Scientific basis for CD/TS/homosexuality

[Valerie Nova]

I know that most crossdressers are not gay, and there are a lot of loaded terms used in this subject, so I'll refer to crossdressing, transexuality, and homosexuality collectively as gender identity disorders. I know a lot of people will probably insist that they aren't disorders, but I'm talking from a biological perspective about conditions that cause a person not to fit well into a typical male or typical female category. Just keep that in mind.

I wrote a paper for a biology class on this subject, it's really fascinating. A lot of people think being a crossdresser, or a transexual, or a homosexual is a choice, but I'd venture a guess that very few here believe that. Most people are quite certain they were born that way. The only trouble is, if there was a gay gene or a transexual gene, it'd be weeded out of society in a few generations, since gays and transexuals do not tend to reproduce as much as their counterparts.

Since it does not make sense for it to be genetic, and because most people with gender identity disorders have felt they were that way as long as they could remember, whatever causes these conditions must take place between conception and early childhood. One of the best theories I've heard is that these conditions are caused by hormones transferred between the pregnant mother and fetus. Here is an article written on this subject.

http://www.viewzone.com/homosexual.html

The article refers mostly to homosexuality, but other papers I've read have stated that it can also apply to transexuals and crossdressers. Basically, the gender of a child's mind is assigned before he or she is born. Boys and girls are born having the mental characteristics of their sex already.

The only thing is, sometimes the brain isn't assigned to the right gender. Also, since the brain is actually made up of many different parts, sometimes some parts will become assigned to one gender and some parts to the other. For instance, the hypothalamus seems to control sexual attraction. If it ends up set to the opposite gender, but none of the other parts of the brain are, the child will probably end up being gay, but otherwise comfortable with his or her gender. Although we do not have anywhere near a complete understanding of the brain, it is likely that there is a part that controls self-perception. If this got switched to the opposite sex, the child would end up believing himself to be a member of the opposite sex, despite being told otherwise.

Imagine the brain, with all the regions colored either blue or pink depending on what gender they're set at. Some regions aren't very strongly affected by sex, like the occipital lobe. (which controls vision) Imagine these as being much lighter in color. Some regions are strongly affected by sex, like the hypothalamus. Imagine these regions as darker. On your typical genetic male, the brain would be mostly blue, with perhaps some purple splotches here and there. Same goes for a typical genetic female, but with the reverse. A crossdresser would probably have a lot more purple regions in his brain, and some that are almost pink. A tomboy would probably have a lot of purple too, and some almost blue. A transexual would be more the opposite color than their own genetic color.

The point I'm trying to illustrate is that gender is really complicated. It's not simply one or the other in the brain. Some people think of it as a spectrum, but that's wrong too. Really, it's a whole bunch of spectrums, each controlling a different aspect of a person's personality. Also, gender identity is not genetic, but it is something you are born with. What is genetic is how a person's brain responds to these hormones. Some parts of certain people's brains are more likely to switch to the opposite gender when exposed to these hormones.

In the link I posted, it is shown that the male offspring of stressed mothers are more likely to exhibit characteristics of the opposite sex. It is very likely that this is the case in people too. It could explain the large number of British crossdressers and transexuals born around world war II. The paper hypothesizes that this condition is advantageous to a species, since under periods of stress, animals are born which don't know how to reproduce. Sometimes it's necessary to have a lower population in order for a species to thrive, just ask any forester.

Of course, that isn't really the case in people. A lot of homosexuals do have kids, and a lot of heterosexuals do not. But then, our species isn't purely an instinct-driven one like our ancient ancestors.

So a few things to consider here. It allows us to understand ourselves. It also allows us to answer questions, like, does that mean my kids will be like me? I'd be interested in hearing anyone's thoughts on this matter. Also, on a final note, were any of your mothers under a lot of stress while they were pregnant with you?

[Shannon CD]

I had a feeling when I saw your thread that you may be talking about fetal hormone wash. It makes perfect sense and is the theory to which I subscribe. Another thing became clear to me as well. My mother is a very anxious person naturally. Anything out of the ordinary can cause her undue stress so I don't imagine that it is outside the realm of possibility that she was under stress while pregnant with me.

One thing I would like to point out as far as genes being weeded out over a few generations;

You have to keep in mind that for hundreds of years men and women who were most probably gay found themselves in marriages and having families simply out of self preservation. And in today's society they are having biological children of their own through other means, so there has never been, and never will be a time that gays did not reproduce, thus making it very possible that a sexuality gene would continue to exist. Particularly if it is a recessive trait.

