Jump to content

Does the Gay Gene Exist?

Paranoid Marvin

By Paranoid Marvin,
in The Big Issues [Real Life]

 Share

Does the Gay Gene Exisit?  

43 members have voted

  1. 1. Are people born gay?

    • Yes
      16
    • No
      14
    • Unsure
      13

51 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
So you too believe in the plot for a New World Order?
Nah, there is nothing new about that. We have been brainwashed for thousands of years. Remember Galileo Galilei? He wasn't allowed by the Church to say that the Earth moved around the Sun, rather than the other way around.We have been, and still are, slave of the monotheistic, Abrahamic religions.
natural is what makes the world turn round. {censored} couples dont have kids, its as simple as that, and you're sticking something where it doesnt belong ;)
Tell that to the bonobos, who aren't extinct because of "{censored}" sex, BTW.
mifki
mifki
Posted
Posted

Alessandro, you are using this bonobo's thing a bit to much lol, they are bi-sexual, the guys still bone the chicks to have kids, you see how far they go just boning the same sex, my bet is not very.

Sure the apes can have sex with each other and have sword fights, but comparing human behaviour to the behaviour of apes is just plain pathetic as far as im concerned. Sure, polar bears practice necrophiliasm, but does that make it ok for me to go digg up some old grannie/granpa and have a bit of fun? I think not.

Lactobacillus P
Lactobacillus P
Posted
Posted
Oh yeah.

I am pro-{censored} marriage and all that good stuff, but I agree with you: there is nothing natural about being homosexual. Two homosexual individuals are counter-productive to a species population. Mind you, we aren't animals so in today's day and age there is nothing 'wrong' with homosexuality :whistle:

 

Well that is an interesting discussion point, are we animals? From a biological standpoint we are not very different from a lot of animals out there. It might even be shocking to discover that the human genome is about 99% the same as that of a chimpanzee. Now back on non-breeding individuals being counter productive to a species population. You are wrong here, single and {censored} individuals/non off-spring producing individuals play a vital role in the stability of populations and actually make genes last longer by playing a more altruistic role that actually solidifies the social bonds in a group. In Meerkats these individuals can be watchers, caretakers etc. Altruism is something that is needed for the survival of the young. You can easily observe this type of behavior in yourself if your brothers/sisters have children - those kids are often special to you not only because they are your niece or nephew - but also because some more basic behavioral instinct can tell that these kids are genetically very close to your own genetic make-up and you feel protective because of that / apart from the fact that there are social and family bonds between you and them.

Non-offspring producing individuals in animal population often take on the role of co-parent or function as a protector or as a herder of the group. In humans this can be observed too...

 

Of course this doesn't mean that all {censored} people are altruistic herders of the people, mother-theresa like figures, but {censored}/single individuals in animal populations often have ' more time ' on their hands/hooves/paws to be altruistic - and they do serve a different function than their 'breeing' counterparts. ;)

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
Alessandro, you are using this bonobo's thing a bit to much lol, they are bi-sexual, the guys still bone the chicks to have kids, you see how far they go just boning the same sex, my bet is not very.

Sure the apes can have sex with each other and have sword fights, but comparing human behaviour to the behaviour of apes is just plain pathetic as far as im concerned. Sure, polar bears practice necrophiliasm, but does that make it ok for me to go digg up some old grannie/granpa and have a bit of fun? I think not.

 

What I find really odd about this story is that when someone mentions {censored} people or behavior, somebody always shouts: That is against nature!!!

Then somebody like me comes and says: "OK, let's see what happens in nature"

And then the next person (like you) comes and says: "Oh, but we aren't animals"

And so we keep going round in circles.

Paranoid Marvin
Paranoid Marvin
Posted
  • Author
Posted
What I find really odd about this story is that when someone mentions {censored} people or behavior, somebody always shouts: That is against nature!!!

Then somebody like me comes and says: "OK, let's see what happens in nature"

And then the next person (like you) comes and says: "Oh, but we aren't animals"

And so we keep going round in circles.

 

I don't understand why people say we aren't animals.

Maybe they just think they are so much better than all of us :P

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
we are animals, just the smartest(we think) on the planet

 

And the most cruel as well. Surely we could learn from the bonobos also in terms of social behavior:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo#Other_social_behavior

InsanelyOne
InsanelyOne
Posted
Posted

Personally I doubt there is a {censored} gene in the sense of one that always results in a homosexual identity. I presume someday scientists will discover a biological marker of some sort that indicates a propensity toward homosexuality but I doubt it's anything as simple as the genes that identify hair and eye color.

 

I believe most people that truly care about this have an agenda. Either those who are adamantly for/against homosexuality in general. Having a direct and identifiable cause provides them with a way to spin their argument.

 

For me I think it's irrelevant to the argument.

 

{censored} and lesbians have existed since the dawn of time and will always exist. It's only a matter of how far the general population goes in accepting that fact and recognizing that it's an acceptable deviation from the norm.

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
lol alessandro17. Im going to sell all my belongings now, and go live with the bonobos, then i can resolve issues by having a {censored} fight, or rubbing my balls with another guy :P.

 

Yes, do, by any means, that would be quite an education.

And BTW, bonobos don't fight:

 

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/in...iew&id=1066

 

MEET OUR MAKE-LOVE-NOT-WAR PRIMATES.

 

 

There is no doubt on which side of the cultural divide Evolution resides. In "Why Sex?" the conflict between Left and Right was played by bonobos and chimps respectively.

 

Chimps are male-dominated; the males are aggressive; the females are timid and submissive; and disputes are settled by violence. Worse yet, they use sex for procreation. (Gasp!)

 

But, Oh!, the bonobo. These lovely ancestors are female-dominated, egalitarian, nearly vegetarian, pansexual, and settle disputes by…well…by…sex. And not just any sex, but every kind of sex. Sure, males and females sometimes unite, but so do females and females, males and males, and adults and juveniles. Just so there are no doubters in the audience, PBS provided ample footage.

 

The central, non-too-subtle message, wrapped in the mantle of evolutionary science, was both clearly stated and vividly illustrated: We human beings would be better off to imitate our ancestors the bonobos, rather than the chimps. The use of science to forward a particular moral and political agenda could not have been bolder.

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
[stupid_Comment] If I was a Bonobo I would just {censored}.. [/stupid_Comment]

 

Imagine if we humans adopted the bonobo way of life.

That would mean:

1)No more fighting. Thus no more cruelty, violence, murders, war...

2)No more sexual taboos, we could do whatever we liked. However we are still humans, thus nothing would be compulsory.

Not a bad World at all, what do you think?

Shrimp
Shrimp
Posted
Posted

In my Opinion Dolphins are the second smartest species, and heres a fact that somewhat relates to the topic:

 

Dolphins are one of the few animals other than humans known to have sex for reasons other than reproduction, sometimes also engaging in acts of a homosexual nature.[15] Various dolphin species have been known to engage in sexual behavior with other dolphin species,[15] this also having resulted in various hybrid dolphin species as mentioned earlier. Sexual encounters may be violent, with male dolphins sometimes showing aggressive behavior towards both females and other male dolphins.[15][16] Occasionally, dolphins will also show sexual behavior towards other animals, including humans.

 

See? Very similar to humans, plus Dolphins have a type of vocal whistling language.

 

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin

apowerr
apowerr
Posted
Posted
Imagine if we humans adopted the bonobo way of life.

That would mean:

1)No more fighting, Thus no more cruelty, violence, murders, war...

2)No more sexual taboos, we could do whatever we liked. However we are still humans, thus nothing would be compulsory.

Not a bad World at all, what do you think?

No, the most attractive would still screw the most attractive. (which is to be expected)

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
Alessandro, if being a bonobo is so attractive, then why dont you just leave and go join the bonobos?

 

I am seriously considering it :D

What worries me is that probably they don't have broadband internet access :D

Zealot
Zealot
Posted
Posted

Im not sure if there is a {censored} genre ,what im sure is that this behavior exists in alot of animals and all around the nature so im sure they have a purpose on the circle of life .

 

 

PS:Im not sure if the bonobos are confortable with all of you calling them {censored} ... i would expect a lawsuit from the bonobos´s lawyer :happymac::D

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
PS:Im not sure if the bonobos are confortable with all of you calling them {censored} ... i would expect a lawsuit from the bonobos´s lawyer :happymac::D

 

And they would be right, because the proper definition is not "{censored}" but "pansexual".

 

Im not sure if there is a {censored} genre ,what im sure is that this behavior exists in alot of animals and all around the nature so im sure they have a purpose on the circle of life .

 

It is pretty safe to assume that a man and a woman of the same age (most of times) who marry and have children is not the only "natural" way of life. We have been brainwashed for thousands of years into believing it by the Jewish and Christian religions.

 

Almost 2400 years ago Plato in The Republic already suggested a completely different way of life.

apowerr
apowerr
Posted
Posted
Almost 2400 years ago Plato in The Republic already suggested a completely different way of life.

Do you mean:

  • Productive Which represents the abdomen.(Workers) — the labourers, carpenters, plumbers, masons, merchants, farmers, ranchers, etc. These correspond to the "appetite" part of the soul.
  • Protective Which represents the chest.(Warriors or Auxiliaries) — those who are adventurous, strong and brave; in the armed forces. These correspond to the "spirit" part of the soul.
  • Governing Which represents the head. (Rulers or Guardians) — those who are intelligent, rational, self-controlled, in love with wisdom, well suited to make decisions for the community. These correspond to the "reason" part of the soul and are very few.

^That way of life?^

 

If not what?

Alessandro17
Alessandro17
Posted
Posted
Do you mean:

 

^That way of life?^

 

If not what?

 

There is a lot more than that to Plato's Republic. My understanding so far is that "wives" and "husbands" are in common and children aren't raised by their natural parents but by the entire society.

However, because various internet searches don't fully clarify the situation, the only thing left is to read The Republic itself.

 

Edit: I found something meaningful

 

http://users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/libeqsor/platsex.html

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...