What do you think?
Rate this book
Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation
What causes a child to grow up gay or straight? In this book, neuroscientist Simon LeVay summarizes a wealth of scientific evidence that points to one inescapable Sexual orientation results primarily from an interaction between genes, sex hormones, and the cells of the developing body and brain.
LeVay helped create this field in 1991 with a much-publicized study in Science , where he reported on a difference in the brain structure between gay and straight men. Since then, an entire scientific discipline has sprung up around the quest for a biological explanation of sexual orientation. In this book, LeVay provides a clear explanation of where the science stands today, taking the reader on a whirlwind tour of laboratories that specialize in genetics, endocrinology, neuroscience, cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology, and family demographics. He describes, for instance, how researchers have manipulated the sex hormone levels of animals during development, causing them to mate preferentially with animals of their own gender. LeVay also reports on the prevalence of homosexual behavior among wild animals, ranging from Graylag geese to the Bonobo chimpanzee.
Although many details remain unresolved, the general conclusion is quite A person's sexual orientation arises in large part from biological processes that are already underway before birth. LeVay also makes it clear that these lines of research have a lot of potential because--far from seeking to discover "what went wrong" in the lives of gay people, attempting to develop "cures" for homosexuality, or returning to traditional explanations that center on parent-child relationships, various forms of "training," or early sexual experiences--our modern scientists are increasingly seeing sexual variety as something to be valued, celebrated, and welcomed into society.
LeVay helped create this field in 1991 with a much-publicized study in Science , where he reported on a difference in the brain structure between gay and straight men. Since then, an entire scientific discipline has sprung up around the quest for a biological explanation of sexual orientation. In this book, LeVay provides a clear explanation of where the science stands today, taking the reader on a whirlwind tour of laboratories that specialize in genetics, endocrinology, neuroscience, cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology, and family demographics. He describes, for instance, how researchers have manipulated the sex hormone levels of animals during development, causing them to mate preferentially with animals of their own gender. LeVay also reports on the prevalence of homosexual behavior among wild animals, ranging from Graylag geese to the Bonobo chimpanzee.
Although many details remain unresolved, the general conclusion is quite A person's sexual orientation arises in large part from biological processes that are already underway before birth. LeVay also makes it clear that these lines of research have a lot of potential because--far from seeking to discover "what went wrong" in the lives of gay people, attempting to develop "cures" for homosexuality, or returning to traditional explanations that center on parent-child relationships, various forms of "training," or early sexual experiences--our modern scientists are increasingly seeing sexual variety as something to be valued, celebrated, and welcomed into society.
432 pages, Hardcover
First published August 31, 2010
About the author
Simon LeVay
20 books30 followersDr. Simon LeVay is a writer and lecturer with a background in neuroscience. He is best known for his research on the brain and sexuality, but has also spent many years studying the visual system. He has written or co-authored several books on sexuality, and coauthored books on such diverse topics as earthquakes and volcanoes, extraterrestrial life, and Parkinson's disease. He has even written a novel. Dr. Simon LeVay lives in West Hollywood, California.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 59 reviews
July 22, 2012
This is really a 3.5 star review. LeVay's honest approach and commitment to thoroughly explaining the research makes this the most enlightening read on the "biology did most of it" side of the current debate around gender and sexual identity. I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and would unhesitatingly recommend it as part of a package of reading about behavioural sciences. Unfortunately, I don't think LeVay's evidence bears out his conclusions, and I think he overlooks some key areas of study. This is the last of a half-dozen books I've read on this subject now, and honestly, I think I'm out of the behavioural sciences business. All it's done is convince how little we know and how much we assume.
LeVay's argument is simple enough: men and women have a set of physical and behavioural differences, and gay men and women are the result of some process disrupting this, so that some of those behavioural differences, primarily attraction to the opposite sex, are disrupted. Lesbians are women who got a bit of masculinity in their dose, and gay men were somewhat feminised.
There are numerous problems in attempting to use studies of behaviour to determine the cuase of same-sex attraction. Perhaps most insurmountably - how do you define gay? LeVay deals with in an offhand way - correctly pointing out that behaviour is not an accurate guide to someone's impulses - millions of closeted gay people attest to that - he suggests relying on description of attraction from the person. Most studies simply rely on subjects self-identifying as gay or straight. A nice illustration in this dilemma comes when LeVay discusses the only four identical-twins-separated-at-birth-with-at-least-one-gay-member that researchers have identified. (Such twins are the holy grail of determining hereditism as a characteristic). Of one pair, both are gay. Of two, one is gay and one is straight. The final pair, both men, have both have sexual encounters with men and with women. But one identifies firmly as straight and the other as gay. The researchers, and LeVay's, frustration is palpable through the paper. It would not be unreasonable, LeVay asserts, to describe them both as some kind of bisexual.
And indeed, it would not be unreasonable. But the kicker here is the main reason I can't take this research seriously - it's because researchers choose to interpret the data this way because it fits what they think is true. There are so many uncertainties in this world for us to fill with preconceived ideas. LeVay expresses dubiousness with a finding, based on self-reporting, that gay men have larger penises than straight men. His doubt is understandable - but it's based on his personal experience of gay men's value on penis size. A similar study, showing lesbians have lower sex drives, he accepts because it reinforces his idea of the truth. Our assumptions, our life experience, are all things we bring to the research table, especially with behavioural sciences, and they influence the conclusions we are going to draw from inconclusive data.
