OP-ED COLUMNIST
Genetic or Not, Gay Won’t Go Away
By FRANK BRUNI
Published: January 28, 2012
Related News
Life After ‘Sex’ (January 22, 2012)
Readers’ Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Seems to me that most of the fuss about the actress is over semantics. Clearly she's bisexual, chooses to call herself gay because she's in a full-time same sex relationship. Obviously she's correct in saying that she chose to be gay given the way she uses the word. Even she acknowledges that it's not necessarily a choice for other gay people.
With regard to Christie, he's not being a political wimp, he's being a bigot, just as Schwarzenegger was when he vetoed a marriage equality bill in California. As one of the New Jersey legislators properly observed, you don't put fundamental human rights up for a vote. I somehow doubt that Christie would veto a bill that provided that Roman Catholics should have the same marriage rights as other citizens of the state if the current laws restricted those marriage rights.
Born this way?!
I've been finely crafted and perfected over years so that I am perfect. This don't just happen on accident.
How funny you should post this today, Justin. I regularly correspond via email with my female high school steady. She knows that I am gay. Today she emailed me about this NYT article and I have spent the better part of the day responding to her emails about the findings of current research in this area.
Equally as important as the question of whether there is a genetic origin of homosexuality, however, is Bruni's observation that to some people it won't make a difference. Even if there is utterly convincing scientific proof that we are who we are because of genes or hormonal influences in the womb, some people will still hate queers. And, unfortunately, there's no medicine to cure that.
Funny Richard to say that we were
molded the way we are in the womb..
Aunt in Beverly Hills Ca., took me
to a doctor out there in '73, and
he said that the benign tumor that
took out my eye, was started with
myself in the womb of my mother.
I don't think he told her that, for
I never mentioned it to her.
"One landmark study looked at gay men’s brothers and found that 52 percent of identical twin brothers were also gay, in contrast with only 22 percent of nonidentical twin brothers and 11 percent of adoptive, genetically unrelated brothers."
That statement confuses me.
What is the percentage of non-identical brothers that are gay?
Or is that a irrelevant statistic?
I would have thought the omission of such an overwhelmingly significant majority group would be irresponsible when using statistics to demonstrate a point?
Besides, I'd be interested to know the percentage of nonidentical brothers, raised in the same household and within a year or four of each other who are both gay?
Or did I miss something here?
Greg. . .the answers to your question[s] are quoted in your comment.
52 percent of identical twin brothers were also gay, in contrast with only 22 percent of nonidentical twin brothers [who are gay] and 11 percent of adoptive, genetically unrelated brothers[are gay]."
Right?
. . . .justin
Sorry. . .this deleted was a repeat of the previous comment. ;-)
Sorry. . .this deleted was a repeat of the previous comment. ;-)
Justin, your answer to Greg is incorrect. He asked about non-twin brothers; i.e. male siblings who were not in the womb at the same time.
Sorry about that. . .guess i was still asleep. . .or not enough sleep.
Sorry, Greg, . . .I guess the wordings here are not as clear as they could be. I never "saw" the non-twin issue.
Thanks, Richard, for the correction.
Thanks Richard.
It seems I did not miss anything.... but the author did.
His statistics are not particularly meaningful......and when I see some error, oversight or omission like in any article I do wonder at the credibility of rest of it.
Hmmm...interesting, Coop.
As for labels, well, it seems it depends on where you live that gives a final twist to your own label.....take yourself out of that environment and you may find that the label you were happy to be stuck with in your own world, environment, has different connotations in the new environment.
I, as a person, don't wish to be judged by a label, only by who I am.
I'm not queer, I'm not gay, I'm not a bender, I'm not a poof, I'm not a QUEER, ......... I'm not even a homosexual.
I'm just a male who prefers company of other males, a male who feels "Love" (whatever that is, but we'll leave that one for later...heehee) I am a male who only wishes to have physical contact of a sexual nature with other males.
Full stop.
Sorry that I've steered off the subject, but labels can be damaging.
Rant over.