• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Pre-Pulse Inhibition determines gayness.

OneWingedBird

Beloved of Ra
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Messages
15,431
Startling Study Says People May Be Born Gay

By Amanda Gardner
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Oct. 6 (HealthDayNews) -- The origins of sexual orientation may be evident in the blink of an eye.

In what is the first study to show an apparent link between a non-learned trait and sexual orientation, British researchers have discovered the way peoples' eyes respond to sudden loud noises may signal differences between heterosexual and homosexual men and women that were developed before birth.

The authors, whose study appears in the October issue of Behavioral Neuroscience, say about 4 percent of men and 3 percent of women are gay. Scientists have long sought to determine whether sexuality is learned or biological.

"We have several decades of research which suggests rather strongly that human sexual orientation is to some degree biologically determined," says study author Qazi Rahman, a lecturer in the School of Psychology at the University of East London. "The problem with those types of studies is that we can't disentangle the effects of learning."

The question then became, "What kind of task could be used that is not influenced by learning or socialization?" The answer came in human startle responses, which are involuntary and instinctual.

Specifically, Rahman and his colleagues decided to use pre-pulse inhibition (PPI (news - web sites)). When humans hear a sudden noise, they respond by blinking. If that loud noise is preceded by a quieter noise (the pre-pulse), the response to the second, loud noise is weaker. In other words, it is inhibited.

The researchers compared responses to a loud noise both alone and after a quieter noise to see what the degree of inhibition was. Participants were 59 gay and straight men and women.

In the heterosexual women, the PPI averaged 13 percent and, in heterosexual men, 40 percent.

Lesbians, however, had a PPI of 33 percent, closer to the straight-man end of the spectrum, while gay men averaged 32 percent, slightly lower than that of straight men but not statistically significant.

The findings are consistent with other studies, which have found that certain traits in lesbians are highly "masculinized," while the same traits in gay men are almost the same as in straight men.

While it's difficult to make generalizations about gay behavior on the basis of these findings (for example, "all gay male thinking is like that of women" , it is possible to build a case for the origins of sexuality, the authors say.

"On the basis of these results and in conjunction with the bulk of the literature in the last three decades or so, the evidence points to some prenatal factor or factors [in determining sexual preference]," Rahman says.

The findings could have implications for a number of social issues.

"Actual sexual orientation and sex-related research is now being accepted as a legitimate national investment in terms of research," Rahman says. "We have problems with STDs [sexually transmitted diseases]. Understanding sexual behavior is clearly important to that."

The findings may also help illuminate sex differences in mental health issues. "Although homosexuality per se is not related to psychiatric problems, on those occasions that gays and lesbians do present with psychiatric problems, they often show disorders that are typical of the opposite sex," Rahman says. Gay men, for example, may be more likely to suffer depression, anxiety and eating disorders than their straight counterparts, while lesbians may be more vulnerable to substance abuse than heterosexual women.

"Maybe having an understanding of brain basis of sexual orientation in healthy individuals may give us some clues in what is going wrong in the brain circuitry underlying certain psychiatric problems," Rahman says. "In the future, we may be able to tailor treatments more specifically."

It's important not to draw too many generalizations. "It's not that the gay brain is like the heterosexual brain of the opposite sex. It seems to be a mosaic of male and female typical traits," Rahman says. "Because we're looking at humans, thing are always more complicated that you would expect."


This all sounds pretty hokey to me, sort of sub Voight-Kampf with a pseudoscientific spin.

I don't even think they've got the figures for the proportions of gay people right, sure it's nearer 10% than the 3-4% quoted here.
 
I agree, this sounds completely daft!
 
Why not try using the length of someone's nose to decide? Probably just as accurate...
 
Well they do say the length of your thumb is the same as the length of your..............


...although if that were the case, women shouldn't have thumbs.

Am I rambling? I just went to a pirate party. Yarrrr.
 
I thought it was the distance between the end of your middle finger to the furthest point you can reach on your palm with the same finger.

Of course, my hands are exceeding small for the rest of my err.. body;) . Sort of like a gorilla in reverse.

Back on topic, why would anyone spend decades working out how to tell whose gay? Why not just ask them??
 
A while ago, they were saying you could tell by the earlobes. More recently, we all had our hands spread out around pub tables, checking to see if we had lesbian fingers. :rolleyes: What gets me is that gay people have been saying for years they were born that way, and then all of a sudden they do some study and announce it like it's a big surprise.

Gay men, for example, may be more likely to suffer depression, anxiety and eating disorders than their straight counterparts, while lesbians may be more vulnerable to substance abuse than heterosexual women.

On the other hand, however inborn gayness is, my gut feeling is things like eating disorders are more of a response to society than something in your genes; maybe it's just something that's more likely to occur if you worry about what men think of you (like straight women and gay men) than if you don't (like straight men and gay women).