And boy is the data inconclusive. Degrees of hereditism from five separate twin studies came up with everything from 0% to 80%, and every figure in between. Studies undertaken by different research groups into the same topic almost never come up with correlating figures. In no single area is the evidence compellingly consistent, so LeVay relies on the fact that a huge number of diffuse studies tend to come up with something - but whether that is the something we expect to see, is left open to doubt. Some, such as occupation choice, are so palpably influenced by social factors, as to be able to be dismissed easily.
One of the key flaws in his approach is that he accepts as a given the assertion of Simon Baron-Cohen that such behavioural differences are provable in men and women from birth - an assertion which is difficult to substantiate. He spends a single chapter essentially summarising Baron-Cohen's book, weeding out the most absurd and outdated studies, but still relying pretty heavily on the baby-looking-at-mobile survey which has been widely criticised, as well as the mental-rotation studies in their simplified form. This chapter is much less patronising and easy to read than Baron-Cohen's book and I'd recommend it as a substitute, actually. He does not refer to Baron-Cohen's critics at all.
Another is his starting point of homosexuality as a manifestation of cross-gender biology (probably hormone exposure at the fetal stage). Alternative explanations are barely explored. Given this, it is also a big gap that he ignores transgender individuals almost entirely. He mentions results of "transexuals" in a couple of studies, but posits not theories into how transgender persons might come to be.
There is no avoiding the political import of arguments now around biology and sexuality. Lady Gaga's Gay Rights anthem, title of "Born this way" is significantly of a general approach the gay liberation movement has taken, of stamping their rights alongside the assertion that sexuality is biologically determined. There is real need as well for an approach which shuts down the tortorous process of trying to force gay and lesbian people to become straight. I'm not sure how much of this need rely, however, on an understanding of the mechanics of how people come to be straight or gay. We still have no idea why some people are left-handed, but we have accepted that they are, and that beating them for being different is a bad thing to do.
I didn't come out of this book agreeing with the author. I did come out feeling like I had a handle on the area of scholarship, and understanding the author's point of view. For that reason, I'd give this book 3.5 stars if I could, and I'm comfortable rounding up to 4.
Sometimes, it just feels to me that in our push to celebrate "diversity" we really just want to expand the number of boxes we can fit people in to. You still have to choose one, we'll just add a new rainbow range of colours. I'm not sure if we'll ever get to the stage where we just accept people for who they are, without worrying who else fits into that category with them.
LeVay's argument is simple enough: men and women have a set of physical and behavioural differences, and gay men and women are the result of some process disrupting this, so that some of those behavioural differences, primarily attraction to the opposite sex, are disrupted. Lesbians are women who got a bit of masculinity in their dose, and gay men were somewhat feminised.
There are numerous problems in attempting to use studies of behaviour to determine the cuase of same-sex attraction. Perhaps most insurmountably - how do you define gay? LeVay deals with in an offhand way - correctly pointing out that behaviour is not an accurate guide to someone's impulses - millions of closeted gay people attest to that - he suggests relying on description of attraction from the person. Most studies simply rely on subjects self-identifying as gay or straight. A nice illustration in this dilemma comes when LeVay discusses the only four identical-twins-separated-at-birth-with-at-least-one-gay-member that researchers have identified. (Such twins are the holy grail of determining hereditism as a characteristic). Of one pair, both are gay. Of two, one is gay and one is straight. The final pair, both men, have both have sexual encounters with men and with women. But one identifies firmly as straight and the other as gay. The researchers, and LeVay's, frustration is palpable through the paper. It would not be unreasonable, LeVay asserts, to describe them both as some kind of bisexual.
And indeed, it would not be unreasonable. But the kicker here is the main reason I can't take this research seriously - it's because researchers choose to interpret the data this way because it fits what they think is true. There are so many uncertainties in this world for us to fill with preconceived ideas. LeVay expresses dubiousness with a finding, based on self-reporting, that gay men have larger penises than straight men. His doubt is understandable - but it's based on his personal experience of gay men's value on penis size. A similar study, showing lesbians have lower sex drives, he accepts because it reinforces his idea of the truth. Our assumptions, our life experience, are all things we bring to the research table, especially with behavioural sciences, and they influence the conclusions we are going to draw from inconclusive data.
And boy is the data inconclusive. Degrees of hereditism from five separate twin studies came up with everything from 0% to 80%, and every figure in between. Studies undertaken by different research groups into the same topic almost never come up with correlating figures. In no single area is the evidence compellingly consistent, so LeVay relies on the fact that a huge number of diffuse studies tend to come up with something - but whether that is the something we expect to see, is left open to doubt. Some, such as occupation choice, are so palpably influenced by social factors, as to be able to be dismissed easily.
One of the key flaws in his approach is that he accepts as a given the assertion of Simon Baron-Cohen that such behavioural differences are provable in men and women from birth - an assertion which is difficult to substantiate. He spends a single chapter essentially summarising Baron-Cohen's book, weeding out the most absurd and outdated studies, but still relying pretty heavily on the baby-looking-at-mobile survey which has been widely criticised, as well as the mental-rotation studies in their simplified form. This chapter is much less patronising and easy to read than Baron-Cohen's book and I'd recommend it as a substitute, actually. He does not refer to Baron-Cohen's critics at all.
