Print
Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex
by New Scientist
Thanks to GP for the link.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html?feedId=online-news_rss20
Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex
Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait.
The scans reveal that in gay people, key structures of the brain governing emotion, mood, anxiety and aggressiveness resemble those in straight people of the opposite sex.
The differences are likely to have been forged in the womb or in early infancy, says Ivanka Savic, who conducted the study at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden.
"This is the most robust measure so far of cerebral differences between homosexual and heterosexual subjects," she says.
Previous studies have also shown differences in brain architecture and activity between gay and straight people, but most relied on people's responses to sexuality driven cues that could have been learned, such as rating the attractiveness of male or female faces.
Brain symmetry
To get round this, Savic and her colleague, Per Lindström, chose to measure brain parameters likely to have been fixed at birth.
"That was the whole point of the study, to show parameters that differ, but which couldn't be altered by learning or cognitive processes," says Savic.
First they used MRI scans to find out the overall volume and shapes of brains in a group of 90 volunteers consisting of 25 heterosexuals and 20 homosexuals of each gender.
The results showed that straight men had asymmetric brains, with the right hemisphere slightly larger – and the gay women also had this asymmetry. Gay men, meanwhile, had symmetrical brains like those of straight women.
The team next used PET scans to measure blood flow to the amygdala, part of the brain that governs fear and aggression. The images revealed how the amygdala connected to other parts of the brain, giving clues to how this might influence behaviour.
Depression link
They found that the patterns of connectivity in gay men matched those of straight women, and vice versa (see image, above right). In straight women and gay men, the connections were mainly into regions of the brain that manifest fear as intense anxiety.
"The regions involved in phobia, anxiety and depression overlap with the pattern we see from the amygdala," says Savic.
This is significant, she says, and fits with data showing that women are three times as likely as men to suffer from mood disorders or depression. Gay men have higher rates of depression too, she says, but it's difficult to know whether this is down to biology, homophobia or simply feelings of being "different".
In straight men and lesbians, the amygdala fed its signals mainly into the sensorimotor cortex and the striatum, regions of the brain that trigger the "fight or flight" response. "It's a more action-related response than in women," says Savic.
'Striking differences'
"This study demonstrates that homosexuals of both sexes show strong cross-sex shifts in brain symmetry," says Qazi Rahman, a leading researcher on sexual orientation at Queen Mary college, University of London, UK.
"The connectivity differences reported in the amygdala are striking."
"Paradoxically, it's more informative to look at things that have no direct connection with sexual orientation, and that's where this study scores," says Simon LeVay, a prominent US author who in 1991 reported finding differences (pdf) in a part of the brain called the hypothalamus between straight and gay men.
But as Savic herself acknowledges, the study can't say whether the brain differences are inherited, or result from abnormally high or low exposure in the womb to sex hormones such as testosterone.
Journal reference: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0801566105)
Comment subject
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html?feedId=online-news_rss20
Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex
Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait.
The scans reveal that in gay people, key structures of the brain governing emotion, mood, anxiety and aggressiveness resemble those in straight people of the opposite sex.
The differences are likely to have been forged in the womb or in early infancy, says Ivanka Savic, who conducted the study at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden.
"This is the most robust measure so far of cerebral differences between homosexual and heterosexual subjects," she says.
Previous studies have also shown differences in brain architecture and activity between gay and straight people, but most relied on people's responses to sexuality driven cues that could have been learned, such as rating the attractiveness of male or female faces.
Brain symmetry
To get round this, Savic and her colleague, Per Lindström, chose to measure brain parameters likely to have been fixed at birth.
"That was the whole point of the study, to show parameters that differ, but which couldn't be altered by learning or cognitive processes," says Savic.
First they used MRI scans to find out the overall volume and shapes of brains in a group of 90 volunteers consisting of 25 heterosexuals and 20 homosexuals of each gender.
The results showed that straight men had asymmetric brains, with the right hemisphere slightly larger – and the gay women also had this asymmetry. Gay men, meanwhile, had symmetrical brains like those of straight women.
The team next used PET scans to measure blood flow to the amygdala, part of the brain that governs fear and aggression. The images revealed how the amygdala connected to other parts of the brain, giving clues to how this might influence behaviour.
Depression link
They found that the patterns of connectivity in gay men matched those of straight women, and vice versa (see image, above right). In straight women and gay men, the connections were mainly into regions of the brain that manifest fear as intense anxiety.
