"Gene in men decides if they are faithful" is the headline in the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter. Researchers at Karolinska Institutet have discovered that males with the gene variant "allel 334" are more likely to be infidel/have problems in their marriages. And, if the men had the variance on both chromosomes they were twice as likely to have a "crisis" in their marriages.
The comparison is between men and two species of voles, where the voles made them look for the vasopressin. Good that one can blame ones genes for more and more things! If one wants to feel like a vole, that is!
It is fascinating that a socially non-acceptable behavior is construed as a problem that one needs to find biological correlates to it. No one seems to think about what the construct is beneath this research: the nuclear family, and where other family constructs must be wrong. And what is the hip thing now? Yes, genetics.
Sigh, this is the second time this summer there have been some odd research on human sexuality from KI published in PNAS. The last time it was a brain structures that were similar between gay men and heterosexual women [PNAS][PubMed].
I am not against studies being done about biological correlates to sexual orientation or behavior, but I think it is time that both researchers and journalists start to think about what they are stating as facts. What are the certainties and uncertainties? The article by the Swedish psychologists Kurt Ernulf and Sune Innala still has its importance: "Rats are hardly sexually oriented! Generalizations on animal behavior is too far-fetched"
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=f0a479c1-be48-4e74-bdc1-c6ab26de1019)
The comparison is between men and two species of voles, where the voles made them look for the vasopressin. Good that one can blame ones genes for more and more things! If one wants to feel like a vole, that is!
It is fascinating that a socially non-acceptable behavior is construed as a problem that one needs to find biological correlates to it. No one seems to think about what the construct is beneath this research: the nuclear family, and where other family constructs must be wrong. And what is the hip thing now? Yes, genetics.
Sigh, this is the second time this summer there have been some odd research on human sexuality from KI published in PNAS. The last time it was a brain structures that were similar between gay men and heterosexual women [PNAS][PubMed].
I am not against studies being done about biological correlates to sexual orientation or behavior, but I think it is time that both researchers and journalists start to think about what they are stating as facts. What are the certainties and uncertainties? The article by the Swedish psychologists Kurt Ernulf and Sune Innala still has its importance: "Rats are hardly sexually oriented! Generalizations on animal behavior is too far-fetched"
