Via Geekpress, here's a long but interesting article on the current state of research into the question of the origin of homosexuality. It's also an example of pretty good science reporting in the MSM.

The article is incredibly one-sided. No mention of Dr. Robert Spitzer's findings suggesting hat sexual orientation is mutable. No mention of *why* the APA removed homosexuality from the "manual of mental disorders" (the change was led by Spitzer himself), or why many professionals objected and still object. No mention of the research that points to psychologiocal and social factors - Freud's speculations don't count as research, although his speculations had some merit accordign to a 1970 task force conducted by the New York County District Branch of the APA:

The majority of the mothers of homosexuals interfered with the development of their sons' peer group relationships, heterosexual development, assertiveness, and decision-making. The fathers of homosexuals were demasculinizing.

No mention of arguments against the homosexuality-is-innate claim (outside a token tip of the middle finger to the Family Research Council. One such argument even comes from Simon LeVay:

"It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.

"The INAH 3 is less likely to be the sole gay nucleus of the brain than a part of a chain of nuclei engaged in men and women's sexual behavior....Since I looked at adult brains, we don't know if the differences I found were there at birth, or if they appeared later." (Nimmons, 1994, p. 64).

Note that brain physiology can and does change due to behavior; further research must control for this. It shoudl also control for the different social/relationship situations historically associated with homosexuality.