June 26, 2006

• errr.. married with two two-headed boys, that is.
• Two tow-headed boys? *gotta stop watching the Italy/Australia match and typing at the same time*
• > Clues from the shape of ears ... all indicate that lesbians there are lesbian-shaped ears? who knew? man, don't hit on her. look at her ears, y'know. i don't think she's into guys.
• Damn! I was all excited about the possibility of pictures of two two-headed boys! My close gay friend has two older brothers. Make of that what you will. Interesting article.
• Where the hell is the science in this article?
• Unscientifically, of course, boys with older sisters were forced to wear makeup and go in drag every time there was a sleepover, so now there's a complete aversion to such things. Yeah, yeah, I know there's no relationship between drag and homosexuality. Just trying for a cheap laff. Ha.
• Oh, for fuck's sake.
• Oh, for fuck's sake.
• foetal testosterone exposure Anyone else initially read that as fatal testosterone exposure? Heh.
• People are always telling me how much my ears look like Halle Berry. They also tell me how much my dick reminds them of Coit Tower.
• New Orleans Drag Queen Shoplifting Terror Crew. Not that that proves anything.
• Nice newsfilter FPP. Thanks.
• Well yes thanks. I don't scour for news everyday all over so it was an interesting FPP for me. Complete bollocks of course, but worthy of discussion here.
• I LOVE the idea of a roving street-gang of drag criminals...its just SO evocative....of what, I am not sure...but it's just RICH....oozing with....something...
• So what about the younger brother/s if the older brother is already gay? Are they like, übergay?
• Fishnets and falsies?
• I thought it was a good FPP as well. And the article clearly says that the publishing doctor doesn't know exactly what biological factors may be involved, just that his raw data is an interesting starting point.
• married with tow children Ah, I thought you meant "with children in tow."
• And I would like to add that I found this FPP interesting as well (as I have always been a firm beliver that homosexuality is genetic - My father and older brother are both gay, but I came out full-on straight; I was adopted).
• i know identical twins where one is gay and one isn't... i think the gay one is the older one, tho (by 2 minutes). i am curious why people spend so much time speculating on what makes people gay and avoid the real problem: what makes people left-handed? how can we stop this blight on humanity?
• > Where the hell is the science in this article? Well, it looks like the author (profile) of the study has been saying the same thing for years or the study is actually old: Journal article from three years ago (summary only - 2nd to last on the page)
• I have no brothers, and my only sister is older than me. Bake me at 350, ladies, you gotta STUD MUFFIN.....
• es el queso, I am WOUNDED to the core. I thought you were my friend, you maligner of the sinister!!! It's not easy being left-handed, the world is against us, with your scissors and your left-o-phobia. Did you know us tragic southpaws have a shorter life expectancy??? *sniff*
• I can't believe that es el Queso could be so gauche.
• hey, love the sinner not the sin, right Medusa?
• Yeah, it's OK to BE left-handed as long as you only USE your right hand. Plus, it's funner 'cause you drop stuff.
• Thanks for the linkages, rdj, but I don't see one drop of good science in this article. I mean, the guy has the nerve to assume that the problem is biological, when the only data he has is birth statistics. If he were a medical doctor, and were doing genetic testing within these "sibling" parameters, I might be interested. Ugh.
• I mean, the guy has the nerve to assume that the problem is biological... Assuming that "the guy" refers to Dr Bogaert, he doesn't have the nerve to assume anything. It's the exact opposite. His research is testing the hypothesis that the "problem" (problem?) is biological, specifically developmental, and it's trying to see if that's a workable assumption to make in the future. The answer, this study suggests, it yes, it it. As the article says, this correlation between older siblings and homosexuality has been known for over a decade. Nothing new there. I disagree with the article's claim that the prevailing opinion up to this point has been that the reason behind this was psychological - certainly, when I was studying human development several years ago, the suggestion was pretty strongly that this was an effect that was likely to be developmental. As the article notes, differing hormone levels in the mother's womb with each pregancy is one hypothesised cause - but it'll take a bucketload more research to nail that one down. I suppose the reason it's presented in this "revolutionary new findings" way is the media's determination to spin every story about interesting scientific research as one of big honking paradigm shifts. Specifically, the fact that science writers feel they have to present it that way to get their editor's attention. Of course, none of this is supposed to suggest one single 'magic bullet' causation for what, after all, is an extraordinarily wide spectrum of behaviours, brain structures and musical tastes.
• Sorry, when I use the word "problem," I am referring to a question that is unsolved, as in "math problem;" I would not assert that homosexuality is wrong, since I am a firm believer that the predisposition to reproduction is generally genetic, and that the urge to reproduce homosexually is just as powerful as it is for heterosexuality. There is no right or wrong about it, since it is a biological prime directive. What I was objecting to was the use of psychological profiling to infer biological results. The suggestion being made is that a woman who has one male child is somehow compromised, and that when the woman's body identifies a second (or later) male fetus, it thereby instigates some "immune response" that potentially causes the child to have a homosexual predisposition, the cause of which has not been determined. Does anyone know exactly how many of those 1000 Canadian men actually were homosexual and had elder brothers? I'm not convinced that the human female body would have evolved to sabotage its male children in such a way.
