What is interesting about scientific studies of being born gay, lesbian, bisexual, trans, queer expressing, or straight--otherwise known as being and having attractions to certain kinds of people that are physical, relational, intellectual, and sexual--is, well, full of questions and moments of reflection:
1. What role does nurture play in this this nature-based premise?
2. The construction of being "gay" or "lesbian," as well as "straight," which may have more to do with nurture than nature.
3. The role of Kinsey's work in terms of a spectrum or continuum of sexual or relational expressions.
4. The possibility of changing one's attractions over a period of time between same sex interests along with opposite sexual interests;
This article raises more questions than settles it.
Then there is this: as people look for the genetic "fixing" of certain disabling conditions, e.g., Down syndrome, if there is a gene for making one LGBQT, and society deems being LGBTQ a "bad," does that mean we are considered, a) disabled, and thus b) needing to be fixed, e.g., genetically modified?
Is this not genetic essentialism, e.g., we are essentially our genetic code?
Cynthia Nixon Is at Least as 'Qualified' as Most of These Celebs Who've Run - [image: celebs who were elected to office.] The Emmy- and Tony-winner was dubbed an "unqualified lesbian," but she's at least as experienced as these cele...
38 minutes ago