As some of you may know, I had an encounter with a man in a coffee shop. The encounter began cordially enough...the man was sitting at the table with some friends I met a while back who meet once a week to discuss positive psychology. As I approached them with my delicious mug of Moroccan mint tea, I heard them discussing (or rather this man lecturing) about faith, hope, and love. I smiled thinking that this would be a pleasant conversation....I was in for a surprise. One of the men (the one in charge of these meetings) had to leave a little early (by "early" I mean early for him...we had already exceeded the one-hour time slot for this group discussion and had all opted to continue discussion outside of this scheduled discussion) so he excused himself and off he went, leaving me, the retired physicist (let's call him "D"), and the man still rambling (let's call him "R"). The conversation took an odd turn as R began to describe why he felt churches should be more exclusive and not let in people who do drugs and other such characters. I disagreed, but my opinion was barely noted before R continued ranting. As the rant evolved, somehow we got on the subject of homosexuality. At this point, the high and mighty R asserted that homosexuality was "unnatural".
I interjected, correcting him with a simple, "No it isn't."
This comment sent in soaring into a rage of hellfire and brimstone and culminated with him telling me "You don't know what you are talking about".
His comment unearthed within me a fury I hadn't realized dwelled within me. I leaned forward assertively and got right in his face as I said, "I have two degrees in biology, I DO know what I am talking about."
The man glared at me as I sat back into my seat and asked, "How old are you?"
I responded with my age only for him to assert that he was "3 times your age" (the guy couldn't have been any older than late 50s or early 60s) and that I couldn't possibly know more than him because I was younger. D interjected with a quick, "So you are in your 70s?" I asked if R had ever studied biology or the natural world....I asked if he had any degrees in the subject, to which he responded that he had a "degree from the university of life" and that he "had been a father and knew homosexuality was unnatural"....both excellent qualifications for discussing the subject at hand. O.o
This went on and on....he rambled about things that weren't pertinent to the discussion and tried to assert that they formed the basis for his argument. He confused gender identity issues with sexual identity issues, he claimed the bible and God himself said homosexuality was unnatural, and he said he had gay friends and loved them as people, but didn't believe they should be married because they would ruin the institution of marriage (though somewhere in there he revealed that he was divorced...one of those damn gays must have ruined his otherwise perfect marriage). Here D and I were, trying to get a word in, but maintaining a calm demeanor as R flew off the handle and caused a scene that had people all over the shop staring at us. R challenged me to find "one shred of scientific proof" that homosexuality exists in nature. All I could think was CHALLENGE FREAKING ACCEPTED!
After R left, D and I discussed the issue in a more civil manner where both of our opinions (though they were similar) could be voiced. We also had one of the barista come over and tell us that he admired our patience with dealing with R. Over the next week, I spent more time that I intended searching the literature for examples of homosexuality in nature. There was certainly no shortage of such evidence, in fact, I had to choose which studies to include in my report for R and which to just read for funzies. I learned a lot....it's amazing what you find when you look more intensely at a subject.
The next week I waited for R at the coffee shop. I even made it a point to arrive early than I am usually able to arrive to make sure I wouldn't miss him. He never showed up. I was there from noon until a little after three and there was no sign of him, so my 23 page document remained in my backpack, along with my Principles of Biology textbook, flagged with passages touching on the subject from various chapters. Several friends and family members have requested to read this document, so I decided to post it here. I know this isn't dealing with parasites themselves, but I believe that ignorance is parasitic, so in a metaphorical sense, this qualifies for the blog's theme. Plus it's my blog, so bite me.
The following is my report to R. This has been somewhat edited from it's original content to protect my own privacy in the event of pissing off someone crazy (and probably angrily ignorant), but I promise to try and leave it as untouched as possible. Be warned, it's kind of a long read. Also, please keep in mind that I wrote this in a week, so don't judge too harshly! Without further ado:
Authentically Natural: An Examination of Homosexuality as a Component of the Natural World
By: Me :)
INTRODUCTIONS
Who
is this 26-year-old punk biologist?
When
we officially met for the first time last week, you made several incorrect
assumptions about me. First, I must apologize for accidentally deceiving you. I
recently had a birthday and I’m not used to calling myself 26 yet. So, I’m not
25…sorry about that. The way I figure, if we are going to have a civil
conversation, we should know more about one another. Here’s who I am.
I’m
a 26-year-old Christian woman raised on a farm in a small town in Texas. Despite
not having a lot of money growing up, I was extremely active in my community
and in high school activities. I was an athlete for a short period of time
(basketball, cross-country, track, and long jump). I was an artist in many
different ways (musician, thespian, prose orator, poet, writer...I also dabbled
in a number of craft-type works of art). I loved science as a general
subject…it was always my favorite subject. Biology held my fascination the most
of any of the branches of this subject. I competed in U.I.L Science along with
a multitude of other academic competitions. I also loved promoting school
spirit by serving as my school’s mascot for the last two years of high school.
I graduated in 2005 as the class valedictorian. I remember praying as I
prepared for my speech. I asked God to give me the right words, and as always,
my God delivered. In my speech, I quoted
one of my favorite songs by Semisonic. The quote was “Every new beginning comes from some other beginning’s end”. I knew
that these words were perfect for such a speech, but I didn’t know just how
often they would return to resonate throughout my life.
