Pew Research: 77% of College Educated Democrats Think Sex is Not Determined at Birth
- Thread starter GunsOfFrankEaton
- Start date
You're a math guy. Ray Blanchard's (the "pioneer" of the FBO theory that has produced most of the cited body of evidence) work has yielded the rough estimate that 1 in 7 homosexual males can "attribute" their homosexuality to FBO. That means that 6 in 7 are homosexual by some other genetic marker. The phenomenon isn't seen in females.
Looking at the homosexual population as a whole, does 1 in 7 gay men are gay because of a later birth order seem more reasonable than 7 out of 7 homosexual people are gay because of something else genetic? I think Blanchard found an interesting correlation in gay males in his observed cohorts, but because of the minority of gay males involved, I'm not able to see any convincing direct causation myself at this point.
For the sake of this conversation, I think people are born with a genetic wire for sexual orientation.
I think sexuality is too complex of a behavior to be attributed to one cause or one gene. If one in 7 homosexuals can be attributed to FBO isn't that evidence that epigenetics have at least a partial hand in sexuality?
Hopefully, not to play "dog" and try to lick his own balls.
Dude, I just posted that I think genetics plays 100% role in sexuality.
If we look at a sample of gay people, 7 being men and 7 being women, the theory that 1 of 14 is gay because of their birth order doesn't hold much value to me. It's a novel correlation in a minority of gay males at this point, but not "compelling" as you described.
Definitely an interesting field though. Much better than the old pray the gay away stuff.
Here's some related discussion info from the book "Animal Homosexuality: A Biosocial Perspective." It includes information from more recent and follow up research than what Ngun cited. Free from Google Books!
https://books.google.com/books?id=E...rder effect observed in other animals&f=false
Is it possible God just meant for the first borns to be the alphas and the rest to be the betas - both gay and cuck?
Weird. davidallen must not like you. I could see all of Chapter 6, which is what you are interested in. Maybe you can access it by Google search. Could be the link.
Silly me and my Dbros think maybe, just maybe, that the Big Guy has a bigger circus, under a larger tent, with far more monkeys needing attention.
Actually I think it’s just evolution. It kind of makes sense that a species would spit out the dominant male first, and then the weaker one second and third and...11th so as not to rock the boat. So maybe being gay/trans/whatever isn’t a defect like Wood thinks, but maybe it’s just Darwinism.
Operator error, it worked if I scrolled up to the beginning of the chapter and started again. I guess I don't see the point you are intending to make, though. FBO is robust and repeated and cross cultural.
Well then, let me pose this question...
Does Blanchard's work show that birth order is an actual predictor of homosexuality in males, or does it show that 1 out 7 homosexual men have multiple older brothers and large families?
Again, I'm not arguing against it per se, but I don't find his results compelling at all in the grand scheme of the question of what causes homosexuality. That's my simple point that I've previously posted several times. If you find it compelling, good for you. If his work is spot on, the results in a prospective study should reproduce his findings. Maybe we'll see that in the future.
Blanchard's (and others subsequent) work show that birth order is an actual predictor of homosexuality in males.
If you take the null hypothesis that homosexuality has nothing to do with epigenetics, then yes the FBO is compelling evidence for rejecting that hypothesis. FBO should not exist if homosexuality was a purely genetic phenomenon.
Who you are attracted to is most likely biologically predetermined in most people but there are people who make a lifestyle choice. I've known lesbians and gay men who admittedly had bad experiences with the other sex and decided they would rather live as gay people.
Sexual orientation has nothing to do with biological sex that is determined by DNA and you can't just wish it away. If you agree that in rare cases there is an anomaly in the DNA that causes someone to have both male and female features then you have 3 classes of biological sex.
I'm not saying a person that is born a male or female can't actually feel like they are the opposite and choose to live that way but you can't change your DNA.
Sexual orientation has nothing to do with biological sex that is determined by DNA and you can't just wish it away. If you agree that in rare cases there is an anomaly in the DNA that causes someone to have both male and female features then you have 3 classes of biological sex.
I'm not saying a person that is born a male or female can't actually feel like they are the opposite and choose to live that way but you can't change your DNA.
Then it should be reproducible in a prospective study. I'll be anxiously awaiting the results when they do one.
I didn't say it has nothing to do with epigenetics. I said FBO isn't compelling to me based on available data.
If homosexuality via FBO exists via epigenetics as Blanchard asserts, it should be preventable. How exciting will that be? Being born later will no longer doom males to being gay.
You would have to be really homophobic to pay for and endure that type of therapy just to reduce your second son's chances of being gay 33%
Endure? It could be simple immunotherapy if Blanchard's hypothesis of an anti H-Y antigen antibody source were correct.
In fact, it could be as simple and cheap as giving an Rh negative mother RhoGAM if she's previously given birth to an Rh positive child is. Just get an injection for each successive pregnancy after the birth of the first male child to eliminate the possibility of any subsequent male children being gay. That could take care of the 1 out of 7 gay males if you're so inclined. Epigenetics is fascinating.
I'm no doctor so I have no idea what kind endurance that would require. I hear immunology and I'm thinking HIV therapy levels of side effects.
