Research about sexuality, gender, etc.

[bankside]

From time to time we start great conversations on JUB about what factors underlie sexuality, gender, sexual orientation, and so on. Sometimes we're armchair academics, sometimes we're well-read on the subject, sometimes we go on intuition, and in many cases we probably even innovate and come up with theories that would be useful to researchers. Also, I'm sure in some cases we reinvent the wheel.

No matter what, it would probably help to collect links to studies, research and commentary on sexual orientation, gender, and sexuality in general. It would be a good resource, and helpful to refer to in debate instead of working blind.

I think this fits under Health and Wellbeing, because coming to a better understanding of who we are is usually central to ensuring our wellbeing. But I can see it being recommended to be moved somewhere else. Not quite sure where.

Anyway, that's my goal for this thread: a listing of just the study, report or scholarly commentary, maybe a quick summary. Please leave the debate or discussion for other threads.

 

[bankside]

The flaws in a new survey that praises girls-only and boys-only classes.

http://www.slate.com/id/2277928/

This commentary discusses problems with research supporting single-sex classrooms, and contains links to other contrary research.

 

[bankside]

Men from Mars, Women from Venus?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10825779

A study that finds women are more flexible in their sexual expression than men.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18686150
And maybe not so much?

 

[mbamike]

Simon LeVay, PhD:

In 1991, LeVay published "A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men" in Science. This article reported a difference in average size between the third Interstitial Nucleus of the Anterior Hypothalamus (INAH3) in the brains of heterosexual men and homosexual men: INAH3 was more than twice as large in heterosexual men as in homosexual men. The INAH3 size of homosexual men was the same as that of women. LeVay wrote that "This finding indicates that INAH is dimorphic with sexual orientation, at least in men, and suggests that sexual orientation has a biological substrate." LeVay added, "The existence of 'exceptions' in the present sample (that is, presumed heterosexual men with small INAH 3 nuclei, and homosexual men with large ones), hints at the possibility that sexual orientation, although an important variable, may not be the sole determinant of INAH 3 size.

 

[Gomaki]

I work at a mental health hospital in the forensic psychiatry unit and sexual behaviours clinic, and one of the doctors wants to do a study about gender identity and sex offenses. He had an interesting case where a female claims she did her crimes while her mind was "a man's", and that inspired him to look further into it.

I wonder how such a study would occur. From the forms I process, gender identity is not anywhere on any questionnaire we currently use, therefore, I don't we could pull many participants from the pool of files we already have. Hopefully this may change the intake questionnaires, or possibly get recorded in interviews in the future. I have often wondered why there was so little research going on about these issues (comparitively to others). It's really a timely issue, don't you guys think?

 

[kallipolis]

^I doubt whether gender identity, or gender identity confusion is a catalyst of, or precursor of criminal activity.

 

[Gomaki]

Not whether it is a precursor or cause, but rather, if it is to occur, the nature of it. As you can imagine, the nature of criminality is different between men and women. It would be interesting to see if females who identify as men commit crimes in the same way as biological men, or males who indentify as women fall into the same patterns as biological women.

 

[kallipolis]

Not whether it is a precursor or cause, but rather, if it is to occur, the nature of it.

As you can imagine, the nature of criminality is different between men and women.

It would be interesting to see if females who identify as men commit crimes in the same way as biological men, or males who indentify as women fall into the same patterns as biological women.

The gender differences between a female, and a male human person are not contributory, or influential factors towards criminal behaviour.

Criminal behaviour is the result of free choice to commit a crime, and is not determined, or influenced by the gender, sexual orientation, or the trans-gender status of a human person.

Anti social, and criminal behaviour is not the result of gender, or sexual orientation. Nor should the gender differences, sexual orientation, or trans gender differences between human beings, be considered grounds for assuming that criminal behaviour is the result of such differences.

We gays should be very wary of contributing to loony ideas that attempt to correlate the homosexual person, and the trans gender person with a higher incidence of anti-social, or criminal behaviour.

 

[Gomaki]

The gender differences between a female, and a male human person are not contributory, or influential factors towards criminal behaviour.

Criminal behaviour is the result of free choice to commit a crime, and is not determined, or influenced by the gender, sexual orientation, or the trans-gender status of a human person.

