How is the "Gay Gene" alive? Evolutionary Biologist Richard Dawkins Explains
Summary
TLDRIn this thought-provoking script, the discussion delves into the possibility of a genetic basis for homosexuality, challenging the Darwinian notion of natural selection. Addressing the persistence of 'gay genes' in the gene pool, the conversation explores various theories, including the 'gay uncle' hypothesis and the 'sneaky male' theory, while contemplating the implications of genetic determinism on societal acceptance and individual responsibility. The dialogue also ponders the future impact of technological advances on the transmission of such genes, highlighting the complexities of nature versus nurture debates.
Takeaways
- π€ The speaker is embarking on a North American tour across 10 cities, which they anticipate to be their last due to their age.
- π They will be promoting their new book, 'The Genetic Book of the Dead', and signing copies of their 19 published books.
- 𧬠The script discusses the existence of genes related to homosexuality and the evolutionary puzzle they present, given that they seemingly do not contribute to reproduction.
- π€ It explores various theories to explain the persistence of such genes, including the 'gay uncle' hypothesis which suggests that these genes may be passed on through nieces and nephews.
- π§ββοΈ The 'sneaky male' theory is mentioned, which posits that individuals with the 'gay gene' might have been more successful in reproduction by being trusted with females by dominant males.
- πΆ The third theory discussed is that genes may manifest differently based on environmental conditions, suggesting that the 'gay gene' might have had a different expression in different environments.
- π The speaker emphasizes that homosexuality is not a choice and is likely determined by biology or genetics, which is supported by various studies and observations.
- π There is a concern that if a 'gay gene' is identified and can be detected prenatally, it could lead to selective abortions and discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community.
- π¨βπ¨βπ§βπ¦ The script touches on the importance of the 'gay gene' for political reasons, as it could help in securing rights for the LGBTQ+ community by showing that homosexuality is not a choice.
- 𧬠The discussion also includes the potential ethical implications of genetic determinism and the responsibility of individuals for their actions, regardless of genetic predispositions.
- π¬ Twin studies are mentioned as evidence supporting a genetic component to homosexuality, although it is noted that the effect is not 100%, which is a common misunderstanding about genetics.
Q & A
What is the main purpose of the speaker's North America tour?
-The speaker is embarking on a North America tour to speak in 10 different cities, which they anticipate to be their last American tour, as they are 83 years old and find travel increasingly irksome.
What is the significance of the 'genetic Book of the Dead' mentioned in the script?
-The 'genetic Book of the Dead' is a book by the speaker that will be published during the tour, and it will be one of the 19 books they will be signing at the events.
What is the primary topic of discussion in the script regarding homosexuality and genes?
-The script discusses the existence of genes for homosexuality and the puzzle of how such genes could be passed on through generations despite not contributing to reproduction, from a Darwinian perspective.
What are the 'gay Uncle' theory and the 'sneaky' theory, as mentioned in the script?
-The 'gay Uncle' theory suggests that genes for homosexuality could be passed on through relatives that the gay individual helps take care of. The 'sneaky' theory posits that individuals with the 'gay gene' might have been bisexual and used their perceived non-threatening nature to gain the trust of dominant males, thus finding opportunities to reproduce.
How does the speaker address the concern about the potential decrease in homosexuality if gay people do not reproduce?
-The speaker suggests that as acceptance grows and technology advances, gay people are finding alternative ways to have children, such as through artificial insemination or agreements with friends, thus still passing on their genes.
What is the 'byproduct' theory mentioned in the script in relation to genes?
-The 'byproduct' theory suggests that a gene may have multiple effects, and the effect we observe (e.g., homosexuality) might not be the primary reason the gene is selected for by natural selection. It could have another, unseen advantage.
What are the ethical implications of discovering a 'gay gene', as discussed in the script?
-The script raises concerns that if a 'gay gene' is discovered and a method to detect it in the womb is developed, it could lead to an increase in abortions, as some parents might choose to terminate pregnancies to avoid having a gay child.
How does the speaker respond to the argument that homosexuality is a choice?
