Human sexual behavior is extremely complex and variable; yet it is
an issue that fascinates many and inspires quite a bit of scientific
investigation. Probably foremost in initiating controversy and heated
debate is the notion of sex partner preference, in particular, same-sex
partner preferences. Given the interest this topic generates, it should
be of no surprise that many scientists have focused their research
energies on trying to determine what causes a given individual to
develop a homosexual orientation as opposed to a heterosexual
orientation. It should be pointed out that the male version of
homosexuality has received the most attention from scientists, and this
paper will necessarily reflect that bias.
Chief among the difficulties that such researchers face is agreeing
upon a clear definition of what one means by sexual orientation. For the
purposes of this manuscript, a definition offered by Gorman (1994) seems
to best capture the concept: sexual orientation refers to whether one is
primarily aroused by same-sex or opposite-sex stimuli, independent of
the sexual behavior engaged in by that individual. Such a definition is
preferred because of its focus on arousal and desire, rather than overt
behavior which may be influenced by a variety of social, political, and
religious pressures.
Based on the research of Kinsey and others, it is estimated that
between 3 and 10 percent of the population identifies as exclusively
homosexual (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948; Levay, 1996; Pillard
& Bailey, 1995). Many studies use some form of the Kinsey Scale to
have research participants self-identify their sexual orientation. The
Kinsey Scale is a seven-point scale that represents a continuum of human
sexual behavior. The scores range from zero (exclusive heterosexuality)
to six (exclusive homosexuality). Although Kinsey argued that there is a
continuum of human sexual behavior, researchers have historically used
his scale to dichotomize samples into heterosexual and
homosexual/nonheterosexual groups. In response to this binary treatment,
several researchers have been prompted to develop their own scales to
better capture the continuous nature of human sexuality and allow for
legitimate discussion of those individuals who identify as bisexual to
be considered in their own right (for a more complete discussion see
Klein, 1993; Rodriguez Rust, 1999).
Given prevailing social mores, we should approach the scientific
literature regarding sexual orientation with some caution for a number
of reasons. First, individuals willing to identify themselves as
homosexual or bisexual may not be the most representative sample of
their respective populations as a whole. Despite his enormous impact on
the study of human sexual behavior, Kinsey received vocal criticism of
the representativeness of his samples because of their willingness to
participate in his studies and because of a presumed overreliance on
prisoners and prostitutes (for examples see Cochran, Mosteller, &
Tukey, 1954; Maslow & Sakoda, 1952), and some of these concerns
continue to resonate today. Second, as previously mentioned, researchers
have often imposed a dichotomy upon their samples so that individuals
are grouped as either heterosexual or homosexual. This practice may not
capture the true continuum of human sexual orientation and behavior and
potentially confounds interpretations by treating bisexuals and
homosexuals uniformly, despite research that suggests that bisexual
individuals are distinct from both hetero- and homosexuals (Klein, 1993;
Rodriguez Rust, 1999; Van Wyk & Geist, 1995). Finally, we should be
cognizant of the motives for engaging in research focusing on the
origins of sexual orientation. In reading this literature, it is clear
that personal bias and opinion have colored the presentation of
scientific findings and their potential implications (for a more
detailed discussion see LeVay, 1996).
Researchers interested in the development of sexual orientation
have often taken either a physiological or a psychosocial approach. It
would be truly naive to argue that either of these perspectives could
operate entirely independently of the other, and neither side is making
that argument. Rather, based on their own backgrounds and expertise,
scientists are approaching the question of the etiology of sexual
orientation from multiple perspectives and levels of analysis in the
hope that the truth will emerge from the convergence of their findings.
In the following pages, some of the major ideas and hypotheses that are
considered include: studies of prenatal development, brain morphology
and function, behavioral genetics, environmental factors, early
childhood/adolescent experiences, and stability/plasticity of sexual
orientation.
PRENATAL DEVELOPMENT
Historically, physiological research investigating the development
of homosexuality has involved the search for biological markers and
focuses on physiological differences between homosexual and heterosexual
individuals (DeCecco & Parker, 1995). Often, the investigation of
the development of a homosexual orientation stems from the dimorphic
nature of the development of males and females. The rationale for such
an approach assumes that homosexuals develop as an intermediate to
heterosexual males and females. The process of sexual differentiation is
beyond the scope of this paper; however, it is important to note that
all developing embryos are equally capable of developing along male or
female lines. The developmental route taken is generally thought to be
determined by a cascade of events set into motion by the presence (or
absence) of the Y chromosome, with incomplete overlap in the timelines
for the sexual differentiation of internal and external genitalia and
neural tissues (for a recent review see Arnold, 2009).
Male homosexuality has long been hypothesized to result from some
sort of prenatal testosterone deficiency. While the cause of such a
deficiency is unclear, some have investigated maternal stress during
gestation as a possibility. There is evidence from the animal literature
to suggest maternal stress during pregnancy demasculinizes and feminizes
male sexual behavior and brain morphology (Kerchner & Ward, 1992;
Ward, 1972). This demasculinization may be due to a delay in a surge of
testosterone necessary for sexual differentiation of the brain (Ward
& Weisz, 1980).
