# Will homosexuality disappear? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 2, 2003, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622 "2003-08-02T23:39:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/21 "2003-08-03T03:55:04Z")
I do not believe that a genetic origin for homosexuality exists. It is just too evolutionarily unrewarding. So the scenario won’t work. If such a gene existed, I think a lot of parents might choose to deep-six embryos or fetuses that possessed it even in a society in which there’s little or no social prejudice against homosexuals. Reason: grandchildren, lack of. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/22 "2003-08-03T04:04:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CaptBushido \* > \*\*I think the assumption that is a genetic flaw is wrong. If that were the case then it would be naturally correcting, as homosexuals don’t (usually) reproduce. It seems more like a cultural fluke (with maybe a LITTLE help from certain genes here and there) to me. So when will homosexuality end (absent a bloody purging by fundamentalists)? When it goes out of style. > > If anyone here is gay and finds that horribly offensive, let me know, I’ll apologize. But is it any worse than saying you’re a genetic freak? \*\* Well, yes, I do find it horribly offensive. Just because something is more-or-less genetically based, doesn’t justify words like “flaw” and “freak.” There are certainly genetic components at work when someone is a genius, or has artistic gifts or sports aptitudes, but we don’t call these people “flawed” or “freaks.” And I really don’t get the phrase “When it goes out of style.” ---
**Author:** ![king\_of\_spain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7cd45c/32.png) [@king\_of\_spain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/king_of_spain)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/23 "2003-08-03T04:09:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CaptBushido \* > \*\*I didn’t know it was recorded in animals. Anyone have any cites on non-human homosexuality? Also, I didn’t really mean CULTURAL so much SOCIETAL fluke. More like a side-effect of civilization, not a temporay fad. Guess I was a little misleading there. Really, though, I suppose I don’t know enough to make an informed estimate, I knew its been around throughout history, but you, particularly, king of spain, make it sound like it was PREVALENT where I imagined a very minute percentage. Any cites on that, as well? \*\* Well, I’m not sure exactly what kind of cites you want, and I wouldn’t know where to find some good ones online off the top of my head in any case. Let me know what sort of cites you’re looking for and I’ll see what I can find tomorrow, though. For a start, the _Symopsium_ by Plato might be a good place to look on the prevalence of homosexuality\* in ancient Greece. It’s a philosophical debate on the nature of love, written around the 4th century B.C.E. - don’t worry, it’s more readable than it sounds if you find a good translation - and not only do the characters discuss homosexuality as a common practice, some of them actually suggest that the ideal erotic relationship is _only_ possible between two males! (It should be noted here that Plato himself disapproved of homosexuality according to some of his other works - but that wasn’t the orthodox opinion of his society, and in any case Plato certainly doesn’t treat it as something practiced by only “a very minute percentage.”) **BrightNShiny** and **MusicJunkie** offered some cites on animal homosexuality, but if you want I can try and look for some more on that tomorrow too. \*I’m using “homosexuality” in this post as shorthand for the practice of male/male or female/female sex, not for exclusive attraction to members of one’s own sex. Like I said before, to have sexual intercourse _exclusively_ with members of one’s own sex was pretty historically rare. ---
**Author:** ![SnoopyFan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d07c76/32.png) [@SnoopyFan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnoopyFan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/24 "2003-08-03T05:23:06Z")
**There is a lot that could be said in response, but a simple answer is that those who are most likely to want to abort their fetus because it will be homosexual are also those most likely to be morally opposed to abortion.** I think that’s a pretty inaccurate statement. I believe homosexuality is morally wrong but if they ever found a “gay gene” and my unborn baby had it, there is NO WAY I would, for one minute, consider getting an abortion. For one thing, our genes don’t necessarily dictate our behavior. Even so, if I knew w/o a doubt my kid was going to be gay, the thought of aborting it wouldn’t cross my mind. That’s my kid, dammit, and I’ll love him/her, gay, straight, bi, Democrat (please God ANYTHING but that 😉 ) or whatever else. Most hardcore pro-lifers are hardasses on this because they believe that ALL life should be protected. I really don’t think we’d see long lines at Planned Parenthood filled with pro-lifers who are making an exception when it comes to gay genes. What I want to know is what will/would the reaction of gays (those who are really rabid about abortion rights be IF a gay gene is found)? Will they support the rights of women who do want to abort for that very reason, or will they flip-flop overnight? ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/25 "2003-08-03T05:27:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by panache45 \* > \*\*Well, yes, I do find it horribly offensive. Just because something is more-or-less genetically based, doesn’t justify words like “flaw” and “freak.” There are certainly genetic components at work when someone is a genius, or has artistic gifts or sports aptitudes, but we don’t call these people “flawed” or “freaks.” And I really don’t get the phrase “When it goes out of style.” \*\* Though we do have a certain je ne sais quoi that the world would be missing without our very existence. ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/26 "2003-08-03T05:29:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Evil Captor \* > \*\*I do not believe that a genetic origin for homosexuality exists. It is just too evolutionarily unrewarding. So the scenario won’t work. > > If such a gene existed, I think a lot of parents might choose to deep-six embryos or fetuses that possessed it even in a society in which there’s little or no social prejudice against homosexuals. Reason: grandchildren, lack of. \*\* There are a lack of children? None are available for adoption and no children need homes? ---
**Author:** ![SnoopyFan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d07c76/32.png) [@SnoopyFan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnoopyFan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/27 "2003-08-03T05:33:54Z")
I think what Evil Captor means is the whole “My DNA won’t go forth into the future” thing. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/28 "2003-08-03T05:35:35Z")
**SnoopyFan** , my limited experience is that few people think it’s okay to pick and choose your children based on the characteristics they might have genetically. > [@](#): > > A movie called Twilight of the Golds was made with this premise. Was this a movie too? I’ve seen it done onstage. Interesting stuff. > [@](#): > > I do not believe that a genetic origin for homosexuality exists. It is just too evolutionarily unrewarding. So the scenario won’t work. A great number of posts have been made on this subject, and at the very least, there are strong counter-arguments to this point. For example - and I’m not claiming this as my own idea - adults who don’t reproduce can aid adults with children. One might also suspect that if it was going to “breed itself out” or whatever, it might’ve already happened. Homosexuality is self-terminating? And here I thought lesbians could have children (see Melissa Etheridge and Julie Cypher). In fact, they can reproduce twice as fast as a straight couple if they so choose. Gay men can reproduce as well, via surrogate mothers. So are we saying animal societies and cultures produce homosexuality? That seems weird… I think it’s probable there’s at least a genetic predisposition toward homosexuality. I wouldn’t characterize it as a genetic ‘flaw,’ however. First, because that’s a value judgment, and second because it’s not a flaw in that it does not impair the ability of those with it to survive. So it’s inaccurate in my opinion to call it a flaw, but in general it’s a bigoted thing to say. ---
**Author:** ![SnoopyFan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d07c76/32.png) [@SnoopyFan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnoopyFan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/29 "2003-08-03T05:43:43Z")
**Homosexuality is self-terminating? And here I thought lesbians could have children (see Melissa Etheridge and Julie Cypher). In fact, they can reproduce twice as fast as a straight couple if they so choose. Gay men can reproduce as well, via surrogate mothers.** True, but if you take a gay couple and give _no outside help_, there will be no reproduction. Two gay guys are never gonna create a baby without a surrogate mom, and two lesbians are never going to make a baby without a sperm donor. The only way either couple can have kids is to either get some help from the opposite sex OR adopt. Left to themselves (this is providing that there is a gay gene), if people reproduced long enough (would probably take a long time), the gay gene would eventually die out. Providing there _is_ a gene to begin with. Which I doubt because as Evil Captor says, evolutionarily (is that a word?) it doesn’t make sense. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/30 "2003-08-03T05:57:49Z")
> [@](#): > > True, but if you take a gay couple and give no outside help, there will be no reproduction. Yes, but in human society today, there is more ‘outside help’ than ever, thus I see no reason to expect the gene will die out. And again, animals have no outside help and it hasn’t died out. Likewise - and perhaps other posters who know more about animals than I will be along to help out - there DO seem to be benefits to homosexuality for the species as a whole. Also, the fact that something doesn’t make sense doesn’t mean it isn’t evolutionary. That’s personifying the process. It doesn’t make any sense (from a logical perspective) that our eyes interpret everything upside down and our brains have to flip them. If evolution ran on ‘sense’ and logic, that wouldn’t happen. But if you understand how we evolved, you can see why it happens. ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/31 "2003-08-03T06:31:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Marley23 \* > \*\* > Was this a movie too? I’ve seen it done onstage. Interesting stuff. > > \*\* [http://us.imdb.com/Title?0120392](http://us.imdb.com/Title?0120392) ---
