Homosexuality
“The term role usually implies prescriptions for behavior which have prior existence in the social structure, such prescriptions for behavior homosexual behavior simply do not exist” (Whitam, 1977, p.1). Sociology defines a role as the rights, obligations, and expected behavior patterns associated with a particular social status. Why would people choose a lifestyle that the majority of the world is in disagreement with? This is why multiple disciplines and their involvement are important to understanding the bigger question. Does socializing oneself with other individuals who are homosexual make oneself to become homosexual? Or is it that individuals are born with homosexual traits? When approaching this issue one must look at it with the sociology discipline, which is defined as the study of social structures, examining social behaviors from a group, studying the patterns of behavior shared by members of a group. The biology discipline would also have to be taken into consideration because it pertains to the organisms at all levels, from one-celled organisms to the whole system.
Sociology Discipline
Homosexuality may have seemed to be spread through socializing in the past although now it seems that it may not be the case. Homosexuality is not considered to be a chosen role because of two important reasons: “1) When applied to the homosexual, the concept role violates the prevailing definitions and conventional usage of this concept in sociology, and 2) the application of the term role to an interpretation of the homosexual is inconsistent with the basic and significant characteristics of the nature of homosexuality and the homosexual subculture” (Whitam, 1977, p. 2). Homosexuality is not a role but rather a “sexual orientation.” Many people believed that in the beginning homosexuality was caused by a homosexual subculture due to specific role behavior. However that is not true, homosexual subculture does not create homosexuality but is rather a response to it. Due to sub cultural theory, the environment will produce an outcome of a person. For example, the drug subculture creates old users to continue and new ones to exist, which could cause people to steal to get money for drugs. Thus the same logic could apply the same theory to the homosexual subculture. A questionnaire was administered to a group of 206 males who classified themselves as homosexual and another group of 78 males who classified themselves as heterosexual. The result of it was that all of the heterosexual and 91% of the homosexual respondent by the age of 17 have experienced an attraction to females or males for the homosexuals (Whitman, 1977, p. 3). Other studies such as Dank (1971) found that by the age of 19, 93% of his homosexual respondents had homosexual experiences and attractions to males. Reports had been made from many homosexuals that they did not come into contact with the homosexual subculture until after high school. Showing that most male homosexuals were more attracted to men despite the absence of a homosexual role, the homosexual subculture is merely helping those define their homosexual orientations. While other male homosexuals would chose not to participate in the subculture for one reason or another, whether it's not knowing that there is a culture or knowing its existence but not participating. For example a young French-Canadian male met a married heterosexual couple in their early sixties, and then the married male later confessed his love for the younger male. There was not any sexual relationship but they became friends and talked about homosexuality. An interview of a fourteen years old child, who live in small Guatemalan town who is unaware of homosexual subculture and the term homosexual, claims that he is strongly attracted to males, having fantasies of being with other male and had no desire in women (Whitman, 1977, p. 7). Showing evidence that homosexuality is not a role, it's not something you choose but it's within oneself. More than likely most children and young adults are not introduced into the homosexual subculture until later on in their life time. Homosexuality is not viewed as good role model for children so it would be terribly inconvenient for one to choose such a style of life. “The world is constructed by heterosexuals for heterosexuals” (Whitman, 1977, p. 9).
Biology Discipline
Based off of Whitam's discipline of sociology view, another question that could arise is that can homosexuality genetically be passed on from our parents? Multiple studies on genetic components in male sexual orientation have been processed providing evidence of a genetic connection within the homosexual group. Evidence from the studies of Hamer et al, shows a genetic component in male sexuality involving the X-linked gene based on family recurrence pattern and analysis of the X chromosome in siblings with homosexual orientations. Hamer and his colleagues recruited 76 homosexual men and studied their family history and determined which other family members were homosexual. Hamer's studies showed that 13.5 percent of the homosexual's male siblings to be homosexual (Pool, 1993, p. 291). Looking further at the family history, Hamer and colleagues found that there was a greater number of relatives on the maternal side of the subjects than the paternal side were homosexual. This implies that homosexuality is passed through female members of the family, suggesting that the homosexuality gene is involved in the X chromosome. Hamer took DNA samples of the 40 pairs of homosexual brothers that he recruited and performed a genetic linkage analysis using a gene marker that detects a genetic trait or a segment of DNA. Each pair of brothers will have about half the DNA on their X chromosomes in common (Pool, 1993, p. 291). If the brothers were both homosexual the gene must be in the same sections of the chromosome, which the gene marker can identify. “Of the 40 pairs, 33 pairs shared a set of five markers located near the end of the long arm of the X chromosome in a region designated Xq28” (Pool, 1993, p.291). Due to the other 7 pair of brothers not having this mark, it cannot be true for all male homosexuals to carry the marks on the X chromosome. It may be that homosexuality is the cause of genetics and the environment. Genetic research on homosexuality is still fairly new so further research needs to be done to get a greater understanding.
Integration
To have a comprehensive understanding of the whole picture, multiple disciplines need to be blended together as a whole. Interpreting sociology and biology can further the understanding of homosexuality, whether it is a learned behavior or a gene passed on. Just looking at it through the sociology view, one would only understand that homosexuality is not a learned behavior and that one cannot be homosexual due to being in the subculture. It is not a lifestyle that one chooses to be but that homosexuality is something that possibly passed on through genes. To understand how genetics and DNA work, biology discipline must be looked at. Studies have shown that there is a gene marker indication in the genes of homosexuality. By never integrating the two disciplines together, one might have never continued searching for more answers. And homosexuality may not have known that a gene is passed on through female family members that could possibly be a factor in determining homosexuality. Because Hamer uses other disciplines he was able to conclude that there may be a homosexuality gene but because some of his subject pairs didn't have the mark, the environmental factors might have a play in it.
References
Pool, R. (1993, July). Evidence for Homosexuality Gene. New Series, Vol. 261, No. 5119, 291-292. Retrieved November 1, 2007 from JSTOR Database.
Whitam, F. (1977, February). The Homosexual Role: A Reconsideration. The Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1-11. Retrieved October 29, 2007 from JSTOR Database.