"The regions involved in phobia, anxiety and depression overlap with the pattern we see from the amygdala," says Savic.
This is significant, she says, and fits with data showing that women are three times as likely as men to suffer from mood disorders or depression. Gay men have higher rates of depression too, she says, but it's difficult to know whether this is down to biology, homophobia or simply feelings of being "different".
In straight men and lesbians, the amygdala fed its signals mainly into the sensorimotor cortex and the striatum, regions of the brain that trigger the "fight or flight" response. "It's a more action-related response than in women," says Savic.
'Striking differences'
"This study demonstrates that homosexuals of both sexes show strong cross-sex shifts in brain symmetry," says Qazi Rahman, a leading researcher on sexual orientation at Queen Mary college, University of London, UK.
"The connectivity differences reported in the amygdala are striking."
"Paradoxically, it's more informative to look at things that have no direct connection with sexual orientation, and that's where this study scores," says Simon LeVay, a prominent US author who in 1991 reported finding differences (pdf) in a part of the brain called the hypothalamus between straight and gay men.
But as Savic herself acknowledges, the study can't say whether the brain differences are inherited, or result from abnormally high or low exposure in the womb to sex hormones such as testosterone.
Journal reference: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0801566105)
Comment subject
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Monday, June 16, 2008 | PermalinkComments 1 - 50 of 89 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #193869 by Cartomancer on June 16, 2008 at 7:15 am
I must say this is not surprising, research has pointed in this direction for a while now. But it is still nice to have more information and more studies confirming the pattern - and exploring the phenomenon in greater depth. Somebody should tell Iris Robinson MP and her entourage of catholic witch-doctors about this...Though, I must say, my own experiences mirror these findings very well. My identical twin brother and I have always had somewhat different responses to stressful situations. My life has been ruled to a great degree by fear, anxiety, depression and various phobias. My heterosexual brother on the other hand generally responds with anger, dynamism, activity and restlessness. In this I am much more like our mother, while he is more like our father.
It is perhaps no accident then that, in dealing with the stresses of leaving home for university, Gavin took up three new martial arts (shorinji kenpo, aikido and Okinawan kobudo) while I developed three new debilitating phobias (sociophobia, catoptrophobia and gerontophobia - socialising, mirrors and getting older). I had not, until recently, considered that this might be partially due to differences in brain function associated with sexual orientation.
Other Comments by Cartomancer
3. Comment #193875 by leodavinci on June 16, 2008 at 7:20 am
No this is all wrong, people are gay because they have sinned, i can fix them, just say 10 hail marys and you'll be on the straight and narrow ;). Other Comments by leodavinci
4. Comment #193887 by epeeist on June 16, 2008 at 7:36 am
Comment #193869 by CartomancerI must say this is not surprising, research has pointed in this direction for a while now.I tend to handwave a bit on this "there is sufficient research to show that homosexuality has a biological basis". Fortunately nobody has ever called me on it.
Besides this are there any publicly available papers that you could point me (and others) to?
Other Comments by epeeist
5. Comment #193890 by Wiggy on June 16, 2008 at 7:40 am
Actually, since the index to ring finger ratio is also supposed to reflect brain development in the womb, if homosexuality is the result of more masculine or feminine brain structure, then you should be able to test it. The effects would go hand in hand.
According to the above study's results (if the index to ring finger ratio theory holds any water at all, that is) a gay man should have a much longer index finger than ring finger and a gay woman should have a much longer ring finger than index finger.
I wonder....
Other Comments by Wiggy
6. Comment #193896 by Philip1978 on June 16, 2008 at 7:46 am
WiggyAccording to your idea I would make a great lesbian! :)
Cartomancer
I am sure Iris and her coven will claim that "special" type of brain that helps them "know" that being gay is wrong!
Balls to it I say!
Other Comments by Philip1978
7. Comment #193897 by robotaholic on June 16, 2008 at 7:46 am
wow, well I'm gay and I have 6 fingers, a fin, and my tail had to be cut off at birth - I wonder... Other Comments by robotaholic
8. Comment #193898 by bugaboo on June 16, 2008 at 7:46 am
I remember reading in the past about evidence of a fraternal birth order effect on the outcome of sexual orientation but didnt keep up with the research. Anyone know of the studies?Other Comments by bugaboo
9. Comment #193901 by Dax on June 16, 2008 at 7:49 am
I guess it's a Life Style Choice™ to have differences in brain functioning, and God doesn't like Life Style Choices™!;)
Other Comments by Dax
10. Comment #193906 by annabanana on June 16, 2008 at 7:56 am
epeeist,I seem to recall reading about a study that looked at the responses of both hetero and homosexual people to the smell of the sweat of their preferred partners' gender...
