Customer Reviews

My Genes Made Me Do It!

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

This book should be read by everybody. The authors argue that homosexuality is a very complex issue, not to be reduced to the simplistic explanation that "my genes made me do it." They point out (as have other authors) that while there could be a small genetic contribution, it is indeed small, and it would not predetermine a person's behavior. In fact, it's questionable if any behavior is predetermined at birth. Behavior, at least, is always ultimately a matter of choice. The Whiteheads argue that sexuality is shaped by all kinds of factors, not just biological. Particularly interesting was their survey of different cultures. Homosexuality has not been, in fact, cross-cultural. There are some cultures in which it's been virtually non-existent, and the current "western" model seems to be unprecedented. Even in those earlier cultures in which homosexual behavior did exist, it seemed to exist in very specific circumstances -- certain ages, certain classes, or in a ritualized fashion -- and not across the board. Even the modes of homosexual behavior have varied. In other words, sexuality can be very fluid, and behavior is often shaped by culture.I think that much of what the Whiteheads say will eventually be accepted (and has certainly been put forth by other authors previously), but this issue at this point is too driven by ideology and politics. This is really the kind of book that should have been published by a major publisher so it could get a wide audience.My one minor concern is that the book does reference Christianity a little bit, and that may take away some of its credibility for some readers who are not Christian. It shouldn't. Some of the best books about homosexuality -- books which are, for the most part, fair and balanced -- have been written from a religious perspective.

The Whiteheads lay the burden of proof upon those who seem to have convinced the world that homosexuality is biologically driven. Clearly, such proof does not exist, according to this study. Science has yet to prove that homosexuality is anything more than one of the hundreds of choices each of us makes throughout life. Read this book if you are interested in the truth.

was reading the review Andrew Woods wrote.

From the offset, Mr Woods "poisons the well" by attacking the author for his supposed "shallow religious views" and motivations, that is irelevant to whether the ideas presented in the book are valid or not. Next Mr woods uses the genetic fallacy by implying the studies that were used in the book are wrong because they are "old" (their beeing old doesn't neccassarily mean they are flawed). He then proceeds to make 2 contradictory statements. Mr Woods critisizes the book by saying ""proving" that Orthodox Jews are never gay, on the basis of their say-so" but then later wants us to accept his view on homosexuality because of the "masses of first-person testimony". I guess anecdotal evidence is fine with him, as long as it supports his position hehe.

Finally, Mr Woods said "The fact remains that if heterosexuality could be achieved by will-power alone, there would be no homosexuals at all in a society which persecutes them so intensely." The fact?? Using your fallacious reasoning, sain murderers would have no choice on whether or not they killed someone because of the way their behavior is persecuted by society and the stiff consequences they face. Your supposed "fact" is contradicted daily by people who choose to ignore the persectution (and even possible execution in some cases) and decided to murder anyways, despite the consequences.

With that beeing said, I reccomend this book for people who have an open mind, want a different perspective (different then what the MSM often perpetuates) on this issue and are tolerant (ya, I said tolerant) of the views of others. I find it ironic that the same people who constantly preach "tolerance" are often so intolerant of people who disagree with them when it comes to homosexuality. I felt the book was well written and I think it does a fairly decent job of refuting the myth that human beeings are "hard wired" to the degree they have no control over their behavior at all.

One of the best features of this book is the online version at [...]. It is constantly updated, with the latest update being the month just before this review. I do not doubt that it will be updated again soon, as there are already 12 revisions posted! This product moves with the progress of the research.

Probably the best way to understand the opposition to this book is to read the one-star reviews. A cautious reader will note that only one single person (as of this date) actually put any sort of reference to back up their claim. You will also note that they only tried to refute one small piece of the puzzle. The dozens of other foundational evidences remain solid. The remainder of the one-star reviews make claims based upon emotionalism, which is indicative of the quality of the argument.

In short, the authors keep revising and updating things as science advances our understanding of human behavior. The opponenets lob insults. Which side do you think is right?

The title of this book is not a promising one. If you believe that homosexuality is genetic in origin, that means that you believe that genes determine people's sexual orientation, not that genes determine their sexual behaviour. People's sexual behaviour tends to be in line with their orientation, of course, but it is not inevitably so. People can choose not to express their sexuality at all, or they can choose to act contrary to their orientation for all sorts of reasons. The title "My Genes Made Me Do It" is therefore inappropriate to start with.

Whether or not homosexuality is determined by genetic and other biological factors is something that I can't claim to know. My guess is that it is - at least mainly - but that's only my guess, and I'm not a geneticist, nor do I have any expertise in biology, so my guess can carry no scientific weight.

I haven't read the whole of this book, but I have read Chapter 10, entitled "Twin Studies: the strongest evidence". In this chapter the Whiteheads tell us not only that it has not been demonstrated that homosexuality is genetic - which is true - but that it HAS been demonstrated that homosexuality is NOT genetic. They argue as follows:

1. Identical twins have identical genes.
2. That being so, if homosexuality were genetically determined, both twins in a pair would always be either heterosexual or homosexual. You wouldn't find pairs of twins where one is heterosexual and the other homosexual.
3. You do in fact find plenty of pairs of twins where one twin is heterosexual and the other homosexual.
4. Therefore homosexuality cannot be genetically determined.

The above argument is in logically correct form, but the conclusion is valid only if the premise from which the argument starts - that identical twins have identical genes - is correct. It isn't.

It was universally assumed until recently that identical twins always have identical genes, but a study recently conducted by scientists in America, Sweden and the Netherlands shows that they don't.

See [...]

So, while it still hasn't been proved that homosexuality is genetically caused, the Whiteheads' "strongest evidence" that it can't be crumbles in the light of modern knowledge.

This is yet another of those books which seek to alter reality in order to make it more palatable to people with deep emotional investments in shallow religions. Because it doesn't seem reasonable that God would condemn people to Hell on the basis of congenital defects, the basic idea is to claim that homosexuality is something like alcoholism: a group of impulses which is imposed on the innocent human being from outside, which could be avoided with the appropriate safeguards.

The authors rightly criticise Kinsey and the early researchers, but reach their own conclusions by using very old 1950s studies ("proving" that Orthodox Jews are never gay, on the basis of their say-so) which are even more ridiculous. They ignore the masses of first-person testimony which would demonstrate the absurdity of the very idea of homosexuality as a vice, and make claims for the effectiveness of therapy which simply cannot be backed up. The fact remains that if heterosexuality could be achieved by will-power alone, there would be no homosexuals at all in a society which persecutes them so intensely.

Whether homosexuality is inborn or acquired matters little in the real world. Changing a given person's sexuality is NOT something which can reliably be done using current techniques and knowledge. To string people along by saying that it is possible is merely cruel, and to undermine the institution of marriage by encouraging gay people to enter feeble loveless "straight" relationships in order to save a bunch of selfish fools from feeling uncomfortable for ten seconds is evil.

Other notes:
The book, a copy of which was apparently sent to many university libraries by the author himself (in the hope of insinuating his claptrap into the groves of academe as quickly as possible) has the appearance of a vanity-publishing effort. It is amateurishly laid out, glued and bound and printed on cheap paper. The endpapers contain advertisements for other low-quality polemical books of a right-wing activist type, and the back cover carries a picture of the two heterosexual experts on homos who have been researching the subject for all of "eight years".

book such as these continue the myth that homosexuality is wrong - it is sad to think some people still believe this nonsense.

Would have been nice if the Whiteheads were actually knowledgable about current research. This is a religious tract masquerading as science.

Should have zero stars but the system won't let me rate it that.