Welcome to 'OZ' - The 'Other' Side of the Rainbow!! Posting is at 10AM, Noon and 2PM CST daily. Up to 12 days of posts on the main page. The archives have more. You can forward posts by clicking on the envelope at the bottom of the post. Enjoy your stay! *** If you need to contact me, or have a copyright issue, please use the "Contact The Wizard" form on the left side of 'OZ'. Original source and author is cited and credited in each post where possible. ***
Tuesday, December 06, 2016
Don't mess with old folks
We went to breakfast at a restaurant where the "seniors' special" was two eggs, bacon, hash browns and toast for $1.99.
"Sounds good," my wife said. "But I don't want the eggs."
"Then I'll have to charge you two dollars and forty-nine cents because you're ordering a la carte," the waitress warned her.
"You mean I'd have to pay for not taking the eggs?" my wife asked incredulously. "I'll take the special."
"How do you want your eggs?"
"Raw and in the shell," my wife replied. She took the two eggs home.
DON'T MESS WITH SENIORS
"Sounds good," my wife said. "But I don't want the eggs."
"Then I'll have to charge you two dollars and forty-nine cents because you're ordering a la carte," the waitress warned her.
"You mean I'd have to pay for not taking the eggs?" my wife asked incredulously. "I'll take the special."
"How do you want your eggs?"
"Raw and in the shell," my wife replied. She took the two eggs home.
DON'T MESS WITH SENIORS
We Three Queens!
Do you know what would have happened if there had been Three Wise Women instead of Three Wise Men?
They would have asked directions,
Arrived on time,
Helped deliver the baby,
Cleaned the stable,
Made a casserole,
Brought practical gifts and
There would be Peace On Earth.
BUT READ ON . . . . .
Cute, but do you know what would have happened if there had been Three Gay Wise Men ?
They would have done a fabulous parade towards the big "B" in full auburn/gold sequined gowns to match the low "Star of Bethlehem" lighting.
Arrived early. Helped deliver the baby AND dressed it up in a gorgeous buttercream-colored 100% cotton throw.
Cleaned the stable AND redecorated it in a "western" theme to match the animals.
Would not have made a casserole but a flawless entree of chilean sea bass dusted in cocoa powder with guatemalan mangoes in a light chutney mix, mashed potatoes with a light cream fennel sauce and anjou pears with yogurt cream cheese and Grand Marnier swirls,topped off with a caff/half caff cappuccino con panna.
The practical gifts would have included items from the new Martha Stewart Living collection.
Peace? How can you have peace when the entire night just screams for a drag number?
Monday, December 05, 2016
Things You Didn't Know You Didn't Know...
Did you know...
It is impossible to lick your elbow.
A crocodile can't stick its tongue out.
A shrimp's heart is in its head.
In a study of 200,000 ostriches
over a period of 80 years,
no one reported a single case where
an ostrich buried its head in the sand.
It is physically impossible
for pigs to look up into the sky.
A pregnant goldfish is called a twit.
More than 50% of the people in the world
have never made or received a telephone call.
Horses can't vomit.
The "sixth sick sheik's sixth sheep's sick"
is said to be the toughest tongue twister
in the English language.
If you sneeze too hard, you can fracture a rib.
If you try to suppress a sneeze,
you can rupture a blood vessel
in your head or neck and die.
If you keep your eyes open by force,
they can pop out.
Rats multiply so quickly that in 18 months,
two rats could have over a million descendants.
Wearing headphones for just an hour
will increase the bacteria in your ear by 700 times.
If the government has no knowledge of aliens,
then why does Title 14, Section 1211
of the Code of Federal Regulations,
implemented on July 16, 1969,
make it illegal for U.S. citizens to have any contact
with extraterrestrials or their vehicles?
In every episode of Seinfeld
there is a Superman somewhere.
A duck's quack doesn't echo,
and no one knows why.
23% of all photocopier faults worldwide
are caused by people sitting on them
and photocopying their butts.
Most lipstick contains fish scales.
Like fingerprints,
everyone's tongue print is different.
Over 75% of people who read this
will try to lick their elbow.
It is impossible to lick your elbow.
A crocodile can't stick its tongue out.
A shrimp's heart is in its head.
In a study of 200,000 ostriches
over a period of 80 years,
no one reported a single case where
an ostrich buried its head in the sand.
It is physically impossible
for pigs to look up into the sky.
A pregnant goldfish is called a twit.
More than 50% of the people in the world
have never made or received a telephone call.
Horses can't vomit.
The "sixth sick sheik's sixth sheep's sick"
is said to be the toughest tongue twister
in the English language.
If you sneeze too hard, you can fracture a rib.
If you try to suppress a sneeze,
you can rupture a blood vessel
in your head or neck and die.
If you keep your eyes open by force,
they can pop out.
Rats multiply so quickly that in 18 months,
two rats could have over a million descendants.
Wearing headphones for just an hour
will increase the bacteria in your ear by 700 times.
If the government has no knowledge of aliens,
then why does Title 14, Section 1211
of the Code of Federal Regulations,
implemented on July 16, 1969,
make it illegal for U.S. citizens to have any contact
with extraterrestrials or their vehicles?
In every episode of Seinfeld
there is a Superman somewhere.
A duck's quack doesn't echo,
and no one knows why.
23% of all photocopier faults worldwide
are caused by people sitting on them
and photocopying their butts.
Most lipstick contains fish scales.
Like fingerprints,
everyone's tongue print is different.
Over 75% of people who read this
will try to lick their elbow.
Why Aren't There More Famous Gay Comedians?
Excerpt from The Advocate.com, BY ROBBIE X PIERCE
The guys over at AsapThought, the Youtube channel that describes itself as “Science with a social conscience,” posted a new video that thoughtfully explores the idea of whether gay men are funny and why there are arguably no mainstream gay male comedians.
The video looks at several factors from a sociological point of view to account for what it presents as a historical lack. Obviously there are gay male comedians, from David Sedaris to Simon Amstell to Graham Chapman, but video narrator Gregory Brown (who is gay himself) makes the argument that comedy can be a straight-white-boys’ club that gets easy laughs by othering people. He points at the recent movie Sausage Party, which was written and directed by straight male comedians, and talks about how their humor could have been more nuanced had they included more diversity among the writers.
 |
| Photo: Gregory "Greg" Brown. From gays historically trying to be taken seriously to straight men having a stranglehold on mainstream comedy, this video presents several intriguing ideas. |
The video looks at several factors from a sociological point of view to account for what it presents as a historical lack. Obviously there are gay male comedians, from David Sedaris to Simon Amstell to Graham Chapman, but video narrator Gregory Brown (who is gay himself) makes the argument that comedy can be a straight-white-boys’ club that gets easy laughs by othering people. He points at the recent movie Sausage Party, which was written and directed by straight male comedians, and talks about how their humor could have been more nuanced had they included more diversity among the writers.
The Christmas Shopping Blues By The Canuck Kevin Westphal
So funny, eh? Fer shure, eh? Murry Chrstmas, eh?
THE 7 DEADLY GAY SINS (AND HOW TO REPENT FOR EACH)
Associate Editor @ UnicornBooty.com
Everyone has heard about the seven deadly sins — lust, sloth, gluttony, etc. — but they’re sooooo medieval and way too much fun to take seriously as “sins.” Instead, we’ve come up with seven modern gay sins that are truly toxic. So join us in these seven circles of hell, but fear not — alongside each sin, we’ve offered a penance to help even the worst sinners work their way into Purgatory.
(NOTE: we’ve used the word “gay” for humor and brevity’s sake — and because gay men came up with this list — but all of these sins easily apply to all queer and non-queer folks; Hell doesn’t discriminate!)
Here they are…
1) BAD LOVEMAKING
Kissing like a piranha, smelling like a porta-potty… there’s a million ways to kill a boner, and in a culture centered on sexual identity, being bad in bed is downright unforgivable.
It’s one thing if you’re inexperienced, nervous or physically incapable. But if you give toothy blowjobs, never reciprocate or have all sorts of neurotic sex-rules, then folks would rather you went celibate than subject anyone else to your bad lovin’.
PENANCE: Improve your bedroom prowess by spending an evening with a skilled sexpert. Many guys would be delighted to teach you how to shag like a pro — just be upfront about what you’re trying to learn, locate a patient guy (perhaps an older dude) and then block out an entire night so you can take your time. And if you’re unwilling to learn, at least think about why you’re willing to let fears kill your sex life.
2) VOTING REPUBLICAN
Supporting anti-LGBTQ politicians is like spitting on the graves of queer activists — it’s offensive to both the dead and the living (and this includes supporting legislators who uphold marriage equality while opposing transgender protections). Yes, 18 percent of LGBTQ people voted Republican in the last election, but if security and economic progress come at the expense of our social standing, they’re not worth it. There are other leaders who can offer us security without throwing our rights or fellow queers under the bus.
PENANCE: Volunteer at your local LGBTQ community center, donate money to progressive politicians or work closely with poor, sick or elderly queers — take time to learn about the issues that affect them and contrast those with the policy stances of conservative, right-wing candidates. You’ll learn a lot.
3) BEING AN “-IST”
Being racist, ageist, classist or ableist isn’t just unsexy and ignorant, it’s downright cruel. While you don’t have to befriend tokens just to prove how woke you are — though you might learn and grow a bit if you did — actively hating others just creates bad blood. Hang out with whoever you like, but the instant you start hating “those people” for being lazy, gross or whatever, you’re the one who’s being lazy and gross.
PENANCE: For two months, volunteer for an organization that serves the community you dislike most. While there, talk with a someone from that community and really listen. Share your experiences on social media, taking time to reflect about anything that surprised you or challenged your beliefs.
4) CATFISHING
In a culture that prizes style over substance and authenticity over perfection, it’s a cardinal sin to mis-represent yourself, especially when tricking or making friends. Considering how many of us have lived in the closet, lying about your true self seems wrong. You don’t have to be 100% transparent or vulnerable all the time, but continually lying puts you into a entirely different closet, full of darkness and shame.
PENANCE: For the next month, confess some of your recent misrepresentations on social media and accompany them with a selfie that best represents your true self. In these posts, share your thoughts about how you see yourself, how you think others see you and any additional insecurities that rise to the surface. Do your best not to self-hate. Rather, take this opportunity to examine why you deceive others about who you are. And if social media feels too revealing, jot these thoughts in a journal and then share them with a close, trusted friend who will give you real-talk about being more authentic.
