Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why are there homosexuals?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Blackcatbone View Post
    Actually, scientists have never found any genes relating to homosexuality and probably won't. Not because it isn't innate, but rather because sexuality has a certain amount of fluidity which is more easily influenced by environmental factors. And by environmental I'm talking about that in the womb, not the home. Someone mentioned earlier that the youngest of a series of boys has a higher probability of being gay, which is true, and there are also some physical characteristics of either sex that are influenced by developmental hormones which have a higher incidence of appearing in gay men and women that indicate opposite sex. Digit ratio being the most widely known, although not guaranteed, and it sometimes accompanies gendered, as opposed to sexual, traits.
    Then it's genetics for the woman's womb. If this womb environment led to the youngest being gay and this was disadvantageous or less advantageous, it would have been out competed by other women's wombs who did not have a changing environment to produce gay kids. One way or another, it is genetics.

    Beyond that, I'm sure there is quite a bit of fluidity too.
    Last edited by wiltondeportes; 08-07-2012, 11:11 AM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by JWBooth View Post
      Reproduction is about the survival of genes, not the species. The apparent paradox of homosexuality has to be explained in that context. Not reproducing but still contributing to the tribe can only be an explanation if the specific contribution led to an increase in reproduction of the homosexuals nearest kin at a rate that would overcome his own lack of procreation bearing in mind that a sibling only shares on average 50% of the homosexuals genes
      Valid point. But survival of the species is as much about behavior as it is about genetics (nature vs. nurture). If the best hunter in the tribe happens to be gay, he'll still play a vital role in educating the next generation, thus helping the tribe survive and be more efficient.
      Subduction leads to orogeny

      My blog that I don't update as often as I should: http://primalclimber.blogspot.com/

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by AmyMac703 View Post
        Valid point. But survival of the species is as much about behavior as it is about genetics (nature vs. nurture). If the best hunter in the tribe happens to be gay, he'll still play a vital role in educating the next generation, thus helping the tribe survive and be more efficient.
        But that would have nothing to do with why homosexuals exist. Enhancing the survival of the tribe's genes at the expense of his own would select against homosexuality, not for it. Being useful to society is meaningless from an evolutionary perspective unless that usefulness makes you a attractive person for a female to mate with or dramatically increases reproductive success of your very near kin.

        Personally, I think the two most likely explanations for homosexuality are either sexually antagonistic selection (homosexuality confers no advantage in males but the same genes produce increased fecundity in their sisters), or simply that the reproductive disadvantage of homosexuality just isn't great enough to wipe it out completely when you factor in genetic drift and such. But that would just be a hunch. This is still very much an open scientific question and we need a lot more research before figure it out.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by JWBooth View Post
          But that would have nothing to do with why homosexuals exist. Enhancing the survival of the tribe's genes at the expense of his own would select against homosexuality, not for it. Being useful to society is meaningless from an evolutionary perspective unless that usefulness makes you a attractive person for a female to mate with or dramatically increases reproductive success of your very near kin.

          Personally, I think the two most likely explanations for homosexuality are either sexually antagonistic selection (homosexuality confers no advantage in males but the same genes produce increased fecundity in their sisters), or simply that the reproductive disadvantage of homosexuality just isn't great enough to wipe it out completely when you factor in genetic drift and such. But that would just be a hunch. This is still very much an open scientific question and we need a lot more research before figure it out.
          Also, if it is genetic, it could be a result of many genes interacting, which could be advantageous for any number of reasons, if they are not combined in such a way as to result in homosexuality. This would explain why we keep getting a certain number of homosexuals in each generation--it's a side effect of a certain mixture of otherwise-adaptive genes that statistically affects a certain proportion of the population due to those genes' prevalence.
          Today I will: Eat food, not poison. Plan for success, not settle for failure. Live my real life, not a virtual one. Move and grow, not sit and die.

          My Primal Journal

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Rusty View Post
            Straight sex has the possibility for procreation. But, most people have sex because it feels good. Why are there homosexuals? Because sex feels good in many ways.
            But isn't this reasoning poor?

            People don't always eat food because they want to provide their body with sustenance; sometimes they just want to enjoy the sensory rewards of eating. This is especially so when the foods they choose are very rewarding, but not healthy. Or worse yet, if they binge and purge.

            The fact that people do eat without the express intent of nourishing their bodies does not change the simple biological truth that eating is there for the sake of nourishment.

            You can thwart the reproductive aspect of sex, or bypass it entirely, but that still doesn't change the fact that sex is there for the sake of reproduction.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by JoanieL View Post
              Because it feels so good to get butt banged?
              It does actually. What cracks me up is the fat ugly straight men who get all anxious about being in the same room as a gay man, as if anyone would want their flabby arse anyway lol. I'm bisexual female, happily married to a hetero male but I freely admit that I love reading slash fiction, so hot..

              Comment

              Working...
              X