Other Comments by annabanana
11. Comment #193909 by Mango on June 16, 2008 at 7:57 am
Goes a long way to help explain why religious gay men sometimes commit suicide over the great anxiety their unchosen sexuality causes them. Other Comments by Mango
12. Comment #193911 by phatbat on June 16, 2008 at 8:00 am
glad to see research being done into this. Perhapse we could one day put 'gay is a choice' nonsense into the same archive as natural disasters being punishments from god.
Oh, hang on a minute, it already is.
Other Comments by phatbat
13. Comment #193912 by Dhamma on June 16, 2008 at 8:01 am
I love my country for being so open-minded when it comes to science and religion. We're only nine million people but regularly come up with important scientific discoveries. It probably only shows that the rest of the world could do so much more if they only put aside religious dogmatisms and spent more money on science.I often find myself debating with people who think homosexuality is purely behavioural, but now I can back up the biological theory with this nice report. Will it help the religious people realize one cannot treat homosexuality by praying? Probably not much, but it's better than nothing.
Other Comments by Dhamma
14. Comment #193916 by Spinoza on June 16, 2008 at 8:03 am
Even if nothing about homosexuality were biologically driven, and all of it were a choice, it would still be absolutely fine. Other Comments by Spinoza
15. Comment #193919 by Dhamma on June 16, 2008 at 8:07 am
Spinoza: By all means, but if you believe every word of 2000 year old scriptures saying homosexuality is a sin, we really need these reports. Maybe they will claim they're sinners even in the womb now instead :D Other Comments by Dhamma
16. Comment #193920 by annabanana on June 16, 2008 at 8:08 am
Good point, Spinoza. Other Comments by annabanana
17. Comment #193926 by al-rawandi on June 16, 2008 at 8:12 am
Dhamma,
Don't sell yourselves short... 9.2 million.
Other Comments by al-rawandi
18. Comment #193928 by clatz on June 16, 2008 at 8:14 am
According to this article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6066606.stm
There are over 1,500 animals that have displayed homosexual behaviour. So it's completely natural and appears to be widespread across the animal kingdom. It would also suggest that there is more than one cause.
I wonder if gay/non-gay chimps display differences in brain structure as well?
Other Comments by clatz
19. Comment #193932 by Cartomancer on June 16, 2008 at 8:17 am
I've just depressed myself even further.I tried a google search for "papers on homosexuality research" to see if I could locate the stuff I had read in response to epeeist's question. The first site listed was an odious little operation called the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. I am guessing that the nation involved is the good old benighted US of A.
http://www.narth.com/index.html
What I found on their website is a group whose modus operandi should be immediately familiar to those of us here who have seen ID groups in action. They seem to be disingenuously clothing themselves in the borrowed mantle of science in order to promote their obviously faith-based nastiness. Observe a selection of the following from their "position statement":
We call on our fellow mental-health association to stop falsely claiming to have "scientific knowledge" that settles the issue of homosexuality. Instead, our mental-health associations must leave room for diverse understandings of the family, of core human identity, and the meaning and purpose of human sexuality...
...Respect for diversity, however, requires teaching about all principled positions. We live in a multi-cultural society where tolerance for differences is essential. And when homosexuality is discussed, it must not cross the line into lifestyle advocacy. Ultimately, sexual lifestyle decisions hinge on matters of deeply held values. Schools should respect the right of families to convey their own social values to their children...
...Social science evidence supports the traditional model of man-woman marriage as the ideal family form for fostering a child's healthy development...
...Psychotherapists around the world who treat homosexuals report that significant numbers of their clients have experienced substantial healing. Change has come through psychological therapy, spirituality, and ex-gay support groups. Whether leading married or committed celibate lives, many report that their homosexual feelings have diminished greatly, and do not trouble them as much as they had in the past...
...Scientific research supports age-old cultural norms that homosexuality is not a healthy, natural alternative to heterosexuality. Research shows that gay teens are especially vulnerable to substance abuse and early, high-risk sexual behavior. It does far more harm than good to tell a teenager that his or her attractions toward members of the same sex are normal and desirable. Teens in this position need understanding and counseling, not a push in the direction of a potentially deadly lifestyle.