-The speaker refutes the idea that homosexuality is a choice by pointing out the lack of a common background among gay people and the innate sense of being gay that many individuals report.
What does the script suggest about the role of environment in determining sexual orientation?
-The script suggests that environment does not play a significant role in determining sexual orientation, as gay people come from a wide variety of backgrounds, and the speaker believes that sexual orientation is more deterministic.
What is the relevance of twin studies to the genetic basis of homosexuality, according to the script?
-Twin studies are mentioned as evidence supporting a genetic basis for homosexuality, as they show a greater likelihood of identical twins being the same in sexual orientation compared to fraternal twins.
How does the speaker view the current state of research on the genetic basis of homosexuality?
-The speaker is optimistic about the future of research, believing that scientists will eventually find a definitive genetic component to homosexuality, despite the current lack of a conclusive 'gay gene'.
Outlines
π€ Final American Tour and Genetic Book Release
The speaker, at the age of 83, announces their final North American tour across 10 cities from September to early October, hinting at retirement with the phrase 'quit while you're ahead.' They anticipate this to be their last visit and will engage in Q&A sessions and book signings for their 19 published works, including a newly released 'Genetic Book of the Dead.' The speaker also addresses the complex issue of genetic inheritance of homosexuality and Darwinian selection, suggesting that while it appears counterintuitive, there are plausible explanations for the existence and persistence of such genes.
𧬠The Puzzle of Homosexuality and Darwinian Selection
The script delves into the question of how homosexuality could persist despite the apparent challenge it poses to Darwinian selection, which typically favors genes that contribute to reproduction. The speaker, Richard Wayne, discusses the possibility of 'gay genes' being passed on through alternative means, such as the 'gay uncle' hypothesis, where homosexual individuals may contribute to the survival of their relatives' offspring, thus indirectly passing on their genetic material. The 'sneaky male' theory is also introduced, suggesting that bisexual males might have used their perceived non-threat to dominant males to mate with females, thus propagating their genes.
π€ The Complexity of Genetic Determinism and Environmental Influence
This paragraph explores the idea that genes are not deterministic and can express different traits under varying environmental conditions. The 'gay gene' may manifest differently depending on factors such as bottle-feeding versus breastfeeding. The speaker argues against a simplistic view of genetic determinism, suggesting that the same gene could have different expressions in different environments, and that the concept of a 'gay gene' is contingent on specific cultural or environmental triggers.
π³οΈβπ Societal Acceptance and the Future of Homosexuality
The discussion turns to the impact of societal acceptance and technological advancements on the genetic continuation of homosexuality. With increasing numbers of gay people starting families through artificial insemination and other alternative methods, the speaker suggests that the genetic lineage associated with homosexuality may continue even without traditional reproduction. The conversation also touches on the potential ethical and societal implications of identifying a 'gay gene,' including the risk of selective abortions and the misuse of genetic information to absolve individuals of responsibility for their actions.
π¬ The Search for the 'Gay Gene' and Its Implications
The script addresses the ongoing search for a definitive 'gay gene' and its potential implications for the understanding of sexual orientation. The speaker argues that while there is strong evidence pointing towards a biological or genetic basis for homosexuality, including twin studies and behavioral patterns, the discovery of a specific gene could have both positive and negative consequences. On one hand, it could bolster support for LGBTQ+ rights by demonstrating that homosexuality is not a choice, but on the other, it could lead to genetic discrimination or even eugenics.
π¬ Twin Studies and the Genetic Basis of Sexual Orientation
The final paragraph focuses on twin studies as evidence for the genetic basis of sexual orientation. It explains that identical twins are more likely to share the same sexual orientation than fraternal twins, suggesting a genetic influence. The speaker refutes the argument that because the genetic influence is not 100%, it must be insignificant, comparing it to the genetic influence on handedness. The paragraph concludes with a critique of 'ex-gay' programs and ministries that claim to convert people's sexual orientation through prayer and other methods, highlighting the harm these practices can cause.