In the human literature, a number of retrospective studies have
resulted in contradictory findings regarding the role of maternal stress
in male homosexuality. When homosexual, bisexual, and heterosexual men
were asked to estimate the amount of stress experienced by their mothers
while they were pregnant with them, non-heterosexuals estimated higher
levels of stress than heterosexuals (Dorner, Schenk, Schmiedel, &
Ahrens, 1983). Furthermore, when mothers were asked directly about the
amount of stress they had experienced while pregnant with their sons,
Ellis (1988) found that mothers of homosexuals were more likely to
report stress than mothers of heterosexuals (especially during the
second trimester of pregnancy). However, Bailey, Willerman, and Parks
(1991) failed to find any difference in the amount of stress experienced
by mothers of heterosexuals and non-heterosexuals in a very similar
study.
While delays in or a deficiency of androgen activity is a
compelling argument for those who view male homosexuals as somehow
intermediate to male and female heterosexuals, this idea is in direct
opposition to observations that both male and female homosexuality may
be associated with hyper-masculinization, perhaps as a function of
excess androgen exposure during early development (for examples see
Bogaert & Hershberger, 1999; McFadden & Champlin, 2000). There
is also some evidence to suggest that females prenatally exposed to
diethylstilbestrol (DES), a synthetic estrogen, are more likely to
identify as bi- or homosexual compared to those females not exposed to
DES (Meyer-Bahlburg et al., 1995), presumably as a function of
estrogen's role in the defeminization of the central nervous
system.
Some researchers have suggested that a maternal immune response to
the H-Y antigen in developing male fetuses may contribute to the
development of male homosexuality (Blanchard, 2001; Blanchard, 2004;
Blanchard & Klassen, 1997). This hypothesis stems from the
observation of what is described as the "fraternal birth order
effect." In 1996, Blanchard & Bogaert observed that male
homosexuals were much more likely to have older male siblings than their
heterosexual counterparts. Furthermore, evidence suggests that this
effect only applies to biological, rather than adopted siblings
(Bogaert, 2006). While this particular observation is compelling, more
recent research suggests that earlier studies conflated issues of
gendered-typed behaviors and sexual orientation. Specifically, the birth
order effect only seems to apply to those individuals who exhibit high
degrees of feminine behavior (Bogaert, 2005).
In rodents, the surge in leutinizing hormone (LH) in response to
estrogen seems to be sex specific; however, it is unclear whether this
pattern is as absolute in humans. Gladue, Green, and Hellman (1984)
found that the pattern of LH secretion in response to an injection of
premarin (an estrogen derivative) of homosexual men was intermediate to
that of heterosexual men and heterosexual women. In addition, homosexual
and heterosexual men differed in terms of the duration of lowered
testosterone after the injection. This response was proposed to serve as
a biological marker of homosexuality that is indicative of
organizational differences in hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis
between hetero- and homosexual men (Gladue et al., 1984). However,
Gooren (1986a) found no difference in the LH secretion pattern between
hetero- and homosexual men. Furthermore, Gooren (1986b) determined that
LH secretion patterns in the human can be changed as a result of
gonadectomy and cross-gender hormone treatment, suggesting this
particular response is not due to an organizational difference in the
HPG axis. However, in male-oriented rams, it appears that LH secretion
pattern is indistinguishable from that of female-oriented rams and that
both are defeminized compared to ewes, suggesting that sexual attraction
is not related to organizational differences in the hypophyseal portal
system (Stormshak, Estill, Resko, & Roselli, 2008).
BRAIN MORPHOLOGY AND FUNCTION
In 1978, Gorski, Gordon, Shryne, and Southam described a sexually
dimorphic area of the medial preoptic nucleus of rats. Specifically,
this area was found to be larger in males than in females and this
difference arises as a function of perinatal hormonal milieu. In the
case of the medial preoptic area, it is clear that this structure is
critical for the normal display of sexual behavior in the male rat (De
Jonge, Louwese, Ooms, Evers, & De Poll, 1989; Everitt, 1990; Hull
& Dominguez, 2006; Hull & Dominguez, 2007).
Structures that display sexual dimorphism in the human brain have
received attention as sites of interest among scientists interested in
finding morphological correlates of sexual orientation as well. Swaab
and Fliers (1985) identified an area of the human hypothalamus that
appears to be analogous to the sexually dimorphic nucleus of the rat
medial preoptic area described by Gorski and colleagues. Allen, Hines,
Shryne and Gorski (1989) were unable to replicate the sexual dimorphism
of this area which they referred to as the interstitial nucleus of the
anterior hypothalamus-1 (INAH-1); however, they did identify two other
sexually dimorphic nuclei in the preoptic-anterior hypothalamus which
they labeled INAH-2 and INAH-3. Levay (1991) conducted a study
investigating how and if the anterior preoptic hypothalamus differed
between heterosexual and homosexual men. Levay conducted a postmortem
analysis of tissue obtained from women, heterosexual men, and homosexual
men. While he observed no differences between men and women in the size
of INAH-1 or 2, Levay did observe that INAH-3 was sexually dimorphic
(larger in men than in women) and that this area was significantly
larger in heterosexual men than in homosexual men. More recent research
suggests that this size difference is due to cell density rather than
cell number (Byne et al., 2001).
Levay's findings have recently received corroboration from
researchers investigating the brains of a naturally occurring population
of male-oriented rams. An area of the hypothalamus dubbed the
"ovine sexually dimorphic nucleus" is larger in male rams than
in female sheep, and it is larger in female-oriented rams than in
male-oriented rams (Roselli, Larkin, Resko, Stellflug, & Stormshak,
2004). These converging lines of evidence definitely point to sexually
dimorphic hypothalamic areas under the influence of hormones as sites of
great importance in an individual's sexual orientation, and this
particular animal model is especially intriguing because these rams
represent a naturally occurring population that displays not only
same-sex behavior but also what seems to be a true preference for
same-sex interactions (Roselli, Larkin, Schrunk, & Stormshak, 2004;
Roselli & Stormshak, 2009a,b).
