Tuesday, February 24, 2009

More birth seasonality data: As a follow-up to my post on GSS data and the connection of month of birth to a homosexual orientation, I looked at the The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. They have a larger sample of homosexuals--N = 226 (i.e, ever attracted to a male).


Percent born between August and November (bad months)

Straight boys 34.0
Gay and bisexual boys 34.9


Percent born between January and April (good months)

Straight boys 32.0
Gay and bisexual boys 32.7


No differences here, and a lack of empirical support for "gay germ theory." Keep in mind Agnostic's argument in the last set of comments that birth seasonality is simply not a good test of the theory.

5 comments:

Jim Bowery said...

Make that "congenital gay germ theory".

Anonymous said...

Going back to the last thread, why do people have such a big problem with the possibility of a "cure" for homosexuality? It is aberrant and unnatural behaviour, and should be cured if we can find a way. Or, if not society wide, at least the option should be made available to parents. To not want it to be cured is like saying we shouldn't cure other disorders because they're trendy and contribute to diversity.

Mike said...

"Going back to the last thread, why do people have such a big problem with the possibility of a "cure" for homosexuality?"

Putting that another way, why should people who have no problem with "gender reassignment surgery" have a problem with a cure for homosexuality?

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Mike said...

There is a big overlap between people who think a fitness-reducing sex change operation is a-okay and people who think fitness-increasing cure for homosexuality is not okay.

Tolerance evidently has its limits when it comes to enabling the hetro-normal.