Mindmap
Keywords
π‘Homosexuality
π‘Darwinian Selection
π‘Genetic Determinism
π‘Gay Uncle Theory
π‘Sneaky Theory
π‘Environmental Influence
π‘Birth Order
π‘Twin Studies
π‘X-Gay Ministries
π‘Byproduct Theory
π‘Ethical Implications
Highlights
The speaker anticipates this to be their last American tour, with events in 10 different cities and book signings.
Discussion on the existence of genes for homosexuality and their transmission despite not directly contributing to the next generation.
The 'gay Uncle theory' is proposed as a possible explanation for the genetic transmission of homosexuality.
The 'sneaky theory' suggests that individuals with the 'gay gene' may have been able to pass on their genes by being trusted with the females of the group.
A third theory posits that genes may manifest differently under various environmental conditions, not strictly as 'gay genes'.
The impact of societal pressure on the expression of homosexuality and the possibility of a decrease in homosexuality due to changes in societal norms.
The potential for genetic research to influence societal and legal attitudes towards homosexuality.
The ethical implications of identifying a 'gay gene' and the potential for misuse in prenatal screening and selective abortions.
The role of technology in facilitating alternative family structures and the continuation of genetic lines for the LGBTQ+ community.
The debate on the determinism of genes in relation to behavior and the potential for genetic predisposition to be used as a defense in legal contexts.
The importance of distinguishing between different types of genetic influences on behavior, especially when considering moral and legal responsibility.
Evidence from twin studies suggesting a genetic component to sexual orientation, despite not being 100% conclusive.
Critique of 'ex-gay' ministries and the harm caused by attempts to change individuals' sexual orientation through prayer and other methods.
The broader implications of genetic research on human behavior and the potential for such knowledge to reshape our understanding of identity and morality.
The complexity of genetic expression and the possibility that genes related to homosexuality may have had different adaptive advantages in the past.
The ongoing search for a definitive 'gay gene' and the belief that such a discovery will further the understanding and acceptance of homosexuality.
The potential societal and political changes that could result from a greater scientific understanding of the genetic basis of homosexuality.
Transcripts
[Music]
I shall be spending the whole of
September and the first week of October
in North America speaking in 10
different cities from Dallas to
Vancouver I am 83 years old and travel
is more irksome than it was the maxim
quit while you're ahead has recently
received a welcome boost and I
anticipate that this will be my last
American tour my swans song my final
bow there'll be a Q&A at every event and
I'll be signing any or all of my 19
books including the genetic Book of the
Dead which will be just
published this will probably be your
last opportunity to tell me how
profoundly you disagree with everything
I've written and said or the reverse if
that is the case either way I look
forward to seeing you
[Music]
[Music]
there's a fair bit of evidence to
suggest that genes for homosexuality
exist not surprisingly one of the
commonest questions I get asked is how
do such genes get passed on darwinian
selection is of course all about the
survival of genes and on the face of it
genes for homosexuality are unlikely to
find themselves in the Next Generation
it is a puzzle but it's one that we can
I think answer
oh you must be way hello I'm
Richard Wayne this program is about
Charles Darwin and uh as a darwinian one
of the commonest questions I get asked
is why are there gays why doesn't why
doesn't it die out um in in by natural
selection because if you if you've got a
gay gene you're less likely to reproduce
it than if you if you're heterosexual
um this is only a problem if it's
genetic for a start so there's got to be
some genetic uh contribution to whether
one is gay or or not I think the
evidence is pretty convincing that there
is yeah I think the evidence is pretty
clear C certainly it doesn't seem to be
upbringing why people are gay for
example the only thing gay people have
in common is that our backgrounds have
nothing in common and I think almost
every gay or lesbian person would say
they didn't choose to be gay they always
knew they were and when their friends
were attracted to the opposite sex they
were attracted to the same sex so I
think to me it's really clear card it's
it's genetic or biologically determined
now we don't have all the answers yet
and the question is from a darwinian
standpoint how does this occur well I I
think nature is pretty smart in that if
you still have 90% to 95% of the the
population heterosexual and reproducing
uh there's room for people who aren't
reproducing and whether it's because uh
set up people to be Warriors and go out
or or they're set up to uh be to be in a