Differences in brain morphology and function are not limited to
sexually dimorphic areas, however. The suprachiasmatic nucleus is larger
in homosexual men than in heterosexual men, but this area does not
appear to be sexually dimorphic (Swaab & Hofman, 1990). The anterior
commissure also varies in size as a function of sexual orientation
(Allen & Gorski, 1992) without differing between women and men.
Global, morphological differences in brain structure as a function
of sexual orientation are related to differences in the ways in which
homosexual and heterosexual brains function. Male and female homosexuals
differ from their heterosexual counterparts in their performance on a
variety of tasks that assess cognitive functions including: spatial
memory, mental rotation, verbal fluency, and recognition of facial
expressions of emotion (Rahman, Abrahams, & Wilson, 2003; Rahman
& Wilson, 2003a,b; Rahman, Wilson, & Abrahams, 2003; Rahman,
Wilson, & Abrahams, 2004a,b).
Furthermore, different neural circuits are activated in the
visually evoked sexual arousal of heterosexual and homosexual men. While
a number of structures are similarly activated in hetero- and homosexual
participants, activation of the left caudate, left angular gyrus, and
right pallidum is exclusive to homosexual subjects and activation in the
left and right lingual gyri and right hippocampus and parahippocampal
gyrus is exclusive to heterosexual subjects. (Hu, et al., 2008).
Furthermore, sex-partner preference specific activation of certain
regions of the reward circuitry of the brain (the ventral striatum and
centromedian thalamus in this case) lead some to propose that there is a
"functional endophenotype" indicative of the individual's
sexual orientation (Ponseti et al., 2006), and recently, it has been
demonstrated that this endophenotype has excellent predictive validity
for an individual's sexual orientation (Ponseti et al., 2009).
BEHAVIORAL GENETICS
Pillard and Weinrich (1986) found that homosexual men had about
four times more homosexual brothers than would be expected given
prevalence rates of male homosexuality, and Bailey and Pillard (1991)
found that concordance rates for male homosexuality were 52% among
monozygotic twins, 22% among dizygotic twins, and 11% for adopted
brothers. After reviewing a number of studies like those mentioned
above, Rodriguez-Larralde & Paradisi (2009) concluded the
heritability of male homosexuality was somewhere in the range of 0.27 to
0.76. In 1993, a study was published that demonstrated a linkage between
male homosexuality and a portion of the X chromosome (Hamer, Hu,
Magnuson, Hu, & Pattatuci, 1993), however, subsequent studies have
been unable to replicate this result (Mustanski et al., 2005; Rice,
Anderson, Risch, & Ebers, 1999).
More recently, Hamer's group has conducted a genome-wide scan
of male sexual orientation which identified several markers that are
associated with genes important for organization and sexual
differentiation of neural tissues and the HPG axis (Mustanski et al.,
2005). It has been suggested that the candidate genes may confer
increased fecundity upon the relatives of homosexuals (Iemmola &
Camperio, 2009; Rahman et al., 2008) or that these genes may be
associated with increased altruism and empathy that could be directed
towards close relatives most likely to reproduce (for example see Salais
& Fischer, 1995). So, even if one accepted the flawed (Dickemann,
1995) assumption that male homosexuals are less likely to successfully
reproduce than heterosexuals, there are a number of potential
explanations for the maintenance of the gene(s) that might contribute to
homosexuality.
There is evidence that differential patterns of gene expression
and/or the resultant in utero hormonal milieu that mediate developmental
pathways are different between heterosexuals and homosexuals. For
instance, Rahman & Wilson (2003a) demonstrated differences in finger
length ratios between heterosexuals and homosexuals. Differences in
handedness (for example Lippa, 2003), dermal ridge patterns (Hall &
Kimura, 1994), hair whorl (Klar, 2004), and functional and structural
aspects of the auditory system between heterosexuals have all been
observed (Loehlin & McFadden, 2003; McFadden & Champlin, 2000;
Mcfadden & Pasanen, 1998), although replicating some of these
effects consistently has proven to be problematic (as discussed in
Schwartz, Kim, Kolundzija, Rieger, & Sanders, 2010).
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
A behavioral pattern and identity as complex as sexual orientation,
is subject to an interaction of the individual's physiology with
his or her environment, and researchers have proposed sundry
environmental factors that may contribute to the development of sexual
orientation. However, the results of these efforts have been somewhat
equivocal. For instance, Bieber and colleagues (1962a) claimed that male
homosexuality resulted more commonly among families with a domineering
mother and a weak father. Research investigating this possibility,
however, has not provided consistent evidence to support this
hypothesis. While Milic and Crowne (1986) report differences in terms of
lovingness and rejection by parents of homosexual versus heterosexual
men, others have found no difference in parenting styles experienced by
heterosexual and homosexual men (Bell, Weinberg, & Hammersmith,
1981; Ross & Arrindell, 1988).
