- Joined
- Sep 8, 2015
- Messages
- 1,478
- Reaction score
- 2,219
AAAS
Genetics of Sexual Behavior (This site explains their research; a PR site)
This recent study of almost 1/2 million people that argues that genes make up only 8-25% of same-sex sexual orientation has been picked up by every major news outlet, and most media stories are titled something like:
"There's No Such Thing As A Gay Gene, Study Argues"
"No Single Gay Gene Determines Same Sex Sexual Behavior, DNA Analysis Finds"
I am not an expert in heritability research and how the exact heritability percentages are estimated, but I certainly have some thoughts on the methodology of this study and the way this is being reported.
1. The population is UK, average age 51 (range 40-70), from genetic databases (23 and Me included). My immediate concern is stigma, denial/shame, and pressure to conform by older generations, and significant underreporting of same-sex sexual behavior, which leads to faulty conclusions about the genes involved if deeply closeted folks are being lumped in with heterosexual folks.
Per the authors: "In addition, most participants in our largest data source, the UK Biobank, were between 40 and 70 years old. We observed a lower percentage of older adults reporting engaging in same-sex sexual behavior. These age and ancestry biases mean that our sample is not representative of the general population and that our findings may not necessarily apply to people from other ancestries, age groups, or demographic categories."
The mass media articles are not reporting this HUGE limitation; instead, the focus is on how "massive" the study is.
2. Several studies in the literature have examined pre-natal hormones and their role in development of same sex sexual orientation. Interestingly, these are labeled as "environmental" influences, despite being purely biological, although not necessarily genetic (I suppose this is "pre-natal" environment, but there's no distinction made between this and other environmental factors, such as social influence, choice, etc.). This information supports a biological link, and thus should be disclosed as an important part of "environmental" factors, but the media is ignoring this, from what I've seen thus far.
Per the Los Angeles Post: "If less than one-third of a population’s sexual behavior is linked to genetics, where does the rest come from? Environment, culture and other factors may play a significant role, Neale said."
3. Just because one gene isn't implicated in same sex behavior doesn't mean there aren't more genes involved that we have yet to determine based on better research.
4. The authors measure same sex behavior (as sex). They do not ask about attraction, that I could tell. This is a big distinction that overlooks people who are gay/lesbian but choose not to date people of the same sex due to pressure to conform to society's norms and/or religious beliefs, etc.
Ultimately, I find the way results are being reported and construed frustrating and concerning, and the conservative right will have a field day with these results. I'm clearly biased as someone who identifies as gay/lesbian, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on the study methodology, how it's being construed in the media, implications, etc.
