Sexual Orientation
The biological basis of sexual orientation (heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality) has long been a topic of controversy in both science and society. A growing body of research supports the view that genetics and the environment work together to determine sexual orientation. Some issues remain unclear. First, how much of sexual orientation is genetic and how much is shaped by environmental influences, including family, society, and culture? Second, is sexual orientation a fixed trait, or is it subject to environmental influence and changeable over time? Two types of genetic studies, classical family/twin/adoption studies and biological/molecular studies, support multiple genetic and environmental determinants in male and female sexual orientation.
Twin and Family Studies
Twin studies are a classic tool for examining the role of genes. Twins brought up together share a similar environment. Monozygotic twins share all their genes, while dizygotic twins share only half their genes. Early twin studies by Franz Kallmann in 1952 and Leonard Heston in 1968 reported that if one monozygotic twin was homosexual, there was a greater chance the other twin would be homosexual. The likelihood of this was greater than for dizygotic twins. These studies were potentially biased. They recruited homosexual subjects and had relatively small sample sizes. Recent twin studies have examined all twins in a community without regard to sexual orientation, providing large, less biased sample sizes. In 2000 Kenneth Kendler and colleagues evaluated genetic and environmental factors in a large U.S. sample of twin and nontwin sibling pairs. Sexual orientation was classified as heterosexual or nonheterosexual (bisexual or homosexual) and was determined by a single item on a self-report questionnaire. There was a greater chance for both monozygotic twins to be nonheterosexual than for dizygotic twins or sibling pairs. Results suggested that sexual orientation was greatly influenced by genetic factors, but family environment might also play a role. One problem with this study is that a single item was used to assess the complexity of sexual orientation.
Katherine Kirk's study in 2000 involved a community sample of almost 5,000 adult Australian twins who answered an anonymous questionnaire on sexual behavior and attitudes. Multiple measures of sexual orientation (behaviors, attitudes, feelings) provided stronger evidence for additive genetic influences on sexual orientation. Heritability estimates of homosexuality in this sample were 50 to 60 percent in females and 30 percent in males. In 1999 J. Michael Bailey found that if a man was homosexual, the percentage of his siblings who were homosexual or bisexual was 7 to 10 percent for brothers and 3 to 4 percent for sisters, higher than would be due to chance.
Some family studies have reported more homosexuals had homosexual maternal relatives but not paternal relatives. This might support a genetic factor on the X chromosome and/or environmental influences. Other, similar studies did not find this. Thus, evidence exists for both genetic and environmental determinants of sexual orientation which may be different for men and women.
A 2000 study examined whether sexual orientation is fixed or changes with time through environmental influence or the effects of aging. J. Michael Bailey recruited a community sample of twins from the Australian Twin Registry and assessed sexual orientation, childhood gender nonconformity (atypical gender behavior), and continuous gender identity (an individual's self-identification as "male" or "female"). Familial factors were important for all traits, but less successful in distinguishing genetic from shared environmental influences. Only childhood gender nonconformity was significantly heritable for both men and women. Statistical tests suggested that causal factors differed between men and women, and for women provided significant evidence for the importance of genetics factors.
Birth-order studies found homosexual males were not usually first born, having older siblings. Extremely feminine homosexual men had a higher than expected proportion of brothers, not an equal numbers of brothers and sisters.
Biological and Genetic Linkage Studies
Biological studies looking at the hypothalamus have found differences between homosexual and heterosexual men and women. Some researchers found differences in parts of the hypothalamus, while others did not. What these findings mean is not clear because they were inconsistent.
In 1995 William Turner examined the ratio of males to females among relatives of the mothers of male homosexuals. He reported that the sex ratio was not normal in maternal relatives. The normal ratio, for relatives of heterosexual males, was an even split: 50 percent male relatives, 50 percent female relatives. The number of male relatives of homosexual males, on the other hand, was significantly lower than the number of female relatives. Also, 65 percent of the mothers of homosexuals had no live-born brothers, or else they had only one live-born brother. On the paternal side, however, the number of male and female relatives of male homosexuals was same as that found for heterosexuals, and the sex ratio of relatives on both the maternal and paternal side for female homosexuals was the same as for heterosexuals. These findings would support genetic factors on the X chromosome, which males inherit from their mothers, as a factor that may cause fetal or neonatal loss of males.
Molecular studies found a linkage between male homosexuality and the X chromosome. Dean Hamer and colleagues in 1993 and Nan Hu and colleagues in 1995 conducted DNA linkage analyses in U.S. families with two homosexual brothers. There was significant linkage at Xq28 for 64 percent of homosexual male siblings but not for homosexual females (Xq28 is band 28 of the long arm of the X chromosome). George Rice and colleagues in 1999 examined four alleles at Xq28 in fifty-two Canadian male homosexual siblings but did not find any such linkage. This could represent genetic variation, diagnostic differences, and/or different methods of data analysis.
In summary, family, biological, and molecular data support multiple genetic and environmental bases for sexual orientation, and evidence exists for childhood gender nonconformity.
Harry Wright
and Ruth Abramson
Bibliography
Bailey, J. Michael., M. P. Dunne, and N. G. Martin. "Genetic and Environmental Influences on Sexual Orientation and Its Correlates in an Australian Twin Sample." Journal of Personal and Social Psychology 78 (2000): 524-536.
Friedman, R. C., and J. I. Downey. "Homosexuality." New England Journal of Medicine 331 (1994): 923-930.
Hamer, Dean H., et al. "A Linkage between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation." Science 261 (1993): 321-327.
Kendler, Kennneth S., et al. "Sexual Orientation in a U.S. National Sample of Twin and Nontwin Sibling Pairs." American Journal of Psychiatry 157 (2000): 1843-1846.