Increasing numbers of homosexual individuals are having children
either through adoption, marriage, or artificial inseminations; and many
wonder whether their children are more likely to develop a homosexual
orientation. Imitating the homosexual parent, being socialized by the
homosexual parent to adopt a homosexual orientation, or viewing
homosexuality as an acceptable alternative to heterosexuality--an option
that might not be as obvious to children of strictly heterosexual
parents, could all play a role in the development of a homosexual
orientation. However, the vast majority of children of homosexual
parents are heterosexual (Bailey, Bobrow, Wolfe & Mikach, 1995;
Golombok & Tasker, 1995). It should be pointed out, however, that a
concordance rate of 9% for non-heterosexual behavior of the sons of
homosexual fathers has been observed, which is slightly larger than
would be expected given overall prevalence rates of male homosexuality
(Bailey et al., 1995). In this particular study, however, genetic
influences could not be controlled for and there was no correlation
between the sexual orientation of these children and the amount of time
spent with their fathers.
EARLY CHILDHOOD AND ADOLESCENCE
One of the most consistent, robust findings among homosexuals has
been that they exhibited behaviors during childhood that are considered
gender nonconforming (Bell et al., 1981; Bieber et al., 1962b), and
recently, this observation has been replicated through the analysis of
childhood videos obtained from male and female homosexual and
heterosexual research volunteers. Pre-homosexual children, regardless of
gender, displayed more gender non-conformity in the videos than their
pre-heterosexual counterparts, and this pattern of behavior continued
through adulthood (Rieger, Linsenmeier, Gygax, & Bailey, 2008).
Homosexual individuals have reported that they were aware from a
very early age of their gender nonconformity and erotic attraction
towards the same sex (Bell et al., 1981; Rieger et al., 2008). There is
some evidence to suggest that masturbation and fantasy may play a role
in integrating early feelings into the development of their sexual
orientation (Money & Tucker, 1975; Van Wyk & Geist, 1984). It is
unclear, however, whether these behaviors are involved in the
development of a homosexual orientation or whether they are products of
an already established homosexual orientation.
Theories of the development of a homosexual orientation often
concentrate on adolescence as a critical period in this process because
of the changes in physiology, psychological functioning, and social
conditions occurring during this time (Savin-Williams, 1988).
Frequently, adolescents engage in homosexual behavior at a higher rate
than the rest of the population; however, this is often viewed as a
natural phase on the way to developing a heterosexual orientation.
However, for some, these activities are a part of a developing
homosexual identity (Savin-Williams, 1990). Troiden (1988) describes
adolescence as a time when homosexuals first become aware of their same
sex attraction and begin to act on these attractions, and he proposed
that male homosexuals generally begin to accept the fact that they are
homosexual between the ages of 19 and 21. In this framework, adolescence
may reflect the acceptance and recognition of an individual's
homosexual orientation, rather than the development of it, per se.
The rate of physical maturation and first sexual experiences are
other aspects of the individual's life that have received attention
from researchers investigating the development of a homosexual
orientation. Because puberty is associated with increased sexual urges,
it has been hypothesized that homosexuality results when an individual
reaches puberty at an early age when there is no access to heterosexual
outlets. Instead, these early "bloomers" are surrounded by
same-sex stimuli with which they might engage in sex play, thereby
associating sexual pleasure with homosexual experience. Masturbation
could then be used to reinforce these homosexual feelings in a time when
sexual urges are quite intense but heterosexual experience is rare. In
addition to the physical component, the individual may have close
friendship ties with these same-sex peers that could create an emotional
preference for members of the same sex (Savin-Williams, 1988). This
writer is unaware of any research suggesting that homosexuals enter
puberty earlier than heterosexuals; however, there is at least one study
that suggests that homosexual males report becoming sexually active
earlier in life than their heterosexual counterparts (Manosevitz, 1970).
It is important to reiterate that most homosexuals are aware of their
same-sex attraction long before puberty (Bell et al., 1981). In
addition, in cultures in which early homosexual experiences are the
norm, there is no apparent increased (in fact, there is a smaller) rate
of adult male homosexuality (Baldwin & Baldwin, 1989), and other
researchers have actually posited theories of the development of sexual
orientation which generally state that the gender group that the
individual does not have access to will actually become the object of
sexual desire. In other words, the "exotic," not the familiar,
becomes "erotic" (Bem, 1996).
STABILITY/PLASTICITY OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION
Some individuals have claimed that they led an exclusively
heterosexual life until they had a given homosexual experience after
which point they were exclusively homosexual (as described in Meijer,
1993). Certainly, many homosexuals have tried to change their sexual
orientation through various "reparative" therapies. In fact,
there are reports suggesting that such programs are successful (for
example, see Spitzer, 2003), though the rigor of the science assessing
these therapeutic techniques described in such studies is often called
into question (Ford, 2001; Haldeman, 2002). Aside from any legitimate
evidence of the efficacy of the reparative therapies, the ethical
grounds for providing such treatment have also been called into
question, given that homosexuality is not an illness (Halpert, 2000).
While reparative therapies are largely eschewed by the scientific
community, there is some evidence of malleability of sexual orientation
because both homosexual men and women may have at one time identified as
either heterosexual or bisexual. However, it is very uncommon to see
individuals that once identified as homosexual to identify as
heterosexual later in life. Thus, this plasticity may in fact reflect
the "coming out" process undertaken by many gay men and
lesbians (for a more detailed description see Levay, 1996). It should be
noted, however, that with regards to "erotic plasticity" women
are generally thought to be more malleable than men; and there are
compelling arguments made about women "switching" sexual
orientations at various points in their lives (as discussed in
Baumeister, 2004). There have also been numerous reports of individuals
who experience changes in sexual interests, sexual orientation, and even
perception of the gender of themselves and others as a function of brain
injury in the temporal lobes (Cheasty, Condren, & Cooney, 2002;
Kasper, Kerling, Graf, Stefan, & Pauli, 2009; Miller, Cummings,
McIntyre, Ebers, & Grode, 1986).
