Citation

Richters J. Reprod. Health Matters 1998; 6(12): 144-149.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1998, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/S0968-8080(98)90018-0

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This paper is a reply to the previous paper by Udo Schüklenk et al, who argue that genetic research into sexual orientation is unethical and should be discouraged. This paper disagrees and shows that in considering the varying definitions and meanings of sexual orientation -which are not universal -- desire, attraction, sexual experience and self-identification maybe inconsistent or overlap and are not always separable. If a genetic testis to have any success at predicting homosexual tendencies, such tendencies must be inborn rather than acquired, and this has not been shown. This paper argues that it would not be possible to limit research into the etiology of homosexuality without putting a serious brake on research into other aspects of sexuality, not least heterosexuality, libido and sexual practices. It therefore concludes that genetic research into sexual orientation should be treated just like any other genetic research and should meet the same scientific and ethical criteria. It calls for the fight against homophobia to take place where it can be most effective, in the legal and human rights arena.