situation to take care of their parents
and people as they get older and maybe
that's what the contribution to Nature
is okay I mean it's not good enough to
say maybe 95% is enough natural
selection is a much more uh stringent
selector than that if there if there are
5% uh who are genetically gay then we do
need a better explanation than just
saying oh well 95% is enough enough now
you started to come on to something that
might actually work when you said maybe
looking after I mean I I I can think of
three I suppose possibilities um one is
the so-called gay Uncle the theory where
where you you look after your nephews
and nieces or other relatives and that
makes sense in a in a wild ancestral
human where perhaps the sort of Butch
men went out hunting and um and left
their their children in charge of in the
charge of not only the mothers but also
uncles I mean maybe the brothers of the
of the so that that that means that that
the gay gene was passed
on in the bodies of the children who
were being
protected by the gay uncles so that
that's that's one possibility right and
that's one that makes a lot of sense I
think that uh you I think it does
explain uh why the gay gene was passed
on and I think there 's a lot more we're
going to learn about that the second
theory is the so-called sneaky
Theory which is the idea that uh the
males who possess the gay gene many of
them may not have been wholly homosexual
they may have been bisexual uh in now in
that case again go back to our scenario
of the um dominant males going off
Hunting and leaving behind um the women
and children in the charge of other
males uh and if there were other males
who were known to be sexual then
the dominant uh males would have trusted
them uh not to meet with the females I
mean they we're imagining a situation in
which the dominant males are very
possessive about their females perhaps
harim holders and so being gay would
have been a pretty good certificate that
you can you can safely leave your your
women with me now if they were bisexual
uh that would have been a false
assumption and once again we now have a
way in which the gay gen could have been
passed on right I mean it does make
sense in that in that way because uh
they could go off and be more trusting
and we see that today where Straight
friends just love that they won't let
their their wives hang out with uh uh
other straight guys they get too close
but if you're gay oh it's great go out
and have a good time and it doesn't seem
to be that jealousy so that that
definitely makes sense both uh
historically and also contemporarily
well now I mean it's hard seems like it
would make a lot of sense it's hardly a
good gay right slogan but but it it
actually is uh it does make sense from a
biological I mean you you see that the
way the argument is going obviously that
that that it could be that uh
that males in our wild ancestors who
possessed the gay gene that they that
they that they got their genes into into
the Next Generation by by using that
that strategy and being gay was or at
least being by bisexual being gay was a
very convincing way of lulling the
suspicions of the dominant males that's
interesting the question with that
theory remains for today though if
people were doing that back then and
then in more modern terms the 50s 60s
and 70s we had people pressured into
getting married and reproducing with
their genes uh what happens for the next
gener few Generations when gay people
are just simply coming out and they're
not having sex with the opposite sex are
we going to see a decrease in
homosexuality well uh it we might do I
suppose on that on that theory but it
would probably take longer than the
couple of decades that we've that we're
playing with now so um I I think perhaps
a more serious objection might be uh I I
don't know what percentage of men are
bisexual as opposed to purely homosexual
and perhaps you know that I I don't know
that but it seems to me that there were
a lot more women that are bisexual I
can't think of really too many guys they
start out as
bisexual and they usually come out as
gay later now there are men who were
bisexual but I just think it's a smaller
percentage than people might think just
from from my experience having met in
being in the gay community and running
organizations were meeting thousands of
people over the years I can't think of
too many people to hop back and forth no
and and you couldn't imagine yourself I
mean you you you couldn't couldn't
imagine being bisexual not in my wildest
dreams I couldn't imagine that and if I
would I'd be happy although it would be
quite distracting but uh yeah it's just
something I could not imagine right okay
and the third theory that I I suggest is
a is a rather more um esoteric one is
that when we talk about a gene for
something or other a gene for anything a
gene for x a gene for being aggressive a
gene for um having blue eyes a gene for
being gay uh it doesn't always have to
be a gene for that thing it's a gene for
that thing under the right
environmental conditions so for example
the gay gene that that manifests itself