As
this chapter of my life ended, I began a new chapter as a college student. I
learned many things over the next four years. I learned more about the natural
world and fell in love with it for its fascinating complexity. I learned that I
didn’t know nearly as much about this subject as I had once thought. I also learned that there were a lot of other
things I didn’t know. I made lots of new friends and embraced a diversity of
people that I had never been exposed to before. I learned about other cultures
and other races. I learned about other faiths and other political viewpoints. I
learned about people by not judging them and by actually taking the time to get
to know them. I met gay people, lesbian people, transgendered people, and
asexual people. I’d like to emphasize that I didn’t meet “gays” or “lesbians”,
I met people. These people were
interesting and taught me that there were more to them than I had ever
realized. I’ve always felt like I was a compassionate person, but these new
friends helped me to realize just how uncompassionate I had been towards people
who were different from me. I was never outright mean to anyone, but I
certainly had my prejudices. I’m not proud of this fact, but that doesn’t make
it any less true. I am proud that I was mature enough to admit this fact and
after intense prayer, I feel as if I have truly repented of my judgmental sins.
I know in my heart that God blessed me with the ability to analyze information
critically and to use that information to rationalize things that don’t make
sense to me. I firmly believe that he sends people into our lives for a reason.
Jesus was known as the great teacher, so it makes sense that we are all
students, and that we all have lessons to learn. But like any good student, we
have to keep our minds and hearts open, and we can’t fall asleep when we don’t
like the subject matter if we actually want to learn anything.
Getting
back to college, I graduated in May 2009 with a Bachelors of Science in
Organismal Biology with a second major in History (the majority of my history
classes were in U.S. history, but were still generally well-rounded). I began
graduate school the following August. I finished my Masters of Biological Sciences
in May of 2012. A few months previous I had received my acceptance letter from a PhD program to which I had applied. I first laid eyes on my new home-city in June when we came to look for a place to
live and for my fiancé to apply for jobs in our future new home. In July I
married the love of my life after dating for four years, and then we jetted off
to a resort in Mexico for what most experts would have to agree was the most
amazing honeymoon anyone has ever had ever. In August, we packed up our
belongings and headed up to this city. I began my work as a Ph.D. student a few
weeks later. So many new beginnings born from the end of this chapter of my life.
I
am now studying ancient parasitism under a world expert in the field of
Archaeoparasitology (in fact, he coined the term itself). I’ve learned a great
deal more since moving here. My knowledge of parasites and the people who study
them has at least tripled since I arrived last August. As before, I’ve made a
lot of new and diverse friends. I’ve learned even more about how different
people are and how wonderful those differences can be. Some of my new friends
are homosexuals. They are such amazing and fun people! They throw great parties
and always go out of their way to make people feel included at group events. I
can’t even count the number of gay men I have met in the last few months
because if we are at a gathering, they always make it a point to introduce
themselves and ask me about what I do. Such a simple act of kindness is
appreciated when you don’t know many of the people surrounding you. After meeting you last Friday, I attended a
birthday party for a gay friend. I wore a pretty, full-length dress and pair of
adorable shoes. We ended up walking more than we had expected to be walking and
my feet began to hurt terribly. I mentioned my pain to my friend and without
much thought he offered to run a few blocks back to another friend’s apartment
to get me some flip-flops, but I didn’t want to split up the group on my
account. Then my friend did something totally unexpected…he offered to swap me
for his flat, comfy-looking shoes. I didn’t think he was serious, but he was.
He wore the heels even after some fraternity boys walking along the sidewalks downtown called
him a “faggot”. He didn’t care. He didn’t want me to be in pain anymore. He
wore those shoes until my feet had recovered and then we swapped shoes again so
he could go dance with his friends for his birthday. This was the most selfless
act of love anyone other than my husband had done for me in years. Words cannot
express how blessed I am to know this man, nor can they adequately express how
thankful I am that God opened my eyes and my heart so many years ago.
I
suppose this all boils down to me needing you to realize that I’m not just some
punk that pissed you off with bullshit last week. I am a person who has been
fascinated by the natural world all of my life. I have spent the better part of
the last decade dedicating my life to studying biological systems and the
organisms that comprise them. I moved to a new state where I barely knew anyone
with my wonderfully supportive husband to become better educated about my
passion, and to build a career as a biologist. I am qualified to discuss matters of biology despite my age and your perception of the correlation that is, in
all actuality, non-existent between the two. I am also an avid supporter for
the rights of homosexuals. I support their civil rights not because some
politician told me to, not because my parents told me to, not because my priest
told me to…but because I got to know homosexuals. I also support their rights
because I have logically analyzed both sides of arguments regarding the rights
of homosexuals over the years and the only rational explanation from legal,
scientific, and religious viewpoints was that they have the right to enjoy the
same lives, liberties, and pursuits of happiness as any other American.
EXAMINING
HOMOSEXUALITY
A
Biological Perspective
I
suppose the best way to start is to begin with the subject about which I know
the most. First, let us define a few words so that we are all on the same page
about what those words mean.
Gender Identity--This
refers to a person’s sense of and subjective experience of their own gender.
Whether a person identifies themself as being male or female is not a function
of their sex chromosomes. Rather, gender identity is a function of one’s own
inner perceptions and feelings about their gender.
Sexual Identity--This
refers to how one thinks of oneself in terms of whom one is romantically or
sexually attracted to. Like gender identity, this is not a function of sex
chromosomes, but rather a function of physical and psychological attraction.
Sexual Orientation--This
refers to an enduring personal quality that inclines people to feel romantic or
sexual attraction to persons of the opposite or same sex or gender or to both
sexes or to more than one gender. These attractions are generally called
heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or asexuality, but there are
subcategories within some of these more broad groupings. Generally, there are
three components that make up one’s sexual orientation: Sexual attraction,
sexual behavior, and sexual identity. There is no simple cause for sexual
orientation. Research suggests that biological factors such as genetics and
biochemistry as well as environmental factors influence sexual orientation.
Sexuality has also been shown by research to be fluid, and to be existent in
various gradations rather than existing dichotomously.
Transgendered--This
refers to individuals who have tendencies that are different from the
conventionally accepted gender roles. Transgendered individuals feel there is a
discrepancy with their assigned gender and their internal sense of gender.
