to think that a 'gay gene' is not responsible for this?!

[LeslieKnopeForPresident]

I've namechanged as this might out me (no pun intended...)

To put this bluntly, I come from a very gay family. My grandparents have 3 lots of grandchildren - me and my siblings (3 of us), and 6 cousins between two of my aunties. So 9 of us together.

Out of 9 of us - 7 are gay. And I include myself in one of the two 'straight' ones, despite actually having had a (secret - my family dont know) relationship with a female when I was early 20s. I'm now late 20s and married to a man.

My gran insists that there must be a 'gay gene' AIBU to think that this is absolute nonsense? AIBU to think that the most logical explanation - should one even be needed - is that none of us have grown up around healthy functional marriages or relationships? AIBU to think that the fact that we have all witnessed many family breakdowns and there are 2 absent fathers, is most likely the reason if there is one at all?!

I'm obviously not going to say that to my old gran, but goodness me - do 'gay genes' exist?!

Being gay is unlikely to be genetic because gay men these days atleast struggle to have biological partners if they have never been with a women. Gayness would be decreasing rather than increasing.

Which completely ignores HUGE amounts of research into genes, sociology, psychology of being gay. You only have to think about the ways gay men live... if you know any gay men... how many of them have never had a relationship with a woman? How many of them have an ex wife and kids?

Then again, how many heterosexual people carry the gene but have not met the social factors to trigger it?

Oh so much lovely science... being ignored....

Nomama in the past gay men would get married and have kids but the ones I know now have only had brief relationship s with women as they new they were gay from the beginning.. Look how Elton john struggled to be a father. I don't know any gay men under 35 with bio kids... Maybe you do?
It us true you can have genes which aren't expressed but it just seems unlikely that a gay gene could be increasing with such a devastating impact on fertility.
My brother is gay.. Would love to be a father but adoption is likely his only option.
There is a theory that sisters of gay men are more fertile but I'm not convinced.

It seems unlikely, but it is happening, therefore there must be a reason behind it.

Likely causes:

1. a gene
2. An environmental factor
3. Social factors
4. A combination of all of the above

It seems odd to deny any one of the possibilities because we, as individuals, know a small cohort of gay men/women.

The latest round of research looked at a very large cohort.... seems reasonable to expect that the research saying that there is a genetic factor is correct. After all, it did not say... and so you will be gay... or this is the only way you could be gay...

And your brother could look at surrogacy... then his genes could continue!

Mmmm! Don't want to answer that too quickly. But that would translate to "having a family member who is gay screws everyone up", it assumes a belief that being gay is in itself wrong, an illness, harmful, etc.

So, no. Where there is a belief that being gay is wrong or an illness then dysfunction already exists!

No no no! That's absolutely NOT what I'm saying, Nomama. I'm talking about people, particularly in previous generations, living in a very heterosexually-biased world. So, as we know was often the case, people who may have had genetic tendencies towards homosexuality may have been living heterosexual lives to maintain societal norms. Which may predispose towards "dysfunctionality" (said with tongue firmly in cheek), as the relationships people felt pressured into having may not have been very successful. Then there may have been higher levels of known heterosexuality in subsequent generations (because of its improved acceptability), and people can wrongly point towards previous generations' "dysfunctionality" as a "cause". This assumes nothing about the moral standing of either heterosexuality or homosexuality (which to mind mind obviously don't differ morally at all), only that society is wrongly geared more towards one than the other.

But have no clue what 'knowing' you're gay might feel like. I mean, I can't be expected to know exactly how it feels, but has anyone described it clearly?

My sister (who is gay) has described this to me, Gallic. She says she used to watch TV in which boys and girls were giggly/bashful with each other and knew from age 4 that, as a girl, she could not identify with feeling this way - or ever expecting to in the future - around boys. She felt like the subtle social cues being portrayed were oddly familiar to her but only in relation to girls, whereas other girls seemed to associate them only with males.

Nomama, obviously I meant higher levels of known homosexuality [not heterosexuality] in subsequent generations (because of its improved acceptability). I've been at the cider.

In relation to the "unlikely"-ness of "passing on gay genes", Nomama...
this doesn't seem that unlikely to me. A gene could confer reduced likelihood of reproduction by reducing the chances of heterosexual sex (by making people more likely to be gay), but genes tend not to do one thing (especially something like "influencing sexuality"). It's perfectly possible that the other actions of this gene might make it more likely to be passed on. Or it could make siblings of people with the gene more likely to have more kids. Any number of possible mechanisms, probably (although I'm no geneticist).

Thank you (and your sister), Lily :)

I tend to think it's a combination of genetics and nurture. A female friend was married and straight until recently, has 4 children with her ex husband, split up from him, met and fell in love with a woman and is now gay. She says she simply fell in love without really thinking about gender. I've known a gay man who was gay since he was young (we met when we were 10 and before we even knew what gay was, he was gay), and a gay person who 'became' gay at almost 40. It doesn't seem as though there's one hard and fast rule at all.

Hi Lily.... I was on the wine myself.. and stopped posting

I am glad I answered that slowly. From your previous posts I didn't think that was what you meant. And yes, secondary actions of genes would also ensure they would be passed on via heterosexual individuals too, clever things genes