now in an urban environment in
homosexual tendencies might in a very
different environment out on the African
plains have manifest itself in another
way genes are not that deterministic
they can show themselves in one way
under one environmental circumstance in
a different way under another one so
just just just as an example of that
suppose that bottle feeding is the
environment this is a purely
hypothetical thing suppose bottle
feeding is the Environmental
circumstance that means that the gay
gene manifests itself in gay Behavior
but if you're breastfed and please don't
imagine I'm I'm I think that's true it's
just a it's just an example but if your
breastfed it doesn't well before bottles
were
invented that means that the gay gene
would never have have manifested itself
in gay Behavior at all it would have
manifested itself as something quite
different I mean maybe the ability to to
be good at tracking animal prey or
something of that sort once bottle
feeding came in it changes the
manifestation of the gene so what this
theory is saying is that there's really
no such thing as the gay gene there's
the gay gene given that the the cultural
or environmental circumstances are right
and before that it wasn't a gay gene at
all so there was nothing to stop it
getting passed on because it was good
for something quite different in those
days yeah I mean the only question I
would have with that would be that gay
people come from every environment
imaginable whether it's somewhere very
liberal whether it's in London or New
York City where you can be openly gay or
in places like Iran where you're going
to get beheaded yes or or hung and
people are still gay under all
circumstances so I I would well what
you're putting there is an argument um
that that that it is more deterministic
than I'm making out there an argument
that if you got the gay genene you are
gay no matter what and that's what I
that's what I believe I think people can
certain pressure can hide their behavior
and we see that in the United States
right here you have people who are who
are out and open when they're living in
a in a bigger city in New York in San
Francisco and say they have to go home
to take care of a parent in rural
Alabama and they're not so out anymore
so I think the social pressure would
determine how it plays out more than
anything and I think we've seen gay
people every society all the way from
from the cave to Alexander the Great on
by I just think it's I think it's it's
something that is more deterministic
from my experience it couldn't change
under any circumstances and the only
thing that would change it uh would be
for example if I went to Saudi Arabia
today they were going to ahead me oh I'd
be saying I'm really straight right
about now yeah yeah yeah um I suppose
one thing I'm actually quite curious
about is
is why isn't the percentage more I mean
what about ancient Athens and Sparta I
mean why why was it so much more common
indeed more or less Universal well I
think that uh that's that's a good
question but I just think that people
culturally were going to experiment but
I think ultimately they were going to if
they were straight they were going to be
with a woman or wanted to eventually
well I think they were they probably all
I mean not all but I mean they they they
viewed women as different they were for
reproducing and and I I think that that
that's right or and so it was a sort of
um they were all the ones we're talking
about were were
bisexual um yeah okay so so do you think
I mean but today for example yeah you
don't see I don't see this the
heterosexuals that go to San Francisco
they're prob the gayest spot on Earth
are still straight my friends that are
straight there I don't see much hopping
over and and and because of the
environment I see people being just
being able to be who they are I don't
see environment influencing that in any
way and um or we' see San Francisco
would all of a sudden go from you know
25% G to 35 and 40 we don't we don't see
that we don't see that can I turn to
another topic which is um obviously I
mean the question of whether there are
gay genes is is is controversial by the
way when we talk about gay genes it
doesn't have to mean the particular one
that that that's you know on the ex
chromosome that's passed down the female
line I mean any any genetic tendency to
be gay uh could be what we're talking
about um do you and do any of your
friends take some kind of consolation
from this I mean is that is politically
speaking or soci speaking or even
morally speaking is is the gay gene a
good thing from your point of view a gay
gene is a double-edged sword and the
reason is Americans if you pull them and
you can show that homosexuality is
inborn they support gay and lesbian
rights across the board I mean it's very
robust and very dramatic they think it's
a choice like what you're going to eat
for breakfast in the morning what shirt
you're going to wear they vote against
gay rights so it's very important to
show through a gay gene it's not a
choice that will help us politically
tomorrow and have dramatic results the