These individuals typically do not seek to change their bodies surgically. This
is a state of a person’s gender identity and has nothing to do with one’s
sexual orientation.
Transsexual--This
refers to individuals who do not identify with the gender they were assigned at
birth. They often (but don’t always)
seek surgery in order to make their bodies reflect their gender identity.
Again, this is a function of gender identity, not sexual orientation.
Intersex (a.k.a. hermaphroditism in non-human
species)--This refers to a variation in sex characteristics
including chromosomes, gonads, and/or genitals that do not allow an individual
to be distinctly identified as male or female. Being an intersexed individual
may include genital ambiguity, and/or combinations of genotypes or phenotypes
other than XY or XX and their associated phenotypes.
Gynandromorph--This
refers to an organism that contains both male and female characteristics. These
animals have astonishingly distinctive demarcations between their male and
female appearances. Gynandromorphic
individuals are found in various species of animals including spiders,
butterflies, moths, lobsters, crabs, birds, and even small mammals.
Parthnogenesis--This
is a type of asexual reproduction through which embryos develop without
fertilization from sperm. Offspring are genetically identical to the parent individual.
Okay,
now that we all know what these words mean, let’s talk sexual diversity in
nature. There are over 1,500 species
that have been observed displaying homosexual behaviors. (Bagemihl, 1999) Many
instances of humans observing such behaviors were never formally documented or
were outright rejected for fear of reprimand by the scientific community
existing within societies not yet accepting of such concepts. However, the
sexual diversity of the natural world remains a biological truth whether or not
man choses to believe in its existence.
There
are a variety of homosexual behaviors displayed by non-human animal species.
These behaviors include mating rituals directed at members of the same sex,
copulation with members of the same sex, displays of affection among members of
the same sex, genital stimulation of members of the same sex without copulation,
and even parenting of offspring by two members of the same sex.
“The
animal kingdom [does] it with much greater sexual diversity--including
homosexual, bisexual, and non-reproductive sex--than the scientific community
and society at large have previously been willing to accept.”
--Bruce Bagemihl, Ph.D. (Canadian Biologist and Linguist)--
homosexual, bisexual, and non-reproductive sex--than the scientific community
and society at large have previously been willing to accept.”
--Bruce Bagemihl, Ph.D. (Canadian Biologist and Linguist)--
A plethora
of species display such behaviors. (See Appendix 1-7). Let’s start with insects. At least 11 species
of dragonflies and damselflies have been documented as having mating damage on
the heads of males in 20%-80% of a population. You see, these animals have an
interesting way of engaging in sex. The males have little claspers on their
abdomens that they use to grip the region behind the head of the females during
copulation. In the process, females
contract “mating damage” to those bodily regions. Males do not use their
claspers for defensive purposes. The discovery of mating damage on these
animals indicates that they engage in homosexual coupling behaviors (Utzeri and
Belfiore, 1990). Bed bugs also have been
shown to engage in homosexual mounting (Ryne, 2009). Fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) have been used
to study the genetic basis of homosexuality. If a male of this species bears
two copies of a particular allele within a certain gene, the male will mate
exclusively with other males of the species (Gailey and Hall, 1989). Later studies covered the alteration of brain
structure in homosexual individuals (Yamamoto, et al., 1998). Other studies
further examined this phenomenon in this species, but we won’t cover them
further for our purposes.
Okay,
but these are just insects, higher animals couldn’t possibly be homosexual,
right? Wrong. Whiptail lizards (belonging to the family Teiidae) undergo
parthenogenesis more often than they engage in sexual behaviors for
reproductive purposes. For this reason, males are rare in many of these
species. Often times, female will engage in homosexual behaviors in order to
stimulate ovulation. Hormones are triggered by such behaviors and engaging in
such behaviors have been shown to actually increase the success of asexual
reproduction. Mating pairs will switch between “masculine” and “feminine”
sexual positions and roles from one mating season to another. Some geckos are also known to reproduce in a
similar manner (Kearney, et al., 2005).
Female homosexuality has also been observed in American chameleons (Anolis) and male homosexuality has been
observed in members of the family Iguanidae (Denniston, 1980).
Still,
those are lizards, surely there’s not more advanced animals that are
homosexuals. Wrong again. Birds have
been shown to display both homosexual and transgender behaviors. The list of
birds that display such behaviors is extensive to put it mildly. Everything
from black swans to ibises, to gulls, to mallards, to pigeons, and vultures can
be found on this list. Flamingos and
penguins have been known to form homosexual committed relationships in
which same-sex birds engage in sex, travel together, live together, and even
raising young together (Smith, 2004). Almost a quarter of all black swan (Cygnus atratus) couples are homosexual.
Male homosexuals will sometimes form temporary threesomes with a female, and
then drive her from the nest in order to raise the offspring without her help
(Goudarzi, 2006; Imaginova, 2007). A
South American bird (Rupicola rupicola)
is known to have populations with upwards of 40% of the population engaging in
regular homosexual activities. Some of
these birds never copulate with members of the opposite sex (Bagemihl, 1999;
Imaginova, 2007). Just like with
insects, I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point about birds and
homosexuality.
Still
thinking all of this evidence doesn’t apply? How about we look at mammals? Domestic animals such as sheep, cattle, and
horses have been known to engage in homosexual activities, as have pets such as
budgerigars, cats, and dogs (Bagemihl, 1999).
Ever wonder why dolphins are sometimes
associated with lesbians? Perhaps it is
because at least two species of this animal have been observed performing
homosexual (and heterosexual) acts of nasal sex (penetration of the
blowhole). Or perhaps it is because some
bottlenose dolphin females have sexual encounters known as “beak-genital
propulsion”, in which a female inserts her beak into another female’s genital
opening while swimming forward. (Norris and Dohl, 1980). Males of this species have been known to rub
their genitals together, swim belly to belly, and even engage in anal sex
(Wells, 1995). Dolphins have also engaged in group sex of both homosexual and
heterosexual compositions. Some dolphins
will even have sex with dolphins of other species. It is also evident that dolphins have sex for
pleasure in addition to sex for procreation (Bagemihl, 1999; Sylvestre,1985).