5) ULTRA-SHADE
Who doesn’t love reading someone to filth for their flaws, especially when they truly suck? But if you negatively criticize anything and everything all the time, it won’t make up for not having a sense of humor or a soul. While your “jokes” may get laughs, non-stop dissatisfaction is a fast track to bitter loneliness. Don’t do it, gurl.
PENANCE: Measure your happiness by how much joy and gratitude you express. Either take the #100HappyDays challenge (where you post positive thoughts on social media for 100 days) or write out a list of things you’re truly grateful for and ways you can express that gratitude without expecting anything in return. Who knows? The fresh air and sunshine just might melt your coal black heart.
6) FLAKINESS
We get it — you’re busy, indecisive, socially anxious or have an addiction (maybe all four!) — but GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER. You have people depending on you. Climb out (SIC) of your bed, out of your head and commit to actually doing something rather than fading in and out like a Victorian ghost.
When you constantly flake, you damage other people’s trust and your own reputation, showing a lack of respect to them and you. You also end up missing out on intimate relationships and great memories. Flakes work best for pastries, cereals and snow — not people.
PENANCE: Hang out with a friend who you’ve repeatedly flaked on. During your time together, fess up to your flakiness, ask why they put up with it and ask how you could do better. Write these things down and then hold yourself more accountable.
If you’re a perpetual home-body, force yourself to go out from time to time, even if just by yourself. You’ll gradually conquer your agora- and commitment phobias. And if your neglect extends to basic things like feeding and bathing yourself, please seek professional mental help.
7) EXTREME NARCISSISM
It’s normal to pride yourself and others on certain physical characteristics and accomplishments, but the world is not your own personal meat market or temp agency. Reducing everyone to how well they serve you diminishes their other talents, personalities, or potential.
While viewing others as inferior may inflate your ego, one day someone will see behind your mask and your ugly little flaws will come screaming out, no matter how perfect you think you are.
PENANCE: Go look in a mirror for fifteen minutes and write down any flaws or self-critical thoughts you have. Then ask yourself whether anyone else shares your flaws, what they mean to you and whether they’re horrible personal failings or just common human quirks.
If you’re used to bossing others around and getting your way, go hang with a friend and let them do a majority of the talking and decision-making, doing your best surrender control especially when things don’t go your way. Breathe and consider this article’s advice if you find it especially challenging.
Sunday, December 04, 2016
Reindeer Jokes
What does Rudolph want for Christmas?
A pony sleigh station!
What do reindeer hang on their Christmas trees?
"Horn"-aments!
Why did the reindeer wear sunglasses to the Christmas party?
Because he didn't want to be recognised!
How can Santa's sleigh possibly fly through the air?
You would too if you were pulled by flying reindeer!
What would a reindeer do if it lost its tail?
She'd go to a "re-tail" shop for a new one!
Why is Prancer always wet?
Because he's a "rain"-deer!
Which reindeer has the cleanest antlers?
Comet!
When should you give reindeer milk to a baby?
When its a baby reindeer!
Why does Scrooge love all of the reindeer?
Because every buck is dear to him!
Which of Santa's reindeer has bad manners?
"Rude"-olph!
What do you call a reindeer wearing ear muffs?
Anything you want because he can't hear you!
What do reindeer always say before telling you a joke?
This one will "sleigh" you!
How does Rudolph know when Christmas is coming?
He looks at his calen-"deer"!
Where do the reindeer like to stop for lunch?
"Deery" Queen!
What do you give a reindeer with an upset tummy?
"Elk"-a-seltzer!
How do you get into Donner's house?
You ring the "deer"-bell!
What's red and white and gives presents to gazelles?
Santelope!
How many reindeer does it take to change a light bulb?
Eight! One to screw in the light bulb and seven to hold Rudolph down!
Did Rudolph go to a regular school?
No, he was "elf"-taught!
Why did Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer cross the road?
Because he was tied to a chicken!
What's red and green and guides Santa's sleigh?
Rudolph the red-nosed pickle!
Did you hear that one of Santa's reindeer also works as a maid?
Yup! Comet cleans sinks!
Why do reindeer wear fur coats?
Because they look silly in snowsuits!
A pony sleigh station!
What do reindeer hang on their Christmas trees?
"Horn"-aments!
Why did the reindeer wear sunglasses to the Christmas party?
Because he didn't want to be recognised!
How can Santa's sleigh possibly fly through the air?
You would too if you were pulled by flying reindeer!
What would a reindeer do if it lost its tail?
She'd go to a "re-tail" shop for a new one!
Why is Prancer always wet?
Because he's a "rain"-deer!
Which reindeer has the cleanest antlers?
Comet!
When should you give reindeer milk to a baby?
When its a baby reindeer!
Why does Scrooge love all of the reindeer?
Because every buck is dear to him!
Which of Santa's reindeer has bad manners?
"Rude"-olph!
What do you call a reindeer wearing ear muffs?
Anything you want because he can't hear you!
What do reindeer always say before telling you a joke?
This one will "sleigh" you!
How does Rudolph know when Christmas is coming?
He looks at his calen-"deer"!
Where do the reindeer like to stop for lunch?
"Deery" Queen!
What do you give a reindeer with an upset tummy?
"Elk"-a-seltzer!
How do you get into Donner's house?
You ring the "deer"-bell!
What's red and white and gives presents to gazelles?
Santelope!
How many reindeer does it take to change a light bulb?
Eight! One to screw in the light bulb and seven to hold Rudolph down!
Did Rudolph go to a regular school?
No, he was "elf"-taught!
Why did Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer cross the road?
Because he was tied to a chicken!
What's red and green and guides Santa's sleigh?
Rudolph the red-nosed pickle!
Did you hear that one of Santa's reindeer also works as a maid?
Yup! Comet cleans sinks!
Why do reindeer wear fur coats?
Because they look silly in snowsuits!
TRUMP’S LATEST TWEET ABOUT THE ELECTION THROWS GAS ON THE FIRE
by Alan Jude Ryland, Secondnexus.com
Election law experts were quick to reject Trump’s claim. “There’s no reason to believe this is true,” said Rick Hasen, a professor of election law at University of California, Irvine. “The level of fraud in US elections is quite low.” In fact, Hasen noted, the number of non-citizens who vote is “quite small–like we’re talking claims in the dozens, we’re not talking voting in the millions, or thousands, or even the hundreds.”
Another expert, David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research and a former senior trial attorney in the Voting Section of the Dept. of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, also agreed widespread election fraud is unlikely. “We know historically that this almost never happens,” he said. “You’re more likely to get eaten by a shark that simultaneously gets hit by lightning than to find a non-citizen voting.”
According to an advisor who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity, Trump believes “that the Democratic establishment will try to steal” his victory and wants to hold the party accountable. Another source close to the president-elect said that Trump was angered by Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s calls for a recount in the state of Wisconsin and lashed out.
Stein launched the effort to ensure election integrity based on a report from New York magazine that said a group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers are urging Hillary Clinton’s campaign to call for a recount of vote totals in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The scientists said that they’d found persuasive evidence that results in those three states may have been manipulated or hacked and presented their findings to top Clinton aides in a conference all on November 17. The Clinton campaign has since announced it will participate in the recount efforts.
The timing of Trump’s tweet is also suspect––it shifted attention away from an investigative report published in the New York Times the same day exposing the intricacies of his many conflicts of interest around the globe.
The claims of voter fraud appear to have originated from conspiracy website Infowars.com, whose founder, radio host Alex Jones, has received criticism for promoting unsubstantiated, often bizarre conspiracy theories including that the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary Shooting in Newton, Connecticut, which resulted in the death of 20 children, was a hoax. (Trump spoke to Jones personally days after his election win to thank him for his support.)
 |
| President-elect Donald Trump made an outrageous and, experts agree, wholly false claim on Twitter yesterday evening that “millions of votes were cast illegally, ironically casting doubt upon the legitimacy of the election he supposedly won. |
Another expert, David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research and a former senior trial attorney in the Voting Section of the Dept. of Justice’s Civil Rights Division, also agreed widespread election fraud is unlikely. “We know historically that this almost never happens,” he said. “You’re more likely to get eaten by a shark that simultaneously gets hit by lightning than to find a non-citizen voting.”
According to an advisor who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity, Trump believes “that the Democratic establishment will try to steal” his victory and wants to hold the party accountable. Another source close to the president-elect said that Trump was angered by Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s calls for a recount in the state of Wisconsin and lashed out.
Stein launched the effort to ensure election integrity based on a report from New York magazine that said a group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers are urging Hillary Clinton’s campaign to call for a recount of vote totals in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The scientists said that they’d found persuasive evidence that results in those three states may have been manipulated or hacked and presented their findings to top Clinton aides in a conference all on November 17. The Clinton campaign has since announced it will participate in the recount efforts.
The timing of Trump’s tweet is also suspect––it shifted attention away from an investigative report published in the New York Times the same day exposing the intricacies of his many conflicts of interest around the globe.
The claims of voter fraud appear to have originated from conspiracy website Infowars.com, whose founder, radio host Alex Jones, has received criticism for promoting unsubstantiated, often bizarre conspiracy theories including that the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary Shooting in Newton, Connecticut, which resulted in the death of 20 children, was a hoax. (Trump spoke to Jones personally days after his election win to thank him for his support.)
If I Could Give You Anything
By Michael Josephson, WhatWillMatter.com
If I Could Give You Anything
If could give you anything, anything at all,
I would give you all the things the poets write about – deep blue skies, pure white clouds, warm sunshine, cool breezes, stunning sunsets, glorious rainbows, and grand waterfalls.
I would give you something to smile about every day.
I would surround you with true friends to share your joys, comfort you through tough times, and bring out the best in you.
I would give you great teachers to fill your mind with wondrous facts, unanswered questions and a love for learning.
I would give you the wisdom to know your heart and the courage to follow it.
I would fill your days with carefree play and meaningful work.
I would give you challenges worthy of your talents and achievements worthy of your pride.
I would fill your heart with gratitude and teach it to forgive.
I would give you genuine self-confidence, fearless enthusiasm, and grand expectations.
I would give you a life filled with hugs, laughter, love, and the wisdom to be happy.
And when you are ready, I would give you a life mate worthy to be your lifelong partner and the father of your children.
And I would give you a daughter as good as you.
Sadly, I don’t have the power to give you all these things.
But I can remind you that you have the power within you to find, make, and keep all the things I wish for you.