That being said I still lean towards the hormone wash as the best possible explanation. It also explains why some genetic girls are born with both X and Y chromosomes.

[Dixie Darling]

Basically, what you are referring to here is what as very often been discussed as the "Hormone Wash Theory". I have long been an advocate that this theory is about as close as anyone has come to presenting an accurate theory as to why some people are crossdressers and some aren't. There is also the PROVEN fact that diethylsilbestrol (DES for short) is a direct cause of some gender differences in men and has been linked to certain cancers in women. This was a drug which was prescribed to countless women for many years - even up into the 70's to lessen or prevent morning sickness during pregnancy.

Also, a recent article I read indicates that there are certain "studdering genes" in some people which have been directly linked to homosexuality and transgenderism so it would also seem apparent that OTHER "studdering genes" will be identified as to being responsible for at least some men being crossdressers.

Dixie -- http://www.geocities.com/senorita_cd

[Valerie Nova]

I had a feeling when I saw your thread that you may be talking about fetal hormone wash. It makes perfect sense and is the theory to which I subscribe. Another thing became clear to me as well. My mother is a very anxious person naturally. Anything out of the ordinary can cause her undue stress so I don't imagine that it is outside the realm of possibility that she was under stress while pregnant with me.

Ah, makes sense that most people here would have heard of it. Most people who aren't concerned with these questions have never heard of it of course.

One thing I would like to point out as far as genes being weeded out over a few generations;

You have to keep in mind that for hundreds of years men and women who were most probably gay found themselves in marriages and having families simply out of self preservation. And in today's society they are having biological children of their own through other means, so there has never been, and never will be a time that gays did not reproduce, thus making it very possible that a sexuality gene would continue to exist. Particularly if it is a recessive trait.

This can be attributed to a sort of natural selection among cultures. Cultures in which homosexuals were made to have children, and cultures in which children were considered a sign of wealth, tended to be more prolific. Mankind has nearly always been at war, and societies have needed all the kids they could get. This is also why a lot of cultures value male children more, they made better soldiers. They also needed more kids because of the greater number of human deaths due to disease, which increased as people congregated more.

Of course, the vast majority of our genes were acquired before there was even such a thing as culture or society. Animals operate mostly on instinct, and our animal ancestors would lose a gay gene if one existed.

That being said I still lean towards the hormone wash as the best possible explanation. It also explains why some genetic girls are born with both X and Y chromosomes.

Actually, that happens because they lack androgen receptors. Essentially, their cells think they're female because they couldn't hear their hormones tell them to be male. An interesting thing about these girls is that they are usually more feminine than normal girls. This is because their cells don't even respond to the small amount of androgens in their female bodies. This results in less body hair among other things.

[joanne_mi]

There is no gay gene. I drift more along the hormone wash theory as an explaination for the transgender phenomena. If you think about it, based on in-utero events, roughly 1/2 the human population is already F/M transsexuals. Maybe we're just trying to get back what we've lost?

As far as gays, scientists have found that when lab rats in an enclosed environment begin to overpopulate, a percentage of the rats will develop a taste for their own genders.

As goeth the human population, so increaseth the per-capita gay population. Or something of that sort.

[Robin Leigh]

Nice post, Vir, and I'll have to come back to this thread after I've had some sleep.

The only trouble is, if there was a gay gene or a transexual gene, it'd be weeded out of society in a few generations, since gays and transexuals do not tend to reproduce as much as their counterparts.

What about a gene (or genes) which can give a propensity to being gay or TG, but it needs to be triggered by something to become active? These triggers would mainly occur in utero, but some of them may occur after birth, while the brain & body continue to develop and affect each other.

Another thing to remember is that for much of human civilization, marriages have been arranged by the parents, not the couples themselves. The fact that you were gay was irrelevant, unless it totally prevented you from having sex.

The only thing is, sometimes the brain isn't assigned to the right gender. Also, since the brain is actually made up of many different parts, sometimes some parts will become assigned to one gender and some parts to the other.

