent taken genetics courses doesnt invalidate our opinions. I feel you think some of us arent smart enough to talk on 'your' level.

 

[BVS]

In my opinion this study is something that i think is a choice. Not genetics. Others think differently. A study wont change my mind.

So for this paticular study you'll deny any truth that could be there but otherwise you're O.K? So what happens if it moves beyond a study?

 

[bonoman]

I never said that. But when i turn on the news and their leading story is Cancer breakthrough and i listen to what is said and it is said that it is in the early stages or something to that effect then i get pissed off. i am turned off studies. They usually turn out to be attention grabbers or make for good headlines but in the end have nothing that is of subsatnce, not saying that some do but i dont have the time to be reading through every study done to find out what the truths and the fictions are. If it is something that can shange my life then i would expect it to have a difference in my life (if it even does effect my life, and this is mostly talking about medical studies.)

I dont have the time to be looking into each study to find out if they are put on by people with agendas and you might not even find out if they are.

So, right or wrong, i paint them all with the same brush and dismiss them until they affect me in a way i must become interested.

 

[Basstrap]

bonoman, that is ridiculous..and an offense to all biochem, chemistry, biology, and physics majors out there....if fact...it's an offense to ever field of study both arts and science.

we would still be in the stone age if it wasn't for "studies"

your outlook on them is surprisingly naive