Why Homosexuality is Natural and Important

[+ quoththeraven]

http://36.media.tumblr.com/bb5f41f21c13484bb2b96732f7416251/tumblr_ns5n0hc6st1rpgnmxo1_1280.jpg

 

Source: http://jenny-jinya.tumblr.com/post/125178930550/i-think-this-is-important-knowledge

[+ Gar1eth]

http://36.media.tumblr.com/bb5f41f21c13484bb2b96732f7416251/tumblr_ns5n0hc6st1rpgnmxo1_1280.jpg

 

Source: http://jenny-jinya.tumblr.com/post/125178930550/i-think-this-is-important-knowledge

 

 

I wonder how often this adoption actually occurs in the wild. And of course 'natural' doesn't mean 'preferred'. I'm bald-have been since I was about 28-much earlier than a large proportion of guys. It's my natural state. But I don't prefer it. And who knows whether all homosexual animals are accepted. It's possible some are killed when immature. We really don't know whether there are other maladaptive traits homosexual animals might exhibit which prevent them from thriving.

 

Gman

[Str8boyluvr]

Not to mention they had a better sense of fashion, were more accomplished in the kitchen, were better educated, and could mix a mean cocktail.

[+ Gar1eth]

Not to mention they had a better sense of fashion, were more accomplished in the kitchen, were better educated, and could mix a mean cocktail.

 

I can't do any of that. I wonder if I'm just a confused straight man.

 

Gman

[Str8boyluvr]

I can't do any of that. I wonder if I'm just a confused straight man.

 

Gman

Works for me. I love straight boys!

[+ Gar1eth]

Not to mention they had a better sense of fashion, were more accomplished in the kitchen, were better educated, and could mix a mean cocktail.

 

I can't do any of that. I wonder if I'm just a confused straight man.

 

Gman

 

Works for me. I love straight boys!

 

I have one correction. I am fairly well educated although you couldn't prove it by what I've done with my life.

 

Gman

[Str8boyluvr]

Damn - so when my parents disowned me for being gay I should have found a gay couple to raise me. NOW you tell me!

[+ FreshFluff]

"Homophobia only exists in one species"

 

That sounds good, but is there any evidence that no other species shuns its homosexual members, or at least treats them differently?

[+ Gar1eth]

And who knows whether all homosexual animals are accepted. It's possible some are killed when immature. We really don't know whether there are other maladaptive traits homosexual animals might exhibit which prevent them from thriving.

 

Gman

 

"Homophobia only exists in one species"

 

That sounds good, but is there any evidence that no other species shuns its homosexual members, or at least treats them differently?

 

Great minds think alike.

 

Gman

[Lookin]

http://detiboga.com/public/user/63/e9/03/3e27d_0d7c.jpg

Honestly, Barney, not every day is Hump Day! . .. . . . .

[+ quoththeraven]

I wonder how often this adoption actually occurs in the wild. And of course 'natural' doesn't mean 'preferred'. I'm bald-have been since I was about 28-much earlier than a large proportion of guys. It's my natural state. But I don't prefer it. And who knows whether all homosexual animals are accepted. It's possible some are killed when immature. We really don't know whether there are other maladaptive traits homosexual animals might exhibit which prevent them from thriving.

 

Gman

 

"Homophobia only exists in one species"

 

That sounds good, but is there any evidence that no other species shuns its homosexual members, or at least treats them differently?

 

When I posted this, I realized there was no backup for the number of species cited. I don't know whether homosexual behavior in penguins, for example, has only been observed in captivity, in which case it could be a response to captivity and not "nature," whatever that is.

 

But there is at least one species I know of in which homosexual behavior has been observed in the wild: bonobos. Other than not contributing to reproduction, such behavior not only does not appear to be maladaptive, it does not lead to persecution. Conflict among bonobos is usually solved with sex; if that doesn't work, the female adults band together to scold and apply psychological pressure on the offending party until peace is restored.

 

To the extent species exhibit homosexual behavior outside of captivity, its persistence in itself suggests it is adaptive. Unless I completely misunderstand evolutionary theory, traits that persist are those that confer some evolutionary advantage. Otherwise they would have ceased long ago.

[big-n-tall]

A lot of species have been shown to exhibit homosexuality, not just the human animal (as QTR so kindly initially posted about).