Imagine the brain, with all the regions colored either blue or pink depending on what gender they're set at. Some regions aren't very strongly affected by sex, like the occipital lobe. (which controls vision) Imagine these as being much lighter in color. Some regions are strongly affected by sex, like the hypothalamus. Imagine these regions as darker. On your typical genetic male, the brain would be mostly blue, with perhaps some purple splotches here and there. Same goes for a typical genetic female, but with the reverse. A crossdresser would probably have a lot more purple regions in his brain, and some that are almost pink. A tomboy would probably have a lot of purple too, and some almost blue. A transexual would be more the opposite color than their own genetic color.

The point I'm trying to illustrate is that gender is really complicated. It's not simply one or the other in the brain. Some people think of it as a spectrum, but that's wrong too. Really, it's a whole bunch of spectrums, each controlling a different aspect of a person's personality. Also, gender identity is not genetic, but it is something you are born with. What is genetic is how a person's brain responds to these hormones. Some parts of certain people's brains are more likely to switch to the opposite gender when exposed to these hormones.

Nice image, and it well illustrates why there is so much diversity in the TG world, with so many combinations possible. (A point I often make here.). And I agree, it's oversimplifying to look for a TG spectrum. It's more like a kaleidoscopic fractal.

I've often thought of creating some kind of brain map or mind map, coloured just as you describe. I'm also working on other ideas to graphically illustrate one's position in "gender space": a Trans Mandala...

The paper hypothesizes that this condition is advantageous to a species, since under periods of stress, animals are born which don't know how to reproduce. Sometimes it's necessary to have a lower population in order for a species to thrive, just ask any forester.

The great science fiction author & science popularizer, Isaac Asimov, wrote an excellent article in the early 60s that hypothesized that homosexuality & other such non-reproductive sexual behaviour gave a species an advantage in times when it was threatened by excess population.

Also, non-reproductive members of a human society still contribute to it in various other ways that benefit the next generation.

Also, on a final note, were any of your mothers under a lot of stress while they were pregnant with you?

Yes! Especially the first month or two...

Robin

[Shannon CD]

"Of course, the vast majority of our genes were acquired before there was even such a thing as culture or society. Animals operate mostly on instinct, and our animal ancestors would lose a gay gene if one existed."

I agree, however a very imprtant point of Darwins theory is that genes can mutate. Although not likely it is possible that a gay gene emerged after civilization developed.

[Robin Leigh]

There are gay animals, Shannon. And not just one's acting weird because they're in captivity. It's very well documented.

Robin

[Snookums]

when asked why I wear womens clothes I like to tell them,my mom drank heavily and smoked like a chimney when she carried me,and I suffered from fetal nicotine and alcohol syndrome.

[Shannon CD]

There are gay animals, Shannon. And not just one's acting weird because they're in captivity. It's very well documented.

Robin

I agree, Robin, but even those occurances can be explained through hormone wash. However, I consider myself to have an analytical, scientific mind (without the scientific training and education, so please forgive me if I can't back my thoughts up as concisely and articulately as others can) and am completely open to the idea that it is either one or the other or both. Life is complex. Our personal decisions are based on multiple extenuating factors, so why wouldn't our biology be the same?

BTW. This is exactly the kind of thread that I love. This is where I can learn and develop a better understanding of human biology without the dryness of the textbook. Thank you for indulging me.

[sissystephanie]

That being said I still lean towards the hormone wash as the best possible explanation. It also explains why some genetic girls are born with both X and Y chromosomes.

I agree with the hormone wash explanation. My mother was a surgical nurse, and certainly was under stress virtually all the time. Of course the fact that my dear Grandma, who took care of my sister and I, dressed me like a little girl may also have had something to do with me being a CD. She dressed me that way because she had more little girl clothes than boys. Lots of girls in the family and me.

One point that does need some more info. We are all born with both X and Y chromosomes! The number of one or the other is what determines what sex we become. But no individual has just one kind of chromosome in their body. So yes genetic girls have both X and Y, but so do genetic males, just in reverse order.

Sissy
More Girl than man

[Marcia-B]

For me ,I saw somebody crossdressed on telly and wondered why they did it and tried it myself.If I didn't see it I wouldn't have tried it.

[Karren H]

Interesting......well, not to me.... I guess I'm lucky in the fact I could care less why.... Don't even want to know why....figured it wouldn't change a thing if I did know and there is only wo much room in my brain for long term storage so if I did know then it would push out something important that I was trying to remember... Like my wifes birthday or what she wants for Christmas... hehehe

And if I did want to know then I'd rather atribute it to something exotic like alien abduction.....