problem comes if they can find out in
the womb they can see in advance if
somebody's going to be gay I think you'd
have absolute disaster you'd have mass
abortions taking place yes there's no
doubt in my mind that you'd have
conservatives because of religious
points of view having abortions even
though they say they're against abortion
uh and you'd have a lot of liberal
parents simply doing it because they
think life would be easier or they'd
want grandchildren I think it would be
our night may come true so I never
thought that so I want I want for
scienti for both science and for
political reasons I think it would be
the most amazing thing in the world if
they discovered a gay genene but if they
can also pair it with the technology to
see in the womb whether a child's gay
it's going to turn into absolute horror
situation for the gay and lesbian
community no doubt about it for me yes
what what would be interesting though is
if homosexuality has been advaned
genetically by this sneaky Theory
uh what does that mean for the future
when you have gay people suddenly not
getting married suddenly not having sex
with the opposite sex at all do that
mean there's going to be a decrease in
homosexuality perhaps our Saving Grace
however genetically is going to be that
as there is more acceptance and there's
technology to reproduce we are having
children we are starting families at
record numbers so we are still moving
our Gene forward uh whether it's through
the artificial in insemination uh or
some people just choose with their
friends to do to have children uh
especially with women now working into
their 30s and they all of a sudden go oh
my God I don't have a child and they go
to their gay best friend and say would
you like to have a child and so we're
seeing alternative ways of spreading the
gene in the future well yes I mean uh
artificial insemination um could be sort
of the ultimate sneaky F the yeah the
scientific sneaky
try to say that 10 times yes that's
right uh well well yes I mean technology
I mean and civilization is having all
sorts of effects and human reproduction
is changing so rapidly the whole
environment is changing so rapidly if
you start asking the question what
effect is this having on natural
selection it's having all kinds of
effects I mean the existence of
contraception uh is of course in in
principle having huge effects I mean
there should be natural selection
against any tendency to use uh
contraceptives doing um heterosexual sex
uh if it what we could speculate that if
if condoms had been around for for a
million years we should shrink from them
as though it was a tarantula or a
scorpion or something because it has the
same kind of effect upon your future
reproductive prospects I think the point
is that all these speculations are
speculations for a rather longer term
future than we're used to dealing with
when we think in terms of decade to
decade changes in changes in passion so
if if there were were any tendency for
gay genes to be decreasing for the
reason that that you suggest we probably
wouldn't see it as an evolutionary
effect until long after our
grandchildren are dead right and of
course it be hard even to recognize that
over we used to thinking in such short
increments of time I mean I think we're
talking about contraception we're
finally seeing for example in Europe the
decrease in younger people in certain
countries and we're seeing the Decades
of that um are as actually changing the
demographic uh po population right now
then there's a theory we could call the
byproduct Theory genes have multiple
effects and the the effect that you
think it well you may be looking at one
of the effects of the Gene and so you're
asking a question about what is the
darwinian survival value of that effect
little do you know that the Gene's
having some quite different effect maybe
some internal effect in in the
biochemistry of the body which is what
its real Advantage is and so you're in a
sense asking the wrong question when you
say uh it could be that you're asking
the wrong question when you say what's
the biological advantage of having a gay
gene the the right answer might be oh
that's not a gay gene or any
incidentally a gay gene what it really
is is a gene for making such and such a
chemical uh we left with a problem why
don't why don't we all have it in that
case and so it's got got to be a bit
more complicated than that uh but
nevertheless the byproduct theory is one
of the first theories that would that
would occur to a darwinian mhm it just
seems to me that they're going to find
something more definitive because gay
people matter where they are in the
world are under incredible pressure
specifically in in conservative areas to
conform unbelievable pressure even at
the expense of their lives yet they
still come out as gay I I think you're
going to find for example the recent
study with the fruit fly where they
changed one into a lesbian fruit fly
with one gene splice I really believe in
my heart they're going to find something
similar with gay and lesbian people it
is such a natural part of our existence