CONCLUSIONS
I have attempted to provide a brief overview of some of the types
of research that have been done and continue to be done in order to
better understand the development of a homosexual orientation. This area
of research is dynamic and researchers have attempted to address a
variety of perspectives in their studies and for a variety of reasons.
Despite decades of research, the ultimate answer to the question posed
in the title of this paper, "Can anyone tell me why I'm
gay?" is a resounding "Not yet."
While there is some evidence to suggest physiological correlates
ranging from genetic markers to structure and function of the brain, one
can feel quickly overwhelmed by the sheer amount of contradictory
findings on all of these fronts, and the news is no better, if not
worse, for research concerning the role that familial and environmental
factors play in the development of sexual orientation.
In reviewing this literature, several concerns emerge for this
writer: 1) sample representativeness is problematic when researching
issues as socially charged as sexual orientation, 2) the ethical
considerations that must be made in human research often result in
correlative data which makes causative inference problematic, 3)
conceiving of individuals' sexual orientations in binary terms may
be overly simplistic and potentially misleading, 4) there is a paucity
of information regarding bisexuality and female homosexuality, and 5)
there seems to be an increasing focus on physiological mechanisms of
origin for sexual orientation without regard for the role that
familial/social/cultural environments may play in this process.
Despite these limitations, there are some developments that this
writer feels have tremendous potential as tools for future research
including the advent of a "functional endophenotype" for
sexual orientation which may provide a more objective measure of sexual
orientation (for example Ponseti et al., 2006). As neural imaging
techniques become more sophisticated, our ability to use them in further
delineating the differences in functions of the brains among individuals
of various sexual orientations will be invaluable. The utilization of
naturally occurring animal models of sexual orientation is also a
promising approach, especially when conducted in conjunction with
continued human studies. Aside from the male-oriented rams described
earlier (Roselli & Stormshak, 2009), the animal kingdom is replete
with homosexual, bisexual, and heterosexual interactions (for a
wonderful discussion of the plethora of examples please see Bagemihl,
1999) that scientists might take advantage of in trying to understand
how a given individual develops his or her sexual orientation.
Furthermore, advances in our understanding of the human genome and its
interaction with environmental factors will continue to elucidate
potential mechanisms by which an individual's sexual orientation
develops. Finally, as social mores around the world evolve,
cross-cultural studies may also provide important insight into the roles
that sociocultural factors play in shaping one's sexual
orientation.
Few areas of research can match the social implications associated
with investigating the etiology of sexual orientation. From
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" to the ongoing debate about
legalization of gay marriage in the United States, this is an issue that
is politically and socially divisive and that generates social stigmas
that can be personally devastating. Nearly 6,000 hate crimes motivated
by sexual orientation were reported to have occurred in the United
States between 2005 and 2008 (Johnson, 2008), and perhaps as a function
of stigmatization and discrimination, homosexual/bisexual individuals
are at higher risk for attempted suicide, suicidal ideation, substance
abuse, and several mental disorders (King et al., 2008).
It is not inconceivable that we may one day fully understand the
origins of sexual orientation and be faced with the implications that
such an understanding engenders. Despite compelling arguments to the
contrary (Greenberg & Bailey, 2001), this author believes we have a
moral imperative to use that information in a socially responsible and
positive way. It is this writer's opinion that this information
should be used to facilitate the development of a social and political
environment in which diversity is fostered, valued, and celebrated for
the richness it adds to the human experience, rather than being seen as
a means to "treat", "cure", or "fix" what
some may view as socially deviant and/or morally reprehensible behavior.
REFERENCES
Allen, L.S., & Gorski, R.A. (1992). Sexual orientation and the
size of the anterior commissure in the human brain. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 89,
7199-7202.
Allen, L.S., Hines, M., Shryne, J.E., & Gorski, R.A. (1989).
Two sexually dimorphic cell groups in the human brain. The Journal of
Neuroscience, 9 (2), 497-506.
Arnold, A.P. (2009). The organizational-activational hypothesis as
the foundation for a unified theory of sexual differentiation of all
mammalian tissues. Hormones and Behavior, 55, 570-578.
Bagemihl, B. (1999). Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality
and Natural Diversity. New York, NY: St. Martins Press.
Bailey, M.J., Bobrow, D., Wolfe, M., & Mikach, S. (1995).
Sexual orientation of adult sons of gay fathers. Developmental
Psychology, 31 (1), 124-129.
Bailey, M.J., & Pillard, R.C. (1991). A genetic study of male
sexual orientation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 48, 1089-1096.
Bailey, M.J., Willerman, L., & Parks, C. (1991). A test of
maternal stress theory of human male homosexuality. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 20(3), 277-293.
Baldwin, J.D., & Baldwin, J.I. (1989). The socialization of
homosexuality and heterosexuality in a non-western society. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 18(1), 13-29.
Baumeister, R.F. (2004). Gender and erotic plasticity:
Sociocultural influences on the sex drive. Sexual and Relationship
Therapy,19(2), 133-9.
Bell, A.P., Weinberg, M.S., & Hammersmith, S.K. (1981). Sexual
Preferences: Its Development in Men and Women. Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press.
Bem, D.J. (1996). Exotic becomes erotic: A developmental theory of
sexual orientation. Psychological Review, 103(2), 320-335.