I am roundly sickened by this tissue of lies, misrepresentations and barely-concealed faith-based prejudices. I had no idea that the forces of ignorance were so sophisticated and barefaced in their tactics in this field. Note the familiar "teach the controversy" line? The appeals to facile postmodernistic "we must respect all principled viewpoints" drivel? The "no transitional fossils" style "there is no scientific evidence" line? And most of all the constant references to some unspecified "spiritual" dimension, the true nature of which they are not keen to disclose for fear of appearing to be the religious front they actually are.
Don't get me started on the disgraceful stuff they have insinuating a link between homosexuality and paedophilia.
Why is it that these subhuman monsters never present the case the other way round? Why do they not stand up for people's "right" to convert from heterosexuality to homosexuality, since they clearly believe it to be possible in the other direction? What of those straight people who would much prefer all the fun of a rampantly promiscuous gay lifestyle? Human rights issue? Purely secular advocacy group? No religious or moral agenda? Pah, don't make me laugh...
This is precisely the kind of dishonest outfit we should be speaking out against. Surely there must be something that can be done about such a blatant and hateful misrepresentation of science and society?
Other Comments by Cartomancer
20. Comment #193956 by clatz on June 16, 2008 at 8:41 am
Agreed Cartomancer, it is very depressing stuff.
Maybe this will cheer you up a bit:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Atheists-Express-Oppositio-by-Stuart-Bechman-080615-934.html
Way to go Atheists!
Other Comments by clatz
21. Comment #193962 by DamnDirtyApe on June 16, 2008 at 8:48 am
So wait a minute... when Eddie Izzard says he's a Male Lesbian... he's a man... with a woman's brain... wired like a man's... oh no I've gone cross eyed. Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe
22. Comment #193970 by moderndaythomas on June 16, 2008 at 8:53 am
I can think of a few men in the church that I occasionally find myself(&*/#&*)! that are serious candidates for being gay.
Poor bastards, how very confused and unhappy they must be.
If I didn't have my man bubble up, I'd hug 'em. But then again when I'm there I just feel like strangling everybody, so.....
Other Comments by moderndaythomas
23. Comment #193984 by black wolf on June 16, 2008 at 9:04 am
What the thick-headed fundies will read out of this is of course that women are just as sinful as gays, scientifically proven by Eve. Which confirms that both need a strong man to tell them where to be and what to do. Women care for the kids, cook and go to church, and the gay men and women are sent to reeducation camps where real men teach them how to clean themselves with Jesus.If they could, they'd try to develop drugs and brain surgery to un-gay people.
Other Comments by black wolf
24. Comment #193985 by esuther on June 16, 2008 at 9:04 am
I find any study of what 'causes' homosexuality to be suspect. I can appreciate that this study was a genuine attempt to examine the brains of self-identified gays for differences with self-identified straights, but the initial assumption, that sexual orientation is binary, is false.It is initially false to say a certain percentage of men or women is, in any absolute sense homosexual or heterosexual. Of course, for practical reasons, people chose one or another sex to pursue. (Life is short and most of us have jobs). But while you CAN say that person A is six feet tall or person B carries the gene for hemophilia, it seems to me you cannot say exactly what constitutes a homosexual. For example: would you attribute homosexuality or heterosexuality to the following persons:
A married woman who has lesbian fantasies while having orgasmic (i.e. unfaked) sex with her husband.
A married man who has a 'happy' marriage but goes to a gay bar once a month for a blow job
A woman who has passive sex with another woman using a dildo
A man who has passive sex with his wife using a dildo
A man who makes a career of the military/the clergy and whose primary sex is masturbation.
Boys/girls who grow up in sexually divided societies who marry but have intense friendships and occasional sex with their own genders (as in rigid Arab societies).
Abused women (or women who have been genitally mutilated) who never have a chance to have good sex with their husbands and look to women for love.
A priest/nun who really IS chaste but who has erotic dreams about the Holy Ghost.
There are probably more 'gray area' sexualities, but I think you get my drift.
As a politically active lesbian, I have know hundreds and interacted at big events with thousands of lesbians, and I can certainly attest to the wide spectrum of personality types. Among my friends and ex-lovers, there is also a spectrum of histories, from long fairly satisfying marriages to men (before me), to total interest in women. Butches and fems and regular women.
