There might be thousands of genes influencing same-sex sexual behavior, each playing a small role, scientists believe. The new study found that all genetic effects likely account for about 32 percent of whether someone will have same-sex sex. Using a big-data technique called genome-wide association, the researchers estimated that common genetic variants — single-letter differences in DNA sequences — account for between 8 percent and 25 percent of same-sex sexual behavior. The rest of the 32 percent might involve genetic effects they could not measure, they said.”
The study analyzed 408,000 men and women from the U.K. Biobank between the ages of 40 and 69, and 70,000 customers of 23andMe with an average age of 51: “The researchers mainly focused on answers to one question: whether someone ever had sex with a same-sex partner, even once.”
Andrea Ganna, lead author and European Molecular Biology Laboratory group leader at the Institute of Molecular Medicine in Finland, said the research reinforces the understanding that same-sex sexual behavior is simply “a natural part of our diversity as a species.” The new study, published Thursday in the journal Science, is not the first to explore the link between genetics and same-sex behavior, but it is the largest of its kind, and experts say it provides one of the clearest pictures of genes and sexuality.
A brand new analysis of more than 100 studies and academic journals, combined with feedback from thousands of people across the country has celled into question the way many LGBT Americans think and feel about whats going on within the community at the moment and brings new housing and employment information to light.
The project called Our Tomorrow, and will provide 125 nonprofit foundations and other partner groups with new data to better engage lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community and hopefully show a better path to whats needed to be done as far as the issues that effect us and need to be worked on most.
So far, the researchers has revealed that more than half of the American LGBT community lives in the South and Midwest, where they have no legal protections from discrimination in housing, employment, or accommodation. Which runs contrary to the notion that many LGBT’s already have protections because of the higher concentrations of the community in big cities and in the more progressive states.
Another part of the project focuses on The “hopes, fears, and ideas” of our community and shockingly shows that only 18 percent of the LGBT community describe themselves as “very happy” compared to 30 percent of the general public.
By canvassing at Pride and other events in 40 cities this summer, survey organizer Hattaway Communications has already culled 6,000 submissions, and welcomes more. You can share your thoughts, ideas and opinions through its website — shareourtomorrow.org — through August 17.
*Funding for this project is provided by the Arcus Foundation, the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, the Ford Foundation, the Johnson Family Foundation, and the Palette Fund
In latest round of junk science trash lobbed for the sole purpose of demeaning gay people and undermining our quest for equal rights. The KING of biased anti-gay bullshit propaganda studies Mark Regnerus, associate professor of sociology at University of Texas at Austin, is saying that there is now a correlation between straight men watching porn and their support for gay marriage among men.
Using recycled data from his seriously flawed The New Family Structures Study, a project for which he was the principal investigator and was financially backed by anti-gay organizations., Regnerus states that among men who view porn daily or almost daily, though, 54 percent strongly agreed (not just agreed) that gay marriage should be legal while only 13 percent who said they viewed porn monthly or less believed the same, Regnerus wrote for The Witherspoon Institute’s “Public Discourse
“In the end, contrary to what we might wish to think, young adult men’s support for redefining marriage may not be entirely the product of ideals about expansive freedoms, rights, liberties, and a noble commitment to fairness,” Regnerus concludes. “It may be, at least in part, a byproduct of regular exposure to diverse and graphic sex acts.”
Regnerus “study” was funded by anti–gay rights authorities of the Witherspoon Institute, who also are closely connected to anti–gay rights organization the National Organization for Marriage.
In an email exchange between an upset alumni of the University of Texas at Austin and the David Ochsner the Director of Public Affairs. The University of Texas at Austin is standing behind and defending Mark Regnerus’ seriously flawed and anti-gay propaganda study the “New Family Structures Study,” despite the fact that it was bought and paid for with money provided by the anti-gay Witherspoon Institute who’s key member is a founder of National Organization for Marriage, was published in a “scientific” journal whose editor has written many” pro- heterosexual marriage”papers and a book about the subject, and even the fact that in the past Regnerus’ in the past has stated that he cannot and will notseparate his “christianity” from his work.
In the email from David Ochsner the Director of Public Affairs.