Another is his starting point of homosexuality as a manifestation of cross-gender biology (probably hormone exposure at the fetal stage). Alternative explanations are barely explored. Given this, it is also a big gap that he ignores transgender individuals almost entirely. He mentions results of "transexuals" in a couple of studies, but posits not theories into how transgender persons might come to be.
There is no avoiding the political import of arguments now around biology and sexuality. Lady Gaga's Gay Rights anthem, title of "Born this way" is significantly of a general approach the gay liberation movement has taken, of stamping their rights alongside the assertion that sexuality is biologically determined. There is real need as well for an approach which shuts down the tortorous process of trying to force gay and lesbian people to become straight. I'm not sure how much of this need rely, however, on an understanding of the mechanics of how people come to be straight or gay. We still have no idea why some people are left-handed, but we have accepted that they are, and that beating them for being different is a bad thing to do.
I didn't come out of this book agreeing with the author. I did come out feeling like I had a handle on the area of scholarship, and understanding the author's point of view. For that reason, I'd give this book 3.5 stars if I could, and I'm comfortable rounding up to 4.
Sometimes, it just feels to me that in our push to celebrate "diversity" we really just want to expand the number of boxes we can fit people in to. You still have to choose one, we'll just add a new rainbow range of colours. I'm not sure if we'll ever get to the stage where we just accept people for who they are, without worrying who else fits into that category with them.
July 30, 2012
This book puts forward a lot of solid scientific studies and manages to do so with fairly little bias, pointing out the potential failings of many its cited studies. it has done its research well (a good 1/4th of the book is bibliography. I can respect that XD).
However, while I must give the book credit for staying on topic, it left me with the feeling it has one glaring omission that was quite neatly skirted multiple times. Much of the research put forward in this book has to do with how hormone levels impact gender presentation and thus homosexuality. What it seems to me has been missed is the consideration that, while the two are undoubtedly related (according to the information presented in the book), it is also related to gender presentation or identification itself; sexual orientation is not the be all and end all here.
I don't expect this book to have gone into details on the topic of non-binary gender since it's topic WAS homosexuality, but it just seems to me that if the woman you are interviewing about liking women identifies as very masculine, perhaps you should clarify that? Maybe?
In many of the laboratory animal studies, the mice/rats were altered through hormones to behave like the opposite sex including (but NOT limited to) sexual orientation. To me this seems like it would have just as much bearing in a gender ID study than a sexual orientation one. Like, maybe instead of making lesbian mice they made "straight" FtM mice? Just food for thought.
The author did not conduct all the studies in the book so the oversight is not his fault, but he could have mentioned the possible discrepancy in terms a little clearer than he did.
Overall the book is a good summation of all the studies done on homosexuality over the years, but anyone with a knowledge of trans* issues may read it with a perpetual head tilt and/or the nagging feeling something potentially relevant is being overlooked.
However, while I must give the book credit for staying on topic, it left me with the feeling it has one glaring omission that was quite neatly skirted multiple times. Much of the research put forward in this book has to do with how hormone levels impact gender presentation and thus homosexuality. What it seems to me has been missed is the consideration that, while the two are undoubtedly related (according to the information presented in the book), it is also related to gender presentation or identification itself; sexual orientation is not the be all and end all here.
I don't expect this book to have gone into details on the topic of non-binary gender since it's topic WAS homosexuality, but it just seems to me that if the woman you are interviewing about liking women identifies as very masculine, perhaps you should clarify that? Maybe?
In many of the laboratory animal studies, the mice/rats were altered through hormones to behave like the opposite sex including (but NOT limited to) sexual orientation. To me this seems like it would have just as much bearing in a gender ID study than a sexual orientation one. Like, maybe instead of making lesbian mice they made "straight" FtM mice? Just food for thought.
The author did not conduct all the studies in the book so the oversight is not his fault, but he could have mentioned the possible discrepancy in terms a little clearer than he did.
Overall the book is a good summation of all the studies done on homosexuality over the years, but anyone with a knowledge of trans* issues may read it with a perpetual head tilt and/or the nagging feeling something potentially relevant is being overlooked.
January 8, 2018
An interesting read, this book is written by a neuroscientist. LeVay refers to a lot of researches done in homosexuality and tries to do it on a unbiased way. I find the book informative but at some point similar data were repeated and with different results so it was a little bit confusing.
Overall a great summary for scientific research done up to the book’s publication point.
Overall a great summary for scientific research done up to the book’s publication point.
March 2, 2017
I conceptualize Human behavior as emerging from a confluence of biological, psychological and social factors.
As for the (tiered AF) nature v nurture debate.
I assume that nature (innate traits) writes the rough draft, and nurture (social and environmental factors) finishes the final edit.
Nature and nurture (a false dichotomy if ever there was one) feed back and forward upon one another and out pops everything Human.
When people debate between biological determinism and blank slate, contra-causal freedom I get crabby. It seems hopelessly last century.
Particularly when the subject becomes a political football.