So my point is, other than the self-identification, which may have a great deal to do with social circumstances, how can you scientifically' say "this subject is a homosexual and his/her brain is such and such"?
And if you can't say for sure that your subject is either homosexual or heterosexual, how can you proceed with a study of their brains?
Other Comments by esuther
25. Comment #193994 by gos on June 16, 2008 at 9:11 am
Dhamma:Spinoza: By all means, but if you believe every word of 2000 year old scriptures saying homosexuality is a sin, we really need these reports. Maybe they will claim they're sinners even in the womb now instead :D
They already do! Don't forget that christenings are performed to wash away that original sin...
P.S. My standard reply to those who ask why I didn't christen my children is that I didn't think they were born sinful.
Other Comments by gos
26. Comment #193995 by hungover on June 16, 2008 at 9:12 am
Were these differences present at birth? Jesus freaks might say that the abhorrant behaviour of these hell-bound homos disfigured their god-given brains...which were all wired up the same.For example, its known that neural activity can shape brain structures. So, repeat the study now on 1000s of random kids then get them back in again 25 years down the line and compare gay V straight at birth too. I would fully expect the observed differences described above to be present in neonates (since the overall number of neurons and hence size of areas is largely regulated by gene expression, trophic factors, guidance molecules etc. ). If this turnied out to be the case then it would be a strong argument that Jesus makes homosexuals and should be held accountable.
Other Comments by hungover
27. Comment #194022 by Eventhorizon on June 16, 2008 at 9:40 am
This probably isnt news to most gay people. It was plainly obvious even when I was a toddler that cognitively I operated more like a female than a male. As a result I was certainly gentler and a lot less 'rough and tumble' than my brothers.
I do however suspect that a persons orientation is not purely the result of nature and no nurture.
Other Comments by Eventhorizon
28. Comment #194052 by Steven Mading on June 16, 2008 at 10:39 am
How does this affect the claim that transsexualism and homosexuality are entirely unrelated things? I've heard it claimed many times that one's mental gender is something different from one's sexual orientation. This study seems to imply that's not true - that homosexual orientation is caused by being the opposite gender in the brain.Other Comments by Steven Mading
29. Comment #194057 by thewhitepearl on June 16, 2008 at 10:48 am
Esuther,
Are you saying that perhaps being homosexual is or can be a matter of nature AND nurture. It's never a clear cut of how much either contributed to the homosexuality but it's never either or?
Moderndaythomas,
Why are you in church in the first place, if you dont mind me asking?
Other Comments by thewhitepearl
30. Comment #194058 by DamnDirtyApe on June 16, 2008 at 10:51 am
This whole discussion reminds me, I must remember to go check out Turing's bench next time I go home to Manchester. I've never properly had a look at it. Other Comments by DamnDirtyApe
31. Comment #194067 by noneoftheabove on June 16, 2008 at 11:32 am
Three points.1. correlation != causation
So we know now that gay people have brain features like those of the other sex. What does that tell us?
Does having a brain like the other sex make you gay? Or does some hormonal or developmental factor contribute independently to both homosexuality and having a brain like the other sex? Or do people whose brains are naturally more like those of the other sex tend to find themselves in social situations that lead them to grow up gay?
This study can't tell you. Not that it isn't an interesting result. But the inferences made are crude and political rather than scientific.
2. People need to get over the whole "nature-versus-nurture" dichotomy.
All development happens in the context of environment, in the egg, in utero, or after birth. So of course homosexuality is biologically determined - at least in the same sense that language, culture, relationships and personalities are. The interesting scientific question is how the whole system of human sexuality develops in its social, neural and hormonal context. This is NOT aided by politically colored interpretations of evidence, no matter how well-meaning.
3. The "nature" versus "nurture" question should be irrelevant from the perspective of political activism.
If being gay is fine, then the reasons for it might be interesting, but they don't matter. It's only if you hold the a priori belief that homosexuality is a defect that its causes matter morally. Then it becomes either a disorder to be medically treated or a choice to be disparaged. Neither position is respectful of gays.
Celebrate diversity. And fine, be interested in its sources if you're curious. But don't buy into the game of arguing about causation with homophobes, because they're either going to pity you or despise you. They're not going to respect you, whatever the outcome of the debate.
The fact is, the thought of homosexuality makes some people uncomfortable, and they want to rationalize that. Sadly, the easiest way to do that is to look down on the group that makes them uncomfortable. On the up side, most heterosexuals these days are worldly enough to be comfortable with gays, or are at least reflective enough to realize that their discomfort is their own problem. So you're not losing much by avoiding the demographic that lacks those qualities.
