ABSTRACT

Xu and colleagues add to the growing research literature on the role of potential familial (i.e., genetic and shared environment) causes in sexual orientation and in the relation between sexual orientation and poor mental health, in which lesbian, gay, bisexual, and other sexual minority individuals have poorer mental health than heterosexual individuals. I address several implications of the findings by Xu et al. and others. First, the nuance or complexity of genetics is considered, given the implications of genetics for health via a single gene, epistasis, or epigenetics. Second, I highlight the magnitude of the genetic relation between sexual orientation and psychopathology, suggesting some, but not all, sexual minority individuals may differ from heterosexual individuals on psychiatric vulnerability. In turn, this suggests that research should identify for whom or under what circumstances the relation holds. Third, I underscore the need for a within-subjects design, in which attention turns to differences among sexual minority individuals. Fourth, the need to reevaluate Minority Stress Theory, the predominant theory accounting for health disparities by sexual orientation, is addressed because of the implications of genetics for health. Fifth, I acknowledge the concern attached to genetic research for potentially compounding the stigmatization already experienced by sexual minority individuals. Nevertheless, this research is occurring and will likely increase in volume. It will inform understanding of sexual minority individuals.

 抽象的

徐及其同事对越来越多的研究文献进行了补充，这些研究文献涉及潜在的家庭（即遗传和共同环境）原因在性取向中的作用以及性取向与不良心理健康之间的关系，其中女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和其他性行为少数族裔的心理健康状况比异性恋者更差。我阐述了 Xu 等人的研究结果的几个含义。和其他人。首先，考虑到遗传学通过单个基因、上位性或表观遗传学对健康的影响，考虑遗传学的细微差别或复杂性。其次，我强调了性取向和精神病理学之间遗传关系的重要性，表明一些但不是全部的性少数个体在精神脆弱性方面可能与异性恋个体不同。反过来，这表明研究应该确定这种关系对于谁或在什么情况下成立。第三，我强调受试者内部设计的必要性，其中注意力转向性少数个体之间的差异。第四，由于遗传学对健康的影响，需要重新评估少数民族压力理论，这是解释性取向健康差异的主要理论。第五，我承认对基因研究的担忧可能会加剧性少数群体已经经历的耻辱。尽管如此，这项研究正在进行中，并且数量可能会增加。它将有助于理解性少数群体。