it's it's so
um in born most of us would say that I I
don't think you're going to find it to
be as a result of some alternative uh
secondary trait it's intrinsic to who we
are and and and so I think that theory
is going to be the one that falls by the
wayside of all of them okay that's
interesting um on the question of uh
responsibility and and that you were
saying that uh society would tend to be
very sympathetic to gays if it was shown
that definitely is a gay gene that of
course is is it has a special force if
it's if it's a deterministic thing which
you just implied that it is that if
you've got the gay G and you're gay and
that and that's that um now it's a
slight risk to to play that card when
dealing with um
responsibility um being gay is of course
nothing to do with being criminal or
anything else but one could imagine
somebody could discover uh a gene for
for some criminal Behavior a gene for
theft or a gene for kleptomania or
something and then you could imagine
people going to court and saying uh well
it wasn't me your honor it was my genes
and
um do you see the kind of difficulty
that that might come never not talking
about gayness now but just just in
general if one starts using the the
alleged deterministic qualities of genes
to absolve one of any kind of
responsibility I think we're going to
have to take each case uh separately
because they're probably going to find a
genetic component alcoholism and and
kleptomania and a number of things so
then the question you ask is okay then
what's wrong with with kleptomania well
you're stealing something from somebody
else you're hurting them abut
homosexuality on the other hand you're
not hurting anybody and so you're going
to have a situation politically where
you have a religious extremists in my
opinion on one side who are trying to
love everything together and saying that
kleptomania and murder is the same as
homosexuality and then you're going to
have the vast majority of people who
aren't uh brainwashed into that sort of
of fundamentalist thinking who are going
to say wait a second don't compare
murder and kleptomania to homosexuality
that's just plain incoherent yes I mean
in any case uh we don't have to bring
genes in you could imagine that somebody
could show that the reason you're
kleptomaniac is because of your
environment of course it is of your
environment and your and your genes I
it's not my fault your honor it's my
environment and uh uh there's no
particular reason to single out genes
for absolving one of responsibility
anyway right and and there're it's going
to be a real these are opening ethical
questions that we've never had to deal
with before and it's it's going to be
absolutely fascinating but also scary as
we go into the future and we learn more
about ourselves and in a sense play
quote God and be able to see how we got
here who we are uh the the small the
little things we only dreamt about or
saw in science fiction are now going to
be playing out on the world stage in in
political Arenas yeah it seems to follow
from the theory of Darwin a natural
selection that if anything is widespread
in a species it must be good for
something or natural selection would
have got rid of it uh and this seems to
raise a problem it's one of the
commonest questions I get asked what why
does gayers survive of course it's only
a problem if it's genetic if it's if it
were purely environmental we wouldn't
have a darwinian problem but it's
because it's genetic that we have to
explain as darwinian how it is that gay
genes uh survive in the population so
for a darwinian it becomes a very
important question is it as a matter of
fact
genetic are there gay
genes and um I think we probably both
looked at the evidence for this what
what's your assessment of the evidence
on on gay genes well first I have to
look at the environmental theories it
said that people are gay because how
they were brought up because they have
distant same-sex parents or they didn't
play sports for example and those are
patently absurd they don't stand the
test of scrutiny uh gay and lesbian
people come from every environment
imaginable we come from very
conservative backgrounds and very
liberal backgrounds we come from very
close families and broken families just
like heterosexuals so that it doesn't
seem to be a cause and effect that those
who push the environmental Theory uh
like like to say on the other hand we're
seeing over the past 15 years many
studies coming out that show many
interesting things for example lesbians
hear music more like a straight man uh
than than many women they have hand
patterns lesbians that resemble uh
heterosexual men there were there were
seem to be genes that at least point in
that direction right now we we also see
for example that birth order the more
Brothers you have uh the the more likely
you are to be gay as as a youngest
brother yes as a youngest brother the
more likely you are to be gay so I think
if you put all of this together there is
a foundation pointing strongly in the
direction of a biological or genetic uh
um determination of sexual orientation