Other Comments by noneoftheabove
32. Comment #194074 by SpacePup84 on June 16, 2008 at 11:45 am
A very fascinating talk given on this topic can be viewed at http://www.gayintostraightamerica.com/526.html - it is by Dr Cynthia Chappell, a professor at the University of Texas. She's not a professional in this field (she's focused on microbiology and immunology), however as the mother of a gay son she was interested in the scientific research into sexual orientation, and given her background was able to really get into the scientific literature on the topic, something the average person may not be able to do (or even know where to look).I summarised the (what I found interesting/main points of the) video on my blog http://tyroneintokyo.blogspot.com/2007/05/biological-explanation-for-human-sexual_20.html .
One of the articles she referenced ("A critical review of recent biological research on human sexual orientation") can be found at http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http://info.med.yale.edu/therarad/summers/mustanski et al review.pdf&ei=OrRWSLGcDYi46gPo5bGPAw&usg=AFQjCNF-unFF-BNeDBHuy-rURuYVES8X9w&sig2=yAf3-IwIiVyElmi9KssIRg
Other Comments by SpacePup84
33. Comment #194081 by moderndaythomas on June 16, 2008 at 12:00 pm
thewhitepearl.
Why are you in church in the first place, if you dont mind me asking?
I'm a victim of circumstances. I took a wrong turn. I was looking for the john. I married a christian.
In any case I only wind up there nowadays for weddings, funerals, and the occasional easter(moderndaythomas, hello? LOL)
And just where were you when that picture of yours was taken I wonder? If you don't mind me asking.
I'm guessing New Years Eve somewhere.
edit: oops, was I flirting? I may be a science geek but I'm not dead. Sorry.
Other Comments by moderndaythomas
34. Comment #194117 by gr8hands on June 16, 2008 at 12:43 pm
esuther, you also miss the most important point: How can you be sure someone claiming to be a heterosexual really is one?One can be fairly confident that someone claiming to be a homosexual actually is one -- or at least on that end of the orientation spectrum.
But (when I was single) I have personally had gay sex with men who refused to acknowledge that they were not heterosexual -- they would not use the word "bisexual" and certainly not "gay" even though we were having male-on-male intercourse. That makes any study reasonably suspect and difficult to accept.
My partner was married, fathered and raised a family before coming out, divorcing and meeting me. I, myself, was married, and fathered a son. Technically we're both bisexual, but choose to live solely with men. The study doesn't go into that rather unsubtle nuance.
But, it's a necessary next step in the research.
Other Comments by gr8hands
35. Comment #194122 by Stafford Gordon on June 16, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Blimey! I wonder what the bi-sexual brain's like; by the sound of it, a bit of a dog's.Other Comments by Stafford Gordon
36. Comment #194135 by gr8hands on June 16, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Are you complaining about man's best friend? One of god's precious creatures? Shame. (smile)Other Comments by gr8hands
37. Comment #194141 by esuther on June 16, 2008 at 1:05 pm
gr8handsIf you read my post carefully, I was suggesting that both categories 'declared homosexual' and 'declared heterosexual' are unreliable. I also identified as hetero in college, even took part in a written sexual orientation survey as a hetero, simply because I was still lying to myself. If I had been in that brain scan study, they would have put my brain information in the hetero column.
And all of those gray area sexualities I listed, what would their brain scans look like?
So my point is that the study itself is suspect, because it is treating social categories as if they were biological ones (i.e. height, eye color, possession of specific genes). Just as suspect as trying to measure the brains of cowboys and accountants.
Other Comments by esuther
38. Comment #194150 by thewhitepearl on June 16, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Moderndaythomas,
"and the occasional easter(moderndaythomas, hello? LOL)"
oooooooh yeeeeah...you'll have to pardon me, sometimes i'm a little slow...And the picture was taken at a bar that i occasionally frequent. No special meaning behind it. What would make you pinpoint it down to a special event like NYE?
Other Comments by thewhitepearl
39. Comment #194153 by moderndaythomas on June 16, 2008 at 1:16 pm
What would make you pinpoint it down to a special event like NYE?
I have an overactive imagination.
Damn, there it goes again.
edit: reading this a week later I realise that I am such a cad! Forgive me.
