A major and long promoted argument on behalf of gay rights has been that sexual orientation has a genetic or other direct physiological basis. This claim is proven by a promissory note of future conclusive scientific evidence and the repeated number of times it is proclaimed.
Motivated researchers thrash through the DNA code, in hopes of finding some statistically significant anomaly, no matter how minor, which corresponds with self-identified homosexuals. (“Then, researchers went through each man’s samples looking for unique genetic markers shared by all men in the study.”) The laws of probability dictate that, in any given study of limited sample size, one will almost invariably find such anomalies. Such findings will not likely be consistently duplicated in further studies. But by the time that claim is totally falsified, some new study with dubious findings will have taken its place, in order to uphold the general propagandistic claim.
These genetic studies are normally conducted on identical and fraternal twins, under the premise that environmental influences can be largely isolated out, especially if the twins are separated at birth. However, the morphological factor never seems to be considered or addressed. Twins, especially identical twins, look quite similar. Social and sexual response to each of those twins, deemed gorgeous or contrariwise homely, will have similarity within any social context.
Dependent upon whatever masculine physiological ideals exist within the gay male community in any given era; identical twins, in which both twins will inherently meet such criteria, will probabilistically attract similar flatteries and solicitations by gay males. Furthermore, the beautiful are prone to physical self-admiration, a psychosocial reality attested by those Hellenistic pederast cultures, which gave us the myth of Narcissus. If one twin be gorgeous and likely self-admiring, so will his double. Such will more likely like like, and like to be liked by like.
But although the underlying similarity of physiology is generated by genes, these are not direct genetic causes of sexual orientation but indirect environmental factors. Twin studies are not as immune from environmental factors as has been hitherto purported.
♦ ♦ ♦
But let us assume, for the moment, authenticity of belief within the LGBT… community. While the case for gay and lesbian rights is ostensibly rooted in “born this way” determinism; so soon after achieving that last victory, the clamor for legal recognition of transgenderism is premised upon subjectivist, even Existentialist sensibilities, in the face of genetics, morphology, significant differences in brain structure, let alone genuine conscious experience.
The LG component of this sexuality paradigm is premised upon “genetics,” while the T component is premised upon “not genetics”; indeed contrary to “genetics.” This violates a rudimentary principle of rational logic, the Law of Non-Contradiction. And in such manifestations as the bathroom wars, they and their allies insist that all others dwell within this their contradiction, this their irrationality.
It is supremely difficult not to perceive this blatant inconsistency in their public arguments as nothing but a will-to-power sophistic shell game, by those who lack belief in and/or care about the Truth and the Good; in order to give intellectual cover for their vices; in order to dupe the simple, naïve, and gullible, whose ability to think critically lay dormant or has atrophied.
© Copyright John Hutchinson
 Carl Engelking, “Study of Gay Brothers Suggests Genetic Basis of Male Homosexuality,” Discover, November 18, 2014, http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2014/11/18/study-of-gay-brothers-suggests-genetic-basis-of-male-homosexuality/#.Vz1J3-R0dII.