If could give you anything, anything at all,
I would give you all the things the poets write about – deep blue skies, pure white clouds, warm sunshine, cool breezes, stunning sunsets, glorious rainbows, and grand waterfalls.
I would give you something to smile about every day.
I would surround you with true friends to share your joys, comfort you through tough times, and bring out the best in you.
I would give you great teachers to fill your mind with wondrous facts, unanswered questions and a love for learning.
I would give you the wisdom to know your heart and the courage to follow it.
I would fill your days with carefree play and meaningful work.
I would give you challenges worthy of your talents and achievements worthy of your pride.
I would fill your heart with gratitude and teach it to forgive.
I would give you genuine self-confidence, fearless enthusiasm, and grand expectations.
I would give you a life filled with hugs, laughter, love, and the wisdom to be happy.
And when you are ready, I would give you a life mate worthy to be your lifelong partner and the father of your children.
And I would give you a daughter as good as you.
Sadly, I don’t have the power to give you all these things.
But I can remind you that you have the power within you to find, make, and keep all the things I wish for you.
Saturday, December 03, 2016
"OZ" Trivia
A -3 parter!
What part of the Tim Man did Dorothy oil first?
What was the name of his farm-hand counterpart?
Who played him in the making of 1939 movie? (TRICK QUESTION!)
Click above for the answer
The Emissary
This is most unique Christmas card I have ever seen -- you click on one of the lighted items and it jumps into another wonderful scene - it goes from page to page and each page is better than the previous page. Click below:
Click above
Gold Wrapping Paper
The story goes that some time ago a mother punished her 5 year old daughter for wasting a roll of expensive gold wrapping paper. Money was tight and she became even more upset when the child used the gold paper to decorate a box to put under the Christmas tree.
Nevertheless, the little girl brought the gift box to her mother the next morning and said, "This is for you, Momma."
The mother was embarrassed by her earlier over reaction, but her anger flared again when she opened the box and found it was empty. She spoke to her daughter in a harsh manner. "Don't you know, young lady, when you give someone a present there's supposed to be something inside the package?"
She had tears in her eyes and said, "Oh, Momma, it's not empty! I blew kisses into it until it was full."
The mother was crushed. She fell on her knees and put her arms around her little girl, and she begged her forgiveness for her thoughtless anger.
An accident took the life of the child only a short time later,and it is told that the mother kept that gold box by her bed for all the years of her life. Whenever she was discouraged or faced difficult problems she would open the box and take out an imaginary kiss and remember the love of the child who had put it there.
In a very real sense, each of us, as human beings, have been given a Golden box filled with unconditional love and kisses from our children, family, & friends. There is no more precious possession anyone could hold.
Nevertheless, the little girl brought the gift box to her mother the next morning and said, "This is for you, Momma."
The mother was embarrassed by her earlier over reaction, but her anger flared again when she opened the box and found it was empty. She spoke to her daughter in a harsh manner. "Don't you know, young lady, when you give someone a present there's supposed to be something inside the package?"
She had tears in her eyes and said, "Oh, Momma, it's not empty! I blew kisses into it until it was full."
The mother was crushed. She fell on her knees and put her arms around her little girl, and she begged her forgiveness for her thoughtless anger.
An accident took the life of the child only a short time later,and it is told that the mother kept that gold box by her bed for all the years of her life. Whenever she was discouraged or faced difficult problems she would open the box and take out an imaginary kiss and remember the love of the child who had put it there.
In a very real sense, each of us, as human beings, have been given a Golden box filled with unconditional love and kisses from our children, family, & friends. There is no more precious possession anyone could hold.
Friday, December 02, 2016
BRAIN CRAMPS
Question: If you could live forever, would you and why?
Answer: "I would not live forever, because we should not live forever, because if we were supposed to live forever, then we would live forever, but we cannot live forever, which is why I would not live forever,"
--Miss Alabama in the 1994 Miss USA contest.
"Whenever I watch TV and see those poor starving kids all over the world, I can't help but cry. I mean I'd love to be skinny like that, but not with all those flies and death and stuff."
--Mariah Carey
"Smoking kills. If you're killed, you've lost a very important part of your life,"
--Brooke Shields, during an interview to become Spokesperson for federal anti-smoking campaign.
"I've never had major knee surgery on any other part of my body,"
--Winston Bennett, University of Kentucky basketball forward.
"Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
--Former Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .
"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president."
--Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpoenaed documents.
"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it,"
--A congressional candidate in Texas .
"Half this game is ninety percent mental."
--Former Philadelphia Phillies manager, Danny Ozark
"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it."
--Al Gore, Former Vice President
"I love California . I practically grew up in Phoenix ."
--Dan Quayle
"We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much clean air do we need?"
--Lee Iacocca
"The word "genius" isn't applicable in football. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein." -
--Joe Theisman, NFL football quarterback & sports analyst.
"We don't necessarily discriminate. We simply exclude certain types of people."
--Colonel Gerald Wellman, ROTC Instrutor.
"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."
--Bill Clinton, President
"We are ready for an unforeseen event that may or may not occur."
--Al Gore, Former VP
"Traditionally, most of Australia 's imports come from overseas."
--Keppel Enderbery
"Your food stamps will be stopped effective March 1992 because we received notice that you passed away. May God bless you. You may reapply if there is a change in your circumstances."
--Department of Social Services, Greenville , South Carolina
26 Beautiful One-liners
1. Give God what's right -- not what's left.
2. Man's way leads to a hopeless end -- God's way leads to an endless hope.
3. A lot of kneeling will keep you in good standing.
4. He who kneels before God can stand before anyone.
5. In the sentence of life, the devil may be a comma--but never let him be the period.
6. Don't put a question mark where God puts a period.
7. Are you wrinkled with burden? Come to the church for a face-lift.
8. When praying, don't give God instructions - just report for duty.
9. Don't wait for six strong men to take you to church.
10. We don't change God's message -- His message changes us.
11. The church is prayer-conditioned.
12. When God ordains, He sustains.
13. WARNING: Exposure to the Son may prevent burning.
14. Plan ahead -- It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark.
15. Most people want to serve God, but only in an advisory position.
16. Suffering from truth decay? Brush up on your Bible.
17. Exercise daily -- walk with the Lord.
18. Never give the devil a ride -- he will always want to drive.
19. Nothing else ruins the truth like stretching it.
20. Compassion is difficult to give away because it keeps coming back.
21. He who angers you controls you.
22. Worry is the darkroom in which negatives can develop.
23. Give Satan an inch & he'll be a ruler.
24. Be ye fishers of men -- you catch them & He'll clean them.
25. God doesn't call the qualified, He qualifies the called.
26. Read the Bible -- It will scare the hell out of you. (Izzat s'posed to be a good thing?)
2. Man's way leads to a hopeless end -- God's way leads to an endless hope.
3. A lot of kneeling will keep you in good standing.
4. He who kneels before God can stand before anyone.
5. In the sentence of life, the devil may be a comma--but never let him be the period.
6. Don't put a question mark where God puts a period.
7. Are you wrinkled with burden? Come to the church for a face-lift.
8. When praying, don't give God instructions - just report for duty.
9. Don't wait for six strong men to take you to church.
10. We don't change God's message -- His message changes us.
11. The church is prayer-conditioned.
12. When God ordains, He sustains.
13. WARNING: Exposure to the Son may prevent burning.
14. Plan ahead -- It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark.
15. Most people want to serve God, but only in an advisory position.
16. Suffering from truth decay? Brush up on your Bible.
17. Exercise daily -- walk with the Lord.
18. Never give the devil a ride -- he will always want to drive.
19. Nothing else ruins the truth like stretching it.
20. Compassion is difficult to give away because it keeps coming back.
21. He who angers you controls you.
22. Worry is the darkroom in which negatives can develop.
23. Give Satan an inch & he'll be a ruler.
24. Be ye fishers of men -- you catch them & He'll clean them.
25. God doesn't call the qualified, He qualifies the called.
26. Read the Bible -- It will scare the hell out of you. (Izzat s'posed to be a good thing?)
Bad Puns - Get your muds wordled!
1. Two antennas met on a roof, fell in love and got married. The ceremony wasn't much, but the reception was excellent.
2. A jumper cable walks into a bar. The bartender says, "I'll serve you, but don't start anything."
3. Two peanuts walk into a bar, and one was a salted.
4. A dyslexic man walks into a bra...
5. A man walks into a bar with a slab of asphalt under his arm and says: "A beer please, and one for the road."
6. Two cannibals are eating a clown. One says to the other: "Does this taste funny to you?"
7. "Doc, I can't stop singing 'The Green, Green Grass of Home."
"That sounds like Tom Jones Syndrome."
"Is it common?"
Well, "It's Not Unusual."
8. Two cows are standing next to each other in a field.. Daisy says to Dolly, "I was artificially inseminated this morning."
"I don't believe you," says Dolly.
"It's true, no bull!" exclaims Daisy.
9. An invisible man marries an invisible woman. The kids were nothing to look at either.
10. Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this bull before.
11. I went to buy some camouflage trousers the other day but I couldn't find any.
12. A man woke up in a hospital after a serious accident. He shouted, "Doctor, doctor, I can't feel my legs!"
The doctor replied, "I know you can't - I've cut off your arms!"
13. I went to a seafood disco last week...and pulled a mussel.
14. What do you call a fish with no eyes? A fsh.
15. Two fish swim into a concrete wall. The one turns to the other and says "Dam!"
16. Two Eskimos sitting in a kayak were chilly, so they lit a fire in the craft. Unsurprisingly it sank, proving once again that you can't have your kayak and heat it too.
17. A group of chess enthusiasts checked into a hotel and were standing in the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories.
After about an hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse.
"But why," they asked, as they moved off.
"Because", he said, "I can't stand chess-nuts boasting in an open foyer."
18. A woman has twins and gives them up for adoption. One of them goes to a family in Egypt and is named "Ahmal."
The other goes to a family in Spain; they name him "Juan."
Years later, Juan sends a picture of himself to his birth mother. Upon receiving the picture, she tells her husband that she wishes she also had a picture of Ahmal. Her husband responds, "They're twins! If you've seen Juan, you've seen Ahmal."
19. Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very little, which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from bad breath.
This made him ..(Oh, man, this is so bad, it's good).....
A super calloused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis.
20. And finally, there was the person who posted twenty different puns to his readers with the hope that at least ten of the puns would make them laugh.
No pun in ten did.