• *emails gay younger brother*
• MonkeyFilter: Complete bollocks of course, but worthy of discussion here. My sister-in-law has seven boys, all of whom seem to be hetero. Ought to be fun trying to out them.
• I'm not convinced that the human female body would have evolved to sabotage its male children in such a way. I agree with you nunia but will throw a curve ball in that although it may not have been intended sometimes the body does evolve in a way to hamper the people production. I've always found the Rhesus Negative factor in pregnancy to be fascinating, as my Mum had this and if they hadn't known about it and the treatment for it back in the 70's I would have been an only child. (Mum always contributed this to some of the domineering aspects of my personality - but that is another story). So possibly not evolution, but a biological accident? Regardless the search for the cause of homosexuality kinda gets my gander up a bit. We all have a range of preferences extending from the partners we choose to whether we prefer vanilla to chocolate ice cream. Do we need to know whether these choices are biological imperative or social conditioning and to what degree? Is it to prove to stupid governments that being biological it's against nature to deny same-sex union? Or is it to help parents to not bring up gay babies? (Of course it all could simply be that the human race needs to pull at every loose thread it finds...) gomichild goes completely off the track
• Do we need to know whether these choices are biological imperative or social conditioning and to what degree? Well, of course we do. Many cultures still ascribe to the dogma that condemns homosexuality as an abomination. This is one of the many parts of our own society that is an antiquated holdover of an anachronistic belief system. The more science can prove that homosexuality is not abnormal, the more people with the closed minds will find a way to accept it. Anyway, about the Rh factor: I'm of the mind that it's more about the potential for differentiation of the species than about defects in propegation. If a female can have successful offspring with one male and not another, that becomes the beginning of a genetic schism. On the other hand, if a woman has a second son that is more likely to not breed successfully (because he prefers boys), that doesn't bode well for propegation. But then, I could be wrong. If someone else here has an advanced grasp of genetics and biology, I'd love to hear their viewpoint.
• It's all the womb's fault, and its rejection of alien life forms.
• The men in this study are Canadian. Ergo, Canadian women should be aware that having many sons means one or more are likely to become gay. I must be the hockey hair and all that "aboot" stuff. I'm convinced.
• I can see that finding a biological basis for homosexuality is one possible way to end homophobia, but I am worried that, if we ever do find a way to nail down a pretty good biologic marker for being gay, it would lead to bad things like selective abortion or genetic "cures."
• Oh noes, teh gay! Criminy, can't we just all get along? Genetics be fascinating, but I'm tired of all the miserable agendas that are being propagated by American society against ANYONE who doesn't agree with the Party line. Dang, can't somebody just dynamite Bush and all his corporate buddies?
• People don't even agree on what homosexuality or bisexuality or fill-in-the-blank-sexuality is, let alone say how sexual orientation works in people. Personally, I doubt there's ever going to be only a single explanation: we are far too complex for that to seem likely. People aren't easily understood, and the belief that this aspect of human behaviour can be reduced to a simple, easy-to-grasp concept is what puzzles me, I suppose.
• Everyone I've ever known who was gay has had at least two vowels in his name.
• Try it: "Tom Cruise." See?
• MonkeyFilter: fill-in-the-blank sexuality Dammit, I want simple, easy-to-grasp concepts that I don't want to have to think too hard about! /American public
• 
• This strikes me as odd, but I know almost nothing of Russian customs.
• I can think of at least one hypothesis why having homosexual younger brothers would be helpful to propegation (entirely layman's view, mind you). Older brothers mature and mate earlier, and it would be helpful to have younger male siblings to act as support and yet not compete for females. In fact, should the younger sibling have a male mate, then there are two supporters for the older sibling, and two less competitors for female mates within a clan/family group/territory. This may not be beneficial to the homosexual individual, but it is beneficial to the family group.
• Yes, but what about the lesbians? bad joke time:...my mother made me a homosexual....
• ...my mother made me a homosexual... Did she use aluminum foil or silly putty?
• > Yes, but what about the lesbians? they have special-shaped ears. see above.
• *bleeeep Wrong answer. Nunia, if I give her the wool, will she make me one, too?
• I think wool would make for an itchy (but warm) homosexual. I like the silly putty idea. You can copy comix from the newspaper on them. Oh, the fun we'll have!
• I guess it works the other way too. Lesbian sisters become surrogate moms, and you get less competing children within your family group. I know alot of unmarried (not necessarily lesbian) women who help take care of their siblings' children. Not sure if this is mainly an Asian/Chinese phenonemon or common to across cultures.
• Common across cultures, I'd say.
• babysitting or lesbianism? *confused
• Both. And why not simultaneously, too?
• It goes across species, too. I remember talking about it in my Primatology course. They calls it "allomothering." You see it in feral cat colonies as well.
• Well, it takes a village... never mind cat colonies ah yes, the famous clutter of cats
• That's when they're stacked more than 2 deep.
• Cat stacking is WRONG!