Other Comments by moderndaythomas
40. Comment #194156 by Egoch on June 16, 2008 at 1:18 pm
From what I read on the index to annular ratio (ca 15 articles) Lesbian have a statistical tendency to have the annular longer than the index, same for straight and gay men. Only heterosexual women have a ratio close to 1 statistically. I did not read about any group having an index longer than the annular (although a friend of mine is in this category). Among straight men, it seems that the more "competitive" the man is, the higher his annular/index ratio. All studies point to androgene hormons like testosterone to increase this ratio.Other Comments by Egoch
41. Comment #194173 by Grumpy Max on June 16, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I just remembered reading something years ago about a study whose results tentatively showed a difference in lesbians' cochlea. So I googled (with some trepidation) "lesbian inner ear" and actually got the Wikipedia article on "Homosexuals". There are lists of purported physiological and cognitive differences exhibited by gay men and women (which are sourced either to the original article or related news story), so if anyone is interested in reading up on this subject, that might be a good first stop.I think Esuther is right to point out that, to an extent, sexuality can be a fluid thing (insert dirty pun about fluids here if you think it appropriate). But it's not entirely a social construct. If the facts are pointing towards correlation between the social and the biological, well...they're still facts.
I suppose these developments are a good thing (I mean beyond the inherent goodness of any advance in knowledge) in that they provide a rebuttal to the allegation that homosexuality is a "choice" exercised out of sheer cussed wilfulness. But if there is an identifiable trigger or indicator for homosexuality, (I mean beyond a fondness for Guys and Dolls) genetic or otherwise, is it not a bit scary to think that it may in the future be recast as a physiological defect (rather than as a psychological one, like in the past)?
EDIT: DOH! I didn't read NoneofTheAbove's comment in detail:
"3. The "nature" versus "nurture" question should be irrelevant from the perspective of political activism.
If being gay is fine, then the reasons for it might be interesting, but they don't matter."
Quite right. My suggestion that this research provides a rebuttal of the "choice" argument would involve an a priori assumption that homosexuality needs be "excused". I beg pardon!
Other Comments by Grumpy Max
42. Comment #194207 by HitbLade on June 16, 2008 at 2:27 pm
GO SWEDEN! :DCould it be that their brains work like the oposite sex's brains do, so for example the gay men act more like women, and they then identify themselves more with women and that makes them interested in other men rather than women. I mean, is homosexuality not sexual in nature, the sexual part is due to peer preassure or something like that? The idea has occured to me before, I have always had a hard time accepting the idea that men just choose to be feminine and homosexual and vice versa, it doesn't make sense to me, there has to be something more to it. I also need more homosexual friends, I find it extremely interesting to talk to them. :)
"Paradoxically, it's more informative to look at things that have no direct connection with sexual orientation, and that's where this study scores,"
(maybe thats what it says, i skipped some of the text cus im lazy today)
Other Comments by HitbLade
43. Comment #194283 by Neuro on June 16, 2008 at 3:17 pm
This is not really that new. If you go back in neuroscience literature, there is tons of biological and neuroanatomical evidence for a straight/gay difference. Plus, most males that are gay have feminine brain structures. Plus, studies in rats show that prenatal stress can affect how the rat acts (homosexual behaviors, such as the male arching its back to mate) and how the brain is organized. Other Comments by Neuro
44. Comment #194371 by joshie on June 16, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Esuther,
you mentioned a few gray areas of human sexuality:
"For example: would you attribute homosexuality or heterosexuality to the following persons:
A married woman who has lesbian fantasies while having orgasmic (i.e. unfaked) sex with her husband.
A married man who has a 'happy' marriage but goes to a gay bar once a month for a blow job
A woman who has passive sex with another woman using a dildo
A man who has passive sex with his wife using a dildo
A man who makes a career of the military/the clergy and whose primary sex is masturbation.
Boys/girls who grow up in sexually divided societies who marry but have intense friendships and occasional sex with their own genders (as in rigid Arab societies).
Abused women (or women who have been genitally mutilated) who never have a chance to have good sex with their husbands and look to women for love.
A priest/nun who really IS chaste but who has erotic dreams about the Holy Ghost.