2. A jumper cable walks into a bar. The bartender says, "I'll serve you, but don't start anything."
3. Two peanuts walk into a bar, and one was a salted.
4. A dyslexic man walks into a bra...
5. A man walks into a bar with a slab of asphalt under his arm and says: "A beer please, and one for the road."
6. Two cannibals are eating a clown. One says to the other: "Does this taste funny to you?"
7. "Doc, I can't stop singing 'The Green, Green Grass of Home."
"That sounds like Tom Jones Syndrome."
"Is it common?"
Well, "It's Not Unusual."
8. Two cows are standing next to each other in a field.. Daisy says to Dolly, "I was artificially inseminated this morning."
"I don't believe you," says Dolly.
"It's true, no bull!" exclaims Daisy.
9. An invisible man marries an invisible woman. The kids were nothing to look at either.
10. Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this bull before.
11. I went to buy some camouflage trousers the other day but I couldn't find any.
12. A man woke up in a hospital after a serious accident. He shouted, "Doctor, doctor, I can't feel my legs!"
The doctor replied, "I know you can't - I've cut off your arms!"
13. I went to a seafood disco last week...and pulled a mussel.
14. What do you call a fish with no eyes? A fsh.
15. Two fish swim into a concrete wall. The one turns to the other and says "Dam!"
16. Two Eskimos sitting in a kayak were chilly, so they lit a fire in the craft. Unsurprisingly it sank, proving once again that you can't have your kayak and heat it too.
17. A group of chess enthusiasts checked into a hotel and were standing in the lobby discussing their recent tournament victories.
After about an hour, the manager came out of the office and asked them to disperse.
"But why," they asked, as they moved off.
"Because", he said, "I can't stand chess-nuts boasting in an open foyer."
18. A woman has twins and gives them up for adoption. One of them goes to a family in Egypt and is named "Ahmal."
The other goes to a family in Spain; they name him "Juan."
Years later, Juan sends a picture of himself to his birth mother. Upon receiving the picture, she tells her husband that she wishes she also had a picture of Ahmal. Her husband responds, "They're twins! If you've seen Juan, you've seen Ahmal."
19. Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very little, which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from bad breath.
This made him ..(Oh, man, this is so bad, it's good).....
A super calloused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis.
20. And finally, there was the person who posted twenty different puns to his readers with the hope that at least ten of the puns would make them laugh.
No pun in ten did.
Thursday, December 01, 2016
Junior Detective
Two young boys were discussing their parents, when one realized he really knew very little about his mother.
Arriving home that evening, he gave her a third degree examination.
"How old are you?" he asked.
"None of your business," replied his mother, shortly.
"Okay, then how much do you weigh?"
"That's not your business either, young man."
The boy thinks a minute then delivers his final bombshell. "Well, then, can you tell me why you and daddy got divorced?"
Shocked and appalled, Mom sends junior to bed without supper.
The next day, the kid reports his failure to his schoolmate. "I know!" says his buddy, "Just look at her driver's license in her purse. It'll tell you everything you want to know."
Later that day, Mom finds her son next to her disemboweled purse, holding her driver's license.
"Just what the heck do you think you are doing?" she yells.
"Well, you wouldn't tell me what I wanted to know," says the junior detective, "but my friend said it's all right here. See, you're 40 years old...you weigh 145 pounds...and daddy divorced you because you got an 'F' in Sex."
Arriving home that evening, he gave her a third degree examination.
"How old are you?" he asked.
"None of your business," replied his mother, shortly.
"Okay, then how much do you weigh?"
"That's not your business either, young man."
The boy thinks a minute then delivers his final bombshell. "Well, then, can you tell me why you and daddy got divorced?"
Shocked and appalled, Mom sends junior to bed without supper.
The next day, the kid reports his failure to his schoolmate. "I know!" says his buddy, "Just look at her driver's license in her purse. It'll tell you everything you want to know."
Later that day, Mom finds her son next to her disemboweled purse, holding her driver's license.
"Just what the heck do you think you are doing?" she yells.
"Well, you wouldn't tell me what I wanted to know," says the junior detective, "but my friend said it's all right here. See, you're 40 years old...you weigh 145 pounds...and daddy divorced you because you got an 'F' in Sex."
Fact or Crap? - Triple Play!!
The popular comic strip character Popeye is known as Karl Pops in Sweden.
This beloved cartoon hero, who made his debut as a comic strip character in 1929, is known in Sweden as Karl Alfred—and as Iron Arm in Italy and Skipper Skraek in Denmark.
This beloved cartoon hero, who made his debut as a comic strip character in 1929, is known in Sweden as Karl Alfred—and as Iron Arm in Italy and Skipper Skraek in Denmark. 
The invention of Tinkertoys® was inspired by empty spools of thread.
Introduced in 1914, the classic construction toy was created by inventors Charles H. Pajeau and Robert Pettit after they saw children entertain themselves by building structures using pencils and empty spools of thread. Their final product was based on Pythagorean principles, which meant that a triangle made from sticks and spools could become the side of a pyramid.
Introduced in 1914, the classic construction toy was created by inventors Charles H. Pajeau and Robert Pettit after they saw children entertain themselves by building structures using pencils and empty spools of thread. Their final product was based on Pythagorean principles, which meant that a triangle made from sticks and spools could become the side of a pyramid.
The Wheaties® brand name was chosen by a five-year-old.
The name was chosen through a companywide contest. Employees submitted such names as Nutties and Gold Medal Wheat Flakes. Jane Bausman, the wife of the company’s export manager, submitted the name Wheaties, which was chosen as the winner. 
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
What Makes People Gay?
by Neil Swidey, Boston Globe
The debate has always been that it was either all in the child's upbringing or all in the genes. But what if it's something else?
With crystal-blue eyes, wavy hair, and freshly scrubbed faces, the boys look as though they stepped out of a Pottery Barn Kids catalog. They are 7-year-old twins. I'll call them Thomas and Patrick; their parents agreed to let me meet the boys as long as I didn't use their real names.
Spend five seconds with them, and there can be no doubt that they are identical twins - so identical even they can't tell each other apart in photographs. Spend five minutes with them, and their profound differences begin to emerge.
Patrick is social, thoughtful, attentive. He repeatedly addresses me by name. Thomas is physical, spontaneous, a bit distracted. Just minutes after meeting me outside a coffee shop, he punches me in the upper arm, yells, "Gray punch buggy!" and then points to a Volkswagen Beetle cruising past us. It's a hard punch. They horse around like typical brothers, but Patrick's punches are less forceful and his voice is higher. Thomas charges at his brother, arms flexed in front of him like a mini-bodybuilder. The differences are subtle - they're 7-year-old boys, after all - but they are there.
When the twins were 2, Patrick found his mother's shoes. He liked wearing them. Thomas tried on his father's once but didn't see the point.
When they were 3, Thomas blurted out that toy guns were his favorite things. Patrick piped up that his were the Barbie dolls he discovered at day care.
When the twins were 5, Thomas announced he was going to be a monster for Halloween. Patrick said he was going to be a princess. Thomas said he couldn't do that, because other kids would laugh at him. Patrick seemed puzzled. "Then I'll be Batman," he said.
Their mother - intelligent, warm, and open-minded - found herself conflicted. She wanted Patrick - whose playmates have always been girls, never boys - to be himself, but she worried his feminine behavior would expose him to ridicule and pain. She decided to allow him free expression at home while setting some limits in public.
That worked until last year, when a school official called to say Patrick was making his classmates uncomfortable. He kept insisting that he was a girl.
Patrick exhibits behavior called childhood gender nonconformity, or CGN. This doesn't describe a boy who has a doll somewhere in his toy collection or tried on his sister's Snow White outfit once, but rather one who consistently exhibits a host of strongly feminine traits and interests while avoiding boy-typical behavior like rough-and-tumble play. There's been considerable research into this phenomenon, particularly in males, including a study that followed boys from an early age into early adulthood. The data suggest there is a very good chance Patrick will grow up to be homosexual. Not all homosexual men show this extremely feminine behavior as young boys. But the research indicates that, of the boys who do exhibit CGN, about 75 percent of them - perhaps more - turn out to be gay or bisexual.
What makes the case of Patrick and Thomas so fascinating is that it calls into question both of the dominant theories in the long-running debate over what makes people gay: nature or nurture, genes or learned behavior. As identical twins, Patrick and Thomas began as genetic clones. From the moment they came out of their mother's womb, their environment was about as close to identical as possible - being fed, changed, and plopped into their car seats the same way, having similar relationships with the same nurturing father and mother. Yet before either boy could talk, one showed highly feminine traits while the other appeared to be "all boy," as the moms at the playgrounds say with apologetic shrugs.
"That my sons were different the second they were born, there is no question about it," says the twins' mother.
So what happened between their identical genetic starting point and their births? They spent nine months in utero. In the hunt for what causes people to be gay or straight, that's now the most interesting and potentially enlightening frontier.
WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHERE HOMOSEXUALITY COMES FROM? Proving people are born gay would give them wider social acceptance and better protection against discrimination, many gay rights advocates argue. In the last decade, as this "biological" argument has gained momentum, polls find Americans - especially young adults - increasingly tolerant of gays and lesbians. And that's exactly what has groups opposed to homosexuality so concerned. The Family Research Council, a conservative Christian think tank in Washington, D.C., argues in its book Getting It Straight that finding people are born gay "would advance the idea that sexual orientation is an innate characteristic, like race; that homosexuals, like African-Americans, should be legally protected against 'discrimination;' and that disapproval of homosexuality should be as socially stigmatized as racism. However, it is not true."
Some advocates of gay marriage argue that proving sexual orientation is inborn would make it easier to frame the debate as simply a matter of civil rights. That could be true, but then again, freedom of religion enjoyed federal protection long before inborn traits like race and sex.
For much of the 20th century, the dominant thinking connected homosexuality to upbringing. Freud, for instance, speculated that overprotective mothers and distant fathers helped make boys gay. It took the American Psychiatric Association until 1973 to remove "homosexuality" from its manual of mental disorders.
Then, in 1991, a neuroscientist in San Diego named Simon LeVay told the world he had found a key difference between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men he studied. LeVay showed that a tiny clump of neurons of the anterior hypothalamus - which is believed to control sexual behavior - was, on average, more than twice the size in heterosexual men as in homosexual men. LeVay's findings did not speak directly to the nature-vs.-nurture debate - the clumps could, theoretically, have changed size because of homosexual behavior. But that seemed unlikely, and the study ended up jump-starting the effort to prove a biological basis for homosexuality.