The obvious examples that come to mind include the hideously inhuman eugenics movement of the early 20th century on the right, or the regressive and intellectually stultifying criticisms by factions on the 1960's era academic left of E. O. Wilsons writing on social biology i.e. evolutionary psychology in today's parlance.
Dude.
Trading out the lame AF nature v nurture (NvN) debate, for the LOVELY both nature and nurture (both/and) synthesis is one of my favorite things about this century.
That being said. Nothing resurrects the Spector of NvN like a reasonable, intelligent, systematic, naturalistic, adult conversation regarding the biological substrates of human sexuality.
Particularly sexual orientation.
On the left, you have people arguing that homosexuality is natural, but not biologically determined, because.....well I'm actually not sure why.
And on the right you have people arguing that homosexuality is against nature, and a lifestyle choice.
Umm no.
Not.
In Gay, Straight and the Reason Why, Simon LeVay offers a comprehensive, open minded overview of the current research on the biological, psychological and social determinants of human sexuality, gender identity and sexual orientation.
I love bio-psychology (an outdated term for what people are mostly calling neuroscience now-a-days).
Far from oppressive, I find biologically grounded explanations for human behavior to be normalizing and empowering.
And I LOVE the way LeVay putts Human sexuality on the slab for dissection. It's fun and it makes a lot of sense.
According to that one Darwin guy, animals (including us) evolved traits for survival and reproduction.
So I think it's at least a reasonable hypothesis that sexual orientation and gender expression are subject to those same biologically based evolutionary processes.
I'm not saying we're just bags of chemicals.
Wait....no actually, I am.
Anyway. I for the life of me can't even come close to fathoming why everyone isn't in 100% agreement that this is the fucking coolest subject in the world!!!!
Get this book. If you're feeling adventurous, and if you're into this sort of thing it's a very interesting and entertaining read.
As for the (tiered AF) nature v nurture debate.
I assume that nature (innate traits) writes the rough draft, and nurture (social and environmental factors) finishes the final edit.
Nature and nurture (a false dichotomy if ever there was one) feed back and forward upon one another and out pops everything Human.
When people debate between biological determinism and blank slate, contra-causal freedom I get crabby. It seems hopelessly last century.
Particularly when the subject becomes a political football.
The obvious examples that come to mind include the hideously inhuman eugenics movement of the early 20th century on the right, or the regressive and intellectually stultifying criticisms by factions on the 1960's era academic left of E. O. Wilsons writing on social biology i.e. evolutionary psychology in today's parlance.
Dude.
Trading out the lame AF nature v nurture (NvN) debate, for the LOVELY both nature and nurture (both/and) synthesis is one of my favorite things about this century.
That being said. Nothing resurrects the Spector of NvN like a reasonable, intelligent, systematic, naturalistic, adult conversation regarding the biological substrates of human sexuality.
Particularly sexual orientation.
On the left, you have people arguing that homosexuality is natural, but not biologically determined, because.....well I'm actually not sure why.
And on the right you have people arguing that homosexuality is against nature, and a lifestyle choice.
Umm no.
Not.
In Gay, Straight and the Reason Why, Simon LeVay offers a comprehensive, open minded overview of the current research on the biological, psychological and social determinants of human sexuality, gender identity and sexual orientation.
I love bio-psychology (an outdated term for what people are mostly calling neuroscience now-a-days).
Far from oppressive, I find biologically grounded explanations for human behavior to be normalizing and empowering.
And I LOVE the way LeVay putts Human sexuality on the slab for dissection. It's fun and it makes a lot of sense.
According to that one Darwin guy, animals (including us) evolved traits for survival and reproduction.
So I think it's at least a reasonable hypothesis that sexual orientation and gender expression are subject to those same biologically based evolutionary processes.
I'm not saying we're just bags of chemicals.
Wait....no actually, I am.
Anyway. I for the life of me can't even come close to fathoming why everyone isn't in 100% agreement that this is the fucking coolest subject in the world!!!!
Get this book. If you're feeling adventurous, and if you're into this sort of thing it's a very interesting and entertaining read.
June 27, 2016
"Gay, Straight and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation" mainly uses biology and psychology to deal with homosexuality. The author puts forward many researches conducted by various scientists for years and discusses each of them in this eleven-chapter book.
Not being knowledgeable enough in biology to understand most of the researches, I dare not assume that I know much about what's happening here. The author also admits that some researches can be doubtful. Homosexuality may be so complicated to be understood specifically, but one thing that we can be sure is that it is from no other than nature itself.
To quote a reviewer named Alison Dellit, "we still have no idea why some people are left-handed, but we have to accept who they are, and beating them for being different is a bad thing to do. Sometimes, it just feels to me that in our push to celebrate 'diversity', we really just want to expand the number of boxes we can fit people in to. You still have to choose one, we'll just add a new rainbow range of colours. I'm not sure if we'll ever get to the stage where we just accept people for who they are, without worrying who else fits into that category with them really just want to expand the number of boxes we can fit people in to. You still have to choose one, we'll just add a new rainbow range of colours. I'm not sure if we'll ever get to the stage where we just accept people for who they are, without worrying who else fits into that category with them."
Not being knowledgeable enough in biology to understand most of the researches, I dare not assume that I know much about what's happening here. The author also admits that some researches can be doubtful. Homosexuality may be so complicated to be understood specifically, but one thing that we can be sure is that it is from no other than nature itself.
