BBC News Article.... Womb environment 'makes men gay'

[Kelda]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5120004.stm

Womb environment 'makes men gay' 
 
Scientists have not found the biological mechanism for this effect
A man's sexual orientation may be determined by conditions in the womb, according to a study.
Previous research had revealed the more older brothers a boy has, the more likely he is to be gay, but the reason for this phenomenon was unknown.

But a Canadian study has shown that the effect is most likely down to biological rather than social factors.

The research is published in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Professor Anthony Bogaert from Brock University in Ontario, Canada, studied 944 heterosexual and homosexual men with either "biological" brothers, in this case those who share the same mother, or "non-biological" brothers, that is, adopted, step or half siblings.

These results support a prenatal origin to sexual orientation development in men

He found the link between the number of older brothers and homosexuality only existed when the siblings shared the same mother.

The amount of time the individual spent being raised with older brothers did not affect their sexual orientation.

Writing in the journal, Professor Bogaert said: "If rearing or social factors associated with older male siblings underlies the fraternal birth-order effect [the link between the number of older brothers and male homosexuality], then the number of non-biological older brothers should predict men's sexual orientation, but they do not.

"These results support a prenatal origin to sexual orientation development in men."

He suggests the effect is probably the result of a "maternal memory" in the womb for male births.

A woman's body may see a male foetus as "foreign", he says, prompting an immune reaction which may grow progressively stronger with each male child.

The antibodies created may affect the developing male brain.

In an accompanying article, scientists from Michigan State University said: "These data strengthen the notion that the common denominator between biological brothers, the mother, provides a prenatal environment that fosters homosexuality in her younger sons."

"But the question of mechanism remains."

Andy Forrest, a spokesman for gay rights group Stonewall, said: "Increasingly, credible evidence appears to indicate that being gay is genetically determined rather than being a so-called lifestyle choice.

"It adds further weight to the argument that lesbian and gay people should be treated equally in society and not discriminated against for something that's just as inherent as skin colour."

 

[EnnisDelMar]

Interesting...

[ednbarby]

I remember reading a book while I was carrying my son called The Wonder of Boys by Michael Gurian.  I didn't agree with all his postulations about how to raise sons within our American culture, but I do remember finding one part about how boys and girls develop differently in the womb very interesting.  It had mostly to do with how the two sides of girls' brains develop simultaneously in the womb, while boys' left brains develop more quickly than their right brains, and how the connections between the two sides don't form completely in boys until after birth.  He talked about how this is why girls seem to have an easier time learning how to understand and process language than boys (girls generally do start talking sooner and better than boys) because the connections between the two sides of the brain have been developing longer.  He went on to talk about how his research so far has found that the amount of testosterone and cortisol a baby is exposed to in the womb can have a great impact on how many so-called masculine and feminine traits a boy or girl will have to the point even of helping determine the sexual orientation as well.  This made perfect sense to me.  I think we're all a product not just of the genes we inherit, but of the chemicals we've been exposed to from conception on.  Even identical twins with identical DNA have distinct personalities.  How can this be unless the way each baby experiences the womb and his or her birth is entirely unique, and it shapes him or her as such going forward?

I'd never heard of the younger brothers theory, but that's certainly interesting, too.  Ed and I are RH-positive and RH-negative, which means I had to have RhoGam injections throughout my pregnancy with Will in case his blood was RH-positive so my body would not see him as a "foreign" object and have an immunological reaction to him.  Really, they told me at the time that it's the *second* child that is most at risk of this - the the womb "remembers" and has built up some kind of immunity to the blood type of the baby that was there before.  So this makes sense to me, too, just from my own experience in hearing this kind of thing.  I still think there could be a genetic link as well.  But I've certainly always believed that homosexuality is somehow inherent and not "learned."  Frankly, I find people who would actually believe the latter is true to be among the biggest ignoramuses on the planet.

[Front-Ranger]

I read that book too, or one similar to it, while I was carrying my son. What impressed me at the time was the long list of physical and mental problems that attack boys more than girls. It seems evolution has given girls a leg up to assure continuation of the species, perhaps. One of the maladies mentioned that is more prevalent in boys is dyslexia, which Jack thought his son suffered from. Another one is the family of "ADD" disorders. My son is totally brilliant but also has ADD behavior which he is able to control by focusing on intense sports like ice hockey and triathlons where he is able to move at the pace he likes, also constant drumming.  I would never think of drugging him altho I have threatened it once or twice!!

[YaadPyar]

My instinctive reaction to articles like this is to think that as long as this kind of research continues, it underlies a fundamental assumption that something "makes" people gay.  If science decides that the causative factor is biologocal, then tolerance, compassion, equal rights...will be advocated.  Otherwise, it's an excuse to justify bogotry. 

Either way, this approach gives me the creeps.  It begs the question of "what's wrong with this certain group of people" and assumes the way to treat them is derived from the answer. 

Does it matter?  Do the differences in people have to be explained by research like this?  Can't we affirm the equal value of all people without it?

[gattaca]

Well, I don't remember the birth experience (does anybody?), and I have only 1 younger sister - so I don't fit the statistical sample.

However, I don't remember ever "deciding" to be gay. I just was. There were no higher-level throught processes involved. I can't say whether or not sexual preferences are genetic, hardwired, due to miniscule variations in our DNA, the result of environmental factors, or a combination of all these - but I grew up gay. And I wasn't involved in the 'decision process'.

The paper poses an interesting premise.

[ednbarby]

My instinctive reaction to articles like this is to think that as long as this kind of research continues, it underlies a fundamental assumption that something "makes" people gay.  If science decides that the causative factor is biologocal, then tolerance, compassion, equal rights...will be advocated.  Otherwise, it's an excuse to justify bogotry. 

Either way, this approach gives me the creeps.  It begs the question of "what's wrong with this certain group of people" and assumes the way to treat them is derived from the answer. 

Does it matter?  Do the differences in people have to be explained by research like this?  Can't we affirm the equal value of all people without it?

Good point, Celeste.  I know what you mean - it does bother me, too, that people seem to have to have a "reason" for it, like it's a disease or disability.  I wish everyone could see it the way I think all of us here see it - that we're all equal in general as human beings and specifically in that not a one of us can help who we are attracted to and who we love.  You're right - these articles (and this kind of research and this mindset in general) only serve to promote the notion that homosexuality is a problem that needs to be solved.  So the tent's not straight.  Why can't they just let it be?

[Kelda]

I had nothing really to add to the article, but I thought it made interesting reading. Liking the replies too.

Never heard of the Wonder of Boys book, but sounds very interesting, and it does indeed make you think about what also may be 'learned' in the womb.

I do see your point however, Celeste, and while that makes sense to us that there is no reason to do this reseach I do think its a useful tool to brandish against the bigots.

[Flashframe777]

I think there are physiological as well as spiritual components to heterosexuality and homosexuality.  By spiritual I don't imply good or bad, but consider it a likely dominant factor.  Science should really examine both sides of the equation. 

[Front-Ranger]

Native Americans thought of gay people as having twice the humanity of straight people, who were thought of as being sort of split in half. And thus gay members of the tribe had an exalted place and lived their lives openly and accepted.