Bieber, I., Dain, H.J., Dince, P.R., Drellich, M.G., Grand, H.G.,
Gundlach, R.H., Kremer, M.W., Rifkin, A.H., Wilbure, C.B., & Bieber,
T.B. (1962a). Homosexuality: A Scientific Study. New York: Basic Books.
Bieber, I., Dain, H.J., Dince, P.R. Drellich, M.G., Grand, H.G.,
Gundlach, R.H., Kremer, M.W., Rifkin, A.H., Wilbur, C.B., & Bieber,
T.B. (1962b). Homosexuality: A Psychoanalytic Study. New York: Vintage
Books.
Blanchard, R. (2004). Quantitative and theoretical analyses of the
relation between older brothers and homosexuality in men. Journal of
Theoretical Biology, 230(2), 173-87.
Blanchard, R. (2001). Fraternal birth order and the maternal immune
hupothesis of male homosexuality. Hormones and Behavior, 40(2), 105-14.
Blanchard, R., & Bogaert, A.F. (1996). Homosexuality in men and
number of older brothers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 153(1), 27-31.
Blanchard, R., & Klassen, P. (1997). H-Y antigen and
homosexuality in men. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 185(3), 373-8.
Bogaert, A.F. (2006). Biological versus nonbiological older
brothers and men's sexual orientation. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Science of the United States of America, 103(28), 10771-4.
Bogaert, A.F. (2005). Gender role/identity and sibling sex ratio in
homosexual men. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 31(3), 217-27.
Bogaert, A.F., & Hershberger, S. (1999). The relation between
sexual orientation and penile size. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28(3),
213-21.
Byne, W., Tobet, S., Mattiace, L.A., Lasco, M.S., Kemether, E.,
Edgar, M.A., Morgello, S., Buchsbaum, M.S., & Jones, L.B. (2001).
The interstitial nuclei of the human anterior hypothalamus: An
investigation of variation with sex, sexual orientation, and HIV status.
Hormones and Behavior, 40(2), 86-92.
Cheasty, M., Condren, R., Cooney, C. (2002). Altered sexual
preference and behavior in a man with vascular ischaemic lesions in the
temporal lobe. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 17, 87-8.
Cochran, W.G., Mosteller, F., & Tukey, J.W. (1954). Statistical
Problems of the Kinsey Report on Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.
Washington, D.C.: American Statistical Association.
De Cecco, J.P., & Parker, D.A. (1995). The biology of
homosexuality: Sexual orientation or sexual preference? In J.P. De Cecco
& D.A. Parker (Eds.), Sex, Cells, and Same Sex Desire: The Biology
of Sexual Preference (pp.127). New York, NY: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Dickemann, M. (1995). Wilson's Panchreston: The inclusive
fitness hypothesis of sociobiology re-examined. In J.P. De Cecco &
D.A. Parker (Eds.), Sex, Cells, and Same Sex Desire: The Biology of
Sexual Preference (pp.147-83). New York, NY: The Haworth Press, Inc.
De Jonge, F.H., Louwerse, A.L., Ooms, M.P., Evers, P., & De
Poll, N.E. Van. (1989). Lesions of the SDN-POA inhibit sexual behavior
in male wistar rats. Brain Research Bulletin, 23, 483-492.
Dorner, G., Schenk, B., Schmiedel, B., & Ahrens, L. (1983).
Stressful events in perinatal life of bi- and homosexual men.
Experimental and Clinical Endocrinology, 81(1), 83-87.
Ellis, L. (1988). Sexual orientation of human offspring may be
altered by severe maternal stress during pregnancy. The Journal of Sex
Research, 25(1), 152-157.
Everitt, B.J. (1990). Sexual motivation: A neural and behavioural
analysis of the mechanisms underlying appetitive and consummatory
responses of male rats. Neurosciene and Biobehavioral Reviews, 14(2),
217-32.
Ford, J.G. (2001). Healing homosexuals: A psychologist's
journey through the ex-gay movement and the pseudo-science of reparative
therapy. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Psychotherapy, 5(3-4), 69-86.
Gladue, B.A., Green, R., & Hellman, R.E. (1984). Neuroendocrine
response to estrogen and sexual orientation. Science, 225,_1496-1499.
Golombok, S., & Tasker, F. (1996). Do parents influence the
sexual orientation of their children? Findings from a longitudinal study
of lesbian families. Developmental Psychology, 32(1), 3-11.
Gooren, L. (1986a). The neuroendocrine response of leutinizing
hormone to estrogen in heterosexual, homosexual, and transsexual
subjects. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 63(3),
583-588.
Gooren, L. (1986b). The neuroendocrine response of leutinizing
hormone to estrogen administration in the human is not sex specific but
dependent on the hormonal environment. Journal of Clinical
Endocrinology and Metabolism, 63(3), 589-593.
Gorman, M.R. (1994). Male homosexual desire: Neurological
investigations and scientific bias. Perspectives in Biology and
Medicine, 38(1), 61-81.
Gorski, R.A., Gordon, J.H., Shryne, J.E., & Southam, A.M.
(1978). Evidence for a morphological sex difference within the medial
preoptic area of the rat brain. Brain Research, 148, 333-346.
Greenberg, A.S., & Bailey, J.M. (2001). Parental selection of
children's sexual orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 30(4),
423-437.
Haldeman, D.C. (2002). The practice and ethics of sexual
orientation conversion therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 62(2), 221-7.
Hall, J.A., & Kimura, D. (1994). Dermatoglyphic asymmetry and
sexual orientation in men. Behavioral Neuroscience, 108(6), 1203-6.