I read this thing once in a bookshop (and have since regretted not buying the book, because I can't for the life of me remember what it was) about how gender behaviour is determined so much by concern about what the other sex thinks of you that it's difficult to tell what differences between the sexes are inborn, and what's cultural. However, if you look at a group of people who aren't shackled by what the opposite sex thinks of them, ie, homosexuals, you find -and this is a generalization, but none the less- that men tend to behave in a way we consider more effeminate, and women in a way we consider more masculine.
Again, an anecdotal generalization, but my experience has always found men to be more sentimental at heart than women are, and I continually marvel at how the personality of my straight female friends changes completely in the presence of a man they fancy. Sexual orientation, I'm convinced, is born not made, but your behaviour seems to depend much more on culture, and on what the group you fancy expect of you, or consider acceptable.

Does that make sense? I'm in a ramble-on mood tonight, and drunk (hey, I'm a gay woman and so naturally prone to subtance abuse ;))
 
taras said:
Well they do say the length of your thumb is the same as the length of your..............

Other thumb?
 
Does anyone else find the word "gayness" amusing, in a very childish way? Surely there must be a more sensible word! :D

Like gaiety.
 
gaiety is way worse! I know what you mean though, I always find the word lesbian good for an immature snigger as well. It's very sad. :D
 
I think people should simply take into account that research into homosexuality is still a relatively new field, so don't be suprised at some of the theories that get chucked around. Who knows, in time they may seems as completely daft as other 'scientific' theories from the past ;)
 
I think that's very likely Jerry :) At least they've stopped trying to look for a cure.
 
lutzman said:
I thought it was the distance between the end of your middle finger to the furthest point you can reach on your palm with the same finger.

Cool! I've got the hands.. now Snowman Jnr. needs to catch up :p

An interesting article on gayness...

http://www.theonion.com/onion3837/newly_out_gay_man.html

I recall there was another article on how gay people were campaigning against the usage of the word 'gay' to mean happy. It doesn't appear to be in the archives though, which is a shame, as it was well funny :)

More on topic, I reckon 'gayness' can't be put down to nature over nurture or vice versa. I challenge anyone to deny that at some point in their lives they've not thought about members of the same sex in some kind of carnal fashion. I thought I may have been as a teenager, but it was something that just went away as I discovered the joys of ladies, and it probably works the other way round with people who are gay. I think that when society evolves a bit more, then there will be a lot more people willing to accept this side of themself, even if they don't wish to do anything with it. It makes wonder sometimes, when I see these big drunken skinheads causing trouble and then breaking down in tears... the ultimate macho man thing gone wrong because they can't accept their feminine side? It's easier for ladies to express their masculine side than it is for us gents to express our feminine side, which is a shame. There must be people out there who beat themselves up (and other people) over this.

What a queer world we live in! :)
 
OK firstly I'd just like to point out I'm not vain enough to actually enjoy being the poster of every other comment on here, and will be going away shortly

Snowman, I think there's something to that; it's incorrect IMHO to consider gay and straight to be like two seperate planets - to my mind, it's more like a continuum (spelling?)... or more like a piece of string, with gay at one end and straight at the other, and most people tend towards one end or the other, but most people do have the potential to be at least bi.

If it comes down to sex, well, anyone can have sex with anything, and probably have fun with it. It's not like physically impossible for straight people to have gay sex and vice versa, and if love is, as we sentimentalists would like to believe, a more deep spiritual thing than mere sticky goodness, then theoretically you can fall in love with anyone. Or anything. Most people have a preference, of course, but IMHO having a preference for a particular sex is no more of an absolute other planet deviance than having a preference for, say, going on top or beating your partner with wooden spoons, or whatever gets you buzzing.
 
Precisely. Most of the modern taboos about homosexuality have their origin in Leviticus.. and we all know how reliable that is as a guide to how to live your life.

I still find it astonishing that being gay was illegal up until the mid-late 60s. I have this theory that there are a great number of people called the 'unthinking masses' i.e. it's illegal to be gay.. so let's bash 'em.. but suddenly, it's not illegal, so in that case, it's ok!

Society's downfall will come from blind obedience to the law, and the willingness to accept any law that is imposed upon the populace. However, that's a different topic for another time maybe :)
 
Hurrah! I'll wave a placard for that one :D

Happily for some of us, though, hot girl on girl action was never illegal, because those enlightened Victorians just didn't believe something so horrible even existed, so they thought there was no reason to outlaw it. Bit like making Father Christmas illegal, or something. Which actually, they probably will when they decide his cultivation and bribery of children indicates that he's actually a paedophile or something.
 
I once borrowed an old, well-thumbed book of Forensics from the library. It featured an old style of determining Serial killer/psychotic tendencies. This included as many physical features as mental ones. I was rather alarmed because like these apparent axe-murderers, I have:

Hair with a tendency to be wiry
Attached earlobes (as opposed to the more common and "normal" detached ones
A fingerprint that is entirely swirly (no other patterns running in tandem)
Fingers that are almost identical in length.