Love Karren

[Robin Leigh]

I agree, Robin, but even those occurances can be explained through hormone wash.

Sure, Shannon. I was just objecting to the idea that a gay gene would need to have arisen after civilization because it would have been weeded out in the wild. Tell it to the chimps.

One point that does need some more info. We are all born with both X and Y chromosomes! The number of one or the other is what determines what sex we become. But no individual has just one kind of chromosome in their body. So yes genetic girls have both X and Y, but so do genetic males, just in reverse order.

I'm sorry, but that's wrong, Stephanie. Normal GGs have XX, normal GMs have XY. The Y chromosome is like a stunted version of the X chromosome. The chromosomes got those names because that's there shape. So a Y chromosome is like an X chromosome with one arm missing. Variations occur, but they are very unusual.

Robin

[Valerie Nova]

There is no gay gene. I drift more along the hormone wash theory as an explaination for the transgender phenomena. If you think about it, based on in-utero events, roughly 1/2 the human population is already F/M transsexuals. Maybe we're just trying to get back what we've lost?

But what of the F2Ms? Anyway, I wouldn't say that the embryo starts out as female, rather it starts out as asexual. If it gets the signal to be male then it becomes male, otherwise it becomes female.

As far as gays, scientists have found that when lab rats in an enclosed environment begin to overpopulate, a percentage of the rats will develop a taste for their own genders.

As goeth the human population, so increaseth the per-capita gay population. Or something of that sort.

Yeah, it could be thought of as a control mechanism to keep the population in check.

[Vivian Best]

I'm one of those that expouse to the theory that "something" happened in the womb! I have no idea what or how it was triggered! I do know this, I was attracted to women's clothes almost from the time I could walk. I was magnetically drawn to my mother's underclothes and stockings from before I started to school. Then I wondered why I couldn't wear girl's clothing. I wanted desperately to wear them but had to settle with mother's things.

My point is that I was so very young when these feelings came about that I see no way that it was environmentally caused. I do have to conceede that my mother dressed me in dresses until I was about three years old but that wasn't unusual during that period of time.

I guess we all have our ideas of how this came about and we will not know the final answer until years in the future. This I do know that this is the way I am and I'm enjoying it!

[DonnaT]

I believe it is a combination of genes and hormones.

Most people are quite certain they were born that way. The only trouble is, if there was a gay gene or a transexual gene, it'd be weeded out of society in a few generations, since gays and transexuals do not tend to reproduce as much as their counterparts.

It would take thousands of years to to accomplish such a task, probably more closer to millions of years.

There have been several genes discovered that affect sexual orintation in some species of animals. For example: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/sc...rssnyt&emc=rss

There have been several genes discovered which affect one's appearance of sex.

Report of newly found DSS gene 1994
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...5BC0A962958260

Report of DAX1 gene 1998
http://lds-mormon.com/gender1.shtml

Both reports mention that the doubling up of the gene affects ones sex. No idea if they are discussing same gene. Both include Italian scientists.

A report in 2001 of the WNT-4 gene
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...82809EC588ED9F

Then there's the AR gene that responds, or not, to androgen, which affects one's sex.
http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/90/1/106

And the latest http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/25087/

A team of Italian researchers has identified a new sex-determination gene, according to a report in Nature Genetics. Genetic analysis has implicated R-spondin1, a member of a relatively new class of mitogens, as an ovary-promoting factor, the loss of which leads to complete sex reversal - that is, to XX males.
....

As noted above, the AR gene responds to a hormone. There is no telling how many other genes thare are which are affected by our various hormones and proteins.


Also see my posts at http://crossdressers.com/forums/show...797#post530797

[Valerie Nova]

Nice post, Vir, and I'll have to come back to this thread after I've had some sleep.


What about a gene (or genes) which can give a propensity to being gay or TG, but it needs to be triggered by something to become active? These triggers would mainly occur in utero, but some of them may occur after birth, while the brain & body continue to develop and affect each other.

Yeah, there is a genetic component to homosexuality, but it is quite small. Like I was saying before, certain people could have more receptors for sex hormones in certain parts of their brains than others. Of course, the hormones would have to be there to influence them.

Another thing to remember is that for much of human civilization, marriages have been arranged by the parents, not the couples themselves. The fact that you were gay was irrelevant, unless it totally prevented you from having sex.

Uh-huh. See my earlier post.