Halpert, S.C. (2000). 'If it ain't broke, don't fix
it!': Ethical considerations regarding conversion therapies.
International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies, 5(1), 19-35.
Hamer, D.H., Hu. S., Magnuson, V.L., Hu, N., & Pattatucci, A.M.
(1993). A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male
sexual orientation. Science, 261, 321-327.
Hu, S.h., Wei, N., Wang, Q.D., Yan, L.q., Wei, E.Q., Zhang, M.M.,
Hu, J.B., Huang, M.I., Zhou, W.h., & Xu, Y. (2008). Patterns of
brain activation during visually evoked sexual arousal differ between
homosexual and heterosexual men. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 29,
1890-6.
Hull, E.M., & Dominguez, J.M. (2007). Sexual behavior in male
rodents. Hormones and Behavior, 52(1), 45-55.
Hull, E.M., & Dominguez, J.M. (2006). Getting his act together:
Roles of glutamate, nitric oxide, and dopamine in the medial preoptic
area. Brain Research, 1126(1), 1389-1394.
Iemmola, F., & Camperio, C.A. (2009). New evidence of genetic
factors influencing sexual orientation in men: Female fecundity increase
in the maternal line. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(3), 393-9.
Johnson, R. (2008). Hate Crime Statistics Motivated By Sexual
Orientation Bias. Retrieved from
http://gaylife.about.com/od/hatecrimes/a/statistics.htm
Kasper, B.S., Kerling, F., Graf, W., Stefan, H., & Pauli, E.
(2009). Ictal delusion of sexual transformation. Epilepsy and Behavior,
16(2), 356-9.
King, M., Semlyen, J., Tai, S.S., Killaspy, H., Osborn, D.,
Popelyuk, D., & Nazareth, I. (2008). A systematic review of mental
disorder, suicide, and deliberate self harm in lesbian, gay and bisexual
people. BMC Psychiatry, 18(8), 70.
Klar, A.J. (2004). Excess of counterclockwise scalp hair-whorl
rotation in homosexual men. Journal of Genetics, 83(3), 251-5.
Klein, F. (1993). The Bisexual Option, 2nd edition. Binghamton, NY:
The Haworth Press.
Kinsey, A.C., Pomeroy, W.B., & Martin, C.E. (1948). Sexual
Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Company.
Kerchner, M., & Ward, I.L. (1992). SDN-MPOA volume in male rats
is decreased by prenatal stress, but is not related to ejaculatory
behavior. Brain Research, 581, 244-251.
Levay, S. (1991). A difference in the hypothalamic structure
between heterosexual and homosexual men. Science, 253, 1034-1037.
Levay, S. (1996). Queer Science: The Use and Abuse of Research into
Homosexuality. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Lippa, R.A. (2003). Handedness, sexual orientation, and
gender-related personality traits in men and women. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 32(2), 103-14.
Loehlin, J.C., & McFadden, D. (2003). Otoacoustic emissions,
auditory evoked potentials, and traits related to sex and sexual
orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32(2), 115-27.
Manosevitz, M. (1970). Early sexual behavior in adult homosexual
and heterosexual males. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 76(3), 396-402.
Maslow, A.H., & Sakoda, J.M. (1952). Volunteer-error in the
Kinsey study. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47(2),
259-62.
McFadden, D., & Champlin, C.A. (2000). Comparisons of auditory
evoked potentials in heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual males and
females. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology,
1(1), 89-99.
McFadden, D., & Pasanen, E.G. (1998). Comparisons of the
auditory systems of heterosexuals and homosexuals: Clicked-evoked
otoacoustic emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America, 95(5), 2709-13.
Meijer, H. (1993). Can seduction make straight men gay? Journal of
Homosexuality, 24(3-4), 125-144.
Meyer-Bahlburg, H.F., Ehrhardt, A.A., Rosen, L.R., Gruen, R.S.,
Veridiano, N.P., Vann, F.H., & Neuwalder, H.F. (1995). Prenatal
estrogens and the development of homosexual orientation. Developmental
Psychology,31 (1), 12-21.
Milic, J.H., & Crowne, D.P. (1986). Recalled parent-child
relations and the need for approval of homosexual and heterosexual men.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 15(3), 239-246.
Miller, B.L., Cummings, J.L., McIntyre, H., Ebers, G., & Grode,
M. (1986). Hypersexuality or altered sexual preference following brain
injury. Journal of Neurology, 49, 867-73.
Money, J., & Tucker, p. (1975). Sexual Signatures: On Being a
Man or a Woman. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Mustanski, B.S., Dupree, M.G., Nievergelt, C.M., Bocklandt, S.,
Schork, N.J., & Hamer, D.H. (2005). A genomewide scan of male sexual
orientation. Human Genetics, 116(4), 272-8.
Pillard, R.C., & Bailey, M.J. (1995). A biologic perspective on
sexual orientation. The Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 18(1),
71-84.
Pillard, R.C., & Weinrich, J.D. (1986). Evidence of a familial
nature of male homosexuality. Archives of General Psychiatry, 43,
808-812.
Ponseti, J., Bosinski, H.A., Wolff, S., Peller, M., Jansen, O.,
Mehdorn, H.M., Buchel, C., & Siebner, H.R. (2006). A functional
endophenotype for sexual orientation in humans. Neuroimage, 33(3),
825-33.
Ponseti, J., Granert, O., Jansen, O., Wolff, S., Mehdorn, H.,
Bosinski, H., & Siebner, H. (2009). Assessment of sexual orientation
using the hemodynamicbrain response to visual sexual stimuli. Journal of
Sexual Medicine, 6(6), 1628-34.
