Homosexuals are great for evolution!

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by B_mitchymo, Mar 15, 2009.

  1. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    I have come to the conclusion having thought about it for a number of years that homosexuality serves two purposes both of which aids evolution.

    a) a natural population control, where populations become extreme, the gay gene kicks in to slow the growth

    and

    b) to extinguish bad genes, inherited bad genes from two people which together create offspring which is actually a devolved human being compared to the parents carries genes which are twice as unhelpful in evolutionary development terms so the gay gene kicks in to prevent bad genes from lasting in the gene pool.

    If this is a pile of tosh then please let me know why so i can go sit back in the corner and re-think for another decade or do you think it makes sense?
     
  2. nudeyorker

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    42,918
    Likes Received:
    36
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC/Honolulu
    Go back to your corner!
     
  3. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    :biggrin1: but why? lol
     
    alcor972 likes this.
  4. HellsKitchenmanNYC

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    5,848
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York
    It kinda makes no sense.
     
  5. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    :biggrin1: but why? lol
     
    alcor972 likes this.
  6. nudeyorker

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    42,918
    Likes Received:
    36
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC/Honolulu
    Because with your theory; why then do we have overpopulation and genetic defects? I don't think that a minority of the population can offset the majority.
     
    keenobserver and alcor972 like this.
  7. Beachboy19

    Beachboy19 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NS, Canada
    LOL. Your saying gay people have bad genes? Oh and if u actually wanna check out the real science:

    Access to articles : Nature Reviews Genetics
     
  8. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    Homosexuality does not stifle the urge to reproduce. In fact, through written history, we know that homosexuals did marry and reproduce. It would be extremely unusual, until recently, that homosexuals didn't reproduce. Modern marriage, where romantic love became the horse before the carriage, is a very recent construct (as is homosexuality as an exclusive orientation).
     
    keenobserver and alcor972 like this.
  9. jason_els

    jason_els <img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    25
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warwick, NY, USA
    Uh oh, the New York mafia strike again! See?
     
  10. goodwood

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,804
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    36
    Location:
    Dallas/Ft. Worth, Texas
    Am i to understand that you suggest men being gay and not reproducing somehow eliminates 'bad or deficient' genes from being passed on?
     
  11. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    Well in my thinking my theory has room to explain this if for example

    a) genetic defects are naturally overlooked in the greater scheme of things if they are minor defects which affect one in every other generation for instance....or....if the genetic defect is serious then perhaps the defect itself is also serving a purpose to limit genes being passed on......or most likely this is the resulting outcome when bad genes are passed down due to thoughtless breeding such as the offspring of incestuous relations maybe.......maybe even a gay male in Iran having a child because he cannot be seen to be gay may produce a child which has inferior genes......i'm not saying that the child wouldnt be normal by the way.

    I guess i'm just interested in the theories that are around and which is most likely
     
  12. koval

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,313
    Likes Received:
    21
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dublin (IE)
    If this is true then how does he explain George Bush?
     
    keenobserver likes this.
  13. MickeyLee

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Messages:
    11,782
    Likes Received:
    1,790
    Location:
    neverhood
    so i am guessing lesbians evolved to keep mullets, the LPGA and softball from going the way of the dodo?

    *drags a nice comfy chair over to Mitchymo's corner* sweetie, bring a book you are going to be here a long time.

    ml

    and comfortable shoes. lesbians are all about comfortable shoes.
     
    keenobserver likes this.
  14. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    YES....the article you refer to identifies women with good genes.....which carry the gay gene (a good thing if my theory is true as it aids evolution)....the genes of a woman with this specific good gene producing a child with a man who may have bad genes in evolutionary terms may cause the gay gene to kick in if evolution would not benefit from the combining genes of the produced child into the gene pool
     
  15. nudeyorker

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    42,918
    Likes Received:
    36
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC/Honolulu
    Well for one thing, I'm not buying your theory that gay genes are in anyway inferior, and for another thing in order for your theory to be tested correctly, any siblings of gay men or woman would have to not reproduce as well.Good luck collecting that data!
     
    alcor972 likes this.
  16. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    I have to graciously disagree as in historical terms society was less evolved so the gay gene in my theory is not so prevalent...only kicking in when populus becomes unsustainable with bad genes outnumbering good genes.....i have no urge as a homosexual to reproduce as a case in point of someone with a 'strong' gay gene
     
  17. Rugbypup

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,194
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    19
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Funny. Though grossly ignorant.

    First up, and a big one here, gay maybe a matter of biology but not strictly genetic. There are no actual proven gay genes. You imply that homosexuals must carry other genes that nature considers massively detrimental to human survival, therefore has selectively made them gay as not to spread them... not so me thinks. Sexuality is not, as far as I'm aware' a precursory link to known genetic conditions.

    YouTube - Is Homosexuality a Choice?

    Have a watch, it might help, lol.

    As to why homosexuality exists, in a social or evolutionary context, well, the jury is out on that one.

    Personally, I don't believe anyone is 100% straight or gay but we all sit on a sexuality spectrum, some straighter so gayer than others. Look at Benobo chimps... Bonobo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...sex is a sort of social lubricant if you will, I suppose ultimately keeping us from killing each other on a daily basis, lol.

    Link it or not, humans are members of the animal kingdom, we have instincts too. Male male sex is extremely prevalent in the animal kingdom and always has been, we are no different.
     
    #17 Rugbypup, Mar 15, 2009
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2009
    malakos and alcor972 like this.
  18. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    No....merely limiting the likelihood....gay people in my theory are like the stalemate in chess where the person carries as many good genes as bad genes but where the good genes contribute less than the damage that the bad genes do......and if in my theory homosexuality is one of natures ways of aiding evolution then it unfortunately cannot help in circumstances where man has an adverse impetus on the natural order by for example criminalising homosexuality which encourages people with bad genes to conduct heterosexual behaviour therefore producing offspring with bad genes or straight people having unprotected sex with strangers which they are not compatible with
     
  19. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    pmsl :biggrin1: i love your sense of humour.....but our offspring would be demonic haha
     
  20. CUBE

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Messages:
    7,327
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    1,163
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The OC
    Thank god us fags are around I guess otherwise we might have white trash uncontrolled at Walmart walking around the with dumb off spring.

    DaVinci was really a loser too...thank goodness his weak defect genes have been eliminated from the gene pool.

    Why not examine the agenda of a society that champions the uneducated and poor to reproduce and the wealthy and educated to not produce. I am actually for all walks of life but I think we could switch the focus and try to improve with each generation rather than devolve like the last 50 years. This of course would be a Fabian Solution in case you ever study philosophy.
     
    keenobserver and alcor972 like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted