Monday, March 13, 2006
Via Queerty, we find a 60 Minutes piece about research into how sexual orientation develops. It's basic, not attempting to delve into the meat of the research (which I would love, but which would be confusing and drive away most readers), but doesn't fall into the trap of politics. There is mention of how much a hot-button issue sexual orientation can be, but from the first paragraph it's clear that this has nothing to do with that: "It's not only a political, social, and religious question but also a scientific question, one that might someday have an actual, provable answer."
That's the key that science journalism misses all to often. This in not politics, this is not a debate. This is about reliable, replicable evidence. The article discusses some of that evidence, saying what's well established (birth order effects) and what isn't (how hormones affect things), and presents it as an exciting, interesting field (that needs more funding).