Nice image, and it well illustrates why there is so much diversity in the TG world, with so many combinations possible. (A point I often make here.). And I agree, it's oversimplifying to look for a TG spectrum. It's more like a kaleidoscopic fractal.

And then of course you have the effect of genetics on your brain and all the interactions your brain has with its own genes and different hormones. It's really quite mind-boggling.

I've often thought of creating some kind of brain map or mind map, coloured just as you describe. I'm also working on other ideas to graphically illustrate one's position in "gender space": a Trans Mandala...

The only thing is, we really don't understand the brain well enough to be able to do that. Sure, we know what certain regions do in a general sense, but our tools for looking at the brain while it's working are really quite primitive.

Also, non-reproductive members of a human society still contribute to it in various other ways that benefit the next generation.

I've often said that myself, usually giving ants and bees as examples.

Yes! Especially the first month or two...

Robin

Wow. This theory seems well corroborated with evidence, among a very small sample anyway. I wonder why I've never heard it mentioned in any mainstream scientific literature? Maybe they don't want worrying expectant mothers to worry even more?

[vbcdgrl]

Interesting hypothesis, Vir Novem (what kind of name is that?). I was born near the end of WWII. I have a diary and some letters that my mom wrote when she was pregnant with me. She was under a lot of stress because she had some physical problems and was really worried about how it was gonna effect me. She was also worried about my dad's drinking. He was too old to be in the armed forces, so he worked at Lockhheed. He went out drinking many times and left my mom home. She also worried about how the war was going and the fate of her nephew who was in the Pacific theater. Unfortunately, her fears were realized as he was killed by a US torpedo while aboard a Japanese ship as a POW.
I can tell by the way she wrote that she was "down" most of the time. Daily life in 1944 was a real struggle because of the war. All the rationing, the bad news, the wondering when it would be over. So, I would say my mom was under a great deal of stress, both physical and mental, during her pregnancy.
I am very interested in the "why" of CDing. Sure would be nice to know what we all have in common.

Vikki

[Valerie Nova]

I agree, however a very imprtant point of Darwins theory is that genes can mutate. Although not likely it is possible that a gay gene emerged after civilization developed.

Maybe, but it would have to only activate under certain conditions, and it could not account for the vast majority of gays that exist.

[Valerie Nova]

One point that does need some more info. We are all born with both X and Y chromosomes! The number of one or the other is what determines what sex we become. But no individual has just one kind of chromosome in their body. So yes genetic girls have both X and Y, but so do genetic males, just in reverse order.

Not true. Even one Y chromosome will result in a genetic male. Multiple X chromosomes and one Y chromosome result in Klinefelter's syndrome, a condition that results in a very feminine male that can't reproduce. Women do not have Y chromosomes at all. Men have one X and one Y.

[Valerie Nova]

Yeah, Donna, I know there are some genes that increase the likelihood of homosexuality, but none of these contribute even 50% to the likelihood that the child will be gay. These genes might be in 25% of straight males and like 35% of gay males. So even though gays might be more likely to have it, most gays don't have it, and most people that have it are not gay. Hormones certainly seem to have a stronger influence.

[Shannon CD]

Maybe, but it would have to only activate under certain conditions, and it could not account for the vast majority of gays that exist.

Ok, here's another snag to throw in. Is it possible that although most people who are gay are geneticall or biologically predispositioned to be gay, that there may be, for lack of a better term, "cultural" gays?

I have heard that in Asia, where male children are more desirable, that there is a dis-proportionately large number of men and thus a dis-proportinately higher percentage of homosexual men. Wouldn't this lend to a cultural explaination? Or simply fall back into the theory that nature intervenes in highly overpopulated species and that this is indeed a natural form of population control?

[Snookums]

is there a scientifc basis that can explain,ignorant shallow arrogant judgemental intolerence.

[Valerie Nova]

Ok, here's another snag to throw in. Is it possible that although most people who are gay are geneticall or biologically predispositioned to be gay, that there may be, for lack of a better term, "cultural" gays?

I have heard that in Asia, where male children are more desirable, that there is a dis-proportionately large number of men and thus a dis-proportinately higher percentage of homosexual men. Wouldn't this lend to a cultural explaination? Or simply fall back into the theory that nature intervenes in highly overpopulated species and that this is indeed a natural form of population control?

Many straight and gay people are actually bisexual. Environment can push a bisexual person one way or the other. And of course, the population control explaination is part of it too.