Dear Mr. XXXXXX,
I am responding on behalf of Dean Diehl. First, I want to thank you for your thoughtful letter. We always appreciate hearing from alumni, whether it entails praise or criticism. Indeed, criticism is vital to our quality as an institution. So is the freedom to explore ideas and issues that might at times be inconvenient or upsetting to certain individuals or groups.
As for the funding, our faculty receive funding from a variety of sources that represent the right, center and left of the political spectrum. We also expect our faculty to receive such funding with no strings attached to the outcome. Prof. Regnerus assured us that he made this clear with the funding sources.
This research has sparked a discussion on campus that I believe will be beneficial for our faculty, students and alumni. Dismissing a faculty member because we disagree with his or her research doesn’t advance anything, and would suggest that we prefer to silence someone rather than engage in rigorous discussion that is expected at a major university.
I would also add that Prof. Regnerus’ research was published in a peer-reviewed journal, which included scholars who disagreed with Prof. Regnerus on several points but nevertheless defended the overall value of the research.
Knowledge is advanced when we engage in respectful discussion and debate of our differences. That is how our students, indeed all of us, develop the analytical and critical skills necessary to address today’s complex and often controversial questions.
I truly hope you will join us in this discussion, and continue to participate in the life and learning of The University of Texas at Austin.
The University of Texas at Austin is defending Regarus’ “study” because he assured the University that the funding donated by the Witherspoon Institute that has heavy ties to the National Organization for Marriage, one of the most vehemently anti-gay marriage organizations in the country at the moment came as “no stings attached” donation? Not to mention that it was published in a “peer related journal” namely Social Science Research, at which James D. Wright the Editor, has not only written a book called “The Covenenat of Marriage” but also talked about “the threat of gay marriage as a potentially destructive inﬂuence on the institution of marriage.”
Lets hope that the educational standard is much better at the The University of Texas at at Austin than their cover-up excuses.
If anything University of Texas should dismiss Regnerus for academic fraud. Far from a researcher, he has a political agenda and is working hand-in-hand with other like-minded agenda-driven “academics” like James D. Wright, The Witherspoon Institute and The National Organization for Marriage to destroy the lives of gay and lesbian Americans and using their University as a front to do so.
Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario has proven that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults and to gravitate toward socially conservative ideals.
Low intelligence in childhood corresponded with homophobia and racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.
In another study, this one in the United States, Hodson compared 254 people with the same amount of education but different levels of ability in abstract reasoning and found that people who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays and blacks
So there you go. It’s now scienticilly proven that racist and homophobic GOP conservatives are idiots.
As if we didn’t know that already. But it is nice to have it verified on paper.
The American Journal of Public Health have waved their PhDs in a Z formation and declared it true. They studied 67,000 people in Maxachusetts and found that 14% of gay men were obese, whereas 21% of straight men fit the same shameful description. What could possibly be the reason for this? Well, jerky asshole men, naturally:
“People in sexual relationships with men – heterosexual women and gay men – get more pressure to look thin and to otherwise conform to attractiveness norms than do people in sexual relationships with women – lesbians and heterosexual men,” [Esther Rothblum, a professor of women’s studies at San Diego State University] said”
Ah, fuckin’ men, man. Right? Ah well, nothing feels as gender equal as skinny feels. Or something. A more troubling data point to come out of the study? Gay men are more likely to be smokers. OF WHAT?
Want to know the secret behind raising the perfect child?
BE A LESBIAN!
A study that has been following children raised by lesbian parents for the past 24 years has concluded that not only are the children healthy, they’re generally smarter, nicer, and better behaved than those raised by male-female couples. (Take that Mike Fuckabee Huckabee!)
The results of the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study were published today in Pediatrics magazine and found that “daughters and sons of lesbian mothers, all conceived through donor insemination, were rated higher than their peers in social, academic, and overall competence, and lower in aggressive behavior, rule-breaking, and social problems, on standardized assessments of psychological adjustment.” While there have been many studies about the children of gay and lesbian parents, this is the first one to follow children from conception through adolescence. So, you can play Mozart for your baby when it’s in the womb all you want, you can get him/her into that fancy pre-school, and enroll the kid in all the extra-curricular activities but until there is some girl-on-girl action involved, your offspring will probably be inferior.