Let’s
move out of the ocean and onto land. Some
of the first homosexual behaviors observed in animals were among wild
rams. Male rams were seen readily mating
with other males even when females were readily available for coitus. These males seemed to refuse to mate with the
females despite seasonal conditions. A
behavior known as “foreleg kicking” is part of the mating ritual in these
animals. This behavior involves the male
gently tapping their forelegs on the genitals of the female to prepare for
intercourse. This behavior has been documented
between males. As many as 10% of these
rams displayed this and other homosexual mating behavior in the populations
observed (LeVay, 2011). Foreleg kicking
is also a part of mating rituals in other animals. In kobs (a type of African antelope), females
are often observed performing foreleg kicking and mounting other females. As in rams, these behaviors occur even during
the breeding season when there are plenty of males available for procreating
(Imaginova, 2007; Bagemihl, 2000).
The
American bison has been known to have courtship, mounting, and full anal
penetration between bulls (Bagemihl, 2000).
Native Americans even had ceremonies reenacting this behavior to make
sure the buffalo would be back in the next year. Speaking of gentle homosexual
giants, elephants and giraffes also engage in same-sex mounting and pair
bonding, as demonstrated by shows of affection such as d trunk playing and
necking. Heterosexual relations among these animals are typically fleeting,
while homosexual partnerships may last for years (Bagemihl, 1999). Lions, monkeys, hyenas, polecats, moose,
rabbits, mice, foxes, zebras, and apes all have homosexual activity among
populations. Homosexuality is
particularly high in giraffes…sometimes reaching as much as 90% among male in a
population (Bagemihl, 1999; Coe, 1967).
Reports
of primates displaying homosexual behaviors are numerous, to put it mildly. Such behaviors occur more often than
incidentally, and should not be dismissed as aberrations in sexual norms among
these animals (Small, 1993). Baboons
have been known to form monogamous homosexual relationships. Some of these relationships have been
documented as lasting up to 6 years in wild populations. Homosexual mounting has been reported as
being common in various species of monkeys and has been studied in rhesus
monkeys, stumptail macaques (Mitchell, 1979), Japanese macaques (Mahlman and
Chapais, 1988), and others.
Homosexuality also exists among chimpanzees, mountain gorillas
(Yamagiwa, 1987; Yamagiwa 1992; Edwards and Todd, 1987), pygmy chimpanzees
(Savage and Bakeman, 1978), siamangs, and gibbons (Edwards and Todd, 1987).
Going
a step further, let’s touch briefly on other forms of sexual diversity in
nature. Some species are completely
asexual, for example, sea urchins never engage in sexual acts at all and rely
on other methods for reproduction.
Remember that word gynandromorph? I won’t go over it again, but these
individuals are ideal examples sexual diversity in nature. Bisexuality occurs within a number of species
naturally, and not just in those that are hermaphroditic. As you’ve already been told, animals such as
elephants and giraffes have fleeting heterosexual relationships that turn into
a more monogamous type of relationship outside of the breeding season when
homosexual relationships are resumed or begun between two males. This is a sort of conditional form of
bisexuality. Some species are bisexuals
in a much more strict sense of the word.
Bonobos
are incredibly sexual primates. The
majority of their day is consumed with sexual intercourse or other sexual
acts. The bonobos aren’t having this
much sex just to procreate, they use sex for a variety of purposes outside of
reproduction. Females have been observed
choosing genital-to-genital rubbing with other females over engaging in sexual
activities with a male (Small, 1993). Sometimes
sex is used to end arguments over food.
These animals have been observed fighting over food, then engaging in
sexual activities, followed by sharing of the food between the post-coital
couple. Age and fitness do not seem to influence the decision to have sex in
these animals. These are not monogamous animals, but they do show signs of
affection before, during, and after sexual encounters whether they be of a
heterosexual or a homosexual nature. These animals typically engage in sex
facing one another, something previously only seen in humans. Sex is a vital tool for these animals that is
used to maintain a peaceful, affectionate, corporative, bisexual, society.
Now
that you know that sexual diversity does, in fact, exist in nature, let’s talk
about some of the biological mechanisms that impact a human’s sexual
orientation. I honestly tried very hard
last week not to laugh when you requested that I present a “gay gene”, but that
reaction wasn’t very Christian of me. I shouldn’t have laughed, even inwardly,
at your ignorance of this particular subject matter. Please accept my humble
apology, and allow me explain first, why this phrase is, in and of itself,
asinine. Afterwards, I will site a few
studies published in peer-reviewed, scientific journals in which the internal
biological factors of homosexuality are examined.
The
presence of the concept of a “gay gene” reveals just how little the general
public understands about genetics and the way that genes function. A genetic
characteristic as complex as one’s sexual orientation is not going to be
controlled by a single gene. In humans,
our eye color alone is controlled by 16 different genes, with two playing the
leading role in iris color determination.
Think about it, if it takes 16 genes to determine the color of your
eyes, how many genes would it take to determine sexual attraction? No one has
been able to determine exactly how many genes control sexual orientation, but
there is significant evidence to suggest that sexual orientation is based, at
least in part, on genetic components. (Thornton, et al., 2009; Garcia-Falgueras
and Swaab, 2010; Bogaert and Skorska, 2011)
Hormones
and neurotransmitters have also been shown to play a role in sexual
orientation. Studies of mice have shown that 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) is
required for male sexual preference (Liu, et al., 2011). This neurotransmitter is more commonly known
as serotonin, and is believed to be involved in our feelings of happiness and
well-being.
