Is homosexuality necessary?

[Not_Punny]

There is no cause. The more we seek for a cause, the more we perpetuate the reasoning that men and women with an inclination towards same-sex attraction are scientifically-challenged. Excuse my language, but what absolute bullshit!

Hello Sweaty Black Balls -- you should read the prior thread that starting my musing in this thread.

The point is that the "medical" or "psychiatric" worlds tend to be looking at "cures" or "reasons" for homosexuality -- and their whole thought trend is based on the presupposition that something is "wrong" with homosexuality.

I am speculating in the OPPOSITE direction -- that perhaps homosexuality was part of the original design, and what might be the purpose of that.

 

[Not_Punny]

Additionally, I strongly agree with Hotmilf's observation that desire to procreate and desire to have sex are two totally different things! There is probably no man alive with stronger sex drive and lower procreative drive than I possess!

But my dearest! What about our twenty children?!! :tongue::biggrin1:

 

[B_sugarandspice]

This thread was inspired by another thread: (The Causes of Homosexuality)

Anyway, that thread got me thinking:

Almost all "investigations" into the causes of homosexuality are prompted by the unproven supposition that homosexuality is a "mistake", and that homosexuality is superfluous to the survival of the species.

As a result, most people are looking for mutations and flaws instead of pro-survival reasons for having a "third gender" (males and females who are genetically programmed to NOT actively reproduce).

Here is some food for thought:

-- Perhaps not all humans are supposed to be reproductively oriented. Look at bees and ants -- not every creature is involved in reproduction.

-- Perhaps the human form is just too complex to have a third gender (one that assists society, but doesn't necessarily reproduce)

-- And perhaps homosexuality functions as a form of population control


Any thoughts on this?

I LOVE YOU!!! That's what I said about it.You rock,babe. A smart and beautiful woman.

 

[slate_australis]

That's the sorta double-edged sword to this issue.

To suggest that homosexuality has some root cause, therefore equally suggests that it is a weakness that can/should be cured. The same thinking behind electro-shock treatment. So that really didn't work.

But for some without some evidence of a natural genetic/scientific basis for homosexuality, then the "choice" argument has some shaky ground to stand on... for those neandethals who think that way.

I personally believe that it is a naturally occuring genetic variant, like handedness. Actually that gives me a thought, maybe I should start a poll, since every bit of literature I've seen on the subject suggests that homosexual/bisexual people are twice as likely as members of the "general" population to be left-handed. Which includes myself.

 

[Not_Punny]

So what about bisexuality?

I hated getting dirty, but liked playing with cars. It's a tricky one, but I know for a fact I have 2 gay/bi cousins on my father's side, and my sister is bi as well. So that's 4/9 grandkids who are either gay or bi.

I believe it's all part of the random genetic programming.

Mayby bi's are genetically useful because they can "fill the gaps" where there might be an overabundance of females or males.

 

[Not_Punny]

My religion teaches that Homosexuals are just people who happen to have been born the same sex as their soulmate.

This is a spiritual belief. It's definitely better than believing that there's some kind of "mistake." :wink:

 

[Not_Punny]

I am not hating. I assure you. :smile:<==See? THeSe beady eyes don't lie.

I admire the maternal espirit and impetus. It was that spark of Cirque Du Soleil that essentially and physically brought me forth some decades ago.

I understand compulsions. Homosexuality...and other sexual orientations...preferences...there are necessities. There are intentions.

I don't desire straight men...but only the cute unavailable ones. :wink: A lot of straight guys don't understand why homosexuality exists. (Even I do not have the answer.) I do not know why people desire certain things, people. It is mysterious...defies all logic. You like who you like. You do whatever drives you. Sexuality is necessary. It is passion. It is a purpose. With passion, you must have enthusiasm for it. Without passion and enthusiasm, life is dull as a knife.

Invisible-droofers, Mr. Damon will be talking to you about that after class.... :wink::tongue:

I can't agree with you more.

 

[Not_Punny]

That's the sorta double-edged sword to this issue.

To suggest that homosexuality has some root cause, therefore equally suggests that it is a weakness that can/should be cured. The same thinking behind electro-shock treatment. So that really didn't work.

But for some without some evidence of a natural genetic/scientific basis for homosexuality, then the "choice" argument has some shaky ground to stand on... for those neandethals who think that way.

I personally believe that it is a naturally occuring genetic variant, like handedness. Actually that gives me a thought, maybe I should start a poll, since every bit of literature I've seen on the subject suggests that homosexual/bisexual people are twice as likely as members of the "general" population to be left-handed. Which includes myself.

Very interesting! You should start a thread on that!

 

[Not_Punny]

Hmmm... When I was a girl I loved getting dirty, and playing with toy trucks and cars! :biggrin1: I also liked sports and playing Army. I absolutely HATED "girl stuff".

I don't think childhood interests really have much to do with sexual orientation. In your case it developed as people may have predicted, but in my case it didn't. I was a tomboy who became a straight woman with no sexual interest in other women at all.

You know, I was a complete tomboy growing up.... yet I turned into a breeder! Go figure! :tongue::wink:

 

[Drifterwood]

I don't actually think that Homo Sapiens is necessary.

I don't think it is a form of population control, because one man can father hundreds of kids with different women.

Sexual preference and the desire to have kids are separate.

Some people like figs, others bananas. Maybe it is as simple as that.

 

[Not_Punny]

Totally agree -- the urge to fuck and the urge to reproduce are two entirely different switches that just so happen to be attached to the same mechanisms. :wink:

But I think homo sapiens are necessary to Homo Sapiens.

 

[Not_Punny]

ILF's are less sexy :biggrin1:

LF's

LOL --- ??? :tongue:

I looked up IFL, and according to an online acronym dictionary, IFL could mean....