To quote a reviewer named Alison Dellit, "we still have no idea why some people are left-handed, but we have to accept who they are, and beating them for being different is a bad thing to do. Sometimes, it just feels to me that in our push to celebrate 'diversity', we really just want to expand the number of boxes we can fit people in to. You still have to choose one, we'll just add a new rainbow range of colours. I'm not sure if we'll ever get to the stage where we just accept people for who they are, without worrying who else fits into that category with them really just want to expand the number of boxes we can fit people in to. You still have to choose one, we'll just add a new rainbow range of colours. I'm not sure if we'll ever get to the stage where we just accept people for who they are, without worrying who else fits into that category with them."
June 29, 2012
LeVay presented varied and routinely underdeveloped areas of research methodically, objectively, and honestly, however, some of the research that he presented was, in my opinion, so shaky and devoid of anything significant or conclusive that I felt like he would have been best to omit it all together. That said, I think the book was often bogged down in explaining many different research methods and concepts when a clearer view of only the strongest studies might have been more convincing.
I took issue with LeVay's inclusion of some studies on cognitive traits that suggested a "gender-shift" in gay/lesbian subjects where the studies concluded things like that gay men performed worse on mental rotation tests than straight men, just like women do, and that they were therefore "feminized." If you read a book like Cornelia Finde's "Delusions of Gender" you can see that female aptitude (or lack thereof) in mental rotation tests is so hugely influenced by gender socialization and not by some intrinsic feminine cognitive shortfall that the tests hardly seem like accurate markers for "feminine."
Ultimately, I would only recommend this book to someone who had already read Finde's book or was otherwise well-versed in avoiding the traps of the gender binary. LeVay is well-intentioned and provides some intelligent information and some fascinating research, but there's certainly some room for improvement.
I took issue with LeVay's inclusion of some studies on cognitive traits that suggested a "gender-shift" in gay/lesbian subjects where the studies concluded things like that gay men performed worse on mental rotation tests than straight men, just like women do, and that they were therefore "feminized." If you read a book like Cornelia Finde's "Delusions of Gender" you can see that female aptitude (or lack thereof) in mental rotation tests is so hugely influenced by gender socialization and not by some intrinsic feminine cognitive shortfall that the tests hardly seem like accurate markers for "feminine."
Ultimately, I would only recommend this book to someone who had already read Finde's book or was otherwise well-versed in avoiding the traps of the gender binary. LeVay is well-intentioned and provides some intelligent information and some fascinating research, but there's certainly some room for improvement.
February 1, 2011
A valuable contribution on this controversial subject, despite subpar clarity. The author takes a balanced view of current research, usually acknowledging the various findings that are based on poor science. That's not to take away from his conclusions; simply to note that the body of knowledge is thin and in need of further honest observation. As for conclusions, testosterone levels in the mother during a critical prenatal period emerge as most likely the strongest biological cause of sexual differentiation. Biology emerges as a more important cause than any other (such as environment or conscious choice). LeVay is careful to note that sexual development is extraordinarily complex. I'd suggest reading the introduction and the conclusions (highly relevant for all clergy, legislators, parents, and journalists) before deciding whether the rest of the book is worth the effort. It is challenging reading.
January 1, 2011
This was an interesting read. Written by a scientist, and...it sounds like it. Not that it was especially technical, just lacked any authorial melodrama. He had a lot of sentences containing "but I'll talk about that in subsequent chapters," which I found a bit irritating. I also doubt this book will change people's mind about whether or not their is a biological basis for homosexuality--because studies are not all completely in agreement (of course) and people seem to have problems with that. So, it needed a little more explanation of science, perhaps. However, the book was interesting & the studies he discussed were informative and I feel like I learned a few things that I wasn't aware of.
September 21, 2015
Spoiler
For those seeking cultural, sociological, or especially moral critique, you will find very little here. This is not LeVay's method.
LeVay is concerned primarily with reporting science, explaining research performed and the biases of particular studies and how those biases might be overcome through better-designed research. In that respect, it is definitely a worthy read.
For LeVay's ultimate conclusion (which I would say is also his presupposition), skip to the last paragraph of the book. His conclusion will not come as a surprise given his introduction. Knowing where he stands does not seem to affect the outcome of the research he reports.
For those seeking cultural, sociological, or especially moral critique, you will find very little here. This is not LeVay's method.
LeVay is concerned primarily with reporting science, explaining research performed and the biases of particular studies and how those biases might be overcome through better-designed research. In that respect, it is definitely a worthy read.
For LeVay's ultimate conclusion (which I would say is also his presupposition), skip to the last paragraph of the book. His conclusion will not come as a surprise given his introduction. Knowing where he stands does not seem to affect the outcome of the research he reports.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 20, 2012
This book is a great summary of all the scientific research that has been done on sexual orientation. LeVay discusses both his research and the research of others, as well as commenting on whether each study is reliable or not. He's very upfront and honest about what studies produced valid findings. So if you're worried about finding skeptical science in here, you may find some of that, but there's also a lot of compelling evidence that may very well point us in the right direction toward understanding sexuality.
