TotalReview (and Eyes) imply an important point: genetic influences do not necessarily follow conceptual compartmentalisations. Banish the thought from your head!
Exactly. If they are passed from genes, there should be some variance , no?
This is where the terms heritability and concordance come in. The best marker of the extent of genetic influence does come from family studies: in particular twin studies. Something that is entirely heritable (i.e. the feature is entirely determined by genes, as in some autoimmune diseases) would have a 100% concordance rate between twins i.e. if one identical twin had it, then the other would invariably have it.
For most conditions (be they physiological or pathological), the concordance rate varies, and therefore the influence of genetics varies, compared with other factors: epigenetic events, physiological stimuli and environment. It should be well obvious to everybody that 'homosexuality', among many other things, is not simply an 'on/off' thing and this particular fact has been established in scientific literature.
However, homosexuality happens to be the term that describes a whole conglomerate of other factors, and perhaps it's better to look at those without necessarily referring to homosexuality in itself. For example, sexual orientation and gender perception is sometimes, but not always, linked.
Also, homosexuality is very complex. I doubt it is going to be just one gene. It could be a variety of genes. If it was just one gene, how would there be bisexuals? I also think the genes are from the X chromosome for gay men. You get the X chromosome from your mother so I think genes on this chromosome could make the boy think like a woman in a sense. Now, this is just a guess I am taking but it would make sense. Also, I think the environment has somewhat to do with it.
Adding onto Strop's point, it shows how complex homosexuality is. Identical twins can have the same hair color because there is not much complex about it. That is caused by one gene. Homosexuality is probably caused by multiple genes. It is like taking some of the genes from the mother instead of the father when it comes to a homosexual man.
Almost all bamboo's are bisexuals. Yes of course I suppose it is because they all have the similar genes, and whenever they reproduce another bisexual drops out.
It's a type of ape or monkey, I forget which, that has recorded accounts of having observed engaging in all of the following sexual activities: face-to-face genital sex (most frequently female-female, then male-female and male-male), tongue kissing, and oral sex.[17] In scientific literature, the female-female sex is often referred to as GG rubbing or genital-genital rubbing.
It's some deffinite evidence of homosexuality in nature. Maybe their jsut hedonists
[quote]I don't even think religion is part of this topic...it's either you're against it or you're not people geez. Don't bring a million beliefs into it cause you want to.
Theres alot more too it then either "your against it or your not... So many people have their own beliefs of how sometimes its good, and others its bad.
Almost all bamboo's are bisexuals. Yes of course I suppose it is because they all have the similar genes, and whenever they reproduce another bisexual drops out.
(I think that was bonobo, as dizzyk pointed out), but one could say that the bonobo monkeys had a culture of bisexual activity, unlike that of humans, in accordance to the consideration that genes is but one part of the picture.
Maybe their jsut hedonists
Not to encourage irresponsibility here but in general, sex is fun, y'know? :P
"Why should everyone go around expecting everyone else to be g.ay? It is just easier if people would accept it already. So are you trying to say that the people against g.ays may be g.ay themselves? Because if you are, yes this is true. I am sure"
