There is no plan for nature, as far as evolution is concerned. Here, perhaps, is where you are mistaken.
Also, if you followed the link given as the first response to your thread you will see some evidence for a heredity basis for homosexuality.
As i said before, i don’t have a problem with homosexuality. I have friends who are gay but i see no scientific proof for why they are the way they are. That was my original question
We’re born, we reproduce, we die…nature’s plan for all living things.
and what was in that link were similarities that were hypothesized to contribute to homosexuality. No proof. Nothing certain.
Sorry, but my superior knowledge is busy trying to figure out why you thought I needed to have a post about anal sex directed at me. Did I ever inquire about it? Or, did you have some ulterior motive for bringing up this topic of conversation with me… :eek:
Rook, if homosexuality was truly contraindicative for genetic survival, it would have been bred out a long, long time ago. Clearly, it prevents an individual from instinctively passing their genes directly to future generations.
Your inability to see any selection benefit from homosexuality does not mean there is none. You might gain some insight by reading about humans’ closest genetic relative, the bonobo, sometimes called the pygmy chimpanzee.
Also, if you would prefer to look less like a fool, then check your spelling before hitting the “submit” button. You can easily do this by hitting the “Preview Reply” button, right next to the “Submit Reply” button.
did u read the comment after that? go ahead and do that then it might make sense
Rook, I never flippin’ posted anything about anal sex or the dangers of anal sex versus other types of sex! I think you meant to direct that post towards someone else. It may behoove you to type a little slower, think about what you are saying and who you mean to say it to. Then we will have much less to make fun of.
Species survival isn’t always about an individual’s reproductive success. Witness: Worker bees in a hive are sterile. Shouldn’t their sterility have been bred out a long time ago? No, because they conribute to the survival of their species.
What role do homosexuals play in the survival of the human species? I don’t know, but since they are around in significant numbers I would hesitate before I called them an aberration.
Species survival isn’t always about an individual’s reproductive success. Witness: Worker bees in a hive are sterile. Shouldn’t their sterility have been bred out a long time ago? No, because they conribute to the survival of their species.
What role do homosexuals play in the survival of the human species? I don’t know, but since they are around in significant numbers I would hesitate before I called them an aberration.
What’s foolish is how many people are misinterpreting my view. I said nothing about homosexuals inability to contribute to society. I’m simply saying science has no real reason for why there is homosexuality to begin with. The reason it hasn’t been bred out is because the majority of gays become homosexual by choice. Those who might be homosexual at birth could be described as a mutation.
Did you read the comment AFTER that? I meant most of it for Doobieous. The only thing pertaining to you was your inability to decifer a sentence that was mistyped but obvious of it’s meaning.
Oh, I see. That’s why you typed my name at the very beginning of the post just as if you meant it for me, and did not mention Doobieous at all.
You know, when this thread started I thought Hastur jumped ugly with Rook a little quick. I thought about maybe jumping in and defending him. Fortunately, I was busy proving God at the moment and didn’t have the time.
Whew! That was a close one.
Well thanks for the thought of helping. People started getting personal when all i wanted was a scientific answer or hypothesis that made sense to me. Oh well…
I think people have categorized your view fairly well.
Don’t you remember saying:
or
or
Other people posting to this thread have repeatedly given you examples of homosexuality in other species, yet you continue to call homosexuality unnatural. What, are the Evil Homosexual Overlords using their Orbital Mind-control Lasers to force those animals to fornicate?
And your true colors are revealed yet again. You don’t want to hear any evidence. You just want a forum to fling out your platitudes ad nauseum.
I am saddened at the lack of understanding of genetics inherent in the above statement.
Rook
Do me a solid and quote me in entirety ok? I think I see where you are coming from and while you and I are in a state of semi-agreement, you are confusing the issue with other things that I wish to have nothing to do with.
Firstly anal sex isn’t restricted to homosexual males. Some of us hetero types dig it as well. See women have an anus too.
Secondly, oral sex can be appreciated by the giver and reciever in a hetero or homosexual relationship. So its a null sum argument.
Third, AIDS. Yes anal sex has a greater degree of risk than vaginal intercourse for several reasons. The vagina is a hostile environment to a lot of things. But there is still risk, see like many a vius Human Imuno Virus has a protein sheath that protects it for short periods in hostile places including but not limited to the vagina. It is true that vigorous anal intercourse does increase the risk becasue the likelyhood of damaged anal and penile tissue increases, but see my first statement as to why anal sex is not a gay only issue.
** In your defence** I think you initially were trying to state some fairly benign thoughts on the subject and were baited into a more agressive tone. It happens to me in here fairly often. Picking at your typing and spelling is just dumb. And I will state that if the people who want to nitpick spelling were really interested in spelling then they would also pick on those whose opinions they agree with. But they aren’t, they don’t have any more highbrow way to insult you so they choose that. Frankly such nitpicking dose you no harm and makes the nitpicker look childish. If they have a problem with what you say then they should adress that, not the manner in which you say it. Unless you happen to have a typing version of tourettes then you should not bother yourself with such distractions. K?
