551

i wonder how the “christian” right-wing will respond to this, which appears to be more scientific evidence to support the idea that they’re wrong…

Men with older brothers more likely to be gay
Research adds to idea of biological basis for sexual orientation

WASHINGTON – Having several older brothers increases the likelihood of a man being gay, a finding researchers say adds weight to the idea that there is a biological basis for sexual orientation.

“It’s likely to be a prenatal effect,” said Anthony F. Bogaert of Brock University in St. Catharines, Canada, “This and other studies suggest that there is probably a biological basis for” homosexuality.

S. Marc Breedlove of Michigan State University said the finding “absolutely” confirms a physical basis.

“Anybody’s first guess would have been that the older brothers were having an effect socially, but this data doesn’t support that,” Breedlove said in a telephone interview.

The only link between the brothers is the mother and so the effect has to be through the mother, especially since stepbrothers didn’t have the effect, said Breedlove, who was not part of the research.

Bogaert studied four groups of Canadian men, a total of 944 people, analyzing the number of brothers and sisters each had, whether or not they lived with those siblings and whether the siblings were related by blood or adopted.

He reports in a paper appearing in Tuesday’s issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that having several biological older brothers increased the chance of a man being gay.

It’s an effect that can be detected with one older brother and becomes stronger with three or four or more, Bogaert said in a telephone interview.

‘Some sort of prenatal factor’
But, he added, this needs to be looked at in context of the overall rate of homosexuality in men, which he suggested is about 3 percent. With several older brothers the rate may increase from 3 percent to 5 percent, he said, but that still means 95 percent of men with several older brothers are heterosexual.

The effect of birth order on male homosexuality has been reported previously but Bogaert’s work is the first designed to rule out social or environmental effects.

Bogaert said he concluded the effect was biological by comparing men with biological brothers to those with brothers to whom they were not biologically related.

The increase in the likelihood of being gay was seen only in those whose brothers had the same mothers, whether they were raised together or not, he said.

Men raised with several older step- or adopted brothers do not have an increased chance of being gay.

“So what that means is that the environment a person is raised in really makes not much difference,” he said.

What makes a difference, he said, is having older brothers who shared the same womb and gestational experience, suggesting the difference is because of “some sort of prenatal factor.”

One possibility, he suggests, is a maternal immune response to succeeding male fetuses. The mother may react to a male fetus as foreign but not to a female fetus because the mother is also female.

It might be like the maternal immune response that can occur when a mother has Rh-negative blood but her fetus has Rh-positive blood. Without treatment, the mother can develop antibodies that may attack the fetus during future pregnancies.

Whether that’s what is happening remains to be seen, but it is a provocative hypothesis, said a commentary by Breedlove, David A. Puts and Cynthia L. Jordan, all of Michigan State.

The research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.


and then, there’s a public toilet in thailand designed to make you uncomfortable.

12 thoughts on “551”

  1. No, they’re not. I just think that there may be a bit more of Ocam’s Razor that could be applied here. If it turns out there really is some “gay factor” in younger brothers, then we accept it as science and just brace for the fallout. I guess, even though they say that they’ve screened out everything but the biological, I’m still skeptical that they actually did it.

  2. It’s not just brothers that are supposed to make the difference, it’s older brothers. And I don’t think that they’re suggesting that any sort of treatment is what makes the difference.

  3. Respectable, yes. But I don’t think it’s large enough, and I definitely don’t think that one study is enough, to call 2% a significant statistical difference.

    If this were election polling, they’d call that 2% difference a dead heat.

  4. Having brothers makes you more likely to be gay? Maybe that’s a matter of having brothers who, yaknow, care for you and take a parentish role with you from the very beginning. But I guess it’s really about some gene or bit in the mother. So now there will be another excuse to beat women and treat them poorly, because it’ll be “their fault” that there were gay children.

  5. i am wholeheartedly of the opinion that the very structure of Western society makes men gay.

    oh and i simply loved that last link!
    i know for a fact that echo will love it too… i’ll be sure to show it to her

  6. It’s certainly an interesting theory, but the fundamentalists don’t give a shit about science. Regardless of whether or not homosexuality is a “choice”, all human beings are children of The Mother and deserved to be treated with dignity and respect.

    Those toilet’s are campy and disturbing.

  7. 994 is a respectable initial sample size, but the fact it was conducted only on Canadian men really does limit it. More sociological data must be gathered.

  8. by order of george w. bush and the southern baptist convention, no further testing is to be done under pain of torture something nasty.

    they might be on to something

  9. Just to play Devil’s Advocate here for a moment, that really is a rather small sampling and a rather small increase to rule out sampling error. I’d like to see a larger scale study done before I put stock in this cause and effect.

  10. Not only does that sabotage the belief that homosexuality is a “choice,” it also sabotages the fact that conservatives have larger families…

Comments are closed.