November 29, 2017
Reading this you learn a few things, that the decision about your sexuality is for the most part predetermined in the womb and you are born gay or straight, that nobody is quite sure of the exact thing that determines this, that there are various ways that scientists can discover your sexuality based on your brain or your genes, or even the amount of people in your family, and finally that there are way too many scientists getting their kicks from changing the sexuality of animals.
October 13, 2018
This book makes a case for Biological determinism. Sexual orientation is caused by biology alone because well, in many cases socialization cannot explain it. That's basically the premise that the book is based on. A false alternative. The book is good for exploring the biological deterministic side of the gender debate.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 16, 2011
A lucidly-presented tour of the current state of published research on the subject which LeVay is multiply qualified to write.
June 29, 2011
Very good and easy to read as well as understandable to a layperson. I don't rate this as perfect b/c there are moments when the author makes some personal & unnecessary commentary.
November 4, 2013
A worth-reading book for those who want to understand the science of Sexual Orientation.
March 15, 2023
I first read this book in 2011 for my freshmen year of college in a course meant to train us how to write essays, conduct research, and critically think so we would be prepared to conduct our thesis research our junior and senior years — all in the context of biology and neuroscience and on the subject of sex, gender, etc. Boy do I wish I could go back in time and remind myself working away my junior and senior year to reference this book on how to organize and write and reflect upon research because it is SO WELL DONE. Technically speaking? Very organized, articulate, and it does an excellent job of citing sources and referencing relevant research. Anyone in school, read this just for that alone!
As for the content itself, it’s interesting. I think LeVay did an excellent job drawing together all the relevant research at the time around sexual orientation and explored the criticisms around “medicalizing” sexuality (which to be clear, this book doesn’t endorse) and therefore fear of analyzing brains in the first place. I got the impression LeVay, an out gay man who seemed prominent in the neuroscience field, was motivated to help consolidate and contextualize pre-existing research around sexuality, how it is indeed a “born this way” issue (with specific sections that acknowledge extreme scenarios where people turn to same-sex relations like in all male prisons, countries where men and women are highly segregated, etc), and that homosexuality, bisexuality, and the like are not sins but understandably found in nature. Though we do not know the full reasons around “why”. He points to gaps in the research and hopefully inspired others to fill in those gaps since 2010 when this was published. If anyone has published books consolidating updated research from a similar POV I am open to recommendations!
That said, I feel I need to acknowledge the lack of, well, acknowledgement of the existence of transpeople. To be fair, he does mention them in passing throughout the book, and while his language is outdated, he is respectful when they are brought up. But concerning subject matter around “masculinizing” and “feminizing” brains, I really feel that leaving them out of the conversation creates a gap in the research and perhaps not a full picture of all the potential hypotheses around this subject matter from a neuroscience/biological perspective. Granted this book is titled “the science of sexual orientation” not sexual identity, and having taken part in writing extensive research myself, I understand that when writing such papers, your point is to prove or disprove a thesis, and sometimes there’s not room for logistical and financial reasons to include everything one should.
All that being said, I’m glad to have reread this and I really encourage people to read this, and then keep on reading because there are so many more findings and I truly believe the more we come to know ourselves and our brains as a species, the more we will be able to heal the likes of diseases (Alzheimer’s, etc) and be all the more accepting for everyone’s differences, because baby you were born this way ❤️
As for the content itself, it’s interesting. I think LeVay did an excellent job drawing together all the relevant research at the time around sexual orientation and explored the criticisms around “medicalizing” sexuality (which to be clear, this book doesn’t endorse) and therefore fear of analyzing brains in the first place. I got the impression LeVay, an out gay man who seemed prominent in the neuroscience field, was motivated to help consolidate and contextualize pre-existing research around sexuality, how it is indeed a “born this way” issue (with specific sections that acknowledge extreme scenarios where people turn to same-sex relations like in all male prisons, countries where men and women are highly segregated, etc), and that homosexuality, bisexuality, and the like are not sins but understandably found in nature. Though we do not know the full reasons around “why”. He points to gaps in the research and hopefully inspired others to fill in those gaps since 2010 when this was published. If anyone has published books consolidating updated research from a similar POV I am open to recommendations!
That said, I feel I need to acknowledge the lack of, well, acknowledgement of the existence of transpeople. To be fair, he does mention them in passing throughout the book, and while his language is outdated, he is respectful when they are brought up. But concerning subject matter around “masculinizing” and “feminizing” brains, I really feel that leaving them out of the conversation creates a gap in the research and perhaps not a full picture of all the potential hypotheses around this subject matter from a neuroscience/biological perspective. Granted this book is titled “the science of sexual orientation” not sexual identity, and having taken part in writing extensive research myself, I understand that when writing such papers, your point is to prove or disprove a thesis, and sometimes there’s not room for logistical and financial reasons to include everything one should.
All that being said, I’m glad to have reread this and I really encourage people to read this, and then keep on reading because there are so many more findings and I truly believe the more we come to know ourselves and our brains as a species, the more we will be able to heal the likes of diseases (Alzheimer’s, etc) and be all the more accepting for everyone’s differences, because baby you were born this way ❤️
June 9, 2017
A good book to see a look at where current research stands on homosexuality. I went into it hoping to find some definitive answers on the science of where non-heterosexuality comes from, but was disappointed. The title can be misinterpreted (which I did) to be a book about definitive science, but it's really a collection of current research, which the author occasionally makes comments on on whether they seem likely or not.