Later that same year, Boston University psychiatrist Richard Pillard and Northwestern University psychologist J. Michael Bailey announced the results of their study of male twins. They found that, in identical twins, if one twin was gay, the other had about a 50 percent chance of also being gay. For fraternal twins, the rate was about 20 percent. Because identical twins share their entire genetic makeup while fraternal twins share about half, genes were believed to explain the difference. Most reputable studies find the rate of homosexuality in the general population to be 2 to 4 percent, rather than the popular "1 in 10" estimate.
In 1993 came the biggest news: Dean Hamer's discovery of the "gay gene." In fact, Hamer, a Harvard-trained researcher at the National Cancer Institute, hadn't quite put it that boldly or imprecisely. He found that gay brothers shared a specific region of the X chromosome, called Xq28, at a higher rate than gay men shared with their straight brothers. Hamer and others suggested this finding would eventually transform our understanding of sexual orientation.
That hasn't happened yet. But the clear focus of sexual-orientation research has shifted to biological causes, and there hasn't been much science produced to support the old theories tying homosexuality to upbringing. Freud may have been seeing the effect rather than the cause, since a father faced with a very feminine son might well become more distant or hostile, leading the boy's mother to become more protective. In recent years, researchers who suspect that homosexuality is inborn - whether because of genetics or events happening in the womb - have looked everywhere for clues: Prenatal hormones. Birth order. Finger length. Fingerprints. Stress. Sweat. Eye blinks. Spatial relations. Hearing. Handedness. Even "gay" sheep.
LeVay, who is gay, says that when he published his study 14 years ago, some gays and lesbians criticized him for doing research that might lead to homosexuality once again being lumped in with diseases and disorders. "If anything, the reverse has happened," says LeVay, who is now 61 and no longer active in the lab. He says the hunt for a biological basis for homosexuality, which involves many researchers who are themselves gay or lesbian, "has contributed to the status of gay people in society."
These studies have been small and underfunded, and the results have often been modest. Still, because there's been so much of this disparate research, "all sort of pointing in the same direction, makes it pretty clear there are biological processes significantly influencing sexual orientation," says LeVay. "But it's also kind of frustrating that it's still a bunch of hints, that nothing is really as crystal clear as you would like."
Just in the last few months, though, the hints have grown stronger.
In May, Swedish researchers reported finding important differences in how the brains of straight men and gay men responded to two compounds suspected of being pheromones - those scent-related chemicals that are key to sexual arousal in animals. The first compound came from women's urine, the second from male sweat. Brain scans showed that when straight men smelled the female urine compound, their hypothalamus lit up. That didn't happen with gay men. Instead, their hypothalamus lit up when they smelled the male-sweat compound, which was the same way straight women had responded. This research once again connecting the hypothalamus to sexual orientation comes on the heels of work with sheep. About 8 percent of domestic rams are exclusively interested in sex with other rams. Researchers found that a clump of neurons similar to the one LeVay identified in human brains was also smaller in gay rams than straight ones. (Again, it's conceivable that these differences could be showing effect rather than cause.)
In June, scientists in Vienna announced that they had isolated a master genetic switch for sexual orientation in the fruit fly. Once they flicked the switch, the genetically altered female flies rebuffed overtures from males and instead attempted to mate with other females, adopting the elaborate courting dance and mating songs that males use.
And now, a large-scale, five-year genetic study of gay brothers is underway in North America. The study received $2.5 million from the National Institutes of Health, which is unusual. Government funders tend to steer clear of sexual orientation research, aware that even small grants are apt to be met with outrage from conservative congressmen looking to make the most of their C-Span face time. Relying on a robust sample of 1,000 gay-brother pairs and the latest advancements in genetic screening, this study promises to bring some clarity to the murky area of what role genes may play in homosexuality.
This accumulating biological evidence, combined with the prospect of more on the horizon, is having an effect. Last month, the Rev. Rob Schenck, a prominent Washington, D.C., evangelical leader, told a large gathering of young evangelicals that he believes homosexuality is not a choice but rather a predisposition, something "deeply rooted" in people. Schenck told me that his conversion came about after he'd spoken extensively with genetic researchers and psychologists. He argues that evangelicals should continue to oppose homosexual behavior, but that "many evangelicals are living in a sort of state of denial about the advance of this conversation." His message: "If it's inevitable that this scientific evidence is coming, we have to be prepared with a loving response. If we don't have one, we won't have any credibility."
AS THE 21-YEAR-OLD COLLEGE JUNIOR IN A HOSPITAL JOHNNY slides into the MRI, she is handed controls with buttons for "strongly like" and "strongly dislike." Hundreds of pornographic images - in male-male and female-female pairings - flash before her eyes. Eroticism eventually gives way to monotony, and it's hard to avoid looking for details to distinguish one image from the rest of the panting pack. So it goes from "Look at the size of those breasts!" to "That can't be comfortable, given the length of her fingernails!" to "Why is that guy wearing nothing but work boots on the beach?"
Regardless of which buttons the student presses, the MRI scans show her arousal level to each image, at its starting point in the brain.
Researchers at Northwestern University, outside Chicago, are doing this work as a follow-up to their studies of arousal using genital measurement tools. They found that while straight men were aroused by film clips of two women having sex, and gay men were aroused by clips of two men having sex, most of the men who identified themselves as bisexual showed gay arousal patterns. More surprising was just how different the story with women turned out to be. Most women, whether they identified as straight, lesbian, or bisexual, were significantly aroused by straight, gay, and lesbian sex. "I'm not suggesting that most women are bisexual," says Michael Bailey, the psychology professor whose lab conducted the studies. "I'm suggesting that whatever a woman's sexual arousal pattern is, it has little to do with her sexual orientation." That's fundamentally different from men. "In men, arousal is orientation. It's as simple as that. That's how gay men learn they are gay."
These studies mark a return to basics for the 47-year-old Bailey. He says researchers need a far deeper understanding of what sexual orientation is before they can determine where it comes from.
Female sexual orientation is particularly foggy, he says, because there's been so little research done. As for male sexual orientation, he argues that there's now enough evidence to suggest it is "entirely in-born," though not nearly enough to establish how that happens.
Bailey's 1991 twin study is still cited by other researchers as one of the pillars in the genetic argument for homosexuality. But his follow-up study using a comprehensive registry of twins in Australia found a much lower rate of similarity in sexual orientation between identical twins, about 20 percent, down from 50 percent. Bailey still believes that genes make important contributions to sexual orientation. But, he says, "that's not where I'd bet the real breakthroughs will come."
His hunch is that further study of childhood gender nonconformity will pay big. Because it's unclear what percentage of homosexuals and lesbians showed CGN as children, Bailey and his colleagues are now running a study that uses adult participants' home movies from childhood to look for signs of gender-bending behavior.
Cornell psychologist Daryl Bem has proposed an intriguing theory for how CGN might lead to homosexuality. According to this pathway, which he calls "the exotic becomes erotic," children are born with traits for temperament, such as aggression and activity level, that predispose them to male-typical or female-typical activities. They seek out playmates with the same interests. So a boy whose traits lead him to hopscotch and away from rough play will feel different from, and ostracized by, other boys. This leads to physiological arousal of fear and anger in their presence, arousal that eventually is transformed from exotic to erotic.
Critics of homosexuality have used Bem's theory, which stresses environment over biology, to argue that sexual orientation is not inborn and not fixed. But Bem says this pathway is triggered by biological traits, and he doesn't really see how the outcome of homosexuality can be changed.
Bailey says whether or not Bem's theory holds up, the environment most worth focusing in on is the one a child experiences when he's in his mother's womb.
LET'S GET BACK TO THOMAS AND PATRICK. BECAUSE IT'S UNCLEAR why twin brothers with identical genetic starting points and similar post-birth environments would take such divergent paths, it's helpful to return to the beginning.
Males and females have a fundamental genetic difference - females have two X chromosomes, and males have an X and a Y. Still, right after conception, it's hard to tell male and female zygotes apart, except for that tucked-away chromosomal difference. Normally, the changes take shape at a key point of fetal development, when the male brain is masculinized by sex hormones. The female brain is the default. The brain will stay on the female path as long as it is protected from exposure to hormones. The hormonal theory of homosexuality holds that, just as exposure to circulating sex hormones determines whether a fetus will be male or female, such exposure must also influence sexual orientation.
The cases of children born with disorders of "sexual differentiation" offer insight. William Reiner, a psychiatrist and urologist with the University of Oklahoma, has evaluated more than a hundred of these cases. For decades, the standard medical response to boys born with severely inadequate penises (or none at all) was to castrate the boy and have his parents raise him as a girl. But Reiner has found that nurture - even when it involves surgery soon after birth - cannot trump nature. Of the boys with inadequate penises who were raised as girls, he says, "I haven't found one who is sexually attracted to males." The majority of them have transitioned back to being males and report being attracted to females.
During fetal development, sexual identity is set before the sexual organs are formed, Reiner says. Perhaps it's the same for sexual orientation. In his research, of all the babies with X and Y chromosomes who were raised as girls, the only ones he has found who report having female identities and being attracted to males are those who did not have "receptors" to let the male sex hormones do their masculinizing in the womb.
What does this all mean? "Exposure to male hormones in utero dramatically raises the chances of being sexually attracted to females," Reiner says. "We can infer that the absence of male hormone exposure may have something to do with attraction to males."
Michael Bailey says Reiner's findings represent a major breakthrough, showing that "whatever causes sexual orientation is strongly influenced by prenatal biology." Bailey and Reiner say the answer is probably not as simple as just exposure to sex hormones. After all, the exposure levels in some of the people Reiner studies are abnormal enough to produce huge differences in sexual organs. Yet, sexual organs in straight and gay people are, on average, the same. More likely, hormones are interacting with other factors.
Canadian researchers have consistently documented a "big-brother effect," finding that the chances of a boy being gay increase with each additional older brother he has. (Birth order does not appear to play a role with lesbians.) So, a male with three older brothers is three times more likely to be gay than one with no older brothers, though there's still a better than 90 percent chance he will be straight. They argue that this results from a complex interaction involving hormones, antigens, and the mother's immune system.
By now, there is substantial evidence showing correlation - though not causation - between sexual orientation and traits that are set when a baby is in the womb. Take finger length. In general, men have shorter index fingers in relation to their ring fingers; in women, the lengths are generally about the same. Researchers have found that lesbians generally have ratios closer to males. Other studies have shown masculinized results for lesbians in inner-ear functions and eye-blink reactions to sudden loud noises, and feminized patterns for gay men on certain cognitive tasks like spatial perception and remembering the placement of objects.