 

However, that is not all. Nature runs the full gamut. There are hermaphroditic and transsexual examples abundant all in nature. Hell there is even cross species sexual attraction. Dolphins are some horny fuckers. Excuse my French. The funniest example of this is a YouTube of a dolphin trying to have sex with a woman while she was wading/swimming. He definitely molested her... not that molestation is funny... well, except when a dog humps someone's leg mercilessly. That's comedy gold.

 

The point is, again as this topic suggests, homosexuality, transgenderism ( is that even a word) and what have you, all usually condemned by religious fanatics as being unnatural and not of God, is actually very... wait for it... natural.

 

If God or whatever higher power you believe in, was against all these so called sexual abominations... then why do these things exist outside of the strict realm of the human animal? Rhetorical question.

[+ Gar1eth]

 

To the extent species exhibit homosexual behavior outside of captivity, its persistence in itself suggests it is adaptive. Unless I completely misunderstand evolutionary theory, traits that persist are those that confer some evolutionary advantage. Otherwise they would have ceased long ago.

 

You make a superficially good point from an evolutionary view. But I don't think that can be the entire story. For example a trait might be neutral with no advantage or disadvantage associated with it. Then there would be no particular selection for or against. But by definition these animals wouldn't be passing on their genes.

 

Or it may not be persistence-traits can arise de novo-maybe same sex attraction is a quirk that can come about with just a slight shift in 'normal' development. Maybe each time it occurs it's a separate incident as in starting from scratch.

 

Or possibly this trait might be neutral or even disadvantageous but what if it were linked to a trait that was advantageous-consider sickle cell disease. Sickle cell trait is protective against malaria. But sickle cell disease is a bad thing to have. Or cystic fibrosis-it's thought that the carrier state may be protective against cholera. But cystic fibrosis is an ultimately fatal.

 

Or do we know that these animals are same sex preferring for life?

 

Or what if it indicates some kind of brain or hormonal derangement during development?

 

Also if the majority of people are on a range of attraction from completely straight to completely gay-well I know it's not fashionable to talk about. But environment might at the very least influence the expression if not also the inner feelings.

 

Gman

[thickornotatall]

http://detiboga.com/public/user/63/e9/03/3e27d_0d7c.jpg

Honestly, Barney, not every day is Hump Day! . .. . . . .

[Mocha]

The point is, again as this topic suggests, homosexuality, transgenderism ( is that even a word) and what have you, all usually condemned by religious fanatics as being unnatural and not of God, is actually very... wait for it... natural.

 

If God or whatever higher power you believe in, was against all these so called sexual abominations... then why do these things exist outside of the strict realm of the human animal? Rhetorical question.

 

Well, you can't let the religious fanatics steer you from having faith. People always cite religious fanatics, and when something is quoted...it's usually something from the Old Testament instructing gay men to be put to death. Then they use it as an excuse to be a God-hating/disbelieving gay man that goes around and fucks guys at random, has miscellaneous relationships, and think he's got his finger on everything gay/God related. I can't speak to those types because their lives are fucked up as it is. They need Jesus in it.

 

There's better interpretations of these meanings all over the web, but the condemnation you're referring to is more often than not trying to teach things that were the law B.C., not A.D.

 

I've just recently come to learn that a lot of the stuff I learned growing up, was misinterpreted from the Bible. I also believe homosexuality is certainly one of them. But again, it comes down to being able to challenge those misinterpretations and do additional research, if you're interested.

[+ Gar1eth]

Well, you can't let the religious fanatics steer you from having faith. People always cite religious fanatics, and when something is quoted...it's usually something from the Old Testament instructing gay men to be put to death. Then they use it as an excuse to be a God-hating/disbelieving gay man that goes around and fucks guys at random, has miscellaneous relationships, and think he's got his finger on everything gay/God related. I can't speak to those types because their lives are fucked up as it is. They need Jesus in it.

 

There's better interpretations of these meanings all over the web, but the condemnation you're referring to is more often than not trying to teach things that were the law B.C., not A.D.

 

I've just recently come to learn that a lot of the stuff I learned growing up, was misinterpreted from the Bible. I also believe homosexuality is certainly one of them. But again, it comes down to being able to challenge those misinterpretations and do additional research, if you're interested.

 

One of the main prohibitions is that 'Man shall not lie with mankind as with a woman'. Well taking it literally -I can't do that anyway because men don't have vaginas. That's not how the statement is interpreted. But I've decided for myself that that's what it really means.