It's because of this lack of definitive research and the author's conjectures that drop this from 5 stars of a good resource collection to 3 stars of leaving you with more questions than you went in with. I need to mention that both current research and the book itself, has a lot of information about the possible causes of male homosexuality. I also got a stronger impression of what makes male children male that what makes females homosexual or bisexual. The author is also a prominent gay neuroscientist, which also makes sense why these is such an additional focus on the causes of homosexual men.
There was little exploration of female sexuality other that women experience sexual arousal different from men in being less visually focused and often more affected by contextual details such as status and personality. I couldn't help but feel like the science at large just gave a big shrug on the matter in a manner as if female sexuality is still a mystery.
I was also very disappointed in the absence of any highlighting of feminist research and the social pressures, especially on women, to act a certain way. How men and women are socialized differently, which can cause for natural selection in male and female traits.
Overall, left me with more questions than answers.
It's because of this lack of definitive research and the author's conjectures that drop this from 5 stars of a good resource collection to 3 stars of leaving you with more questions than you went in with. I need to mention that both current research and the book itself, has a lot of information about the possible causes of male homosexuality. I also got a stronger impression of what makes male children male that what makes females homosexual or bisexual. The author is also a prominent gay neuroscientist, which also makes sense why these is such an additional focus on the causes of homosexual men.
There was little exploration of female sexuality other that women experience sexual arousal different from men in being less visually focused and often more affected by contextual details such as status and personality. I couldn't help but feel like the science at large just gave a big shrug on the matter in a manner as if female sexuality is still a mystery.
I was also very disappointed in the absence of any highlighting of feminist research and the social pressures, especially on women, to act a certain way. How men and women are socialized differently, which can cause for natural selection in male and female traits.
Overall, left me with more questions than answers.
November 18, 2022
Gay marriage has been making the headlines recently and there are a lot of arguments for and against it. At the heart of a lot of these arguments is whether homosexuality is “natural” or “unnatural”.
Simon LeVay is a neuroscientist and takes an evidence-based approach to his subject. He doesn’t just look at the theories behind human sexuality; he looks at the evidence for those theories, or lack of it. This is what lifts this book head and shoulders above previous books looking at the origins of human sexuality. LeVay doesn’t have one theory that he is pushing; instead he takes a critical look at all of them.
He concludes that our sexualities are a product of our genes, sex hormones and brain systems (nature not nurture), but it is how he reaches this conclusion that is fascinating. He analyses the data with a refreshing evidence-based approach.
This book is also written in clear and easy to read prose, not in an academic style, full of jargon and language that is difficult to understand. LeVay uses clear English; his explanations draw the reader in, not putting you off.
The subject matter might not be of interest to everyone, but this book can benefit all nurses. We’re called to give unbiased care to all; this book helps us see sexuality as a natural part of life.
Simon LeVay is a neuroscientist and takes an evidence-based approach to his subject. He doesn’t just look at the theories behind human sexuality; he looks at the evidence for those theories, or lack of it. This is what lifts this book head and shoulders above previous books looking at the origins of human sexuality. LeVay doesn’t have one theory that he is pushing; instead he takes a critical look at all of them.
He concludes that our sexualities are a product of our genes, sex hormones and brain systems (nature not nurture), but it is how he reaches this conclusion that is fascinating. He analyses the data with a refreshing evidence-based approach.
This book is also written in clear and easy to read prose, not in an academic style, full of jargon and language that is difficult to understand. LeVay uses clear English; his explanations draw the reader in, not putting you off.
The subject matter might not be of interest to everyone, but this book can benefit all nurses. We’re called to give unbiased care to all; this book helps us see sexuality as a natural part of life.
January 5, 2021
In this book, LeVay gives a refreshing appeal to science and genetics as they relate to theories of homosexuality. He presents a great number of hypotheses, then proceeds to weigh their relative scientific backing through explaining sound studies and wide polling. One crucial aspect of his analysis is in explaining studies done on hormonal drivers in animals (particularly sheep), as these provide a more objective subject. As he states in the introduction, while his particular opinion supports the innateness of homosexuality, he does not believe that either conclusion should be used as fodder for discrimination. This being said, while he concludes that the development of homosexuality is primarily genetic, with environmental factors playing a role in the expression of "gay genes", he does seem to disregard the possibility of environmental conditioning and fails to sufficiently justify this dismissal. Overall, this book helped me to better understand at least the basics of what could be the possible origin of homosexuality.
June 21, 2017
Maybe my expectations for this book were too high, but I didn't enjoy it. If it were any longer, I probably wouldn't have finished it. Focusing mainly on psychology rather than biology as I had hoped, LeVay presented a lot of information that did not seem new or revolutionary to me. While I understand that the biological basis of sexuality is immensely complicated, most of the research presented in the book was deemed inconclusive. The only chapter I really enjoyed was the chapter on the role of genes in determining sexual orientation. If you are looking for an analysis that is more conclusive with relevant findings and includes more biology and less psychology, I would skip LeVay's work.