I just hope this method of flushing out criminals was discarded along with phrenology.
 
Something that these people did not appear to take into account when devising this particular test is that mildly autistic people, including those with Aspergers Syndrome, have abnormal reactions to stimuli. This appears to come about because of different neural 'wiring', so it would certainly affect the outcome of a test such as this.
AS people often don't even realise that they are autistic - they are labelled as 'odd', 'socially phobic', 'geeky' etc. So how well did the testers make sure all their subjects were non-autistic?
 
On a related tangent (from the perhaps polar opposite direction), there's a piece in the current New Scientist (Comment and analysis -"Can gays become straight?"; p. 19, edition dated 11 October 2003, and written by Simon LeVay -sadly not online at the NS site) which reports on a study recently published in the October issue of Archives of Sexual Behaviour by Robert Spitzer, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia U.

Basically Spitzer has published a paper in which he says that conversion therapy -basically, counselling, encouraging and supporting gay men and women to abandon their homosexual inclinations- actually works. :eek!!!!:

From LeVay's article.
His finding: the majority of the respondents did in fact report a successful transition. They said they were experiencing sexual attraction to at least one opposite-sex partner, their homosexual urges were diminished or (less commonly) abolished, and they did not experience any harm as a result of the therapy.

Ah, but-! :)

According to LeVay, Spitzer, who apparently was a key-player in having homosexuality removed from the American Psychiatric Association's "official list of mental disorders" and so should be presumed to be free of anti-gay bias, found his respondents mainly through the services of therapists who offer conversion therapy and whose reps largely depend upon the perceived success of the therapy. (Anyone else see a problem there? If not, see item 1 in the list below.) Apparently most of the 200 respondents, interviewed by "structured telephone interview", indicated that they were 'very', in many cases, 'extremely' religious, a fact that seems to me to have a certain inevitability to it.

(CT seems to largely consist of -IMO, and reading between the lines- having it constantly and intensively reaffirmed to you that you will only ever be a worthwhile human being when you succeed in ridding yourself of your homosexual urges. Who's going to put themselves through that kind of ego-battering hell, indeed, who's going to find a circle of friends who'll willingly support them through this brainwashing (instead of telling them to stop wasting their money and 'just be yourself', the way a real friend should), if not the zealously religious?)

Spitzer acknowledges the possibility that occurs to the rest of us, that his respondents might simply be deceiving themselves, or actually even lying, but seemingly asserts that the fact that most have admitted that their conversions have been slow, and in most cases incomplete, would seem to indicate that they are in fact being truthful. Earth to Spitzer: that observation about their admissions really doesn't amount to anything if the respondents are deluding themselves! They'd simply be truthfully recounting their delusions as fact! Duh! :rolleyes:

But think about that for a mo':

1.) he culls the majority of his respondents from referrals from conversion therapists, who will have formed close bonds with the respondents, and whose reputations (and livelihoods) are tied into the perceived success of the therapy they gave those respondents.

2.) the majority of his respondents are highly-motivated to ignore/suppress any homosexual urges they might still be experiencing; after all, their very Salvation depends on it!

3.) most of his respondents will have a circle of associates who will actively police the respondents' lifestyle, associations and behaviour (that's what Churches do in my experience), making 'backsliding' a practical impossibility in many, if not most, cases. (While I do recognize that 'being religious' doesn't automatically equate with 'belonging to a church', from what I gather, many, if not all, of the people who resort to conversion therapy are initially put in touch with their therapists by religious organizations, or else are put in touch with support groups that are largely religious in character by their therapists once undergoing CT, so the inference that they'll almost certainly possess 'friends' who will be both co-religionists and members of their own congregations would seem a reasonable surmise on my part.)

4.) he resists the suggestion that any of his respondents are lying to him, but can't adequately counter the suggestion that his respondents might be self-deluded.

5.) most of his respondents confess to still having homosexual urges.

So show me where Spitzer's study tells us that conversion therapy works? Or are they claiming it's only behaviour modification rather than an actual cure now? Also explain to me how someone whose sexual urges remain chiefly homosexual in character, can no longer be described as 'homosexual'. Just because they aren't acting upon those urges? Gee, does that mean 'Celibate' is now to be recognized as a sexual orientation in its own right? How about 'Masturbator'? :rolleyes:

LeVay is a neuroscientist who has published work demonstrating physical brain differences between hetero- and homosexual men (1991), and is the author of Queer Science (1996) and Human Sexuality (with Sharon Valente, 2002).
 
Zygon said:
So show me where Spitzer's study tells us that conversion therapy works?

Well, that would be tricky because, as you've noted, his research is somewhat flawed (to put it politely).
 
The best argument against ex-gays is ex-ex-gays.

There was a case a few years back where two men who were spearheading the ex-gay movement and related 'rehabilitation' services went on to find love - with each other!

*frowns*

I had a link for this story but it seems to have died.
 
Back
Top