and I believe it's going to play out
where we see it's going to be definitive
at some point when we have the knowledge
there were religious conservatives in
America that will argue well we haven't
shown there's a gay gene therefore there
isn't one and it has to be environmental
and that's crazy that's like saying
before we discovered the world was round
that it was kind of round our flat
because we just hadn't come to that
point of Discovery Well that's not true
we're just not there yet there's a lot
we don't know but that doesn't mean it
points to environmental there is no
cause and effect when it comes to how we
are raised or our family relationships
that would point to that what about twin
studies the twin studies show that the
more that identical twins are much more
likely to be gay than uh fraternal twins
or well strictly speaking what you mean
is isn't it that if you're gay and
you're an identical twin your twin is
likely to be gay if you're heterosexual
and you're an identical twin your twin
is likely to be heterosexual and that
resemblance is greater for identical
twins than for fraternal twins uh yeah
the twin studies do Point genetic uh
however people might argue well that if
it's not
100% uh that means that genetics can't
play a role well as far as I know there
were left people who were left-handed
and right-handed who were brothers or
sisters and we have one that's
right-handed one that's left-handed and
nobody suggesting that they're
left-handed because of their bad
upbringing it doesn't have to be 100%
anyway that's that's completely
completely illogical it's it's it's
enough that it's a statistical effect
and that's that's a very key point
though because people think if genetica
has to be statistically 100% And that's
the main argument that we hear over and
over again from the religious right in
America particularly in the South yes
that point Cuts both ways I suppose
because if you are worried about
responsibility as they are um they could
say well if it's not 100% that means we
could train you to be heterosexual and
what we have in America is we have a
robust uh um xgay industry when I mean
xgay there's people who say they can
help you pray away the G if you just pay
them enough money and we see more than
100 Ministries in this country they have
an elaborate uh tour of conferences and
symposiums around around the nation to
try to convert people from gay to
straight and they do all kinds of weird
things like have men drink sports drinks
and call each other dude so they'll be
more masculine or they have you wear a
rubber band on your wrist and when you
see someone who's attractive you snap
the rubber band um or they have
exorcisms that's a very popular thing
here in America we have exorcisms in
these so-called xkay Ministries so
you're right I mean they are trying to
make that argument and then they're
saying since you can change we're going
to have these programs to help you do so
and it's hurting a lot of people
destroying families and ruining lives
there's a famous case of a well-known
preacher in in Colorado who who uh was
converted back to being heterosexual by
prayer Ted Haggard prayed away the gay
in only a couple weeks he's the exhibit
a of what's wrong with these programs in
the B case the genes for working as a
sterile worker are passed on because
copies of those genes are in the
reproductive individuals say the queen
and so the queen is passing on genes for
being a worker a sterile worker under
other environmental conditions so the
gay Uncle Theory would be that in a
primitive human
society an uncle would look after his
young nephews and nieces and he wouldn't
have any children of of his own but he
look after his young nephews and and
nieces and the genes that the nephews
and nieces get from their father father
say who is the brother of the gay Uncle
the the father passes on to his
offspring genes for under some
circumstances being being a gay uncle
and the final Link in the chain of
argument is that a family that has a gay
Uncle actually managed to produce more
children than a family that doesn't have
a gay Uncle because there's more hands
to feed the young and look after them
protect them and so on I think it makes
a lot of sense I think that there
there's a very narrow interpretation of
why we are here on Earth is as human
beings and I think there's a lot of
explanations of why we're here we're not
just a bunch of we're not viruses that
are we just simply all of us just simply
reproducing there's no other aspects of
life there are many things that people
do to to perpetuate the species other
than just simply have sex and reproduce
and I think that's an an excellent
example of how these genes can get
passed on yeah yeah let's say perpetuate
the genes rather than perpetuate the
species we're talking talking Darwinism
good thank you very much sure thank you
discussion excellent thank you for your
work okay if you enjoyed this episode
you can show some support by subscribing
to the podcast sharing it with your
friends and leaving a review
[Music]
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)