About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here?
Let's talk.
The other half of the equation is
blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science,
please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our
Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.
Why are we still discussing this? Why are we so insistent upon simplying every single controversial issue? Shouldn't it be remarkably easy for everyone to realize that sexuality, like *every single behavior that we partake in* is a mixture of both genetics and environment?
My love of vegetable soups is resultant of two things: growing up in a vegetable-soup-loving-family, and having taste buds that aren't repulsed by mashed vegetables. This is a pretty easy formula. But somehow, we can't do the same thing with sexuality. Because of the prideful agendas on both sides of the argument, we apparently *must* insist that homosexuality is either the product of genes, or the product of environment/choice. It's insane.
Obviously, genes have a great influence upon sexuality. But you should not discount the environment.
First of all, I used to religiously listen to Loveline, and the majority of their homosexual callers were sexually abused as a child. It's perfectly plausible to believe that childhood sexual trauma could realign a person's compass, and perhaps activate that person's 27% chance of becoming a homosexual (most people probably have much lower odds).
Second of all ... they were able to predict sexual orientation in 95% of cases? What the hell does that mean? Considering that the homosexual/bisexual population occupies about 5% of the population, their success rate isn't really thrilling me.