 

Gman

[big-n-tall]

Well, you can't let the religious fanatics steer you from having faith. People always cite religious fanatics, and when something is quoted...it's usually something from the Old Testament instructing gay men to be put to death. Then they use it as an excuse to be a God-hating/disbelieving gay man that goes around and fucks guys at random, has miscellaneous relationships, and think he's got his finger on everything gay/God related. I can't speak to those types because their lives are fucked up as it is. They need Jesus in it.

 

There's better interpretations of these meanings all over the web, but the condemnation you're referring to is more often than not trying to teach things that were the law B.C., not A.D.

 

I've just recently come to learn that a lot of the stuff I learned growing up, was misinterpreted from the Bible. I also believe homosexuality is certainly one of them. But again, it comes down to being able to challenge those misinterpretations and do additional research, if you're interested.

 

Just because I bring up religious fanatics doesn't mean I don't have faith. I just used them as an example because they are the ones, usually, claiming things are against nature/God.

 

What you typed, I already know. But thanks for your input.

[Rod Hagen]

The real interesting question is, assuming that gay has a biological component, genetic or otherwise, why does it persist? I've been interested in this question for 20 years. It's unanswered. Here's a good book on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Straight-Science-Homosexuality-Evolution-Adaptation/dp/0415157730

[+ Gar1eth]

The real interesting question is, assuming that gay has a biological component, genetic or otherwise, why does it persist? I've been interested in this question for 20 years. It's unanswered. Here's a good book on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Straight-Science-Homosexuality-Evolution-Adaptation/dp/0415157730

 

 

The major supposition I've always heard is that you care for either your siblings' children or more extended family/pack children . So your nieces-nephews/extended family are more likely to survive and pass on their genes.

 

Gman

[Rod Hagen]

That was a theory floated for awhile, that we are surrogate caregivers. It doesn't bear out, however. The question persists.

[+ poolboy48220]

The real interesting question is, assuming that gay has a biological component, genetic or otherwise, why does it persist? I've been interested in this question for 20 years. It's unanswered. Here's a good book on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Straight-Science-Homosexuality-Evolution-Adaptation/dp/0415157730

I've wondered about that myself. One explanation I thought of is that since most gays had to be closeted, they ended up in opposite-sex relationships and passed on their genes that way.

 

Is coming out and the acceptance of same-sex relationships going to be our extinction event?

 

On the other hand - no homosexuality in either of my parents, nor in their siblings, so that argues against a genetic component. Two of my parent's four children are gay.

[+ Gar1eth]

I've wondered about that myself. One explanation I thought of is that since most gays had to be closeted, they ended up in opposite-sex relationships and passed on their genes that way.

 

Is coming out and the acceptance of same-sex relationships going to be our extinction event?

 

On the other hand - no homosexuality in either of my parents, nor in their siblings, so that argues against a genetic component. Two of my parent's four children are gay.

 

 

For the species sake, to have it be that strongly genetically determined wouldn't be a good thing. It's probably multiple genes acting together rather than a simple gay/non-gay.

 

The only other gay person I know in my family is a 1st cousin once removed from me-ie, one of my parents' first cousins. But of course there's no way to know about anyone with gay tendencies who got married.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if gayness is a screw-up in development of the fetus. But a common screw-up that can happen with some frequency.

 

 

 

Gman

[+ poolboy48220]

Orson Scott Card put that theory ("a screw-up in development of the fetus") forth in one of his novels in "The Homecoming Saga" series. I slogged through that whole series, unfortunately.

 

And I don't think we can accept Mr. Card as an authority on the subject

[+ Gar1eth]

Orson Scott Card put that theory ("a screw-up in development of the fetus") forth in one of his novels in "The Homecoming Saga" series. I slogged through that whole series, unfortunately.

 

And I don't think we can accept Mr. Card as an authority on the subject

 

Ugh-I guess I'm going to have to rethink my feelings. I'm not fond of Mr. Card.

 

Gman

[+ quoththeraven]

On the other hand - no homosexuality in either of my parents, nor in their siblings, so that argues against a genetic component. Two of my parent's four children are gay.

 

To the extent it's genetic/biological, the mechanism is probably more complex than that. Also, absence in your parents' generation doesn't mean it can't be genetic.