If homosexuality were shown to be genetic how many people would you guesstimate carry the "gay gene"?
Also if there is a gay gene would you want to scientists to find it or not?
>>5237414
No need to ponder that - it's almost certainly not purely genetic. There is no one "gay gene" you can turn on or off. It's most likely a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors.
>>5237567
Epigenetic is the term I was looking for - the study of how genes are expressed via environmental factors.
>>5237576
I don't believe in the changing of sexual orientation but why is it then that once those epigenetic genes are switched on they stay on and can't be switched off, not that someone should try to, but why?
>>5237620
Maybe the same way you can't "ungrow" your bones, for example
>>5237414
How would it be? It's straight people that keep having gay babies.
>>5237620
Once genes are "turned on" or expressed via environmental factors during development, that's it - they're on. It's a chemical change, not a physical one. You can't un-fry an egg, for example.
I doubt there's a gay gene. God may have fucked around in the old testament but do you really think he'd curse a person from birth like that?
I believe we're all born straight.
I just choose to master bate to degenerate porn.
I believe not being straight is a choice
>>5237963
That's not quite how genetics work.
I don't think there's a "gay gene" though. I ascribe to the theory that it has to do with neonatal hormones.
>>5237620
Probably the same reason there's no cure for trannies besides transitioning, some neurological structures are pretty set and non-plastic past a certain point in development.
>>5238075
There is a "gay gene" but it's not like "if you have this then you're gay" it just increases the likelihood that you will be gay if it gets activated during development while if it's not activated then it doesn't make people gay but it does make them more promiscuous and likely to pass on their genes.
Hopefully one day we can develop some kind of Vaccine.
>>5237997
This.
Pretty sure the more popular hypothesis is that there is a gene that because of epigenetics is expressed as homosexuality through a combination of environmental factors (including those in the womb).
Explains neatly why identical twins are likely, but not guaranteed, to share a sexual orientation.
i remember reading something that said the more babies a women has the less testosterone the baby will have, so say she has three boys, the youngest boy would have less testosterone than the oldest so would have a higher chance of being the gay
>gay men have less testosterone
>>5238878
That's not it - it's to do with exposure in the womb.
One example of how this is expressed physically is the difference in length between ring and index fingers. Less test in the womb = longer index finger.
So when most gay men have longer index than ring fingers, like women, there's an indication levels of estrogen in the womb have effected their sexuality.
>>5238813
You remember wrong. It's about the hormones in the womb. Gay guys' balls are no less efficient at making testosterone than straight guys'. But they may have been exposed to more estrogen in the womb, changing the way they develop.
>>5238891
>So when most gay men have longer index than ring fingers
That isn't true at all. Jesus, why can't people understand what these weak correlations mean? All the studies have ever shown is that gay men are statistically significantly more likely to have index fingers like that. That doesn't mean "most gay men". It means "some frequency more among gays than straights". Could literally be 3% compared to 6%.
It's epigenetics affected by womb environment during different stages of the fetus development.
If it was as simple as a gay gene, I still would want them to find it. Otherwise, how are they going to be able to cure something without knowing how?
>>5237414
seeing how hormones can actually change the sexual orientation of transexuals, estrogen has a high chance of turning a previously straight man, into a gay one. But that's not always the case, estrogen also has a slight chance of turning a gay man into a straight one so estro is very much a random roulette of sexual orientation, androphilia having the highest chances, but with plenty of gynophilia to make it a bit of a risk.
Testosterone however, is a different ball game altogether. Judging by how T effects trans guys, 8 times out of 10 testosterone will turn a straight women a 100 times more straight and can turn a gay woman straight. Androphilia seems to be the highest likelihood when taking T.
So yes, with current technology we could probably turn gay people straight, but with gay men and estrogen, the estro probably has to be modified a bit to turn fags into straights.
>>5238891
But my index finger is regular and I'm still super gay. I don't think it really matters at all tbhq senpai
>>5238050
>I believe not being straight is a choice
depends on wether you define being straight as wether you have sex with the opposite sex or wether you like having sex with the opposite sex. if it's the first you have a choice as you can choose to express your behavior to an extent. if it's the second you don't have a choice as you can't choose what you like but only find out.
>>5238953
So... people taking either type of hormone tend to come out liking men more? What does that say?
It would be so qt if FTMs on T suddenly found themselves unable to resist the vag, but alas...
>>5238953
i hope you don't really hold these beliefs
>>5239044
Based on reading trans stories around the Internet they seem pretty accurate?