Rahman, Q., Abrahams, S., & Wilson, G.D. (2003).
Sexual-orientation-related differences in verbal fluency.
Neuropsychology, 17(2), 240-6.
Rahman, Q., Collins, A., Morrison, M., Orrells, J.C., Cadinouche,
K., Greenfield, S., & Begum, S. (2008). Maternal inheritance and
familial fecundity factors in male homosexuality. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 37(6), 962-9.
Rahman, Q., & Wilson, G.D. (2003a). Large
sexual-orientation-related differences in performance on mental rotation
and judgment of line orientation tasks. Neuropsychology, 17(1), 25-31.
Rahman, Q., & Wilson, G.D. (2003b). Sexual orientation and the
2nd to 4th finger length ratio: Evidence for organizing effects of sex
hormones or developmental instability? Psychoneuroendocrinology, 28(3),
288-303.
Rahman, Q., Wilson, G.D., & Abrahams, S. (2004a). Biosocial
factors, sexual orientation, and neurocognitive functioning.
Psychoneuroendocrinology, 29(7), 867-81.
Rahman, Q., Wilson, G.D., & Abrahams, S. (2004b). Sex, sexual
orientation, and identification of positive and negative facial affect.
Brain and Cognition, 54(3), 179-85.
Rahman, Q., Wilson, G.D., & Abrahams, S. (2003). Sexual
orientation related differences in spatial memory. Journal of the
International Neuropsychological Society, 9(3), 376-83.
Rice, G., Anderson, C., Risch, N., & Ebers, G. (1999). Male
homosexuality: Absence of linkage to microsatellite markers at Xq28.
Science, 284(5414), 665-7.
Rieger, G., Linsenmeier, J.A., Gygax, L., & Bailey, J.M.
(2008). Sexual orientation and childhood gender noncomformity: Evidence
from home videos. Developmental Psychology, 44(1), 46-58.
Rodriguez-Larralde, A., & Paradisi, I. (2009). Influence of
genetic factors on human sexual orientation. Investigacion Clinica,
50(3), 377-91.
Rodriguez Rust, P.C. (1999). Alternatives to binary sexuality:
Modeling bisexuality. In P.C. Rodriguez Rust (Ed.), Bisexuality in the
United States (pp. 33-54). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Roselli, C.E., Larkin, K., Resko, J.A., Stellflug, J.N., &
Stormshak, F. (2004). The volume of a sexually dimorphic nucleus in the
ovine medial preoptic area/anterior hypothalamus varies with
sexual
partner preference. Endocrinology, 145(2), 478-83.
Roselli, C.E., & Stormshak, F. (2009a). Prenatal programming of
sexual partner preference: The ram model. Journal of
Neuroendocrinology,21(4), 359-64.
Roselli, C.E., & Stormshak, F. (2009b). The neurobiology of
sexual partner preferences in rams. Hormones and Behavior, 55(5),
611-20.
Ross, M.W., & Arrindell, W.A. (1988). Perceived parental
rearing patterns of homosexual and heterosexual men. The Journal of Sex
Research, 24, 275281.
Salais, D., & Fischer, R.B. (1995). Sexual preference and
altruism. In J.P. De Cecco & D.A. Parker (Eds.), Sex, Cells, and
Same Sex Desire: The Biology of Sexual Preference (pp.185-96). New York,
NY: The Haworth Press, Inc.
Savin-Williams, R.C. (1990). Gay and lesbian adolescents.
Homosexuality and Family Relations, 197-216.
Savin-Williams, R.C. (1988). Theoretical perspectives accounting
for adolescent homosexuality. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 9,
95-104.
Schwartz, G., Kim, R.M., Kolundzija, A.B., Rieger, G., &
Sanders, A.R. (2010). Biodemographic and physical correlates of sexual
orientation in men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 93-109.
Spitzer, R.L. (2003). Can some gay men and lesbians change their
sexual orientation? 200 participants reporting a change from homosexual
to heterosexual orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32 (5),
403-17.
Stormshak, F., Estill, C.T., Resko, J.A., & Roselli, C.E.
(2008). Changes in LH secretion in response to an estradiol challenge in
male- and female-oriented rams and in ewes. Reproduction, 135(5), 733-8.
Swaab, D.F., & Fliers, E. A sexually dimorphic nucleus in the
human brain. Science, 228, 1112-1115.
Swaab, D.F., & Hofman, M.A. (1990). An enlarged suprachiasmatic
nucleus in homosexual men. Brain Research, 537,141-148.
Troiden, R.R. (1988). Homosexual identity development. Journal of
Adolescent Health Care, 9, 105-113.
Van Wyk, P.H., & Geist, C. (1995). Biology of bisexuality:
Critique and observations. Journal of Homosexuality, 28(3-4), 357-73.
Van Wyk, P.H., & Geist, C. (1984). Psychosocial development of
heterosexual, bisexual, and homosexual behavior. Archives of Sexual
behavior, 13, 505-544.
Ward, I.L., & Weisz, J. (1980). Maternal stress alters plasma
testosterone in fetal males. Science, 207, 328.
Ward, I.L. (1972). Prenatal stress feminizes and demasculinizes the
behavior of males. Science, 175, 82-84.
William J. Jenkins
Mercer University
Author info: Correspondence should be sent to: Dr. William J.
Jenkins, Dept. of Psychology, Mercer University, 1400 Coleman Ave.,
Macon, GA 31207.