The brain evidence is interesting, but it goes more to a lack of choice, rather than a genetic aspect.

Except it's not evidence of lack of choice (unless you adopt a very specific kind of Cartesian dualism) either.

What does this have to do with Cartesian dualism at all?

Unless you accept some form of Cartesian dualism you should expect every aspect of the mind to show up on sufficiently advanced brain scans, whether or not it is a choice. Thus, the brain evidence isn't particularly interesting.

For that matter, how is this at all relevant, since as I stated earlier, the matter under discussion is what is descriptively thought of as a choice or not by members of society.

And my point is that this perception isn't grounded in anything objective and thus itself needs an explanation.

Your reasoning was basically "everyone lies thus some political group lying isn't evidence against their other claims". Not a particularly strong argument at the best of times, certainly not here were the situation is extremely analogous to the lie under discussion (just substitute "transgender" for "homosexuality").

That' isn't what the argument is. Please reread that discussion.

I have, twice in the last few days in fact. Why don't you try rereading it?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume I misunderstood your argument there, if so could you state it more explicitly.

Really? Did you see any evidence in that discussion that any aspect of this has had any influence on the scientific studies in question?

Well Julian practically admitted it.

Have they somehow managed to fake data and get it through? Do you think they've had papers get rejected?

Sometimes, generally pressure is applied to people who produce politically incorrect results. Look what happened to Mark Regnerus or Jason Richwine, or to use a more famous example James Watson.