“Here
we report that the neurotransmitter 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)...Wild-type male
mice preferred females over males, but males lacking central serotonergic
neurons [such as those releasing 5-HT] lost sexual preference although they
were not generally defective in olfaction or in pheromone sensing...These
results indicate that 5-HT and serotonergic neurons in the adult brain regulate
mammalian sexual preference.”
--Liu,
et al., 2011--
Other
studies involving mice have shown that disabling the fucose mutarotase gene
(which adjusts the brain’s exposure to estrogen) causes female mice to behave as
if they were males when they reach sexual maturity (Park, et. al., 2010). This is similar to the study looking at
induced homosexuality in fruit flies mentioned earlier. Although these studies focus on single genes
or particular neurotransmitters, the researchers acknowledge that other genes
and multiple neurotransmitters as well as hormones must play a role in these
complex behaviors.
Some
researchers believe that birth order may influence the likelihood of
homosexuality among males. The association
between birth order and male sexual orientation is termed “the fraternal birth
order effect” (Valenzuela, 2010). The cause for this effect is unknown,
however, researchers have a working theory that involves the maternal immune
system. According to this theory, the
first time a woman becomes pregnant with a male, her body’s immune system
reacts to it as if it is a foreign body, which is often why pregnancies with
males are more difficult that pregnancies with females. As the pregnant mother-to-be’s body releases
antigens and antibodies to protect the mother, the immune system “learns” how
to identify males. With successive
pregnancies involving male fetuses, the body knows how to identify these male
threats and begins to produce less testosterone in an attempt to subdue the
threat. The more boys a mother gives
birth to, the higher the chance that her next son will be homosexual. (Blanchard and Bogaert, 1996; Blanchard and
Klassen, 1997; Blanchard, 2001; Blanchard, 2004).
Another
interesting study conducted in the early 90s showed that the hypothalamus of
homosexual males was smaller than that of heterosexual males. This structure is used to regulate sexual
behavior. The size of this structure was
equivalent in homosexual males with the same structure in heterosexual females
(LeVay, 1991; Angier, 1992). Other anatomical studies showed that the anterior
commissure of homosexual men is larger than the structure in both heterosexual
men and women. This structure is a
bundle of nerves that allow for both halves of the brain to communicate with
each other (Allen and Gorski, 1992). Studies have further shown hormonal
differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals (West, 1977). A particularly well-written article expands
on these and other aspects of homosexuality in nature. I suggest reading Homosexuality: A Paradox of Evolution by Preston Hunter. Keep in mind that this was written in 1994
and that many more studies have come out since its publication.
A
Psychological Perspective
On
Friday you asserted that being a homosexual was a choice. Now that we have examined the biological
reasons why such a statement is untrue, let us look briefly at homosexuality
from a psychological point of view.
For
many years people used to believe that homosexuality was a choice. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (a.k.a. “The DSM”) once listed being gay as a disorder known
as “androphilia” and being a lesbian as a disorder known as “gynephilia”. Similar terms were also once used to refer to
transgendered people (“auto-gynephilia/auto-androphilia”). All terms associated with homosexuality were
removed from the DSM in 1973, but were replaced by the phrase “ego-dystonic
homosexuality” which addressed a “lack of heterosexual arousal” coupled with a
“persistent distress from a sustained pattern of unwanted homosexual
arousal”. This new diagnosis only
applied to homosexuals who didn’t want to accept their sexual orientation. This came under harsh criticisms by some
psychoanalysts who still believed homosexuality could be treated with
conversion therapy. After years of
debate among professionals in the field, the diagnosis was removed completely
from the DSM in 1986.
Since
that time, many other professional organizations have stated that sexual
orientation is not a choice and that it is not something that can be
changed. These organizations strongly
oppose attempts at conversion therapy and instead advocate for families and
friends of homosexuals to be supportive of their loved one’s innate sexual
identity. These organizations include:
- · The American Psychological Association (publish the DSM)
- · The National Association of Social Workers
- · The American Psychiatric Association
- · The American Academy of Pediatrics
- · The American Psychoanalytic Association
- · The American Medical Association
Mental
health professionals have agreed since the 1970s that homosexuality is a
normal, natural form of human sexual orientation (APA, 2009). Homosexuality was declassified as a mental
disorder first by The American Psychiatric Association in 1973 and then by The
American Psychological Association in 1975 (Bayer, 1987). Many other organizations did the same in the
years that followed. By 1990,
homosexuality was declassified by the World Health Organization.
Many
studies have looked at sexual orientation from a psychological perspective, but
few are more famous that the Kinsey studies of the 1940s and 1950s. The studies showed that sexual orientation
was not as black-and-white as people had once believed. In fact, most people
fall somewhere between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively
homosexual. These studies culminated in
the creation of a scale known as the Kinsey Scale. This scale is depicted below.
Rating
|
Description
|
0
|
Exclusively heterosexual. Individuals make no physical contact which results in
erotic arousal or orgasm and make no psychic responses to individuals of
their own sex.
|
1
|
Predominantly
heterosexual/incidentally homosexual.
Individuals have only incidental homosexual contacts which have involved
physical or psychic response or incidental psychic response without physical
contact.
|
2
|
Predominantly heterosexual but
more than incidentally homosexual.
Individuals have more than incidental homosexual experience and/or respond
rather definitely to homosexual stimuli.
|
3
|
Equally heterosexual and
homosexual. Individuals are about equally
homosexual and heterosexual in their experiences and/or psychic reactions.
|
4
|
Predominantly homosexual but more
than incidentally heterosexual.
Individuals have more overt activity and/or psychic reactions in the
homosexual while still maintaining a fair amount of heterosexual activity
and/or responding rather definitively to heterosexual contact.
|
5
|
Predominantly homosexual/only
incidentally heterosexual.
