i wonder if it's the same in penguins....and then what explains the relations with a praying mantis.

i enjoyed reading this post. thank you.

Although I appreciate the research, and essentially I might understand the curiosity and wish to convey certain biological factors regarding gay people and if there is a cause to be found for the differences.

But one can't help wondering if the information wouldn't be used for further sinister causes.

After all, genetic legitimacy didn't stop racial or gender bigotry and discrimination throughout mankind. I don't see much point in looking for a genetic connection to homosexuality. People with exceptional prowess tend to upset people who believe in leveling things for the mediocre. Geniuses have been jailed or put in remedial situations to do just that, even after they've made some of the greatest discoveries to benefit mankind. Punishing those who are different to maintain certain hierarchies is as old as mankind has been alive.
That's why I don't think it should matter whether or not homosexuality has a gene base. There is a biological component to our sexuality, period.

When people are committed to their prejudice, to the point of excluding anything else, even evidence, these are people who should have THEIR heads examined.

When talking to a reasonable person and pointing out that self reliance, commitment to productivity and the freedom to reach one's full potential, essentially as it won't infringe on another to do the same, should be enough for anyone to understand.
If they don't, and can't agree this is all gay people want and deserve, then nothing will convince them of anything.

And finding a biological component to homosexuality won't convince many that it's a component that still renders gay people less of what straight thing of themselves.
Much the way racists are convinced of how white skin renders superiority unto who has it.

Those of us who know better, don't care about genetic components. We care that a human being is allowed self reliance, freedom and presented with equal standards and protections.
And in our country's mission statement, it is assumed you have all these because you have the genetic make up of a human being.
If it's enough for the Constitution and Bill of Rights, it's enough.

Levay has some interesting things to say and some very disturbing things as well. I encourage anyone studying his research to also read this link to what Andrea James has written about him:

http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/simon-levay.html

He basically feels that any transwomen who aren't attracted to men are basically paraphiliacs.

Here's another link about Lavey by Lynn Conway discussing some of the politics of Lavey's interest in "the gay gene."
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/LeVay-Hamer-Burr/Levay's%20Gay%20Gene%20promotional%20tour.html

Please do not take this man's research at face value, there's a lot of disturbing aspects to it.

Does his research also include ASEXUALS? The media has been paying more attention to what could be classified as another aspect of sexual orientation.
Some biologists, if not careful, could make the public construe this also as an 'abnormality', however I doubt that it would require society to commit asexuals to second class citizenship, banishment from marriage for not procreating, nor indictments and fear mongering as threatening to society.

Asexual folks are 'coming out' so to speak and are being frank and their numbers counted. Would Dr. LeVay do some back checking on the size of glands or other utero endocrine influences towards asexuality?

Seriously, would the religious consider asexuals acting in rebellion against the Biblical directive of being fruitful and multiplying?

I think religious people in particular have very little to stand on. As we all know and obviously homosexuality has no exception in any human culture or our entire history.

Religious belief, especially in America is not only chosen, it's not enforced...therefore NO civil law should be subject to influence by said beliefs.
Not only that, we can point to some of the world bloodiest wars, destruction of indigenous peoples and systemic bigotry and discrimination based on religious belief.
Which is the biggest reason why the Founders utilized more caution in establishing specific laws that govern without it.

Apparently religion requires some of it's members not to believe in science, or it's intervention, even for the sake of human and civil rights and their expansion.

Hi Betty,
Sometimes I have a hard time being succinct, but the concentration on homosexuality in Dr. LeVay's research is an extension of targeting gay people as a higher kind of lab rat.

As long as straight folks continue to argue that homosexuality is mutable as a condition of equal opportunity and protection, so much focus on homosexuality, even by endocrinologists and biologists gives it the kind of profile something abnormal or malfunctioning would have.

I suppose that's why the whole business creeps me out. Why does accepting homosexuality as a fact and part of human sexuality require so much scrutiny, even in this day and age?

Which is why I brought up asexuality. Perhaps if there was more invasive study, a lack of compassion or as I said, systemic legal bigotry against asexuals, there might be the same interest in studying their glands and hormone levels.
Yet, they are accepted and they themselves are giving awareness to society who might otherwise ignore them.
But at least doesn't go out of it's way to punish them.

People in this country have the most bizarre and persistent paranoia regarding gay people that's reached proportions that are truly strange and scary.
Dr. LeVay's research, I would think, gives them a kind of validation that there is something wrong with gay people to require study at all.