Metaphysics, Science, Homosexuality Metaphysics, Science, Homosexuality
A year and a half ago, John Derbyshire at NRO opined about the origins of homosexuality in an article titled: Metaphysics, Science, Homosexuality. Why is this subject the least bit relevant? Because, presumably, whether the cause is nurture or nature, whether homosexuality is innate or not, should affect how we, as society, deal with the subject.
Derby listed 13 different theories, and then opined that he felt that the most likely involved either too much of a good thing (#10) or too much of the wrong thing (#13) in the womb were the most likely culprits, at least for the more studied male homosexuality. I would have to add a closely related #14, Womb environment—not enough of a good thing to cover a suggestion that part of the cause is not enough testosterone at critical parts of brain development while still in the womb that resulted in not completely masculinizing a male's brain. I saw this theory in a study that showed a higher than normal number of homosexual males born at the end of WWII, and the theory was that maternal stress resulting from the high casualty levels then was the cause of this.
Derbyshire mentions his previous post in reference to a recent BBC article titled: Womb environment 'makes men gay' where there appears to be a correlation between how many biological brothers a male has had before him and his chances of being homosexual. The theory there is that the more boys a mother has had, the more her body reacts to the maleness in her womb. Not said, but something that I think is potentially possible, is that the maleness would most likely be detected through testosterone being created by the boys. Nevertheless, this falls clearly under Derbyshire's #13.
My guess is that Derbyshire will ultimately be vindicated, though most likely it won't be a single cause, but different causes, just as we have found with many biological phenomena. Nevertheless, I suspect that most, at least, male homosexual orientation will turn out to be a result of #10, #13, and/or #14.
Derby listed 13 different theories, and then opined that he felt that the most likely involved either too much of a good thing (#10) or too much of the wrong thing (#13) in the womb were the most likely culprits, at least for the more studied male homosexuality. I would have to add a closely related #14, Womb environment—not enough of a good thing to cover a suggestion that part of the cause is not enough testosterone at critical parts of brain development while still in the womb that resulted in not completely masculinizing a male's brain. I saw this theory in a study that showed a higher than normal number of homosexual males born at the end of WWII, and the theory was that maternal stress resulting from the high casualty levels then was the cause of this.
Derbyshire mentions his previous post in reference to a recent BBC article titled: Womb environment 'makes men gay' where there appears to be a correlation between how many biological brothers a male has had before him and his chances of being homosexual. The theory there is that the more boys a mother has had, the more her body reacts to the maleness in her womb. Not said, but something that I think is potentially possible, is that the maleness would most likely be detected through testosterone being created by the boys. Nevertheless, this falls clearly under Derbyshire's #13.
My guess is that Derbyshire will ultimately be vindicated, though most likely it won't be a single cause, but different causes, just as we have found with many biological phenomena. Nevertheless, I suspect that most, at least, male homosexual orientation will turn out to be a result of #10, #13, and/or #14.
6:30 AM Display: Full / Chopped / Footer
Display:
Full /
Chopped /
None
Display:
Chopped /
Footer /
None
Posted by
Bruce Hayden at 6:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home >>