Inter Facility Links
International Frequency List
immunofluorescence
In a Former Life
In-Flight Lock
Induction Field Locator
Inside face of liner
inspiratory flow limitation
Institut f&#252;r Logistik
Institute of Fluorescent Lighting
Integrated Facility for Linux
Integrated Foundation Library
Inter-Facility Link
Intro To Foreign Languages
ISLAND FREE LIBRARY

None of these make sense....

Please!! Put me out of my misery. I mean mystery!

 

[B_blackkid]

I F L

is not.

I L F

You looked up the wrong term. Dyslexia?

 

[Drifterwood]

IFL - International Fucker's League.

I am the European President. :smile:

 

[Not_Punny]

Duhhhhhh!!!!!

But then I looked up "ILF" and the only definitions I got were...

infra-low frequency
Inductive Loss Factor
In-Line Filter
indicated low forceps
Industrial Leathers Federation
INITIAL LICENSE FEE
Initial Load Format
Input Loading Factor
Integrated Lift Fan
Interactive Learning Forum
interleukin enhancer binding factor
intermediolateralis pars funicularis
Interstitial lung fibrosis
intraluminal fluid
iShares S and P Latin America 40 Index Fund
isolated lymphoid follicles

I don't think anyone is talking about interstital lung fibroses...

So, OK, I admit it -- I don't know everything, and tonight I'm particularly stupid (or should I say, pustid :tongue -- so what the heck did he mean?!!! :biggrin1:

 

[Not_Punny]

Ohhhh! There you are!!

Obviously I am grossly deficient because I never knew!

All hail to the President of the .... (what did you say?!) :tongue:

 

[ManlyBanisters]

I don't actually think that Homo Sapiens is necessary.

I don't think it is a form of population control, because one man can father hundreds of kids with different women.

Sexual preference and the desire to have kids are separate.

Some people like figs, others bananas. Maybe it is as simple as that.

My goodness - I find myself agreeing with you for once, publically!!

What is the world cumming to?!

I have problems believing sexuality is genetic at any level. What the hell has procreation got to do with the things that give any of us sexual pleasure - regardless of the labels society puts on our coital habits?

 

[B_blackkid]

Population control may or may not be a factor. It's only one way of looking at it.

The current estimates is that about 10% of the population is homosexual. (BTW, does that include all the non-gays in the Middle East?)

In the wild, some animal species assist the herd (or trail the herd) without reproducing themselves, such as elephants and wolves.

1. Population control makes little sense. If population control was the means then the estimated amount of homosexuals should increase vastly OVER TIME; chronologically speaking the estimated value has not changed for any sexuality in general. This would mean that if there was an influx, even if "The world was lying" ( like someone else suggested ) at least 20% of the planet must be homosexual, and the estimation of 10% is based off of "who comes out" not "who reports"; the actual numerals of admittance to homosexuality are lower worldwide, and furthermore the 10% statistic sounds solely American, because oddly enough that "happens" to be the estimation for America "as well". Now, I can honestly doubt the population is about 20% homosexual, but I can also see it being higher than 10%; the population of the world that belongs to the GBLT community that "exclusively" cannot reproduce would be GL ( 10% ) and T ( <1% after operation ) B, bisexuals, can indeed have children whilst following their nature. So why all of this? If the estimated amount hasn't changed in years ( and it hasn't; homosexuality, as defined today, is based off actual attraction and not action, so don't bring up the Greeks / Romans ) throughout eras ( Japan anyone? ) I would think your theory makes little sense. By Ratio the number of homosexuals "then" should be lower than the homosexuals "now" and that diffrence, again, should be staggering unless you want to argue that it was a staggered set numeral by the universe to prevent "overgrowth" which isn't the same Pop. Control, it's something which inhibits, but does not represent nor control, population.

2. Many animals have completely different non-human systems as far as reproduction and duties go; those animals need not have any particular sexuality however in order to survive or act in their offices. Animals in the herd which do not procreate could just as easily be argued as "Asexual" rather than having any sexuality at all; so it falls through on those accounts as welll. Another thing is that plenty of animals use sex as a communicative device and not as a means of reproduction; a popular misconception is the Bonobo Monkey in which the females ( females only mind you ) of the species are known to take place in orgies depicting a "Lesbian" nature; this obviously wasn't true after some real study because it turns out that's how they bond and communicate and if one wanted to place the Bonobo into a human term it would definitely be Bisexual and not Homosexual.

Anthropology and Sexology do not correlate directly; being gay does not instantly make you capable of, or incapable of, anything and also does not instill any seemingly overt behavior that deals solely with an office in society, or place and role. Of course if you know "Most Gay/Lesbian People to be..." please share what they are; also, don't throw Neurology into this with the Right-Left brained arguement, because it's been posited that neurologically the brain is "switched" in some gay people which explains flamboyant behavior in males and masculine behavior in females. Sounds like total bullshit to me, but some believe it and others don't; that still doesn't explain the actual Office ( such as Guardian ) you suggested.

 

[Drifterwood]

Ohhhh! There you are!!

Obviously I am grossly deficient because I never knew!

All hail to the President of the .... (what did you say?!) :tongue:

It is in my power to bestow membership. :biggrin1:

My goodness - I find myself agreeing with you for once, publically!!

What is the world cumming to?!

I don't know, but I am going to change my mind :tongue:

After I have sorted out this excess of testosterone :redface:

 

[ManlyBanisters]

I don't know, but I am going to change my mind :tongue:

After I have sorted out this excess of testosterone :redface:

Good idea! Me too... :tongue:

And that is not what the world is cumming to, that is what is cumming to the world :wink: