How would you feel if your child was gay

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SirStev0

Lifer
Nov 13, 2003
10,449
6
81
Originally posted by: shoegazer
Originally posted by: destrekor
But seriously? There is absolutely no way having homosexual males would be advantageous at all to a tribe. If the straight men die in tribal conflict, what... are the homosexual men going to cry with the women and then the tribe dies off?
I don't want to make some kind of debate out of this, I just want to know how you came to that massive leap. More competing males is always more beneficial than less.

Natural selection is all about producing offspring that produce more offspring. So, what better place for their to be genetic variety and mutations than the genes having to do with sex? Sometimes these mutations lead to homosexuality, in other cases they lead to more offspring.

Think sickle cell anemia. Depending on the genes you inherit, you can pick up a debilitating disease (i'm not at all saying homosexuality is a bad disease) that makes survival and producing offspring much more difficult OR you can pick up resistance to malaria which is hugely beneficial to passing on ones genes in certain parts of the world. Perhaps some of the genes that lead to homosexuality are beneficial to producing more offspring in others depending on the combination received. I believe there was a recent study showing that female siblings of homosexual men tended to produce more offspring.

That is the idea. It is called heterozygous advantage and it is used to explain the maintance of alleles for traits that seem to be undesirable in the gene pool.

Individuals who are heterozygous for the Sickle Cell trait have some of the disadvantages (anemia and sickle cell attacks) but can also survive malaria better than those without it. It selects for those individuals and maintains the allele. There is some research into CF and other recessive diseases that try to find what possible heterozygous advantage they may contain because it will help explain why the allele wasn't just voted out of the pool by killing off lines that had it. They are studied because only one gene controls the disease

Homosexuality, like alcoholism, schizophrenia, probably depression, and other conditions are what are known as Multifactorial traits. These are traits that are not only controlled by multiple genes and alleles (polygenic) but also environment and other factors. It is also very likely that genes that control these traits are epistatic (controlled and modified by other genes) and pleiotropic (affect multiple traits). In other words they are epically complex. Somewhere in this mess there is a reason the alleles that attribute to homosexual behavior are maintained. Something for some reasons keeps them around.

I have even heard that it might have even been religion and society demanding individuals to engage only in heterosexual intercourse in order to produce offspring that kept the alleles in the gene pool. If people were allowed to live as they please, the homosexual allele should theoretically eventually go away, since they would not make offspring.
 

rise

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2004
9,116
46
91
Originally posted by: destrekor
meh
that's better. you have the most useles long posts this side of p&n.

anyway OP, yeah, who cares if your son or daughter is gay? nothing could make me stop loving him.

even if he was a serial killer i'd love him but know that i failed at some aspect of parenting.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Originally posted by: TallBill
I'd be fine with it, since I do believe that there is no choice involved. But there's no reason to use a fake voice and act highly flamboyant.

But ith tho fabulouth!
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Originally posted by: SirStev0
Originally posted by: TallBill
I'd be fine with it, since I do believe that there is no choice involved. But there's no reason to use a fake voice and act highly flamboyant.

as opposed to using a fake deep voice and acting straight/incognito?

yeah. funny how one can apparently accept that there is a biological component involved in one aspect of this, whereas things like voice pitch are faked--like it couldn't possibly be hormones.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Originally posted by: ironwing
If my kid turned out gay I would disown him.





Why should I treat him any different than any other kid someone claims is mine?

:D
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Originally posted by: shoegazer
Originally posted by: destrekor
But seriously? There is absolutely no way having homosexual males would be advantageous at all to a tribe. If the straight men die in tribal conflict, what... are the homosexual men going to cry with the women and then the tribe dies off?
I don't want to make some kind of debate out of this, I just want to know how you came to that massive leap. More competing males is always more beneficial than less.

Natural selection is all about producing offspring that produce more offspring. So, what better place for their to be genetic variety and mutations than the genes having to do with sex? Sometimes these mutations lead to homosexuality, in other cases they lead to more offspring.

Think sickle cell anemia. Depending on the genes you inherit, you can pick up a debilitating disease (i'm not at all saying homosexuality is a bad disease) that makes survival and producing offspring much more difficult OR you can pick up resistance to malaria which is hugely beneficial to passing on ones genes in certain parts of the world. Perhaps some of the genes that lead to homosexuality are beneficial to producing more offspring in others depending on the combination received. I believe there was a recent study showing that female siblings of homosexual men tended to produce more offspring.

And why do people seem to think that homosexual men are sterile, or in any way unable to procreate? Homosexual men does not spell the end of the tribe.

I'm sure they'd be more than willing to take one for the team if it meant the extinction of their race.

Now, if you want to consider actual tribal social order, there are tribes where only certain men are allowed to mate. It insures the Chieftan's genetic dominance. No problem having homosexual men in this order--hell, I'm sure there's plenty of soap-dropping incidents going on in that bathhouse with structure like that....
 

manowar821

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2007
6,063
0
0
I'd love him or her exactly the same, regardless of sexual orientation. Also, I would approve, as well... But that doesn't matter, my kid wouldn't need my approval to be homosexual. It's not my choice, nor do I have any right to try to control it.

By the by, why do some of you worry about the legality of homosexual acts, anyway? Why respect or concern yourself with rules made up by bigots who deserve nothing better than death?
 

rise

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2004
9,116
46
91
i also love how many replies are by posters who have no children.

edit- i know the OP has none.

edit 2- your poll sucks so i didn't vote. all i ask of my son is honesty, respect, tolerance and a BS detector, which would be ringing at an alarming rate right now.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,165
1,637
126
If I saw them playing with like, an iron toy and a doll house toy when they were little I would buy them a toy chainsaw and lots of toy guns.

I don't believe that sexual orientation is a "choice." (I am straight because I am straight, I didn't decide to be straight one day, I assume the same is true with gays.) I would support the kid.
 

GiggleGirl

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: ducci
How would you feel if your child was blind? Had down syndrome? Had webbed toes? Had 1 leg?

They all should really have the same answer.

The answer, of course, being "disappointed, but still love them unconditionally".

Being gay is that same as have down syndrome? Even in the same ball park? Even in the same game?! Stupid comparison.

im pretty sure they just mean that being gay is just like any other naturally occurring aspect of someones persona, and should be looked past like all those other things. the stigma of homosexuality has got to go. its a genetic predisposition.
 

GiggleGirl

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
I thought we had reached the point where love really was love, and completely unconditional... especially towards your own family.

the only thing i can think of about this is if a family member of mine murdered or molested a child........... i would guess i would "love" them but i would NEVER treat them the same EVER again. i almost feel like they would be dead to me.................... but then again, murder and molestation is not even in the same quadrant as simply being gay. to which i say, WHO CARES?!?!?!
 

GiggleGirl

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: shocksyde
This thread will be useful in determining who I dislike on this board.

Intolerance is probably my biggest pet peeve.

intolerance? First, read my post on page 1. Please. Can't miss it, it's the novel at the end.
And secondly, any logical person can also say homosexuals are being slightly intolerant of their own bodies and nature. You know... child production? Yeah... kind of something that we're all supposed to do at some point in our lives, unless we're unfit and can't get a mate (which happens all the time these days... but eugenics isn't something that is looked at highly by... well basically anyone... Hitler kind of killed that movement).

I'll repeat though... while the things I have said might sound harsh, I'm also not intolerant, just a realist. I'll give unconditional love to any child of mine, regardless of anything about them, be it mental health issues or homosexuality or sexual identity... and will respect anyone I personally meet, regardless of race, religion, or sexuality... regardless of whether I personally approve of their choices in life.

not everyone desires to reproduce or feels that it is part of their genetic path............ thats just life
 

GiggleGirl

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: moshquerade

People do not chose to be homosexual. Why would someone WANT to be homosexual with the intolerance and shunning they would have to put up with? No one would.

wow, this is exactly my opinion........





 

GiggleGirl

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,607
0
0
Originally posted by: destrekor
As in my last post, while I love blaming religion for most things wrong with society, I think this supersedes religion...
the idea of homosexuality only being socially wrong because of religion is, imho, bullshit.
The idea of life is that well... you make babies so that your lineage continues. Being gay means, well... no babies in your future. I doubt any society in history ever accepted full-on homosexuality, because that meant you no longer cared about the natural need to have children.
Again, in some societies, bi-sexuality seemed to be accepted, but I still don't know a lot of the reasoning. But even these people had wives and children, just had something else on the side...

being gay does not eliminate your ABILITY to produce children. your sexual organs dont just stop their normal functions because your brain tells you you love men. a gay man can have children with a woman, would he love her? probably not. would he enjoy having sex with her? probably not. hes still physical capable of reproducing and definitely could have the same mentality of WANTING children........ hes still human
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,534
911
126
If my child was gay there isn't really anything I can do about it so it really wouldn't change anything as far as my feelings toward him go. I'd be fine with it.

I have no problems with gay people.
 

destrekor

Lifer
Nov 18, 2005
28,799
359
126
Originally posted by: GiggleGirl
Originally posted by: destrekor
As in my last post, while I love blaming religion for most things wrong with society, I think this supersedes religion...
the idea of homosexuality only being socially wrong because of religion is, imho, bullshit.
The idea of life is that well... you make babies so that your lineage continues. Being gay means, well... no babies in your future. I doubt any society in history ever accepted full-on homosexuality, because that meant you no longer cared about the natural need to have children.
Again, in some societies, bi-sexuality seemed to be accepted, but I still don't know a lot of the reasoning. But even these people had wives and children, just had something else on the side...

being gay does not eliminate your ABILITY to produce children. your sexual organs dont just stop their normal functions because your brain tells you you love men. a gay man can have children with a woman, would he love her? probably not. would he enjoy having sex with her? probably not. hes still physical capable of reproducing and definitely could have the same mentality of WANTING children........ hes still human

I'll give you that, at least the idea that they are fully capable. I never argued they weren't, but a totally homosexual man is not even going to think about doing anything with a woman. If he does have a child, it might be from the marriage he had before he decided he was actually gay. I'd say good luck being a homosexual man in a relationship, and then finding a woman and having a child with her, all the while knowing you are gay and are NOT committed to a relationship. What woman is going to want to simply bear a child for a man and let him have the kid? Granted it can and probably has happened, but that's a terrible route. And if the guy lets the woman keep the child... what's the point? Most people don't think of having children like I do, where it's a function of preserving your family lineage and some of your genetics. And if they do think about the family lineage part, then why would he let go of said child? See... it's a tough situation that doesn't really work out at all.

Of course, he could have a child with a woman prior to deciding he's been lying to himself and is gay. And he can also decide that being gay isn't who he wants to be and decide to pursue an interest in women. However, both are far less common than a man being gay for life and never having a kid, or if having a kid is what he wants, then adopts... so that he and his 'partner' can raise the child together.