New York University researcher Lynn S. Hall, who has studied traits determined in the womb, speculates that Patrick was somehow prenatally stressed, probably during the first trimester, when the brain is really developing, particularly the structures like the hypothalamus that influence sexual behavior. This stress might have been based on his position in the womb or the blood flow to him or any of a number of other factors not in his mother's control. Yet more evidence that identical twins have womb experiences far from identical can be found in their often differing birth weights. Patrick was born a pound lighter than Thomas.
Taken together, the research suggests that early on in the womb, as the fetus's brain develops in either the male or female direction, something fundamental to sexual orientation is happening. Nobody's sure what's causing it. But here's where genes may be involved, perhaps by regulating hormone exposure or by dictating the size of that key clump of neurons in the hypothalamus. Before researchers can sort that out, they'll need to return to the question of whether, in fact, there is a "gay gene."
THE CROWD ON BOSTON COMMON IS THICK ON THIS SCORCHER of a Saturday afternoon in June, as the throngs make their way around the 35th annual Boston Pride festival, past booths peddling everything from "Gayopoly" board games to Braveheartian garments called Utilikilts. Sitting quietly in his booth is Alan Sanders, a soft-spoken 41-year-old with a sandy beard and thinning hair. He's placeda mound of rainbow-colored Starbursts on the table in front of him and hung a banner that reads: "WANTED: Gay Men with Gay Brothers for Molecular Genetic Study of Sexual Orientation."
Sanders is a psychiatrist with the Evanston Northwestern Healthcare Research Institute who is leading the NIH-funded search for the genetic basis of male homosexuality (www.gaybros.com). He is spending the summer crisscrossing the country, going to gay pride festivals, hoping to recruit 1,000 pairs of gay brothers to participate. (His wife, who just delivered their third son, wasn't crazy about the timing.) When people in Boston ask him how much genes may contribute to homosexuality, he says the best estimate is about 40 percent.
Homosexuality runs in families - studies show that 8 to 12 percent of brothers of gay men are also gay, compared with the 2 to 4 percent of the general population.
Sanders spends much of the afternoon handing out Starbursts to people who clearly don't qualify for a gay brothers study - preteen girls, adult lesbians wearing T-shirts that read "I Like Girls Who Like Girls," and elderly women in straw hats who speak only Chinese. But many of the gay men who stop by are interested in more than free candy. Among the people signing up is James Daly, a 31-year-old from Salem. "I think it's important for the public - especially the religious right - to know it's not a choice for some people," Daly says. "I feel I was born this way."
(In fairness, there aren't many leaders of groups representing social and religious conservatives who still argue that homosexual orientation - as opposed to behavior - is a matter of choice. Even as he insists that no one is born gay, Peter Sprigg, the point person on homosexuality for the Family Research Council, says, "I don't think that people choose their sexual attraction.")
In the decade since Dean Hamer made headlines, the gay gene theory has taken some hits. A Canadian team was unable to replicate his findings. Earlier this year, a team from Hamer's own lab reported only mixed results after having done the first scan of the entire human genome in the search for genes influencing sexual orientation.
But all of the gene studies so far have been based on small samples and lacked the funding to do things right. Sanders's study should be big enough to provide some real answers on linkage as well as shed light on gender nonconformity and the big-brother effect.
There is, however, a towering question that Sanders's study will probably not be able to answer. That has to do with evolution. If a prime motivation of all species is to pass genes on to future generations, and gay men are estimated to produce 80 percent fewer offspring than straight men, why would a gay gene not have been wiped out by the forces of natural selection? This evolutionary disadvantage is what led former Amherst College biologist Paul Ewald to argue that homosexuality might be caused by a virus - a pathogen most likely working in utero. That argument caused a stir when he and a colleague proposed it six years ago, but with no research done to test it, it remains just another theory. Other scientists have offered fascinating but unpersuasive explanations, most of them focusing on some kind of compensatory benefit, in the same way that the gene responsible for sickle cell anemia also protects against malaria. A study last year by researchers in Italy showed that female relatives of gay men tended to be more fertile, though, as critics point out, not nearly fertile enough to make up for the gay man's lack of offspring.
But there will be plenty of time for sorting out the evolutionary paradox once - and if - researchers are able to identify actual genes involved in sexual orientation. Getting to that point will likely require integrating multiple lines of promising research. That is exactly what's happening in Eric Vilain's lab at the University of California, Los Angeles. Vilain, an associate professor of human genetics, and his colleague, Sven Bocklandt, are using gay sheep, transgenic mice, identical twin humans, and novel approaches to human genetics to try to unlock the mystery of sexual orientation.
Instead of looking for a gay gene, they stress that they are looking for several genes that cause either attraction to men or attraction to women. Those same genes would work one way in heterosexual women and another way in homosexual men. The UCLA lab is examining how these genes might be turned "up" or "down." It's not a question of what genes you have, but rather which ones you use, says Bocklandt. "I have the genes in my body to make a vagina and carry a baby, but I don't use them, because I am a man." In studying the genes of gay sheep, for example, he's found some that are turned "way up" compared with the straight rams.
The lab is also testing an intriguing theory involving imprinted genes. Normally, we have two copies of every gene, one from each parent, and both copies work. They're identical, so it doesn't matter which copy comes from which parent. But with imprinted genes, that does matter. Although both copies are physically there, one copy - either from the mom or the dad - is blocked from working. Think of an airplane with an engine on each wing, except one of the engines is shut down. A recent Duke University study suggests humans have hundreds of imprinted genes, including one on the X chromosome that previous research has tied to sexual orientation.
With imprinted genes, there is no backup engine. So if there's something atypical in the copy from mom, the copy from dad cannot be turned on. The UCLA lab is now collecting DNA from identical twins in which one twin is straight and the other is gay. Because the twins begin as genetic clones, if a gene is imprinted in one twin, it will be in the other twin as well. Normally, as the fetuses are developing, each time a cell divides, the DNA separates and makes a copy of itself, replicating all kinds of genetic information. It's a complicated but incredibly accurate process. But the coding to keep the backup engine shut down on an imprinted gene is less accurate.
So how might imprinted genes help explain why one identical twin would be straight and the other gay? Say there's an imprinted gene for attraction to females, and there's something atypical in the copy the twin brothers get from mom. As all that replicating is going on, the imprinting (to keep the copy from dad shut down) proceeds as expected in one twin, and he ends up gay. But somehow with his brother, the coding for the imprinting is lost, and rather than remain shut down, the fuel flows to fire up the backup engine from dad. And that twin turns out to be straight.
IN THE COURSE OF REPORTING THIS STORY, I EXPERIENCED A good deal of whiplash. Just when I would become swayed by the evidence supporting one discreet theory, I would stumble onto new evidence casting some doubt on it. Ultimately, I accepted this as unavoidable terrain in the hunt for the basis of sexual orientation. This is, after all, a research field built on underfunded, idiosyncratic studies that are met with full-barreled responses from opposing and well-funded advocacy groups determined to make the results from the lab hew to the scripts they've honed for the talk-show circuit.
You can't really blame the advocacy groups. The stakes are high. In the end, homosexuality remains such a divisive issue that only thoroughly tested research will get society to accept what science has to say about its origin. Critics of funding for sexual orientation research say that it isn't curing cancer, and they're right. But we devote a lot more dollars to studying other issues that aren't curing cancer and have less resonance in society.
Still, no matter how imperfect these studies are, when you put them all together and examine them closely, the message is clear: While post-birth development may well play a supporting role, the roots of homosexuality, at least in men, appear to be in place by the time a child is born. After spending years sifting through all the available data, British researchers Glenn Wilson and Qazi Rahman come to an even bolder conclusion in their forthcoming book Born Gay: The Psychobiology of Sex Orientation, in which they write: "Sexual orientation is something we are born with and not `acquired' from our social environment."
Meanwhile, the mother of twins Patrick and Thomas has done her own sifting and come to her own conclusions. She says her son's feminine behavior suggests he will grow up to be gay, and she has no problem with that. She just worries about what happens to him between now and then.
After that fateful call from Patrick's school, she says, "I knew I had to talk to my son, and I had no clue what to say." Ultimately, she told him that although he could play however he wanted at home, he couldn't tell his classmates he was a girl, because they'd think he was lying. And she told him that some older boys might be mean to him and even hit him if he continued to claim he was a girl.
Then she asked him, "Do you think that you can convince yourself that you are a boy?"
"Yes, Mom," he said. "It's going to be like when I was trying to learn to read, and then one day I opened the book and I could read."
His mother's heart sank. She could tell that he wanted more than anything to please her. "Basically, he was saying there must be a miracle - that one day I wake up and I'm a boy. That's the only way he could imagine it could happen."
In the year since that conversation, Patrick's behavior has become somewhat less feminine. His mother hopes it's just because his interests are evolving and not because he's suppressing them.
"I can now imagine him being completely straight, which I couldn't a year ago," she says. "I can imagine him being gay, which seems to be statistically most likely."
She says she's fine with either outcome, just as long as he's happy and free from harm. She takes heart in how much more accepting today's society is. "By the time my boys are 20, the world will have changed even more."
By then, there might even be enough consensus for researchers to forget about finger lengths and fruit flies and gay sheep, and move on to a new mystery.
*By Neil Swidey
With crystal-blue eyes, wavy hair, and freshly scrubbed faces, the boys look as though they stepped out of a Pottery Barn Kids catalog. They are 7-year-old twins. I'll call them Thomas and Patrick; their parents agreed to let me meet the boys as long as I didn't use their real names.
Spend five seconds with them, and there can be no doubt that they are identical twins - so identical even they can't tell each other apart in photographs. Spend five minutes with them, and their profound differences begin to emerge.
Patrick is social, thoughtful, attentive. He repeatedly addresses me by name. Thomas is physical, spontaneous, a bit distracted. Just minutes after meeting me outside a coffee shop, he punches me in the upper arm, yells, "Gray punch buggy!" and then points to a Volkswagen Beetle cruising past us. It's a hard punch. They horse around like typical brothers, but Patrick's punches are less forceful and his voice is higher. Thomas charges at his brother, arms flexed in front of him like a mini-bodybuilder. The differences are subtle - they're 7-year-old boys, after all - but they are there.