Anti social, and criminal behaviour is not the result of gender, or sexual orientation. Nor should the gender differences, sexual orientation, or trans gender differences between human beings, be considered grounds for assuming that criminal behaviour is the result of such differences.

We gays should be very wary of contributing to loony ideas that attempt to correlate the homosexual person, and the trans gender person with a higher incidence of anti-social, or criminal behaviour.

I don't think you are following what I'm talking about. I'm talking about gender differences in criminal behaviours. Not that these things contribute to it, and if you read what I wrote, at no point am I suggesting that sexual orientation or gender identity are risk factors for criminal activity.

I've seen several cases of GLBT offenders. Just like anyone else, we (GLBT) can and do commit crimes, sexual or otherwise. I'm not interested in the reason being sexual orientation, that is for sure not a reason. The research we want to do it is related to types of crimes, methods, etc. For example, do trans-men offenders commit their crimes in the same way as biological men, do they operate under the same framework? This is not an attempt to label or drag trans-people down, this is an attempt at understanding patterns of sexual offenses better. I know it's a touchy subject, but I hope you can understand that the results could be important.

 

[kallipolis]

I don't think you are following what I'm talking about. I'm talking about gender differences in criminal behaviours.

Not that these things contribute to it, and if you read what I wrote, at no point am I suggesting that sexual orientation or gender identity are risk factors for criminal activity.

I've seen several cases of GLBT offenders. Just like anyone else, we (GLBT) can and do commit crimes, sexual or otherwise. I'm not interested in the reason being sexual orientation, that is for sure not a reason. The research we want to do it is related to types of crimes, methods, etc. For example, do trans-men offenders commit their crimes in the same way as biological men, do they operate under the same framework? This is not an attempt to label or drag trans-people down, this is an attempt at understanding patterns of sexual offenses better. I know it's a touchy subject, but I hope you can understand that the results could be important.

I fully understand what you are suggesting.

The methodology of the execution of criminal behaviour is never the result of differences in gender, or sexual orientation. Thus the implication of your assertion that gender, and sexual orientation differences have a bearing, on the methodology of committing crimes has no foundation in reality. It is a false premise upon which to base such research.

On the contrary your assumption has no merit, simply because there is no known credible research available to support such an assertion.

Criminal behaviour is the result of actions that do not depend upon gender, or sexual orientation. Consequently any attempt to correlate the methodology of executing criminal behaviour with differences in gender, and sexual orientation is meaningless, and plays into the hands of those espousing loony theories, that attempt to implicate minority sexual orientation, with increased risks for criminal, and anti social behaviour.

 

[bankside]

kallipolis, gomaki, you are badly off topic. this thread is intended to collect or catalogue research into sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender, and brief summaries thereof. This is not the thread for discussion or debate of that research, though it looks like it could be a good thread if you wanted to request a mod split it out. Think library reference shelf, not debate hall.

 

[kallipolis]

kallipolis, gomaki, you are badly off topic. this thread is intended to collect or catalogue research into sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender, and brief summaries thereof. This is not the thread for discussion or debate of that research, though it looks like it could be a good thread if you wanted to request a mod split it out. Think library reference shelf, not debate hall.

On the contrary Gomaki is well on topic, and his choice to introduce such a subject is useful for the education of many who visit this forum.

Leave the censorship to others.

Attempts to control the specifics of discussion are not within your domain.

 

[Dolmance]

I'd advise getting in contact with Doctor William Byne. I was having a discussion with a homophobe on YouTube who misquoted (deliberately) some of Doctor Byne's work, so I went looking for him to set the record straight. The man is not only very easy to contact, he is also incredibly forthcoming and engaged with me in a long discourse on the current research, what the general "feeling" is on the matter amongst biologists working in the field and also provided a comprehensive list of the most recent research, what their significance is etc. His e-mail is very easy to find with a simple googling of his name.

It seems that the current general understanding is that the development of sexual orientation is very poorly understood; despite the reductitionist views of those seeking absolute biological or environmental factors, the research that currently exists is, at best, ambiguous, suggesting a number of highly complicated factors influencing the eventual outcome (some of which may be idiosyncratic to the biology and genetic make up of individuals). There most certainly isn't anything like a single specific environmental factor or even a set of environmental factors that can be identified, nor is there anything like the idiotically reductionist notion of a "gay gene."

