Gay genes

It is very likely that a certain reader or the occasional browser who reads the newspaper just to look important has just found out that their spouse, friend, sibling or neighbor is gay. I cannot blame the reader for asking what is wrong with that special person who has just dropped this bomb on you either by choice or by way of catching them.

A few months ago I came across an article that wrote on the biological basis of homosexuality in humans. This is all well and good until the writer warns of the danger of the study. Think about it, if the study concludes on a genetic malfunction or hormonal imbalances (note how both terms are negatives) than people would consider homosexuality as a disorder of some kind that can be "cured".

A concept of note I found particularly interesting is that of homosexual antagonism. The idea basically tries to explain how homosexuality in men has a prenatal cause. It can get very technical but the basic idea is this; men who have older brothers are more likely to be born gay.

The theory is that an antigen that makes unborn boys straight induces antibodies in the mother's immune system. This means that the mother's own immune system acts against the unborn boy's heterosexuality.After the pregnancy, the immune system is ready for another attack thereby increasing the chances of the next male sibling being gay.

I can already imagine the social uproar from gay-rights activists and sympathisers as expecting mothers start terminating or somehow altering their child's genetic sequence to prevent the child from being born gay.

Now, homosexuality will always be a touchy issue, but when homophobes have science in their arsenal, I foreseesexual apartheid. I know, that feels as weird as it sounds and when you have a homophobe in power, this just might be a possibility.

Homophobes aren't the only problem, as we have a history of pandemic deniers and the US has the unfortunate problem of climate-change deniers and those guys are just plain stupid and dangerous.

But back and closer to home, I think we really need to sit down and change the way we look at homosexuality and stop hiding behind religious and biological concepts and outright admit to senseless homophobia.

Historical misinformation may also play a role. Some people have this idea that homosexuality is only emerging now, as if it is a by-product of the times. A day at the history section at the local library might do a lot of us some good in this respect.

Some hide their staunch prejudices behind texts like the Holy Bible and say that it says this and that. Ah, and then there's the naturalist who claims how unnatural it is for a man to be romantically involved with another man.

I would personally think it unnatural if homosexuality never existed, I'd wonder how it is that we are hardwired to exclusively fall for only the opposite sex. Our intelligence and freewill distinguishes us from all the other creatures of this planet and part of that freewill compels us to challenge any conventions.

If this was not the case, science, art and even religion would not exist.

There would not be any need for these cultural traits. One flaw of the human race is our ways of settling differences and a misguided sense of self preservation. And history has
shown us how dangerous it is when segregation and the suppression of a group (be it racial, religious or sexual) are applied in an attempt to preserve a self elevated group.

Even Voldomort failed in his attempts to eradicate mud-bloods. We are more than our genes and I think we have evolved beyond the ideas and propaganda of old. If we don't like something, we should just out and say it, and engage like sane human beings in constructive debate and maybe we can all just try to get along.

I know history is against us but if one reader should apply an open mind toward homosexuality than I haven't wasted a good hour writing this.

Stay hungry. Stay curious. Keep an
open mind.

Why you should care about science

If you ask any scientist why they do what it is they do, you might get varying answers. For instance, an undergraduate might tell you something very different from a post doctorate student (who by this time would have asked themselves the same question with increasing frequency over the years).

SMBC

I could run out of op-ed space explaining to you the many reasons why science is important in our lives but for the purpose of this column, I will only tell you that it is to vanquish ignorance and exercise a healthy dose of skepticism. Too many of us are victims of pseudoscience, myths, misconceptions and incorrect use of science in marketing ploys.

Ignorance in its purity can be very easily overcome. Throw in a dash of ego into the mix and you’ve got yourself a misguided sense of self-preservation when it comes to “touchy” issues such as creationism, vaccination, evolution, alternative medicine and nutritional information.

Thankfully, all these can save one a big headache if you apply the simplest skills of science among which resonates “assume nothing and question everything”. Now, science journalism is there not only as a fact-checking tool but as a standard by which we practice healthy skepticism (not cynicism) to better ourselves intellectually.

It is unfortunate, in my opinion that science stories do not hold a lot of weight in terms of editorial space in many national (and indeed local and community) papers in South Africa. They have to compete with sports and politics, with the latter being in great supply.

As a science advocate, it is my duty to try to convince you why you should like (or at least care about science) but I have found out that it isn’t that simple. A sports journalist doesn’t need to convince sports fans (who cover most of the population) as to why they should like sports.

I wouldn’t go as far as to say that writing such stories is easy as being a journalist requires one to have a ridiculously hectic life and the non-existance of a stable social life. Those who are able to achieve the latter are overachievers or frauds or both.

I have to also admit that science on the surface for someone who is not initially interested is intimidating. I’d love to, more than anything, tell you that science is all about the discovery of some wonder material or newly discovered giant killer chicken or the advent of a space rock on a collision course with Richards Bay (I’d really love to) but I have learnt that this is not always the case.

Hey, don’t get me wrong, these stories are amazing and you can see a lot of them on reputable websites with a favorite being I Fucking Love Science and a few others such Phil Plait’s Bad Astronomy and the best science journalists in the world at National Geographic's Phenomina (seriously, go check them out on your phone).

I think what we need is some dose of skepticism and do away with our fear of science. Yes, we need to fall in love with the wonder of science but be very careful not to turn into “bumper-sticker” science, as one of South Africa’s foremost science journalists (and author of Searching African Skies) once put it.

Science can be so much more than that, it’s clear that if we really apply ourselves to the scientific process and understand the scientific method, we can greatly improve (or install!) our bullshit-o-meters to protect ourselves from this pre-zombie-apocalypse era we find ourselves in.