Individuals are almost entirely homosexual in their activities and/or reactions.
|
6
|
Exclusively homosexual. Individuals who are exclusively homosexual, both in
regard to their overt experience and in regard to their psychic reactions.
|
This
scale has been adapted by many other researchers and is the predecessor to more
commonly used scales found in modern psychological and psychiatric research.
More modern techniques include the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid (KSOG), which
is more multidimensional, as well as Sell Assessment of Sexual Orientation
(SASO), which measures sexual orientation on a continuum and is meant to
provoke discussion rather than to provide a final solution (Klein, et al.,
1985; Sell, 1997). Assessing one’s sexual orientation typically involves
assessing three components: Sexual Attraction, Sexual Behavior, and Sexual
Identity.
I
believe that you also mentioned something about being opposed to same-sex
parenting. While you are entitled to
your own opinion, I felt it would be pertinent to point out that many (almost
all) social scientists agree that this form of parenting is not psychologically
damaging to children. There is no
scientific literature supporting the assertion that heterosexual parents are
inherently better than homosexual parents.
In fact, many organizations regularly issue reports in support of the
rights for gay and lesbian parents.
These organizations include the following:
- · The American Academy of Pediatrics
- · The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
- · The American Psychiatric Association
- · The American Psychological Association
- · The American Psychoanalytic Association
- · The National Association of Social Workers
- · The Child Welfare League of America
- · The North American Council on Adoptable Children
- · The Canadian Psychological Association (CPA).
CONCLUSIONS
I
suppose it is about time that I wrap up this report. After all, every new
beginning comes from some other beginning’s end. This is the end of my report to you, but I
anticipate that it is a new beginning for you and your understanding this
subject from a scientific perspective. I
hope that this new-found knowledge inspires you to delve deeper into the
science of homosexuality. I’m not looking to change your opinion on
homosexuality in terms of whether you see it as “right” or “wrong”, but I hope
I have educated you enough on the subject for you to realize that homosexuality
is natural in both a biological sense and in a psychological sense.
Throughout
this report, I have demonstrated, using sound, scientific evidence, that a
great variety of animals display homosexual behaviors and also that many of
these animals form monogamous homosexual partnerships. Homosexual parenting has
also been observed in nature and the offspring from such parenting strategies
seem to fair just as well as offspring raised by heterosexual parents.
I
have also presented a number of studies discussing the biological and
psychological aspects of human sexual orientation. As discussed previous, many
factors come into play with the development of an individual’s sexual
orientation. Many of these factors are not completely understood, but as
research progresses, new insights regarding the causal effects of hormones,
neurotransmitters, and genes begins to emerge. Advances in psychological and
psychiatric research continue to show that sexual orientation is not something
that one chooses, nor is it an aspect of one’s psyche that can be changed by
“reparative” or “conversion” therapies.
In
conclusion, our sexual orientation is a function of our biology and wide
variety of sexual diversity is present in the natural world of which we are a
part. Opposition to homosexuality and
other non-heterosexual forms of sexual orientation are not valid from
biological and psychological perspectives. Discrimination against individuals
with these forms of sexual orientation is consequently not justified by these
fields of science. Cultural and religious perspective may agree or disagree
with homosexuality, but have no bearing on the scientific realities of this
subject.
REFERENCES
Allen, L. S. and R. A.
Gorski. 1992. Sexual orientation and the size of the
anterior commissure in the human brain.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America. 89(15): 7199-7202.
Angier, Natalie.
"Researchers Find a Second Anatomical Idiosyncrasy." New York
Times. (1 August 1992) p. A7.
APA
Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation. 2009.
Report
of the Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Bagemihl, B. Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity. St. Martin’s Press. New York, 1999.
Bagemihl, B. 2000.
Left-handed bears and androgynous cassowaries: Homosexual/transgendered
animals and indigenous knowledge. Whole
Earth Magazine.
Bayer, R. Homosexuality and
American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. Princeton: Princeton
University Press. 1987.
Blanchard, R. 2001.
Fraternal birth order and the maternal immune hypothesis of male
homosexuality. Hormones and
Behavior. 40(2): 105-114.
Blanchard, R. 2004.
Quantitative and theoretical analyses of the relation between older
brothers and homosexuality in men.
Journal of Theoretical Biology.
230(2): 173-187.
Blanchard, R. and A. F.
Bogaert. 1996. Homosexuality in men and number of older
brothers. The American Journal of
Psychiatry. 153(1): 27-31.
Blanchard, R. and P.
Klassen. 1997. H-Y antigen and homosexuality in men. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 185(3):
373-378.
Bogaert, A. F. and M.
Skorska. 2011. Sexual orientation, fraternal birth order,
and the maternal immune hypothesis: a review.
Frontiers in neuroendocrinology.
32(2): 247-254.
Brentlinger, R. Gay Christian
101: Spiritual Self-Defense for Gay Christians
Coe, M. J. 1967.
Necking behavior in giraffes. Journal
of Zoology (London). 151(3): 313-321.
Denniston, R. H.
"Ambisexuality in Animals." In Judd Marmor (ed.) Homosexual
Behavior: A Modern Reappraisal: A Modern Reappraisal. New York: Basic
Books, Inc., 1980, pp. 25-40.
Edwards, A. A. R. and J. D. Todd. 1987. Homosexual Behaviour in Wild White-handed
Gibbons (Hylobates lar ). Primates.
32(2): 231-236.
Gailey, D.
A., and J. C. Hall. 1989. Behavior and Cytogenetics of Fruitless in
Drosophila melangogaster Courtship Defects Caused by Separate, Closely Linked
Lesions. Genetics. 121(4): 773-785.
Garcia-Falgueras,
A., and D. F. Swaab. 2010. Sexual
Hormones and the Brain: An Essential Alliance for Sexual Identity and Sexual
Orientation, in Endocrine
Development. Pediatric
Neuroendocrinology. 17: 22–35.