>>5239052
during the process of transitioning there's a lot of stuff happening. you can't just summarize everything, especially something we know very little about such as sexual orientation, with "lol hormones". there is also a lot of pressure for people to be straight in society. even if one isn't ostracized if they are gay the social norm is straight and for people who can be as repressed about themselves as trans people can be it is not unlikely for them to perceive themselves as liking the opposite sex. once trans people are on hormones they often report being able to be themselves much easier so engaging their actual sexual orientation may just be one prospect of it.
>>5239082
Why does it seem like most FTMs report liking men more after T then? Are they just a vocal minority?
>>5239094
you gotta be more specific. what does "liking men more than before" mean? did they like girls before and didn't want to engage with men at all? did they not like sex with men before or was it just that they didn't want to engage with them before for reasons that might be related to dysphoria? how is that exactly challenging my post?
>>5239111
They report higher levels of subjective arousal caused by men than before. If you think that's simply a false generalization, that's cool, I admit I'm only going off anecdata here.
It would challenge your post because you seemed to be implying that orientation changes during transition are more due to social pressure than hormones. But many FTMs on T take on an attraction that is considered less socially desirable in their new gender than their old. It seems reasonable to attribute this change to the hormones.
>>5239151
>orientation changes during transition are more due to social pressure
i'd argue that girls are under less social pressure than boys and homosexual FTMs might engage with girls pre-transition to feel more like a man in addition to being a dyke but i admit i enter thin ice with that one.
>It seems reasonable to attribute this change to the hormones.
while hormones have an effect on your psyche and they certainly play a role in the change of sexual orientation during transition as i have said so before too it is very doubtful to go to the extent you established before. i am very sure if hormones had such an effect it would have been long known because i'm sure that enough gay people, both men and women, have been treated with them already to change them. also hormone leves don't have any effect on sexuality, only libido.
>>5237414
Being a mtf my orientation has changed like a lot.
So here's my analyization.
Be 15-18 horny teenager would masterbate at least like once a day sometimes even doing it 3 times a day.
I would mostly look at just straight guy on girl, lesbians, or girls just playing with themselves. Every now and then I'd look at shemale porn. Not often though
In public I would check chicks out all the time. Girls in short shirts, pregnant woman's cleavage you name it. Like i got this message in my head every time I looked a chick " like I'd bang her so hard, or omg that's so fucking hot".
Whatever
Be 19 tho and having been on hrt now for like a year or so I can say a lot has changed.
I literally no longer find attraction to woman. I don't stare any more.
i just don't find pleasure about thinking thoughts of me sticking my penis on some girls ass anymore.
It's wierd.
I only masterbate like 4 times a month max now. And really it's only cause I force my self to.
I'm not as attracted to men as I was attracted to woman when I was pre hrt.
But if I see some masculine average to good looking guy over 20 I'll find my self staring and having thoughts about that man putting his arms around my waist kissing my neck and stroking my hair.
Like my thoughts not only have shifted to men, but they are more romantic thoughts rather than preverted thoughts.
Like If I meet a girl and like maybe she's a nice person I might give it a go?
But it doesn't mean Id go out actively seeking a girl to date.
Same with a feminine gay guy.
I mostly now find attraction to straight acting dudes and it works out.
Cause most girls find me to short feminine to date.
Gay flamboyant dudes arnt attracted to me cause I'm also too feminine.
But the straighter acting dudes are in love with me. And they only want to top.
Which is good cause even though having srs right now isn't as essential as ffs now I don't want to use my penis anymore.
So yes you could change people's orientation with hormones/blockers
>>5239200
>it would have been long known because i'm sure that enough gay people, both men and women, have been treated with them already to change them.
Except that they already do that. They did it to Alan Turing and now modern day Iran uses transexual hormones and surgery to treat gays.
>>5239297
>Except that they already do that
>do that
>do
do you mean "know" or did you misunderstand me? i meant that of course it has been tried countless times already but if it would be working it would have been known long ago.
>Alan Turing
who?
>Iran uses transexual hormones and surgery to treat gays.
so they turn gay guys in straight girls?
>>5237414
>gus kenworthy
Holy shit this guy hot.
>>5239326
>>Iran uses transexual hormones and surgery to treat gays.
>so they turn gay guys in straight girls?
Yes.
>>5239379
And he bats for our team, yay!