When the twins were 2, Patrick found his mother's shoes. He liked wearing them. Thomas tried on his father's once but didn't see the point.
When they were 3, Thomas blurted out that toy guns were his favorite things. Patrick piped up that his were the Barbie dolls he discovered at day care.
When the twins were 5, Thomas announced he was going to be a monster for Halloween. Patrick said he was going to be a princess. Thomas said he couldn't do that, because other kids would laugh at him. Patrick seemed puzzled. "Then I'll be Batman," he said.
Their mother - intelligent, warm, and open-minded - found herself conflicted. She wanted Patrick - whose playmates have always been girls, never boys - to be himself, but she worried his feminine behavior would expose him to ridicule and pain. She decided to allow him free expression at home while setting some limits in public.
That worked until last year, when a school official called to say Patrick was making his classmates uncomfortable. He kept insisting that he was a girl.
What makes the case of Patrick and Thomas so fascinating is that it calls into question both of the dominant theories in the long-running debate over what makes people gay: nature or nurture, genes or learned behavior. As identical twins, Patrick and Thomas began as genetic clones. From the moment they came out of their mother's womb, their environment was about as close to identical as possible - being fed, changed, and plopped into their car seats the same way, having similar relationships with the same nurturing father and mother. Yet before either boy could talk, one showed highly feminine traits while the other appeared to be "all boy," as the moms at the playgrounds say with apologetic shrugs.
"That my sons were different the second they were born, there is no question about it," says the twins' mother.
So what happened between their identical genetic starting point and their births? They spent nine months in utero. In the hunt for what causes people to be gay or straight, that's now the most interesting and potentially enlightening frontier.
WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHERE HOMOSEXUALITY COMES FROM? Proving people are born gay would give them wider social acceptance and better protection against discrimination, many gay rights advocates argue. In the last decade, as this "biological" argument has gained momentum, polls find Americans - especially young adults - increasingly tolerant of gays and lesbians. And that's exactly what has groups opposed to homosexuality so concerned. The Family Research Council, a conservative Christian think tank in Washington, D.C., argues in its book Getting It Straight that finding people are born gay "would advance the idea that sexual orientation is an innate characteristic, like race; that homosexuals, like African-Americans, should be legally protected against 'discrimination;' and that disapproval of homosexuality should be as socially stigmatized as racism. However, it is not true."
Some advocates of gay marriage argue that proving sexual orientation is inborn would make it easier to frame the debate as simply a matter of civil rights. That could be true, but then again, freedom of religion enjoyed federal protection long before inborn traits like race and sex.
Then, in 1991, a neuroscientist in San Diego named Simon LeVay told the world he had found a key difference between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men he studied. LeVay showed that a tiny clump of neurons of the anterior hypothalamus - which is believed to control sexual behavior - was, on average, more than twice the size in heterosexual men as in homosexual men. LeVay's findings did not speak directly to the nature-vs.-nurture debate - the clumps could, theoretically, have changed size because of homosexual behavior. But that seemed unlikely, and the study ended up jump-starting the effort to prove a biological basis for homosexuality.
Later that same year, Boston University psychiatrist Richard Pillard and Northwestern University psychologist J. Michael Bailey announced the results of their study of male twins. They found that, in identical twins, if one twin was gay, the other had about a 50 percent chance of also being gay. For fraternal twins, the rate was about 20 percent. Because identical twins share their entire genetic makeup while fraternal twins share about half, genes were believed to explain the difference. Most reputable studies find the rate of homosexuality in the general population to be 2 to 4 percent, rather than the popular "1 in 10" estimate.
In 1993 came the biggest news: Dean Hamer's discovery of the "gay gene." In fact, Hamer, a Harvard-trained researcher at the National Cancer Institute, hadn't quite put it that boldly or imprecisely. He found that gay brothers shared a specific region of the X chromosome, called Xq28, at a higher rate than gay men shared with their straight brothers. Hamer and others suggested this finding would eventually transform our understanding of sexual orientation.
That hasn't happened yet. But the clear focus of sexual-orientation research has shifted to biological causes, and there hasn't been much science produced to support the old theories tying homosexuality to upbringing. Freud may have been seeing the effect rather than the cause, since a father faced with a very feminine son might well become more distant or hostile, leading the boy's mother to become more protective. In recent years, researchers who suspect that homosexuality is inborn - whether because of genetics or events happening in the womb - have looked everywhere for clues: Prenatal hormones. Birth order. Finger length. Fingerprints. Stress. Sweat. Eye blinks. Spatial relations. Hearing. Handedness. Even "gay" sheep.
These studies have been small and underfunded, and the results have often been modest. Still, because there's been so much of this disparate research, "all sort of pointing in the same direction, makes it pretty clear there are biological processes significantly influencing sexual orientation," says LeVay. "But it's also kind of frustrating that it's still a bunch of hints, that nothing is really as crystal clear as you would like."
Just in the last few months, though, the hints have grown stronger.
In May, Swedish researchers reported finding important differences in how the brains of straight men and gay men responded to two compounds suspected of being pheromones - those scent-related chemicals that are key to sexual arousal in animals. The first compound came from women's urine, the second from male sweat. Brain scans showed that when straight men smelled the female urine compound, their hypothalamus lit up. That didn't happen with gay men. Instead, their hypothalamus lit up when they smelled the male-sweat compound, which was the same way straight women had responded. This research once again connecting the hypothalamus to sexual orientation comes on the heels of work with sheep. About 8 percent of domestic rams are exclusively interested in sex with other rams. Researchers found that a clump of neurons similar to the one LeVay identified in human brains was also smaller in gay rams than straight ones. (Again, it's conceivable that these differences could be showing effect rather than cause.)
In June, scientists in Vienna announced that they had isolated a master genetic switch for sexual orientation in the fruit fly. Once they flicked the switch, the genetically altered female flies rebuffed overtures from males and instead attempted to mate with other females, adopting the elaborate courting dance and mating songs that males use.
And now, a large-scale, five-year genetic study of gay brothers is underway in North America. The study received $2.5 million from the National Institutes of Health, which is unusual. Government funders tend to steer clear of sexual orientation research, aware that even small grants are apt to be met with outrage from conservative congressmen looking to make the most of their C-Span face time. Relying on a robust sample of 1,000 gay-brother pairs and the latest advancements in genetic screening, this study promises to bring some clarity to the murky area of what role genes may play in homosexuality.
This accumulating biological evidence, combined with the prospect of more on the horizon, is having an effect. Last month, the Rev. Rob Schenck, a prominent Washington, D.C., evangelical leader, told a large gathering of young evangelicals that he believes homosexuality is not a choice but rather a predisposition, something "deeply rooted" in people. Schenck told me that his conversion came about after he'd spoken extensively with genetic researchers and psychologists. He argues that evangelicals should continue to oppose homosexual behavior, but that "many evangelicals are living in a sort of state of denial about the advance of this conversation." His message: "If it's inevitable that this scientific evidence is coming, we have to be prepared with a loving response. If we don't have one, we won't have any credibility."
AS THE 21-YEAR-OLD COLLEGE JUNIOR IN A HOSPITAL JOHNNY slides into the MRI, she is handed controls with buttons for "strongly like" and "strongly dislike." Hundreds of pornographic images - in male-male and female-female pairings - flash before her eyes. Eroticism eventually gives way to monotony, and it's hard to avoid looking for details to distinguish one image from the rest of the panting pack. So it goes from "Look at the size of those breasts!" to "That can't be comfortable, given the length of her fingernails!" to "Why is that guy wearing nothing but work boots on the beach?"
Regardless of which buttons the student presses, the MRI scans show her arousal level to each image, at its starting point in the brain.
Researchers at Northwestern University, outside Chicago, are doing this work as a follow-up to their studies of arousal using genital measurement tools. They found that while straight men were aroused by film clips of two women having sex, and gay men were aroused by clips of two men having sex, most of the men who identified themselves as bisexual showed gay arousal patterns. More surprising was just how different the story with women turned out to be. Most women, whether they identified as straight, lesbian, or bisexual, were significantly aroused by straight, gay, and lesbian sex. "I'm not suggesting that most women are bisexual," says Michael Bailey, the psychology professor whose lab conducted the studies. "I'm suggesting that whatever a woman's sexual arousal pattern is, it has little to do with her sexual orientation." That's fundamentally different from men. "In men, arousal is orientation. It's as simple as that. That's how gay men learn they are gay."
These studies mark a return to basics for the 47-year-old Bailey. He says researchers need a far deeper understanding of what sexual orientation is before they can determine where it comes from.
Female sexual orientation is particularly foggy, he says, because there's been so little research done. As for male sexual orientation, he argues that there's now enough evidence to suggest it is "entirely in-born," though not nearly enough to establish how that happens.
Bailey's 1991 twin study is still cited by other researchers as one of the pillars in the genetic argument for homosexuality. But his follow-up study using a comprehensive registry of twins in Australia found a much lower rate of similarity in sexual orientation between identical twins, about 20 percent, down from 50 percent. Bailey still believes that genes make important contributions to sexual orientation. But, he says, "that's not where I'd bet the real breakthroughs will come."
Cornell psychologist Daryl Bem has proposed an intriguing theory for how CGN might lead to homosexuality. According to this pathway, which he calls "the exotic becomes erotic," children are born with traits for temperament, such as aggression and activity level, that predispose them to male-typical or female-typical activities. They seek out playmates with the same interests. So a boy whose traits lead him to hopscotch and away from rough play will feel different from, and ostracized by, other boys. This leads to physiological arousal of fear and anger in their presence, arousal that eventually is transformed from exotic to erotic.
Critics of homosexuality have used Bem's theory, which stresses environment over biology, to argue that sexual orientation is not inborn and not fixed. But Bem says this pathway is triggered by biological traits, and he doesn't really see how the outcome of homosexuality can be changed.
Bailey says whether or not Bem's theory holds up, the environment most worth focusing in on is the one a child experiences when he's in his mother's womb.
LET'S GET BACK TO THOMAS AND PATRICK. BECAUSE IT'S UNCLEAR why twin brothers with identical genetic starting points and similar post-birth environments would take such divergent paths, it's helpful to return to the beginning.
Males and females have a fundamental genetic difference - females have two X chromosomes, and males have an X and a Y. Still, right after conception, it's hard to tell male and female zygotes apart, except for that tucked-away chromosomal difference. Normally, the changes take shape at a key point of fetal development, when the male brain is masculinized by sex hormones. The female brain is the default. The brain will stay on the female path as long as it is protected from exposure to hormones. The hormonal theory of homosexuality holds that, just as exposure to circulating sex hormones determines whether a fetus will be male or female, such exposure must also influence sexual orientation.
