Gay Activists to Protest

[Gordon Nore]

...it seems that there is a genetic component as well, which means there must be some kind of evolutionary payoff, or such seemingly counter-reproductive behavior would rapidly die off... or the species would...

Very well put. I suspect we'll discover in years to come that the progeny of the epidemic of same-sex partnerships (biological or adoptive) are predominantly heterosexual, and the argument that homosexuality is a threat to the species will finally be laid to rest. Every gay person that I ever met was the product of a heterosexual union.

 

[Cryozombie]

I seriously doubt that such behaviors (and there are more examples in the article) are cultural, or are the result of abuse or other actions in the animals' pasts - so to me, at least, it seems that there is a genetic component as well, which means there must be some kind of evolutionary payoff, or such seemingly counter-reproductive behavior would rapidly die off... or the species would.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's not, or that you are wrong, just musing out loud... If it was truly "genetic" and "counter reproductive" and that the traits would "breed out"... wouldn't that support the idea that environment and choice play some role in that lifestyle, which is why it not only exists but thrives?

I can't help but think of a friend I have who is gay. When he was very young, his mother died. He was given over to the care of his grandmother, who then died not long after that. So he was then sent to live with his father, and had an abusive stepmother. Most of his friends seem to think, and I'm inclined to agree, that he is Gay because he has abandonment issues with women, and doesn't trust them. Of course, we could all be way off base, but I'm inclined to believe that not all elements of Homosexuality are purely genetic, that there are psycological factors as well.

 

[Empty Hands]

If it was truly "genetic" and "counter reproductive" and that the traits would "breed out"... wouldn't that support the idea that environment and choice play some role in that lifestyle, which is why it not only exists but thrives?

No, not necessarily. Some have advanced an evolutionary mechanism similar to the one proposed by Dawkins for altruism. On the face of it, altruism would seem to make little genetic sense. How would risking yourself for anyone other than your direct offspring help your genes survive? Yet, we have direct evidence of genetic altruism in animals. Dawkins hypothesized that sacrificing oneself for the group indirectly helps your genes in related individuals to survive, and thus would be evolutionarily selected for. Some have made similar arguments for homosexuality in that a non-breeding homosexual would still help their genes survive in their relatives by acting as an unencumbered caregiver or altruist for the group.

Alternatively, carrying one or more genetic markers for homosexuality (it definitely is not single-gene) may confer other survival advantages. This is the reason that the gene for sickle-cell anemia is so prevalent in populations of African descent - one copy of the gene confers resistance to malaria. Perhaps something similar is working with homosexuality.

Or, the selection pressure on homosexuality just may not be enough to kill it off. Selection is a random process, after all. Many genes that have horrible effects (i.e. cystic fibrosis or similar) that kill off children young nevertheless still survive and kick around the gene pool. With genes that have less selection pressure than these horrible diseases, these genes could easily stick around for a very long time.

 

[Twin Fist]

i think the real answer is that there is no "one answer" that fits for everyone.

some people choose, some dont.

 

[CuongNhuka]

Alternatively, carrying one or more genetic markers for homosexuality (it definitely is not single-gene) may confer other survival advantages. This is the reason that the gene for sickle-cell anemia is so prevalent in populations of African descent - one copy of the gene confers resistance to malaria. Perhaps something similar is working with homosexuality.

This is what I've told several people who asked me for my views on such things (yes, people do ask). I tell them I think everyone is inherenitly bi-sexual, it's just a personal subconsioucous choice one way or anouther. And that this choice is so subconsious, that people wouldn't even notice. That this choice is effected by many things (mostly genes and psychological issues like what Cryo mentioned). But, if it's inherenit, it must have a purpose, right? Of course. There are many species of animals that can change there sex when there is too many of one in a breeding population. By changing there sex, they can help to stabilize the population, and keep there species alive. Maybe homosexuality/bisexuality is just our population begining to evolve to the same end. That we are evoliving a bisexual mentality to allow a similar end.

Keep in mind, this is just my own geussing. So, what do I know?

 

[Big Don]

I tell them I think everyone is inherenitly bi-sexual, it's just a personal subconsioucous choice one way or anouther.

One can't wait to see how that viewpoint goes over at the MCRD...

 

[CuongNhuka]

One can't wait to see how that viewpoint goes over at the MCRD...

It's a simple matter of NOT talking. Which is something I'm actually rather good at. You suck at it, but that's anouther matter.

 

[Sukerkin]

Steady, gentlemen. It'd be a kindness if pointed words were not jabbed about. Provocation is as frowned upon as the responses to that provocation.

I've lost count of the amount of times it's been posted up that if someone 'winds your clock' then use the Ignore function. That is the sole reason it exists i.e. so that, unlike in the real world, fundamental and insoluable personal differences can be simply made to disappear.

 

[Twin Fist]

It's a simple matter of NOT talking. Which is something I'm actually rather good at. You suck at it, but that's anouther matter.

uh, your post count is larger than Don's...............

 

[Twin Fist]

I've lost count of the amount of times it's been posted up that if someone 'winds your clock' then use the Ignore function. That is the sole reason it exists i.e. so that, unlike in the real world, fundamental and insoluable personal differences can be simply made to disappear.

that doesnt punish the antagonist

 

[shesulsa]

uh, your post count is larger than Don's...............

He's also been here about two years longer.

 

[Sukerkin]

So true, TF but we're all grown-ups here and should have grown out of the need to snipe back at someone for taunting words.

It's harder on-line than it is in the 3D world, I know; I find it very difficult at times to bite my tongue myself.

In the end, the board has functions for dealing with these conflicts. Ignore and RTM are chief tools in the box for stopping discourse from becoming bickering.

 

[Twin Fist]

He's also been here about two years longer.

you know, if i wanted facts, i would watch the news lady..................................%-}

 

[Twin Fist]

In the end, the board has functions for dealing with these conflicts. Ignore and RTM are chief tools in the box for stopping discourse from becoming bickering.

but, bickering is FUN, and i might add, clears the air

 

[Cryozombie]

Or it just annoys the **** out of the rest of us who aren't involved in their repeated petty sqaubbles in every damn thread they post in.

 

[Sukerkin]

but, bickering is FUN, and i might add, clears the air

As Cryo just illustrated, it's not fun for everyone. Also, it is most certainly not what MT terms and conditions tolerate.

Mock arguments and 'snipes' between users who are friends is a different thing from one user sticking pins in another until they 'lose it'. It isn't easy to seperate the two cases sometimes but in others (see above) it is very clear.

 

[Twin Fist]

Or it just annoys the **** out of the rest of us who aren't involved in their repeated petty sqaubbles in every damn thread they post in.

To paraphrase the Kurgen

"ah Zombies...no sense of humor"

lol

 

[Empty Hands]

I tell them I think everyone is inherenitly bi-sexual, it's just a personal subconsioucous choice one way or anouther.

Uh, that isn't at all what I said. I was just exploring potential evolutionary mechanisms.

But, if it's inherenit, it must have a purpose, right? Of course.

No, not at all. This is a scientifically flawed method of reasoning. Teleological (telos = purpose) reasoning is avoided at all costs in science. There may be a reason that a gene is present, but it doesn't have an inherent "purpose." To posit that it does is a violation of materialism, the basis of modern science.

Plus, there are a whole lot of things banging around biological systems with no real purpose. Biology is not a "clean" system.

 

[Empty Hands]

To paraphrase the Kurgen

There can be only one!

 

[Cryozombie]

To paraphrase the Kurgen

"ah Zombies...no sense of humor"

lol

You mean misquote, not paraphrase.