How does evolution explain homosexuality?

[kami333]

Originally posted by: Gibsons
Here's a hypothesis, it could easily be completely wrong:

Usually in a family, the first son is the least likely to be homosexual. Later sons after that more likely. This phenomenon can't be strictly due to a 'gay gene.' As someone else indicated above, there's evidence for gestational influence or maybe even direct cause. In a tribal, paternalistic society, having two (or more) males competing to be the alpha male might be much worse than having just one. They might kill or injure each other or split the tribe/family against itself. In theory, maybe, the homosexual and heterosexual brothers are less likely to do so.

There's at least a few things wrong with this as homosexuals can be every bit as competitive or ambitious as heteros, but at least they won't be fighting over a girl.

There's been a couple of studies showing that the likelyhood of one being homosexual increases 20-40% with each older brother. If I remember correctly, they didn't find any correlation with adoptees but found some with brothers that were raised apart, which points to some sort of inutero process rather than a social one.

But I also seem to recall a few studies that showed the opposite, that there is no correlation with birth order and homosexuality so who knows...

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Because there are always gonna be screwed up people in the world.

yes, you are.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: God Mode
its a glitch

in the matrix.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
The discussion is surprisingly civil!

We can fix that... loser.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: RoloMather
The majority of homosexuals don't have offspring due to mate preferences. Therefore they should be negatively selected out during the whole process of evolution.

So why does homosexuality exist?

It's just a popular fad right now, like CB radios were a few years back. It will eventually die out like all fads do and it won't be 'cool' to be gay anymore.

More brain-exploding stupidity from this member. I'm shocked.

Sounds like my sense of humor just doesn't appeal to you.

Are you the guy that claimed to have read Nathan Lane's autobiography and then posted that there was no way he was gay?

I have read nothing by Nathan lane.
I don't even know who Nathan Lane is.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: RoloMather
The majority of homosexuals don't have offspring due to mate preferences. Therefore they should be negatively selected out during the whole process of evolution.

So why does homosexuality exist?

It's just a popular fad right now, like CB radios were a few years back. It will eventually die out like all fads do and it won't be 'cool' to be gay anymore.

More brain-exploding stupidity from this member. I'm shocked.

Sounds like my sense of humor just doesn't appeal to you.

Are you the guy that claimed to have read Nathan Lane's autobiography and then posted that there was no way he was gay?

I have read nothing by Nathan lane.
I don't even no who Nathan Lane is.

perhaps I was being too subtle

 

[oogabooga]

Originally posted by: alphatarget1
The discussion is surprisingly civil!

while there have definitely been low moments, yea the discussion hasn't hit rock bottom by the end of page 1 like these threads usually do.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: RoloMather
The majority of homosexuals don't have offspring due to mate preferences. Therefore they should be negatively selected out during the whole process of evolution.

So why does homosexuality exist?

It's just a popular fad right now, like CB radios were a few years back. It will eventually die out like all fads do and it won't be 'cool' to be gay anymore.

More brain-exploding stupidity from this member. I'm shocked.

Sounds like my sense of humor just doesn't appeal to you.

Are you the guy that claimed to have read Nathan Lane's autobiography and then posted that there was no way he was gay?

I have read nothing by Nathan lane.
I don't even no who Nathan Lane is.

perhaps I was being too subtle

No I knew you were referring to my homosetuals are lying post--the one with Natalie Wood's link in it. I just answered the question you posed straight-forwardly is all.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: RoloMather
The majority of homosexuals don't have offspring due to mate preferences. Therefore they should be negatively selected out during the whole process of evolution.

So why does homosexuality exist?

It's just a popular fad right now, like CB radios were a few years back. It will eventually die out like all fads do and it won't be 'cool' to be gay anymore.

More brain-exploding stupidity from this member. I'm shocked.

Sounds like my sense of humor just doesn't appeal to you.

Are you the guy that claimed to have read Nathan Lane's autobiography and then posted that there was no way he was gay?

I have read nothing by Nathan lane.
I don't even no who Nathan Lane is.

perhaps I was being too subtle

No I knew you were referring to my homosetuals are lying post--the one with Natalie Wood's link in it. I just answered the question you posed straight-forwardly is all.

I was referring to your arson/death penalty post actually.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: RoloMather
The majority of homosexuals don't have offspring due to mate preferences. Therefore they should be negatively selected out during the whole process of evolution.

So why does homosexuality exist?

It's just a popular fad right now, like CB radios were a few years back. It will eventually die out like all fads do and it won't be 'cool' to be gay anymore.

More brain-exploding stupidity from this member. I'm shocked.

Sounds like my sense of humor just doesn't appeal to you.

Are you the guy that claimed to have read Nathan Lane's autobiography and then posted that there was no way he was gay?

I have read nothing by Nathan lane.
I don't even no who Nathan Lane is.

perhaps I was being too subtle

No I knew you were referring to my homosetuals are lying post--the one with Natalie Wood's link in it. I just answered the question you posed straight-forwardly is all.

I was referring to your arson/death penatly post actually.

You mean the OP where I stated "No way is this guy innocent". Well that's a little too subtle
since I have completely forgotten about that thread.
I can see how you might make the connection between my obstinance in championing his guilt and somebody calling a gay man a liar after reading the guy's autobiography.

Am I close to understanding what you were getting at?

 

[Nik]

Cottage cheese still sucks.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: RoloMather
The majority of homosexuals don't have offspring due to mate preferences. Therefore they should be negatively selected out during the whole process of evolution.

So why does homosexuality exist?

It's just a popular fad right now, like CB radios were a few years back. It will eventually die out like all fads do and it won't be 'cool' to be gay anymore.

More brain-exploding stupidity from this member. I'm shocked.

Sounds like my sense of humor just doesn't appeal to you.

Are you the guy that claimed to have read Nathan Lane's autobiography and then posted that there was no way he was gay?

I have read nothing by Nathan lane.
I don't even no who Nathan Lane is.

perhaps I was being too subtle

No I knew you were referring to my homosetuals are lying post--the one with Natalie Wood's link in it. I just answered the question you posed straight-forwardly is all.

I was referring to your arson/death penatly post actually.

You mean the OP where I stated "No way is this guy innocent". Well that's a little too subtle.
I can see how you might make the connection between my obstinance in championing his guilt and somebody calling a gay man a liar after reading the guy's autobiography.

Am I close to understanding what you were getting at?

yessir. I was drawing a comparison between trying to deny Nathan Lane's homsexuality with denying the innocence (or at the very very least the horribly botched trial and execution) of a US citizen by his own govt.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

There are a few problems with your hypothesis. First, homosexuals are not unable to reproduce, they just tend to choose mates with whom they cannot produce offspring (two men or two women will rarely produce a viable embryo). However, there remains a very real possibility that someone who identifies as homosexual will have sexual intercourse with an opposite sex partner in their lifetime, and those sexual encounters are as likely to result in fertilization as any other.

Also, with humans, you must take into account socialization. Socialization has been used over time to convince homosexuals they must take heterosexual partners, just as it is used to justify sexual activities like masturbation, oral and anal sex, and fetish activities which have no hope of fertilizing an egg, but are performed for mere hedonistic pleasure. We are one of the few species on Earth that routinely participates in sex specifically for pleasure while actively trying to avoid it leading to fertilization. That may seem ridiculous if viewed from an evolutionary standpoint, but part of our increased cognition and socialization is to recognize that orgasms are fun, but they don't always need to lead to pregnancy.

But homosexuality occurs in other species as well. The evolutionary "purpose" (and I hesitate to use that word because evolution does not have a specific purpose) has been guessed at, but we really don't know why these genes continue to crop up across different species. But given the sheer lunacy of reproduction that life has to offer (salmon swimming upstream to lay eggs only to drop dead afterwards, varieties of insects and arachnids consuming their mate after reproduction, birds hatching two eggs to ensure the survival of one chick, then killing the remaining chick intentionally, etc.), we don't always understand why life is the way it is. Evolution doesn't always work to make a species as viable as it could possibly be; it is not directed, it is not intentional, and it does not always serve to make species "better."