During fetal development, sexual identity is set before the sexual organs are formed, Reiner says. Perhaps it's the same for sexual orientation. In his research, of all the babies with X and Y chromosomes who were raised as girls, the only ones he has found who report having female identities and being attracted to males are those who did not have "receptors" to let the male sex hormones do their masculinizing in the womb.
What does this all mean? "Exposure to male hormones in utero dramatically raises the chances of being sexually attracted to females," Reiner says. "We can infer that the absence of male hormone exposure may have something to do with attraction to males."
Michael Bailey says Reiner's findings represent a major breakthrough, showing that "whatever causes sexual orientation is strongly influenced by prenatal biology." Bailey and Reiner say the answer is probably not as simple as just exposure to sex hormones. After all, the exposure levels in some of the people Reiner studies are abnormal enough to produce huge differences in sexual organs. Yet, sexual organs in straight and gay people are, on average, the same. More likely, hormones are interacting with other factors.
Canadian researchers have consistently documented a "big-brother effect," finding that the chances of a boy being gay increase with each additional older brother he has. (Birth order does not appear to play a role with lesbians.) So, a male with three older brothers is three times more likely to be gay than one with no older brothers, though there's still a better than 90 percent chance he will be straight. They argue that this results from a complex interaction involving hormones, antigens, and the mother's immune system.
By now, there is substantial evidence showing correlation - though not causation - between sexual orientation and traits that are set when a baby is in the womb. Take finger length. In general, men have shorter index fingers in relation to their ring fingers; in women, the lengths are generally about the same. Researchers have found that lesbians generally have ratios closer to males. Other studies have shown masculinized results for lesbians in inner-ear functions and eye-blink reactions to sudden loud noises, and feminized patterns for gay men on certain cognitive tasks like spatial perception and remembering the placement of objects.
New York University researcher Lynn S. Hall, who has studied traits determined in the womb, speculates that Patrick was somehow prenatally stressed, probably during the first trimester, when the brain is really developing, particularly the structures like the hypothalamus that influence sexual behavior. This stress might have been based on his position in the womb or the blood flow to him or any of a number of other factors not in his mother's control. Yet more evidence that identical twins have womb experiences far from identical can be found in their often differing birth weights. Patrick was born a pound lighter than Thomas.
Taken together, the research suggests that early on in the womb, as the fetus's brain develops in either the male or female direction, something fundamental to sexual orientation is happening. Nobody's sure what's causing it. But here's where genes may be involved, perhaps by regulating hormone exposure or by dictating the size of that key clump of neurons in the hypothalamus. Before researchers can sort that out, they'll need to return to the question of whether, in fact, there is a "gay gene."
Sanders is a psychiatrist with the Evanston Northwestern Healthcare Research Institute who is leading the NIH-funded search for the genetic basis of male homosexuality (www.gaybros.com). He is spending the summer crisscrossing the country, going to gay pride festivals, hoping to recruit 1,000 pairs of gay brothers to participate. (His wife, who just delivered their third son, wasn't crazy about the timing.) When people in Boston ask him how much genes may contribute to homosexuality, he says the best estimate is about 40 percent.
Homosexuality runs in families - studies show that 8 to 12 percent of brothers of gay men are also gay, compared with the 2 to 4 percent of the general population.
Sanders spends much of the afternoon handing out Starbursts to people who clearly don't qualify for a gay brothers study - preteen girls, adult lesbians wearing T-shirts that read "I Like Girls Who Like Girls," and elderly women in straw hats who speak only Chinese. But many of the gay men who stop by are interested in more than free candy. Among the people signing up is James Daly, a 31-year-old from Salem. "I think it's important for the public - especially the religious right - to know it's not a choice for some people," Daly says. "I feel I was born this way."
(In fairness, there aren't many leaders of groups representing social and religious conservatives who still argue that homosexual orientation - as opposed to behavior - is a matter of choice. Even as he insists that no one is born gay, Peter Sprigg, the point person on homosexuality for the Family Research Council, says, "I don't think that people choose their sexual attraction.")
In the decade since Dean Hamer made headlines, the gay gene theory has taken some hits. A Canadian team was unable to replicate his findings. Earlier this year, a team from Hamer's own lab reported only mixed results after having done the first scan of the entire human genome in the search for genes influencing sexual orientation.
But all of the gene studies so far have been based on small samples and lacked the funding to do things right. Sanders's study should be big enough to provide some real answers on linkage as well as shed light on gender nonconformity and the big-brother effect.
There is, however, a towering question that Sanders's study will probably not be able to answer. That has to do with evolution. If a prime motivation of all species is to pass genes on to future generations, and gay men are estimated to produce 80 percent fewer offspring than straight men, why would a gay gene not have been wiped out by the forces of natural selection? This evolutionary disadvantage is what led former Amherst College biologist Paul Ewald to argue that homosexuality might be caused by a virus - a pathogen most likely working in utero. That argument caused a stir when he and a colleague proposed it six years ago, but with no research done to test it, it remains just another theory. Other scientists have offered fascinating but unpersuasive explanations, most of them focusing on some kind of compensatory benefit, in the same way that the gene responsible for sickle cell anemia also protects against malaria. A study last year by researchers in Italy showed that female relatives of gay men tended to be more fertile, though, as critics point out, not nearly fertile enough to make up for the gay man's lack of offspring.
But there will be plenty of time for sorting out the evolutionary paradox once - and if - researchers are able to identify actual genes involved in sexual orientation. Getting to that point will likely require integrating multiple lines of promising research. That is exactly what's happening in Eric Vilain's lab at the University of California, Los Angeles. Vilain, an associate professor of human genetics, and his colleague, Sven Bocklandt, are using gay sheep, transgenic mice, identical twin humans, and novel approaches to human genetics to try to unlock the mystery of sexual orientation.
Instead of looking for a gay gene, they stress that they are looking for several genes that cause either attraction to men or attraction to women. Those same genes would work one way in heterosexual women and another way in homosexual men. The UCLA lab is examining how these genes might be turned "up" or "down." It's not a question of what genes you have, but rather which ones you use, says Bocklandt. "I have the genes in my body to make a vagina and carry a baby, but I don't use them, because I am a man." In studying the genes of gay sheep, for example, he's found some that are turned "way up" compared with the straight rams.
The lab is also testing an intriguing theory involving imprinted genes. Normally, we have two copies of every gene, one from each parent, and both copies work. They're identical, so it doesn't matter which copy comes from which parent. But with imprinted genes, that does matter. Although both copies are physically there, one copy - either from the mom or the dad - is blocked from working. Think of an airplane with an engine on each wing, except one of the engines is shut down. A recent Duke University study suggests humans have hundreds of imprinted genes, including one on the X chromosome that previous research has tied to sexual orientation.
With imprinted genes, there is no backup engine. So if there's something atypical in the copy from mom, the copy from dad cannot be turned on. The UCLA lab is now collecting DNA from identical twins in which one twin is straight and the other is gay. Because the twins begin as genetic clones, if a gene is imprinted in one twin, it will be in the other twin as well. Normally, as the fetuses are developing, each time a cell divides, the DNA separates and makes a copy of itself, replicating all kinds of genetic information. It's a complicated but incredibly accurate process. But the coding to keep the backup engine shut down on an imprinted gene is less accurate.
So how might imprinted genes help explain why one identical twin would be straight and the other gay? Say there's an imprinted gene for attraction to females, and there's something atypical in the copy the twin brothers get from mom. As all that replicating is going on, the imprinting (to keep the copy from dad shut down) proceeds as expected in one twin, and he ends up gay. But somehow with his brother, the coding for the imprinting is lost, and rather than remain shut down, the fuel flows to fire up the backup engine from dad. And that twin turns out to be straight.
IN THE COURSE OF REPORTING THIS STORY, I EXPERIENCED A good deal of whiplash. Just when I would become swayed by the evidence supporting one discreet theory, I would stumble onto new evidence casting some doubt on it. Ultimately, I accepted this as unavoidable terrain in the hunt for the basis of sexual orientation. This is, after all, a research field built on underfunded, idiosyncratic studies that are met with full-barreled responses from opposing and well-funded advocacy groups determined to make the results from the lab hew to the scripts they've honed for the talk-show circuit.
You can't really blame the advocacy groups. The stakes are high. In the end, homosexuality remains such a divisive issue that only thoroughly tested research will get society to accept what science has to say about its origin. Critics of funding for sexual orientation research say that it isn't curing cancer, and they're right. But we devote a lot more dollars to studying other issues that aren't curing cancer and have less resonance in society.
Still, no matter how imperfect these studies are, when you put them all together and examine them closely, the message is clear: While post-birth development may well play a supporting role, the roots of homosexuality, at least in men, appear to be in place by the time a child is born. After spending years sifting through all the available data, British researchers Glenn Wilson and Qazi Rahman come to an even bolder conclusion in their forthcoming book Born Gay: The Psychobiology of Sex Orientation, in which they write: "Sexual orientation is something we are born with and not `acquired' from our social environment."
Meanwhile, the mother of twins Patrick and Thomas has done her own sifting and come to her own conclusions. She says her son's feminine behavior suggests he will grow up to be gay, and she has no problem with that. She just worries about what happens to him between now and then.
After that fateful call from Patrick's school, she says, "I knew I had to talk to my son, and I had no clue what to say." Ultimately, she told him that although he could play however he wanted at home, he couldn't tell his classmates he was a girl, because they'd think he was lying. And she told him that some older boys might be mean to him and even hit him if he continued to claim he was a girl.
Then she asked him, "Do you think that you can convince yourself that you are a boy?"
"Yes, Mom," he said. "It's going to be like when I was trying to learn to read, and then one day I opened the book and I could read."
His mother's heart sank. She could tell that he wanted more than anything to please her. "Basically, he was saying there must be a miracle - that one day I wake up and I'm a boy. That's the only way he could imagine it could happen."
In the year since that conversation, Patrick's behavior has become somewhat less feminine. His mother hopes it's just because his interests are evolving and not because he's suppressing them.
"I can now imagine him being completely straight, which I couldn't a year ago," she says. "I can imagine him being gay, which seems to be statistically most likely."
By then, there might even be enough consensus for researchers to forget about finger lengths and fruit flies and gay sheep, and move on to a new mystery.
*By Neil Swidey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)