There are probably more 'gray area' sexualities, but I think you get my drift."
i think i get your drift, but can't help wondering if these examples can be classified as behaviour for sexual gratification (fetish??), whereas homosexuality for some gay people is a consistent pattern of sexual preference/behaviour, which gender they seek for emotional/sexual intimacy, or even their identity. afterall, my 'gayness' is not only defined as what gives me an orgasm.
granted that a lot of people are unsure of what their sexuality is, and i guess a sample size of 20 or 25 is fairly small, but i'm willing to bet that these people probably have enough self-knowledge to brand themselves one way or another. or towards one end of the spectrum or the other.
Other Comments by joshie
45. Comment #194413 by Zoron on June 16, 2008 at 6:21 pm
I wonder why they didn't also test self-identified bisexuals? Other Comments by Zoron
46. Comment #194429 by Shuggy on June 16, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Steven Mading:How does this affect the claim that transsexualism and homosexuality are entirely unrelated things? I've heard it claimed many times that one's mental gender is something different from one's sexual orientation. This study seems to imply that's not true - that homosexual orientation is caused by being the opposite gender in the brain.
I agree. If the study had found transsexuals had the brain of the opposite sex, it would make a lot more sense.
This takes us back to "a woman trapped in a man's body" descriptions of homosexuality (has anyone else heard of "The Invert" by "Anomaly" [1927] - a little handbook of self-hatred if ever there was one? I keep my copy upside-down in the bookshelf, it seems only appropriate.)
As a gay man, my anecdotal experience is that gay men's sexuality is much more like strait men's (only directed at men) than strait women's, and conversely lesbians' more like strait women's (only I'm much more tentative there).
Eg. The tendency of men, strait or gay, to fetishise the anatomy of their preferred target gender. The tendency of women not to, but to be attracted holistically. The tendency of men, strait or gay, to put sex ahead of relationships, and women vice versa.
Other Comments by Shuggy
47. Comment #194434 by chuckgoecke on June 16, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Wonderful comment, Joshie (and Esuther) . Human Sexuality is so much more complicated than the establishment medical/social/religious authorities would have us believe. I once jokingly pseudo-confided to a friend that I was bi-sexual; "I like heterosexual women and lesbian women." She one-up me with "I'm tri-sexual, I'll try anything once." I really think all of us are bisexual, just on a continuum from 100% hetero- to 100% homo sexual. Very few are near the ends, although they might argue tooth and nail that they are. Some of the really gayist men are probably priests, ministers, and other homophobes. They harden their anti-gay feelings because of their guilt due to their pent up feelings. Other Comments by chuckgoecke
48. Comment #194435 by Saerain on June 16, 2008 at 7:22 pm
21. Comment #193962 by DamnDirtyApe on June 16, 2008 at 8:48 amI stole that line from Izzard. It is the most expressive way of explaining to someone why I, a heterosexual male, wear clothing marketed as women's.
So wait a minute... when Eddie Izzard says he's a Male Lesbian... he's a man... with a woman's brain... wired like a man's... oh no I've gone cross eyed.
It helps that my lover is a female gay man. Hah!
Other Comments by Saerain
49. Comment #194439 by Zoron on June 16, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Are the gays in this research effeminate gays or normal ones? Other Comments by Zoron
50. Comment #194443 by mordacious1 on June 16, 2008 at 7:59 pm
ZoronWhat's a "normal gay"? What's a normal heterosexual for that matter?
Other Comments by mordacious1
Upcoming Events:
About this site
Mailing List Signup: Enter your email
Go to The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Richard Dawkins Articles | Comments | Tour Journal
Atheist Resources | Local Groups
Debate Points | Latest Responses
Audio Books
The God Delusion
Read by
Richard Dawkins &
Lalla Ward
The Ancestor's Tale
Read by
Richard Dawkins &
Lalla Ward
On the Origin of Species
Read by
Richard Dawkins
Links:
Quote:
"They said God was on high and he controlled the world and therefore we must pray against Satan. Well, if God controls the world, he controls Satan. For me, religion was full of misstatements and reaches of logic that I just couldn't agree with."
Gene Roddenberry
Other Recommended Reading
Breaking the Spell
Daniel C. Dennett
Freedom Evolves
Daniel C. Dennett
The Blank Slate
Steven Pinker
More Books
Adjust font size: 
"If this book doesn't change the world -- we're all screwed."
-Penn (Penn & Teller)
The God Delusion
by Richard Dawkins
Over 1.5 million copies sold
DVDs
'The Genius of Charles Darwin' DVD (PAL Region 2 ONLY)
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Original Program' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #193868 by Wiggy on June 16, 2008 at 7:13 am
Other Comments by Wiggy