Goudarzi, S.
2006. Gay Animals Out of the Closet?:
First-ever Museum Display Shows 51 Species Exhibiting Homosexuality. MSNBC.
Hunter,
P. 1994.
Homosexuality: A Paradox of Evolution.
http://www.adherents.com/misc/paradoxEvolution.html
Imaginova.
2007. Gay Animals: Alternative Lifestyles in the Wild.
Kearney, M.,
R. Wahl, and K. Autumn. 2005. Physiological and Biochemical Zoology. 78:
316-324.
Kinsey, A. 1948. Sexual Behavior
in the Human Male.
Kinsey, A., W. Pomeroy, and C.
Martin. 1953. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.
Klein, F., B. Sepekoff, and T. J.
Wolf. 1985. Sexual Orientation: A Multi-Variable Dynamic
Process. Journal of Homosexuality. 11(1-2): 35-49.
LeVay, S. 1991.
A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and
Homosexual Men. Science. 253: 1034-1037.
LeVay, S. Gay,
Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation. Oxford
University Press, New York. 2011.
Liu, Y., Y. Jiang, Y. Si, J. Kim,
Z. Chen, and Y. Rao. 2011. Molecular regulation of sexual preference revealed
by genetic studies of 5-HT in the brains of male mice. Nature. 472: 95-99.
Mehlman, P. T. and B. Chapais. 1988. Differential Effects of Kinship, Dominance,
and the Mating Season on Female Allogrooming in a Captive Group of Macaca
fuscata . Primates. 29 (2): 195-217.
Mitchell, G. Behavioral Sex Differences in Nonhuman
Primates. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1979.
Norris, K.S., and T.P. Dohl. 1980.
Behaviour of the Hawaiian spinner dolphin, Stenella longirostris.
Fishery Bulletin. 77: 821-849.
Park, D., D. Choi, J. Lee, D.
Lim, and C. Park. 2010. Male-like sexual
behavior of female mouse lacking fucose mutarotase. BMC Genetics. 11:62.
Roughgarden, J. Evolution's
Rainbow: Diversity, Gender and Sexuality in Nature and People. Paperback ed. Los Angeles: Univ. of
California Press, 2004.
Ryne, C.
2009. Homosexual interaction in bed
bugs: alarm pheromones as male recognition signals. Animal Behavior. 78(6):
1471-1475.
Savage, S. and R. Bakeman. "Sexual Morphology and
Behavior in Pan paniscus. " In D. J. Chivers and J. Herbert
(eds.) Recent Advances in Primatology: Volume One: Behaviour. New
York: Academic Press, 1978.
Sell, R. L. 1997.
Defining and measuring sexual orientation: A review. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 26: 43-58.
Small, M. F. Female
Choices: Sexual Behavior of Female Primates. Ithaca, New York: Cornell
University Press, 1993.
Smith, D.
2004. Love that dare not squeak its
name. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/07/arts/love-that-dare-not-squeak-its-name.html?src=pm
Sylvestre, J-P. 1985. Some observations on behavior of two Orinoco
dolphins (Inia geoffrensis humbolultiana)
in captivity, at Duisburg Zoo. Aquatic
Mammals. 11(2): 58-65.
Terry, J. 2000. Unnatural acts in nature: The
scientific fascination with queer animals. GLQ. 6(2): 151-193.
Thornton,
J., J. L. Zehr, and M. D. Loose.
2009. Effects of prenatal
androgens on rhesus monkeys: a model system to explore the organizational
hypothesis in primates. Hormones and
behavior. 55(5): 633-645.
Utzeri C.,
and C. Belfiore. 1990. Anomalous tandems in Odonata. Fragmenta Entomologica. 22
(2): 271–288.
Valenzuela,
C. 2010.
Sexual Orientation, Handedness, Sex Ratio, and Fetomaternal
Tolerance-Rejection. Biological
Research. 43: 347-356.
Wells, R.S. 1995.
Community structure of bottlenose dolphins near Sarasota, Florida.
Presented at the 24th International Ethological Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii.
West, D. J. Homosexuality
Re-examined. London: Gerald Duckwort & Co. Ltd, 1977.
Yamagiwa,
J. 1987.
Intra- and Inter-group Interactions of an All-male Group of Virunga
Mountain Gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei ). Primates. 28(1): 1-30.
Yamagiwa,
J. 1992.
Functional Analysis of Social Staring Behavior in an All-male Group of
Mountain Gorillas. Primates. 33(4): 523-544.
Yamamoto,
D., K. Fujitani, K. Usui, H. Ito, and Y. Nakano. 1998.
From behavior to development: genes for sexual behavior define the
neuronal sexual switch in Drosophila. Mechanisms of Development. 73(2):
135-146.
Appendix
I:
A List of Insects Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
A List of Insects Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
· Blowfly
· Common Skimmer
spp.
· Cutworm
· Hen Flea
|
|
Appendix
II:
A List of Other Invertebrates
Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
A List of Other Invertebrates
Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
·
Box Crab
·
Hawaiian
Orb-Weaver
Appendix
III:
A List of Fish Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
A List of Fish Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
·
Char
·
Grayling
Appendix
IV:
A List of Amphibians
Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
A List of Amphibians
Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
Appendix
V:
A List of Reptiles Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
A List of Reptiles Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
Appendix
VI:
A List of Birds Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
A List of Birds Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
· Barn Owl
· Blue Tit
· Calfbird
· Emu
|
· Galah
· Jackdaw
· Kestrel
· Mallard
· Mew Gull
· Ostrich
|
· Raven
· Ruff
|
Appendix
VII:
A List of Mammals Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
A List of Mammals Displaying Homosexual Behaviors
· Antelope
· Beluga
· Bharal
· Buffalo
· Caribou
· Cheetah
· Donkey
· Dugong
· Elk
· Fox
· Gazelle
· Giraffe
· Gorilla
|
· Javelina
· Koala
· Lechwe
· Lion
· Macaque
· Markhor
· Marten
· Moco
· Moose
· Musk-ox
· Noctule
|
· Puku
· Quokka
· Rabbit
· Red Deer
· Red Fox
· Reindeer
· Roe Deer
· Siamang
· Takhi
· Talapoin
· Tiger
· Tucuxi
· Urial
· Vervet
· Vicuna
· Wapiti
· Warthog
· Wisent
|
Thanks, Johnica.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great piece of research; thank you so much for doing it. I will be sharing this with a number of my homophobic friends--well, family members, actually. I don't tolerate homophobia in friends, but one can't choose one's family.