>>5238050
>I doubt there's a gay gene. God may have fucked around in the old testament but do you really think he'd curse a person from birth like that?
Holy fucking autism, kiddo.
>>5238050
T'is not a curse, t'is a blessing not to be chained to a woman and her demands all ye life. T'is a blessing to appreciate the cock over the axe wound that is the vagina. Curse my ass. If gayness is a curse may I forever have that curse, meaning if there is reincarnation, I want to come back as a gay man.
Is it true that gay men's brains are partially feminized?
If it's be genetic, why is my entire family so damn straight?
Every single one but me.
>>5239989
Every heard of recessive traits? You can carry a gene without it exhibiting itself. For example I have brown eyes but carry the blue eyes gene, I know this because my father has blue eyes.
>>5240066
But my father isn't gay. No family memeber besides me had ever showed an interest in same sex. Either that, or someone's in a closet, but I cannot even imagine who could it be. Even the dead ones were known as nothing but straight.
>>5237414
My guess is that there are gynophylic and androphyilic genes that can trigger.
>>5240083
You do realize that a century or so ago many gay men lived lives of unhappiness and in shame while in sham marriages to the opposite sex. They just close their eyes and imagine they're fucking a man.
I met a guy who's in his 60's and has children and only came out after his wife died. He was too scared to come out for the longest time and never was into women, just married because it was expected of him. It's very likely that every single person gay or straight has a gay relative somewhere on their family tree that hasn't come out due to societal pressure.
And who knows maybe your dad is bi and just hasn't revealed that side of himself, or maybe he's gay and closeted, maybe when you bring a sexy man home, he's secretly drooling in his mind and undressing him with his eyes without your even knowing.
>>5237963
>Implying one of the parents isn't always in the closet.
>Implying having kids with a homosexual won't result in a high chance of homosexuality even if the child is raised in the straightest society on the planet.
And this is why straight guys have a deep dislike of actual lesbians and see bi girls as only fun for a fuck.
The lack of alleles in this thread is disturbing.
>>5237620
It's not epigenetic changes per se that are static. Cells (their DNA) undergo epigenetic changes all the time. You're rather asking why being gayyy is not reversible if it is more or less set in epigenetics (which is more or less reversible changes).
Epigenetic changes have a major role in embryology and the formation of tissues by being one of the major reasons why cells commit to a becoming certain type of cell (neuron, blood vessel, muscle etc etc) and also creates minuscle variation in cell function, by regulating what genes are/can be expressed in that cell, depending on external stimuli (gradients of signaling molecules/hormones in the immediate environment of the cell, neuronal signaling, etc).
As such, if being gay is purely a result of current epigenetic state of neuronal cells, it is theoretically as reversible as any other epigenetic change, for instance through long-term change of hormone levels in the blood. However, it might be that there doesn't exist any practical way of changing these epigenetics in adulthood.
If being gay is instead entirely due to a change in brain structure following early epigenetic modification (such as due to womb hormones yada yada), changing the epigenetics in adulthood would have little to no effect on gayness.
>>5240066
>still believing that eye color is a mendelian trait
>>5240985
But they've done tests before where the injected gay men with testosterone under the theory that there was some hormone imbalance that caused homosexuality and needless to say, it didn't work.
>>5239429
The guy gave people lepreseee
Can't spell that
>>5240083
You do realize that genes have can be more or less expressed right, that many times in combination with other genes they may express themselves in another way.
So a gene that increases intelligence and or empathy might as well also increase the attraction to the same sex. Depending on it's strength and with which other genes it's involved it might make a person a 3 on the Kinsey (which he would be able to ignore the same sex attraction and pass his genes) or a 2 or a 6.
>>5237997
There are proteins that turn genes on and off. The egg frying analogy is not correct.
There are many examples where one trait expressed in one set of conditions can lead to a detriment, but in another causes a benefit. For instance, the gene that causes sickle cell protects the carrier from malaria.
One possible example in this context of homosexuality; a gene or set of genes that "cause" homosexuality in one gender may cause an increase in the sexual response system in the other.
Human psychology is complex and varied though and that is only part the huge set of possibilities of what could be going on.
>>5243130
So say I have a heterosexual friend who says he really wishes that he was gay and if he were gay I would be at the top of the list, what proteins do we need to find for him to become gay?
>>5237414
if there was indeed a gay gene, i guesstimate that the gay gene would actually be inherent in everyone. the difference being dominant/recessive. so... fuck off.
>>5243277
Lots of semen.