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Nik
Cottage cheese still sucks.

Dude this is a thread about the evolutionary benefits of homosetuality, not cottage cheese, but I'll take your word about cottage cheese since I don't eat it.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Atot likes cocks.


Me love vagina.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: RoloMather
The majority of homosexuals don't have offspring due to mate preferences. Therefore they should be negatively selected out during the whole process of evolution.

So why does homosexuality exist?

It's just a popular fad right now, like CB radios were a few years back. It will eventually die out like all fads do and it won't be 'cool' to be gay anymore.

More brain-exploding stupidity from this member. I'm shocked.

Didn't you know? Anything out of the norm is a fad. Especially being godless heathens.

 

[SandEagle]

Originally posted by: TehMac
Could be a number of things...maybe they just liked fish sticks when younger and the infatuation developed...

wtf? LOL

i'm glad i developed an infatuation for honeydew when i was younger

 

[eits]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: eits
how does evolution explain autism/down syndrome/birth defects, etc?

Evolution is what happens to populations of imperfect replicators. The cases you describe are simply examples of the fact that humans, like all biological organisms, replicate imperfectly.

In short, evolution doesn't guarantee the eventual perfection of replication.

True, true, over time a population as a whole will either evolve or go extinct, such are the laws of nature, or rather, were the laws of nature until we empathical beings came along and started to save those who wuld otherwise have perished under natures own laws.

the same goes for chimps. female chimps mate with those who treat them nicely and wants to spend time with them rather than which ever one is most attractive or more of an alpha male.

anyways, the point i was trying to make is that homosexuality is genetic, in many cases (many other cases are due to past abuse/trauma)... it doesn't have anything really to do with evolution. if evolution were perfect for humans, we wouldn't have autism or down syndrome or birth defects because we'd have weeded them out of the gene pool. if evolution were perfect, homosexuality would be weeded out of the gene pool. the fact of the matter is that evolution isn't perfect when it comes to humans because either perversion/rape/empathy/social pressure keeps certain imperfect traits within the gene pool.

no offense to anyone who's gay or anything... i have nothing against homosexuality. i'm just saying that it's a flaw in biology. it's supposed to be male + female.

disclaimer: i'm a card-carrying democrat who is 100% for gay marriage. i've felt that way ever since way before i discovered that my brother was into guys (and, honestly, there's definitely no way you'd be able to tell if you met him). don't get offended, i'm just stating the facts.

 

[Oceandevi]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: RocksteadyDotNet
It's not genetic, so it cant be bred out.

Something to do with hormones during pregnancy.

That's why you can have identical twins, one gay and one normal.

In before some moron mentions religion.

I don't think it's as simple as an on/off switch either.

there are all kinds of varying degrees of bisexuality.

I've had sex with women. I didn't enjoy it as much as I enjoy having sex with the other gender, but it wasn't unenjoyable.

I knew it!

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Gibsons
Here's a hypothesis, it could easily be completely wrong:

Usually in a family, the first son is the least likely to be homosexual. Later sons after that more likely. This phenomenon can't be strictly due to a 'gay gene.' As someone else indicated above, there's evidence for gestational influence or maybe even direct cause. In a tribal, paternalistic society, having two (or more) males competing to be the alpha male might be much worse than having just one. They might kill or injure each other or split the tribe/family against itself. In theory, maybe, the homosexual and heterosexual brothers are less likely to do so.

There's at least a few things wrong with this as homosexuals can be every bit as competitive or ambitious as heteros, but at least they won't be fighting over a girl.

I'm the younger bro, and I don't think I ever was gay...maybe my dad beat it out of me or I became fascinated with guns.

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Many men and even women are in hetero relationships and have children before "realizing" they are gay.

:laugh: