• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The rise of homosexuality

Tucker Case said:
We can look at prevalence in historical instances in places where homosexuality was not demonized and draw a logical conclusion that rates of homosexuality are flat while openness is on the rise.
Click to expand...

Still an unclear picture. What if it was more prevalent in a given area, before our current globalization caused a spread of many traits, not just sexual orientation? Again, yes that is part of a good educated guess, and makes for a good working theory right now, it's just not a confirmable thing.
 
maquiscat said:
If you have an advantaged gene set that also causes or influences homosexuality that could do it. Or if it is from double recessive genes, i.e. each parent has to contribute a recessive gene, then the recessive gene can easily be passed on via heterosexual reproduction. That assumes that the cause is purely genetic. There are thoughts that the hormonal floods could also affect sexual orientation, among other potential pre-natal factors.
Click to expand...

Actually I was thinking of a paper I read some time ago. It showed that having an on site homosexual uncle improved the probability of children surviving to maturity.
 
joG said:
Actually I was thinking of a paper I read some time ago. It showed that having an on site homosexual uncle improved the probability of children surviving to maturity.
Click to expand...

Did it specify uncle, as in the homosexual aunt didn't work as well?
 
CLAX1911 said:
If it is truly genetic... pleiotropy
Click to expand...
joG said:
You think it is random at the relatively high level of incidence?
Click to expand...

Going a little off topic, but just because something is genetic and isn't conducive to reproduction doesn't mean that it's going to be weeded out by evolution. There's plenty of conditions and features that are as such but are still prevalent. Or even look at genetic diseases. Huntington's and Tay-Sachs have stuck around despite the fact that they will literally kill you.
 
maquiscat said:
Did it specify uncle, as in the homosexual aunt didn't work as well?
Click to expand...

It specified "uncle". I do not remember aunts being mentioned. I just looked in Google, but finding the article I meant would take some time, as a good number are mentioned. The one I meant was rather statistical.
 
brothern said:
Going a little off topic, but just because something is genetic and isn't conducive to reproduction doesn't mean that it's going to be weeded out by evolution. There's plenty of conditions and features that are as such but are still prevalent. Or even look at genetic diseases. Huntington's and Tay-Sachs have stuck around despite the fact that they will literally kill you.
Click to expand...

True. On the other hand, homosexual preference would be expected to reduce the probability of successful reproduction. This was historically more important, as most children died, which meant you had have many children to have your genes around today. This makes it probable that there is an evolutionary advantage to having a certain number of homosexuals in the gene pool.
 
joG said:
True. On the other hand, homosexual preference would be expected to reduce the probability of successful reproduction. This was historically more important, as most children died, which meant you had have many children to have your genes around today. This makes it probable that there is an evolutionary advantage to having a certain number of homosexuals in the gene pool.
Click to expand...
Homosexuality only governs the preference, not the ability. Many homosexuals have tried to live straight live and produced offspring. Even today opposite sex homosexual couples with get together for the purpose of having kids created in the old fashion method, because they can't afford artificial methods.
 
maquiscat said:
Homosexuality only governs the preference, not the ability. Many homosexuals have tried to live straight live and produced offspring. Even today opposite sex homosexual couples with get together for the purpose of having kids created in the old fashion method, because they can't afford artificial methods.
Click to expand...

No doubt. But that is the way biology works. Organisms eat, because they are hungry (quantity) and because it tastes good (selected foods). That is why they the food and quantities they do. The same is true for reproduction. Much of it is because there is an urge and it feels good. If you live with a boy or have had sex with him, you will not have as much sex with the girl. So yes, the homosexual man might have sex with a fertile mate. But this will happen less often, because the interest is lacking. The probability falls. Selection is a thing of large numbers, after all.
 
depakote said:
The rise of homosexuality begins when the child makes the parents subordinate to themselves. When the authority of the parents are taken away, even if for reasons of needing to be understood, does the rise begin.

To go against your parents and to force circumstances so that they will have to see things 'your way' is the rise of such licentiousness. A child should not have to have their parents understand why they like to wear tight jeans or have colored hair. The child does not have to have their parents understand why they like to smoke pot and hang out with their friends every weekend. Nor does the child have to have their parents understand why they like sodomic sex or woman to woman sex...

And to force parents to try to change their whole lives' morals and standards and wisdom to see the world through their child's eyes is a cause for authority shifts which cause the younger generations to believe that what they are doing is moral and wise. To do such things is to collapse the entire lineage of standards and morals and wisdoms that has been handed down generation after generation.

Once the parent is willing and agrees that the sodomic sex and the woman to woman sex is acceptable, the chances of the child to see life in any other way, will get harder, since he or she has only 1 set of parents.

This form of 'acceptance' is termed 'love'. To understand and to accept. However, this form of 'love' is only very very temporary.

If parents have a hard enough time trying to soothe out their heterosexual children's marriages when they fight, how much more difficult will it be to try and help soothe out their homosexual children's marriages when they fight?
Click to expand...

My father is a fighter pilot, I was in the navy, I'm married, I have two kids. Despite all that, I'm still trans, still married to my wife, and I have zero power over my parents. They choose to either love me for being the best me I can be or they don't. That's their choice. Your rant is quite addled.
 
joG said:
No doubt. But that is the way biology works. Organisms eat, because they are hungry (quantity) and because it tastes good (selected foods). That is why they the food and quantities they do. The same is true for reproduction. Much of it is because there is an urge and it feels good. If you live with a boy or have had sex with him, you will not have as much sex with the girl. So yes, the homosexual man might have sex with a fertile mate. But this will happen less often, because the interest is lacking. The probability falls. Selection is a thing of large numbers, after all.
Click to expand...
You are not factoring in the social pressure that we place on individuals. It is that social pressure that kept homosexuals hidden for so long, marrying the opposite sex and having kids. It is a factor that we feel and exert as a species more so than others.
 
maquiscat said:
You are not factoring in the social pressure that we place on individuals. It is that social pressure that kept homosexuals hidden for so long, marrying the opposite sex and having kids. It is a factor that we feel and exert as a species more so than others.
Click to expand...

True, but not the whole of it. If someone turns you on, you are more probable to have sex, when you get home. None of my gay freinds with wives have children of their own. In a number of cases they have a child ir two by a lover. Now that is not a huge group and, pampered as they are, probably not representative.
 
joG said:
It is interesting. What is the reason it survived darwinian selection?
Click to expand...

That is a good question. Homosexuals tend to be more intelligent than heterosexuals. My theory is that homosexuality is caused by genes that are recessive for homosexuality but dominant for higher intelligence. Human evolution has favored higher intelligence. If my theory is correct, siblings of homosexuals inherit one of the genes, and are more intelligent too.
 
WTF.jpg
 
SmartCat said:
That is a good question. Homosexuals tend to be more intelligent than heterosexuals. My theory is that homosexuality is caused by genes that are recessive for homosexuality but dominant for higher intelligence. Human evolution has favored higher intelligence. If my theory is correct, siblings of homosexuals inherit one of the genes, and are more intelligent too.
Click to expand...

Interesting. In fact, most of the homosexuals I have known made a quite intelligent impression and a number were certainly so. Of course, come to think about it, most of the people I care to associate with ....

;)
 
brothern said:
Going a little off topic, but just because something is genetic and isn't conducive to reproduction doesn't mean that it's going to be weeded out by evolution. There's plenty of conditions and features that are as such but are still prevalent. Or even look at genetic diseases. Huntington's and Tay-Sachs have stuck around despite the fact that they will literally kill you.
Click to expand...

Well I have learned what pleiotropy is. And if homosexuality is indeed genetic is think it was do to some pleiotropic effect. Is be willing to bet that Huntingtons disease is as well.
 
CLAX1911 said:
High level of incidence? To my knowledge only about 2% of people are homosexual. That isn't a high level of incidence.
Click to expand...

I thought we were closer to 5%?
 
CLAX1911 said:
High level of incidence? To my knowledge only about 2% of people are homosexual. That isn't a high level of incidence.
Click to expand...

Are you counting only those who are exclusively homosexual, or including those who just have a preference for the same gender?
 
Quag said:
The OP of course
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with the sentiment, without the quote it simply isn't obvious, especially with all the other WTF posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom