The article is about a claim that the pattern of homosexuality in many families fits a pattern that would be associated with epigenitic markers, AFAICT.
Still, I think I understand it better now. Doesn't seem like too major of a revelation -- the evidence already seemed to be saying that that homosexuality arose at least partly from biological factors rather than solely as a product of upbringing. I guess it's nice that we may have discovered the mechanism, but I can't say that I care much.
"Yeah, I got a way to defend it. Bring a bat to the game and kill one of them."
-Nick Van Exel, on defending the Stockton-Malone Pick & Roll