**Author:** ![GoHeels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b3f665/32.png) [@GoHeels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GoHeels)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/32 "2003-08-03T06:34:23Z")
**laigle** : > [@](#): > > I doubt it could be made to vanish. It’s not like homosexuals are genetically linked to heavily religious families, and as long as there’s a good percentage of people tolerant of homosexuality mass abortion wouldn’t eliminate the trait. You could see a drastic decrease in population though. That’s what I was thinking when I wrote the OP and asked about the societal implications. Assume the technology to uncover homosexuality prenatally emerges within the next 5-7 years, at which time the societal attitudes toward homosexuals remains pretty much where it is now (no such thing as gay marriage, homosexuality existing outside - or on the margins - of the mainstream, etc.). I don’t think it’s necessarily accurate to envision ONLY overly religious parents overlooking their objections to abortion and terminating their homosexual fetus. I think you might have plenty of parents who a) may, as SnoopyFan/Evil Captor point out, fear their DNA not progressing into the future, or b) may fancy themselves as tolerant, but fear their child being ostracized, who would decide that having a gay child is just not worth the trouble. I fear if this technology arrived before societal attitudes progressed to the point of gay acceptance by the mainstream, quite a few gay children would be aborted (again, IMHO, it is unconscionable to abort a fetus simply because he/she is gay). If gays make up 10% of the population (which seems to be the standard estimate), but by 2050 make up, say, 5-7% of the population, what could be the societal implications of the radical dwindling of the gay population? ---
**Author:** ![Mucky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@Mucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mucky)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/33 "2003-08-03T06:43:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mangeorge \* > \*\* > No, there would be no law. How on earth could conservatives justify a position on either side of this question? > Peace, > mangeorge \*\* Really, mangeorge, this isn’t true. As a conservative, I think I speak for most of my kind in saying that human life is valued higher than human “normalcy.” That is, of course, assuming you believe that some people are genetically predisposed to being homosexual. But that is the situation in this thread. I, for one, am pro-life in nearly all cases (extremely high danger to the mother being the sole exception), and if I were to find out my child were to become a homosexual, it would be a non-issue as to my desire to have my wife carry the child to term. -Mucky ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/34 "2003-08-03T06:57:43Z")
> [@](#): > > Assume the technology to uncover homosexuality prenatally emerges within the next 5-7 years, at which time the societal attitudes toward homosexuals remains pretty much where it is now (no such thing as gay marriage, homosexuality existing outside - or on the margins - of the mainstream, etc.). While society can be quite intolerant, this might be overstating the case. Not everyone approves of homosexuality, sure, but I don’t know that much of the population would actively terminate a pregnancy for this reason. As far as the mainstream goes, there are any number of TV shows with gay characters (some of them quite popular), and people - slowly, perhaps - are becoming more comfortable with gays, and the more people become comfortable, the few will view it as something that should be eliminated. Also, as far as ‘no gay marriage,’ that’s not true in all nations… ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/35 "2003-08-03T07:18:47Z")
Not an online cite, but a great book: [\*\*Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity _by Bruce Bagemihl_ \*\*](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/031225377X/103-2472826-4427043) > [@](#): > > Publishers Weekly: Homosexuality in its myriad forms has been scientifically documented in more than 450 species of mammals, birds, reptiles, insects, and other animals worldwide. Biological Exuberance is the first comprehensive account of the subject, bringing together accurate, accessible, and nonsensationalized information. > > Kirkus Reviews: > A scholarly, exhaustive, and utterly convincing refutation of the notion that human homosexuality is an aberration in nature. Biologist Bagemihl, who formerly taught cognitive science at the University of British Columbia, argues persuasively that our current understanding of biology and evolution is tainted by a heterosexually biased interpretation of animal behavior. He intends as his audience both a scientific and a general readership; he reaches both with his clear and straightforward presentation. Focusing primarily on mammals and birds, and citing only strictly documented case studies, he firmly establishes in part one of this work that homosexual and transgendered behaviors occur widely in the animal world. Speaking of causal factors, is anyone else here a proponent of the _congenital_ or _cross gendered neuroanatomy (CGN)_ theories? Originally conceived by **Karl Heinrich Ulrichs** in the 19th century, but (IMO) still the most plausible etiological explanation. A study abstract, outlining multiple CGN etiologies, if you’re interested: [**Measuring Gender**](http://www.mind.ilstu.edu/research/persons/gender/measure.doc): > [@](#): > > Influenced