View Full Version : sexuality
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1025276.stm
JVK, how do you think this fits into your
model?
Surreal
11-22-2004, 09:29 PM
Interesting. Dont know what to
think of it, but still intersting.
einstein
11-23-2004, 12:23 AM
I don't think we can conclude
its genetic by that study.
I've seen somewhere a theory (might have been in JVK's book) that homosexuality was
caused by the wrong horomones in the womb during pregnancy. Any twins will have the same conditions.
If they
could do that with identical twins from different surrogate mothers, I'd believe it. I don't think that
experimental setup is possible.
yea, I do believe that it does
nothing to discount his theory, just wondering how he thinks it all fits in.
jvkohl
11-23-2004, 01:26 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1025276.stm
JVK, how do you think this fits into
your model?
It's becoming clearer that a gay gene (or more likely genes) predispose less sexual
differentiation of the olfactory system (central nervous system, and reproductive system) by influence migration of
gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) secreting nerve cells on their route to the hypothalamus. The result appears
to be a hypothalamic GnRH pulse which is less frequent and results in further incomplete sexual differentiation
during development. From the available animals models of homosexual orientation it also appears that animals are
responding to same sex pheromones in a manner similar to that which would typically occur in response to opposite
sex pheromones. Links to the articles I've published that detail my approach are available from the Scientific
Evidence page of my website (not an easy read). After first explaining heterosexual attraction via mammalian
pheromones, it was important to also explain homosexual attraction using the same model (since most people fail to
grasp the necessity to explain all of human sexuality using the same model). Current "thoughts" that focus on visual
aspects of physical attraction will never be applicable in any biological approach to sexual orientation. Colleagues
will soon publish an article with results showing that human homosexuals produce different natural body odor, and
that they prefer the natural body odor of other homosexuals.
JVK
Could it be a lack of rone production
that makes gay guys seem more feminine (overall on average), and an increase in rone production that makes lesbians
more butch?
When you say their natural body odor is different, is this with regard to the absence or increase
of chemicals other than rone?
Watcher
11-23-2004, 01:54 PM
bjf just a laymans view on this
but there could also be other non LS pheromone compounds responsible. Arone seems to be a key factor but im sure
there are other complex compounds also at work.
But good article Jkohl.
jvkohl
11-23-2004, 09:56 PM
The androsterone/etiocholanolone
(A/E) ratio will most likely be the key that opens up many doors when it comes to sexual differentiation, and the
processes involved. It's a bit more complicated than I've indicated, nonetheless. We covered sexual
differentiation best in a 1996 Hormones and Behavior review: From fertilization to adult sexual behavior--my co-
authors were Milton Diamond and Teresa Binstock.
What I expect to see within the next ten years is a report
that homosexual males prefer the scent of a more characteristically female A/E ratio. There should also be more
focus on adrenal androgen production/metabolism--and how it is controlled by other hormones like GnRH.
Meanwhile, the authors of the paper on homosexual odor production and preferences were made aware of the A/E
ratio connection when I spoke with them last April. It's likely that they will follow up with an approach to
isolate these hormones; their metabolism, and their connection to sexual orientation.
Of interest is that the
A/E ratio difference was presented in the early 70's, confirmed, and promptly dismissed by the majority of
researchers. But the late Dr. Leonard Storm, my genetics professor in Las Vegas, and later a collegue at a sexuality
conference, called my attention to it in the early 90's. Then he promptly retrieved the original paper from his
files--published in one of the first issues of Hormones and Behavior, as well as the Newsweek magazine article that
detailed the findings for the general public. I am indebted to him more than he ever knew. Can you imagine
remembering a study from 20 years past, and being able to retrieve it from your files the next day? What made him
think the paper was important enough to think about when it was first published?
It was this stroke of
fortune that helped me proceed with extending the mammalian heterosexual attraction model to homosexual attraction,
circa 1993. At this point, all that remains is for other researchers to "catch the wave." But there are many who do
not want to learn/acknowledge that so much of human sexuality is shared with other mammals. It will be very
interesting to see what happens when the study on homosexual odors/preferences hits the general public between the
eyes. No doubt many people will continue to state that human sexual behavior is so much more complicated; and that
animal studies mean little in this regard. It's easier to go down with dogma than to ride the wave of
change.
JVK
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.