Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    americangayboy's Avatar
    americangayboy Posts: 220, Reputation: 38
    Full Member
     
    #21

    Sep 30, 2007, 11:39 AM
    I don't think anyone who has taken even one research oriented class thinks it comes down to the nature vs nuture debate, in fact, people in behavior genetics think it's funny when people even bring it up, because virtually nothing is determined solely by biology or solely by the environment. Even things like eye color are influenced by by diet. We can say for certain that there is a biological influence, however, we can't say that biology is the only cause.
    gallivant_fellow's Avatar
    gallivant_fellow Posts: 157, Reputation: 31
    Junior Member
     
    #22

    Sep 30, 2007, 12:19 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by TOONICE
    I agree to an extent with what you are saying...however, to suggest it is a defect or abnormally is to also suggest there could be a way to fix it. If evolution has created a percentage where "every species has about the same percentage of homosexuals", would this not be a form of evolving for a reason. Only the strongest survive is the major theory of evolution....evolving to survive...and only the strongest organisms/animals/plants/etc. able to do this will or face extinction. Granted Homosexuals, by theory and popular opinion, can't procreate. By choice they can reproduce and maybe genetic material is passed on and may remain dormant till the right conditions exsist through the generations.

    This also leads to question if the Homosexual does choose to have sex with the opposite sex, then does this make them bisexual (which I question the ability to love, sexually, same sex and opposite sex equally) or is it a homosexual giving in to the urge, unconsciously, for homosexuals to survive for possibly generations?

    What would also be the reasons for for evolution to homosexual....maybe a form of population control?

    Just playing out the reasoning....
    Evolution has also created a percentage where every species has about the same number of anything. I saw something about a resort island where monkeys can easily obtain alcohol, and their preferences, number of alcoholics, etc. are identical to ours. Watch it if you want, it's pretty cool. YouTube - drunk monkeys

    You also talk about homosexuality like it's a gene that's passed down and was fine tuned by nature, no one knows this. It could just be a mother's anti-bodies going crazy or many other causes that aren't genetically supposed to happen. Look at extreme mental and physical retardation in babies. Is this a gene used to help the human race? Insulting example, but I'm just saying that some things in nature aren't perfect.

    If homosexuality is a genetic advantage for a species and you are right, I don't think population control would be the reason. Humans thrive in numbers. I think it would be to help balance out the playing field, making sure everyone has a partner and nothing more. Like if a mother made too many males and they were all straight, things might get too hectic.
    americangayboy's Avatar
    americangayboy Posts: 220, Reputation: 38
    Full Member
     
    #23

    Sep 30, 2007, 02:46 PM
    Gallivant, I think you're confused. I'm not offended that you used mental retardation in your comparison, I'm offended that you're comparing a maladaptive gene to a benign (or possibly adaptive) gene. Also, you read one study about hormone antibodies and you're convinced that this is the reason people are gay? It doesn't work like that. If it did, I could claim that gay people make better parents than staight people. There are a handful of studies that show children of gay and lesbian parents are more intelligent, better adjusted, financially more stable (of course, this is on average) than children of straight parents.
    gallivant_fellow's Avatar
    gallivant_fellow Posts: 157, Reputation: 31
    Junior Member
     
    #24

    Sep 30, 2007, 08:24 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by americangayboy
    Gallivant, I think you're confused. I'm not offended that you used mental retardation in your comparison, I'm offended that you're comparing a maladaptive gene to a benign (or possibly adaptive) gene. Also, you read one study about hormone antibodies and you're convinced that this is the reason people are gay? It doesn't work like that. If it did, I could claim that gay people make better parents than staight people. There are a handful of studies that show children of gay and lesbian parents are more intelligent, better adjusted, financially more stable (of course, this is on average) than children of straight parents.
    I'm not confused. I have read many studies, but I have presented a link to one of them for your interest. I never said that antibodies are the reason people are gay. I did however offer it as a possibility and said "Maybe this is the cause." Maybe it is.
    americangayboy's Avatar
    americangayboy Posts: 220, Reputation: 38
    Full Member
     
    #25

    Sep 30, 2007, 08:30 PM
    Well, it's pretty clear that there isn't a single cause... to anything. Yes, the study you cite is compelling, but what you're saying is inaccurate and somewhat offensive. Homosexuality is nothing like mental retardation, at least no more so than homosexuality is like race, hair color, height, or any other variable.
    TOONICE's Avatar
    TOONICE Posts: 7, Reputation: 1
    New Member
     
    #26

    Oct 1, 2007, 09:44 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by gallivant_fellow
    Evolution has also created a percentage where every species has about the same number of anything. I saw something about a resort island where monkeys can easily obtain alcohol, and their preferences, number of alcoholics, etc. are identical to ours. Watch it if you want, it's pretty cool. YouTube - drunk monkeys

    You also talk about homosexuality like it's a gene that's passed down and was fine tuned by nature, no one knows this. It could just be a mother's anti-bodies going crazy or many other causes that aren't genetically supposed to happen. Look at extreme mental and physical retardation in babies. Is this a gene used to help the human race? Insulting example, but I'm just saying that some things in nature aren't perfect.

    If homosexuality is a genetic advantage for a species and you are right, I don't think population control would be the reason. Humans thrive in numbers. I think it would be to help balance out the playing field, making sure everyone has a partner and nothing more. Like if a mother made too many males and they were all straight, things might get too hectic.
    I appreciate your point of view and this healthy discussion.
    I will say, Genetics can be a product of mother nature fine tuning things... or a freak of mother nature... which begs to argue that you originally saying it is an abnormally is also possible. Yet, in the nature of evolution, the strongest survive. Mutations survive only if strong enough... evolution mutates... evolves... so in the genetics of mental retardation... what caused it? And why? Was the parents on drugs? Did the mother drink? ETC ETC ETC... OR was their a recessive gene that was a dormant and this being the result... or did both parents carry the recessive gene that caused the retardation with the right conditions. (1 in 10000000 chance therory).

    It goes to show, did both parents have an recessive gene with homosexuality that was dormant... who knows... but could be used in both arguments... Evolutionally Defect Or Intent?


    TOONICE
    americangayboy's Avatar
    americangayboy Posts: 220, Reputation: 38
    Full Member
     
    #27

    Oct 1, 2007, 09:48 AM
    It's interesting that you bring this up, because there has been a sex-linked patern of sexual orientation observed in regards to male sexuality. Meaning that for this variable, only the mother would contribute to it.
    N0help4u's Avatar
    N0help4u Posts: 19,823, Reputation: 2035
    Uber Member
     
    #28

    Oct 4, 2007, 03:35 PM
    Americangayboy -I don't think anyone who has taken even one research oriented class thinks it comes down to the nature vs nuture debate

    I agree When I was in the 8th grade and first learned about nature vs nurture my reply was why does it have to be vs and not something working together?
    ky37m's Avatar
    ky37m Posts: 35, Reputation: 5
    Junior Member
     
    #29

    Oct 29, 2007, 12:12 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by gallivant_fellow
    There is an extra hormone or something that makes a females into a males. It is thought that some mothers produce antibodies that attack the hormone, leaving some males not fully developed. It is supposed to be extremely common that the last boy born is most likely going to be the gay one if there is a gay in the family. The reason could be that the mother's antibodies against the male hormones grow too strong over the course of having many sons.

    I've seen a book about it on TV recently and I've read some stuff too. Maybe this is the cause.
    This is very interesting! I would love to hear more. I have 8 siblings. I am the last of the boys and yes I am gay. I realized that I was attracted to other guys about 2 months shy of my 10th birthday. Since then, I have spent everyday trying to be straight so that I would be considered normal by society. By the way, I am so through with that. So now, I'm kind of on a journey , trying to be comfortable in my own shell. Any thoughts or ideas would be really helpful.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search



View more questions Search