by Ulrich’s ideas, Magnus Hirschfeld (1868-1935), the founder of the modern scientific study of human sexuality, also believed that homosexuals were cross-gendered, but being a scientist and a good materialist, he put his hypothesis in terms of concrete brain structures and not just minds. Hirschfeld hypothesized that all human embryos possess “rudimentary neural centers” directing sexual attraction to both males and females (Hirschfeld 1896). In heterosexuals, the center for attraction to the opposite sex develops while the center for same-sex attraction regresses. In homosexuals, Hirschfeld argued, the opposite developmental sequence occurs. > > Exactly one hundred years later, the cross-gendered conception of homosexuality coupled with other correlational data about homosexual people motivates much of the current theorizing about the etiology of homosexuality. (LeVay 1996) As a trait developed in utero, like left/right handedness, I’m not sure it could be detected prenatally. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/36 "2003-08-03T07:43:04Z")
> [@](#): > > I do not believe that a genetic origin for homosexuality exists. It is just too evolutionarily unrewarding. So the scenario won’t work. I’m too drunk to read the rest of this thread to see if it has been posted already, but the fact is that it is NOT genetically unrewarding at all. Remember, that genes are not individuals: not thinking things. They are parasites on larger hosts, reproducing themselves. So if an entire family tree benefits from having an occasional homosexual, hen it WILL survive just fine as a gentically recessive trait. Indeed, biologist E.O. Wilson has suggested precisely this: that homosexuals are common features in societal animals because their prescence make enire kin groups more likely to survive. ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/37 "2003-08-03T13:56:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mangeorge \* > \*\*Problem solved? Do you think it’s that simple, Sua? What we have here is a moral conflict. What would they be most opposed to, abortion or homosexuality? \*\* OK, an easier answer - people opposed to homosexuality will refuse to accept that there is a genetic marker that means their child will be gay. 'Cause, ya know, homosexuality is a _lifestyle choice._ But Sua, you argue, they won’t reject the scientific evidence! Hey, these guys think the universe was formed in six frigging days. Alternative: these people think that homosexuality can be cured. In that case, there is no moral conflict - one does not murder someone who has a curable condition. Morally, the proper action is to cure the condition. Sua ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/38 "2003-08-03T14:35:07Z")
But, oddly enough, the increasing cultural acceptance of homosexuality could lead to its disappearance. Like some posters have said, in previous ages, it was either condemned, or assumed that even if you have homosexual affairs you will also be married with kids. Therefore the large majority of homosexuals had children. Whereas that’s not the case today, birth-children wise. They are not expected to have children. Therefore, if it is genetically related, the gene could die out due to increased cultural acceptance. If there is some truth to the “cousin helper” theory, I would think it has long been overshadowed by our cultural safety net of social services and welfare and such. I don’t see that factor giving the gene a large relative advantage. At any rate, what advantage that remains would be dwarfed by the lack of necessity for children. (note, my phrase “die out” is relative. Recessive genes can, of course, live on forever) ---
**Author:** ![Shaolinrabbit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Shaolinrabbit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shaolinrabbit)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/39 "2003-08-03T15:25:09Z")
While I would agree that most pro-life folks aren’t going to abort a gay fetus, with some notable exceptions, like Phelps perhaps, I still think the determination might cause a great deal of harm. I mean, who wants to be that kid? At least today a homosexual can remain anonymous within their family circle until puberty/ moving out. Maybe your folks don’t talk to you after that, but you can hide it from them, at least into your teens and such. If they knew from the time you were conceived, or shortly thereafter however, everything in your whole life is going to be wrong from the minute you pop out. I’d suspect there’d be a lot more suicides than abortions. ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622/40 "2003-08-03T16:08:00Z")
The dominent assumption in our culture today is that everyone is one or the other: either straight or gay. This perception is not one that’s existed throughout history. People do not seem to have seen things this way in the ancient world. Why assume that our current perception is anything but temporary? Right now, this is the way most of us see things, but it’s not the only way to see things. It seems possible that, a few generations from now, the idea that everyone is one or the other, straight or gay, will seem quaint and old fashioned. Perhaps people will come to percieve a continuum from strongly straight to srongly gay, with many possible points in between: no sharp dividing line, and few people being absolutely exclusively anything. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-homosexuality-disappear/192622.md?page=3)