June 5, 2018
Admittedly I don't know enough biology to ascertain the validity of some of the theories put forward in this book and I must confess that some points I felt a bit lost in the midst of so many concepts of genetics and anatomy. Nevertheless, this was an interesting read. In spite of my lack of expertise, one striking conclusion emerges from this book: we are still far away from overcoming the chasm of ignorance that separates us from understanding the determinants of sexual orientation. I had some issues with how most (if not all) the theories of sexual orientation presented on this book hinge on sexual orientation being considered a gender trait, and homosexuality as gender-inappropriate.
February 20, 2024
I had 100 pages left before the end, but I had a tough time getting through to the end. This might be a book I come back ti and try again. It feels unfair to leave a review, but my impression with it was mostly that sexual orientation could be caused by A, B, C but all the research was inconclusive. I compare it to a book I read of the causes of autism which basically said “it could be these 100 reasons but no one really knows”.
Altogether informative, and I suppose without the research there’s no way to formally recognize the cause of orientation, only that there are some differences in the brain and hormones and so forth.
Altogether informative, and I suppose without the research there’s no way to formally recognize the cause of orientation, only that there are some differences in the brain and hormones and so forth.
June 28, 2021
I’m a methodologist, and I spent the entire book questioning the validity of every study included here. This is very biology focussed and misses a tonne of really important social research that I think would give a new dimension to the arguments presented.
Warning: The author seems to have some severe internalised biphobia, constantly conflates gender and sex (they are NOT the same thing), and uses super outdated language around gender and sexuality.
Not the worst book, but I wouldn’t recommend to anyone that isn’t going to explore the literature around sexuality more widely.
Warning: The author seems to have some severe internalised biphobia, constantly conflates gender and sex (they are NOT the same thing), and uses super outdated language around gender and sexuality.
Not the worst book, but I wouldn’t recommend to anyone that isn’t going to explore the literature around sexuality more widely.
October 17, 2017
An interesting and informative, although slightly biased (as LeVay is himself gay and seems to have some preconceived ideas), look at the science behind sexual orientation. There is still so much that we don’t know or understand. Obviously, there are gestational hormonal elements involved, but that’s just one aspect of the science and there is an interweaving between orientation, attraction, and actual gender. I’m just trying to wrap my head around it all. Like the author himself.
February 8, 2019
A very good summary of the existing data on homosexuality. The basic point is that homosexuality is a type of shift towards the other sex. So
Gay men are shifted in the feminine direction on a number of traits, and lesbians shifted towards men. Here are the pros:
1. Each piece of research is explained well
2. Thorough
3. Appropriately skeptical of some findings.
And cons:
1. He is too convinced that the cause of homosexuality is solely biological. Even though twin studies show only 50% concordance he does not take seriously the possibility that some of the cause is cognitive or environmental or social.
2. The data is very thin. And while he is appropriately skeptical, he still weighs individual isolated studies too heavily.
Gay men are shifted in the feminine direction on a number of traits, and lesbians shifted towards men. Here are the pros:
1. Each piece of research is explained well
2. Thorough
3. Appropriately skeptical of some findings.
And cons:
1. He is too convinced that the cause of homosexuality is solely biological. Even though twin studies show only 50% concordance he does not take seriously the possibility that some of the cause is cognitive or environmental or social.
2. The data is very thin. And while he is appropriately skeptical, he still weighs individual isolated studies too heavily.
September 20, 2018
It was a really informative read. It included many studies while the author remained unbiased and I was really impressed. I learned a lot and its definitely worth a read as long as you're ready to absorb a lot of scientific information. It was a fun read and I am probably going to re-read it in the future.
July 9, 2022
3.5 stars
Interesting reading about biological reasons that may determine our sexual orientation. Some chapters were too much technical, but overall the reading was not that difficult. Maybe - but it can be just my impression - the author tends to bias (a bit) some research outcomes to bolster his ideas.
Interesting reading about biological reasons that may determine our sexual orientation. Some chapters were too much technical, but overall the reading was not that difficult. Maybe - but it can be just my impression - the author tends to bias (a bit) some research outcomes to bolster his ideas.
August 15, 2022
Really interesting research summary on the causality of “gayness”. Most hypotheses (up to the publication date) are explored with specific papers being mentioned and their limits being discussed. The book mostly focuses on the G II. LGBT due to a lack of research for the other sexual orientations.
March 12, 2023
Should be titled: Gay, Straight, and ALL the ReasonS Why NOT... So Far!
The author really get interesting when taking about his own research.
But most of the book details debunked and inconclusive theories and research.
Even though this book was only published a decade ago, it feels dated or incomplete. Can't really put my finger on it.
If you must read it, skip the first 60 pages or so.
The author really get interesting when taking about his own research.
But most of the book details debunked and inconclusive theories and research.
Even though this book was only published a decade ago, it feels dated or incomplete. Can't really put my finger on it.
If you must read it, skip the first 60 pages or so.
July 18, 2024
A thoughtful review by a neuroscientist of the scientific evidence about factors which may influence the development of homosexuality. The author announces right at the start that he is gay but this has little effect on the narrative or the conclusions.
There is much thought provoking information as Levay reviews societal and scientific attitudes and assumptions.
There is much thought provoking information as Levay reviews societal and scientific attitudes and assumptions.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 59 reviews