Homosexuality, Research Paper Example

Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture?

The debate over the origins of homosexuality has been on going for centuries.  All moral arguments aside, scientist and psychologists have examined biology, sociology and psychology as well as environmental and evolutionary causes for homosexuality and have largely come up short.  The idea itself is a bit of a conundrum; “If there is one thing that has always seemed obvious about homosexuality, it’s that it just doesn’t make sense.  Evolution favors traits that aid reproduction, and being gay clearly doesn’t do that.  The existence of homosexuality amounts to a profound evolutionary mystery, since failing to pass on your genes means that your genetic fitness is a resounding zero (Kunzig, 2008).”  The argument that homosexuality is counterproductive to evolution has largely formed the basis for research into environmental psychology, parenting studies and sociological gender studies.  However, as the understanding of genetics grows, previously held ideas of how evolutionary genetics function has changed; is it possible that homosexuality is a genetic tool that aids in the evolutionary process rather than hindering it?  If there is to be anything understood about evolution it’s that evolution is a “big picture” process and that it may be an oversimplification to say that homosexuality is evolutionary suicide.

The biggest question raised by asserting that homosexuality has a genetic basis is; wouldn’t the gay gene eventually fade out over time because gays and lesbians would be less likely to produce biological children (until recently, of course).  On the surface this would seem like quite logical, however genetic testing has revealed that these traits can be passed generation to generation.  Biologist Geoffrey Hall, building on genetic work in fruit flies started by Kulbir Gill in the sixties, showed that it was possible for a gene that is counterproductive to reproduction to be carried on generation to generation.  Fruit flies have proven to be a valuable source in genetic testing due to their short life span- two to three months.  Certain fruit flies are born unable to reproduce.  Known as “fruitless” flies, they unsuccessfully attempt to mate with both male and female fruit flies.  “Although fruitless flies don’t mate, the perpetuation of the fruitless trait is made possible by the fact that it is recessive- a full pair of the mutations is needed for fruitless behavior to be expressed.  When males that carry a single fruitless gene mate with a fruitless carrying female, a percentage of their offspring will carry the full pair and display typical fruitless behavior.  If a genetic component of homosexuality in human beings exists, it could possibly operate by means of a comparable mechanism (Burr, 1993).”

This makes it highly possible for a homosexual gene to be passed from generation to generation without homosexuals necessarily passing their genes to their own offspring.  This may answer the “how” but it certainly doesn’t answer the “why” of the homosexual-evolution question because it fails to show how homosexuality would benefit a species.  Psycho-biologist, Qazi Rahman, and psychologist, Glenn Wilson, have put forth a theory that may explain why homosexuality would be an evolutionary tool, asserting that it is unlikely only one gene would make someone homosexual, but rather a combination of genes.  “Gay genes might survive because so long as a man doesn’t have enough of them to make him gay, they increase the reproductive success of the woman he mates with. Biologists call it ‘sexually antagonistic selection,’ meaning a trait survives in one sex only because it is useful to the other. Nipples–useless to men, vital to women–are one example, and homosexuality may be another. By interfering with the masculinization of the brain, gay genes might promote feminine behavior traits, making men who carry them kinder, gentler, more nurturing—‘less aggressive and psychopathic than the typical male,’ as Rahman and Wilson put it. Such men may be more likely to help raise children rather than kill them–or each other–and as a result, women may be more likely to choose them as mates (Kunzig, 2008).”  Thus, the existence of several genes that, when properly combined, generate homosexuality but, when limited, create more nurturing and caring males actually aids the evolutionary/ reproductive process.  Males who are more nurturing are more likely to make good mates and produce more offspring that will have a higher probability of survival.  Biologically speaking (and contrary to many of the moralist arguments against it) homosexuality may actually be responsible for creating nurturing, caring families.

Rahman and Wilson investigated the possibility that these caring, nurturing families would tend to have more children and would lead to the passing of the gay gene(s).  “Sure enough, the mothers of homosexuals in the study did indeed have between a quarter and a third more children than the mothers of heterosexuals. Camperio also uncovered another dramatic finding: In families with gay sons, the aunts from the mother’s side had many more children than the aunts on the father’s side–the large families, in other words, were on the maternal side (Kunzig, 2008).”  These findings are supported by a study at the National Cancer Institute’s Laboratory of Biochemistry, which found “that families of 76 gay men included a much higher proportion of homosexual male relatives than found in the general population. Intriguingly, almost all the disproportion was on the mother’s side of the family (Henry, 1993).”  The gene or genes that cause homosexuality most likely originate from the maternal side of the family tree.  If the gene fosters larger, more nurturing families that the likelihood of the gene being passed on is increased.

Statistically, the more children one has, the more likely one of them will be gay.  Psychologist Anthony F. Bogaert was trying to find a psychological correlation between fraternal siblings and homosexuality and may have inadvertently added to the genetic argument put forth by Rahman and Wilson, finding that the more older brothers an individual male had, the more likely he was to be gay (Bower, 2006).  The more brothers born to a family, the more likely the gay gene will eventually emerge in one of them, the chances becoming greater and greater with each new birth.

The difficulty facing the gay community with the investigation into the genetics of homosexuality is that if a genetic factor is found, it could be argued that it is not a desirable trait, much like mental illness or genetic disease (Bower, 2006).  However, often the simplest answer is the correct one.  While there does exist a link between genetics and homosexuality, that includes an understanding of how the genes are passed down, how they have remained in existence and also why they would benefit the human species, there are a large number of moral, social and familial influences at work, just as there is in any individual.  These are not factors, which can be decided by the individual whom they are affecting but are rather predetermined through genetics or outside of their control, such as family and social environment.  A person is born a certain way with certain characteristics, but that does not predetermine their life but does greatly influence the way their world is experiences and the tendency toward particular judgments and decisions they will make in the future.

References

Bower, B. “Gay males’ sibling link: men’s homosexuality tied to having older brothers.” Science News 1 July 2006: 3. General OneFile. Web. 23 June 2010.

Burr, Chandler. “Homosexuality and biology: an introduction to a muddled and sometimes contentious world of scientific research–one whose findings, now as    tentative as they are suggestive, may someday shed light on the sexual orientation  of everyone.(Cover story).” The Atlantic Mar. 1993: 47+. General Reference   Center Gold. Web. 23 June 2010.

Henry, William A. “Born gay?” Time 26 July 1993: 36+. General OneFile. Web. 23 June 2010.

Kunzig, Robert. “Finding the switch: homosexuality may persist because the associated genes convey surprising advantages on homosexuals family members.” Psychology Today 41.3 (2008): 88+. General OneFile. Web. 23 June 2010.