 

[kallipolis]

I'd advise getting in contact with Doctor William Byne. I was having a discussion with a homophobe on YouTube who misquoted (deliberately) some of Doctor Byne's work, so I went looking for him to set the record straight. The man is not only very easy to contact, he is also incredibly forthcoming and engaged with me in a long discourse on the current research, what the general "feeling" is on the matter amongst biologists working in the field and also provided a comprehensive list of the most recent research, what their significance is etc. His e-mail is very easy to find with a simple googling of his name.

It seems that the current general understanding is that the development of sexual orientation is very poorly understood; despite the reductitionist views of those seeking absolute biological or environmental factors, the research that currently exists is, at best, ambiguous, suggesting a number of highly complicated factors influencing the eventual outcome (some of which may be idiosyncratic to the biology and genetic make up of individuals). There most certainly isn't anything like a single specific environmental factor or even a set of environmental factors that can be identified, nor is there anything like the idiotically reductionist notion of a "gay gene."

I subscribe totally to this opinion, which represents my understandings, and that of the mainstream.

I am concerned that those views that represented majority opinion among American psychologists, and psychiatrists until some forty years ago, that homosexuality is a mental health condition, should not be revised/represented under the pretence of new research, that attempts to attribute self destructive/anti-social/criminal behaviour to people who are homosexual.

I may add that there still remains a tiny minority of American psychologists who believe that homosexuality is a mental health condition.

This short article offers the interested reader some perspective on this matter:

http://hubpages.com/hub/listingtostarboard

 

[kallipolis]

^The captioned article represents the opinion of an ultra conservative, who believes that gays can be cured of our illness, by resorting to therapy.

 

[bankside]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12140064

"There are no genetic factors that can be studied independently of the environment," says Michael Meaney, a professor at McGill University in Canada.

"And there are no environmental factors that function independently of the genome. [A trait] emerges only from the interaction of gene and environment."

This means that everything about us - our personalities, our intelligence, our abilities - are actually determined by the lives we lead. The very notion of "innate" no longer holds together.

This research is not specifically about sexual orientation, however it involves neuroplasticity. That is an interesting area to follow, as some studies have shown differences in the brains of gay and straight men.

 

[EJMichaels]

I found an interesting series that doesn't fully qualify to be posted here because I'm not summarizing the studies. It's from Discovery Channel, a 20-part program on the biological (and other measurable) bases of various aspects of sexual behavior. All the studies were on heterosexual attraction, but some of the findings may apply to others. For example, men become less selective about partners when testosterone increases. If the goal is to spread his genetic material, that makes sense. Other studies examine things like physical characteristics and scent.

You can watch it here, or on Netflix
The Science of Sex Appeal
http://health.discovery.com/videos/science-of-sex-appeal/

 

[EJMichaels]

Also slightly off the indicated format, I want to recommend a book: "PoMoSexuals: Challenging Assumptions About Gender and Sexuality". Pomo, as in Postmodern.

This brilliant book addresses many of the concerns found in the numerous threads on bisexuals, pansexuals, and other hotly debated labels. It's almost 15 years old, but I just found it. I wish I had read it back then - would have saved me a lot of confusion.

From Amazon.com:

We live in a complicated world, and according to PoMoSexuals, it is a lot more complicated than we thought. Now that society has become accustomed to the idea that gay men and lesbians exist, Lawrence Schimel and Carol Queen have brought together 15 essays dedicated to demolishing those categories. They are not, of course, arguing that homosexuals don't exist, but simply that these categories and words cannot do justice to the wondrous complexity of human sexuality…

…[gives voice to] people living in the gray areas of gender and sexuality who struggle with what it means to have "nonstandard" erotic desires and identities in America. They represent people on the margins of gender and sexuality, ranging from a man who becomes a lesbian woman to a heterosexual woman exploring her attraction to gay men and a lesbian who writes gay male porn...

Here's one of many reviews: http://gaybookreviews.info/review/3168/1167