So look, here it is on the table. Everyone is people. You are people, I am people, the people who don’t like what you have to say are people too. The problem is that nobody wants to be told about themselves from the outside. I don’t like it when someone at work talks about Jews even if they have a point, I just don’t like it. Especially if it is a controversial issue like the existence of a gay-gene. Which, btw most scientific information today agrees to. At least all the biologists I respect for other work agree on it.
Everyone wants to feel like they have a reason to exist and for why they are the way they are. I have green eyes and am left handed. I can tell you all kinds of great things about both because I know each is a bit unusual and so I am defensive about it. The fact is that left-handedness is a handicap. I am a minority because of it. I compensate by being defensive about it and by having all kinds of justifications for being left handed and the other “advantages” it gives me. If I were gay, I certainly would not want some hetero telling me I’m here by mistake, that I don’t have a reason to exist in nature.
For years some of the brightest minds in the world of psychology have worked with biologists to find out if there is a gay gene to explain it. They have done so (sequence Xq28), and that work has justified work done for well over a hundred years by sociologists to explain why something like homosexuality does exist and why it will continue to exist. As I stated in the second portion of my earlier post homosexuality in the human animal provides for a special kind of person who is capable of viewing the entire specis on a larger scale because they do not suffer the same compulsions to procreate at the heterosexual human animal.
Do I think that the gay gene is mutation? Yes I can agree with that. So is green eyes from brown eyed parents. That is why I attempt to make such statements in a manner in which they are plasced in proper perspective. Most peple know someone with more significant mutations (I personally have knows three people with extra nipple sets and I bet you have too). The point of combining sociology with this field of research is to find a reason for this gene to continually pop up because it is on the surface contradictory to survival of the individual’s genetic signature and yet it continues to show up. There is also an important thing to note about mutations and how broad that definition is. A mutation can be caused by outside effects on the fertilized egg which causes a mutation {Thlobodomite or “flipper” babies are an example of that)but as the mutation originates from outside the gene pair that is considered a “mutate”. Mutation from withing the gene pair such as the “gay-gene” is on a different order of magnitude. For the most part we are highly evolved creatures physically, almost all of the really nasty genes have been weeded out so what you have left are healthy genes. Therefore it is important to look for a reason why the gay-gene survives. Again, that is the point of the second portion of my previous post.
Now don’t let anyone’s picking at you cause you to burn bridges and ignore those who disagree with you on GP, but don’t actually have anything to say on the subject, and just state your mind on the original topic.
If you have resources to post on that then do so and leave them to speak for themselves. The people here for the most part are intelligent and will read them or probably have read them. If someone offers data that you disagree with then take your time and find contrary data from multiple sources (avoid organizations that have political agendas as they are quickly dismissed).
I hope this is of some use to you. In general this thread has been interesting and enlightening to me and it got me to call my mom (she is looking in some boxes for my old stash of term papers and thesis work so I hope to have my biblio for you all soon).
Oh, and for whoever thinks that I don’t make sense about en-vitor being unnatural but brought up the termite fishing monkeys. If you can find me a petri dish and decanting unit growing in a jungle somewhere I’ll retract that statement. Otherwise you are being a silly person and your mother smells of eldeberries.
Rook:
Please don’t thank me. I got nothing to do with your crap.
If the attack was premature you certainly justified it after the fact. I’m just glad I wan’t involved in this train wreck.
The Gay Guy… has a headache.
You have no desire to enlighten yourself above your own little pet theories, so I am loathe to respond to any of them (and I note you didn’t even glance at my second post in this thread). However, if this is your synopsis, you’re flat out wrong - the American Psychological Association, backed by 35 years of scientific research, has concluded that homosexuality, like heterosexuality and bisexuality and asexuality, is a complex combination of nature, environment, biology, geneaology, chemistry, parenting, in-vitro experience, childhood experiences, etc., ad nauseum, that there is no way it will ever fully be understood. It is nature and nurture.
The “men and women fit together” has already been debunked here over and over, but you refuse to see that. If you want to reduce human sexuality to Tab A and Slot B, that’s your wife’s problem, not mine.
Oh, and please, use the links in my sig line - please, for pity’s sake.
Esprix
Either back this claim up with reputable scientific cites (which, if you’re right, should be quite easily attainable on the web) or retract the statement. We’re fighting ignorance here, and if you’re so sure you’re right, then the burden of proof is on you.
Of course, you won’t be able to, because I promise I’ll be able to come up with a dozen or more quite reputable cites that completely destroy this little theory of yours.
So put your money where your mouth is, to coin a phrase.
Esprix
We don’t? Then where have I been sticking that thing? No wonder she won’t let me turn the light on!
Sorry, I couldn’t resist. 