ReplyDeleteWith a bit of clean up I could easily see this as a published work. If the entire core argument was stripped out as the main paper with the personal rebuttles left out, this would make an excellent text book chapter!! Love your writting style soooooo much!
ReplyDelete@obertb: Thank you! I hope that it helps them!
ReplyDelete@Jon: I just read this and giggled. I cleaned it up a bit and made it a work of literary nonfiction. I just published it on Smashwords last night. :)
@Anyone and Everyone: If you'd like to read the ebook version of this story, here's the link! Happy reading! :D
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/305152
As a fellow parasitophile and scientist I find some aspects of your lengthy report here rather disingenuous. It is written in a manner whereby you simply find evidence to support your own predetermined outcome as if to bolster your liberal street cred, rather than presenting the science behind the topic in a more rounded and non-partisan manner, and only then reaching conclusions.
ReplyDeleteMore specifically my criticisms relate to your rather black and white statement stating that homosexuality is not a choice. Mainstream science on this aspect is not actually in agreement here. Twin studies (which I'm sure you are aware of but conveniently do not mention) do not support the notion that homosexual behaviour is some sort of genetically predetermined outcome, and in fact more often than not it seems that if one twin states to be homosexual the other will not. An indication that environmental factors have as much, if not greater role to play.
Homosexual behaviour may occur in nature, but it is certainly cannot be described as normal behaviour. You also are stretching it a little with your statements on homosexual adoption, as the effects on society by such are very much open to debate, especially given that it will take decades before the non-exact science of psychology will be able to do any real analysis on this issue. It also should go without saying to any naturalist that the arguments for the traditional family and upbringing of offspring by both mother and father as being optimal has much greater support in nature, and I find it rather dishonest for any scientist to simply dismiss this normal arrangement of nature and sexual reproduction when forming sociological arguments.
@paddyd: Thank you for your comment. I apologize for my late response, I'm currently working at a field station and the internet here is hit and miss so I haven't been blogging as much lately.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to start by saying that this particular post was intended for friends who asked me to post the story on my blog in response to the incident in the coffee shop (hence the blogpost's title). It was never my intention to "bolster [my] liberal street cred", but it was also not my intention to write a totally objective argument. This piece was written for one person by another person. It was written in a conversational style that also included scientific literature to support the point that homosexuality does, in fact, occur in the natural world.
While I realize that LGBTQA issues are rarely black and white, the majority of literature supports the idea that human sexuality is largely a factor of our genetics whether we consider ourselves to be homosexual or heterosexual. Sure, environmental factors play a role in shaping where we fall on the scale, but we seem to be genetically predisposed to lean more one way than the other.
I also must apologize for being unclear. I did not intent to assert that homosexual behavior was normal in nature, the intent was to demonstrate that homosexuality DOES occur in nature. In fact, it occurs more often among more species than what most people believe. While this is a far cry from constituting normal behavior in animals in a broad sense, homosexual behavior is quite "normal" (i.e. commonly observed) among particular populations of organisms, such as the bonobos.
While we are on the subject of "normal", I'd like to address your comment on what you call traditional families in nature. While many primates and other mammals display bi-parental care, the majority of child rearing in nature is far from this picturesque view on reproductive behavior. If we look at the majority of Earth's fauna, we are looking at the group known as invertebrates, which comprise a whopping 97% of animal diversity. Invertebrates rarely display any type of parental care and the few that do are even more rarely known to have any sort of bi-parental involvement. (With the exception of course of things like schistosomes that live encopula.)
But let's say you are referring to the 3% of animal biodiveristy that is comprised of vertebrate animals. Within the realm of bird reproductive behavior there have been cases of heterosexual couple care, single parent care, multiple individual non-parent care, and homosexual couple care. Different species have different ways of rearing young, but the majority would not fit your "traditional" model. Turtles, amphibians, and squamates have much of the same story to tell as our bird friends. And fish...well, fish are just promiscuous as all hell. With their external fertilization! The scandal! Which brings us to the only animals you seem to be concerned with...the mammals. I probably don't have to remind you (you being a fellow parasitophile and scientist after all) that some animals, like opossums, display almost no maternal care for their young. Other mammals have, as mentioned in the article I wrote, been observed displaying homosexual behaviors as well as having same-sex couple child rearing practices.
I'm sorry that you find me to be dishonest, but honestly, I'm not convinced you truly understand what the "normal arrangement of nature" is yourself. If there's anything I've learned as a biologist it's that nature is nature, naturally...and that "normal" is a highly variable term when discussing aspects of the natural world.
Thank you again for your thought-provoking comment. I will ponder these things further before issuing a second edition of the e-book that came from this post.
Nice post....Will contests generally focus on the assertion that the testator lacked testamentary capacity, was operating under an insane delusion, or was subject to undue influence or fraud.Left Out Of A Will
ReplyDeleteTake every chance you get in life, because some things only happen once
ReplyDeletecara menghilangkan benjolan ganglion di pergelangan tangan sampai tuntas, Inilah 8 Jenis Buah-Buahan Penurun Kolesterol Tinggi ,