What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Assuming someone will screw this up but... (1 Viewer)

GTBilly

GTBilly

Footballguy
So I just read on reddit this little thought and I'm too lazy to search for it so I'll ask here:

If being gay is genetic or not a choice(which I believe). Then why hasn't it been bred out of humans?

Discuss

 
One of the arguments I've read is that women that carry a homosexual male gene are actually more sexually aggressive and procreate at a greater rate then women without the gene, thus making up for the gay men who don't procreate at all.

Not sure how that effects lesbians, though.

 
Not really qualified to answer since I'm not a biologist or geneticist but I think it is a mistake to view homosexuality as being "genetic" the same way we view having red hair or being tall as genetic.

 
First of all, sexual attraction isn't so simple as gay or straight. Second, as has been brought up already homosexuals are in fact, perfectly fertile. So to answer your question, most every living thing is genetically programmed to produce offspring, humans of all orientations are no different. Most people I know, including my mother who has now been married to and loved both a man and a woman wanted children, and so she has them.

Its silly to believe that they wouldn't be mutually exclusive.

Its my opinion, that sexual attraction is likely a combination of factors, most of which are genetic; resulting in countless possible orientations, all of which still feel the baser instinct to reproduce.

Know the right people and you will quickly begin to see the trend, so many women I know who are gay tried for so long to be with a man even though it didn't feel right, usually made worse because having children felt right. The past millennia until pretty recently has been incredibly sexually repressed. Give it a hundred years, old stigmas die hard.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Run It Up said:
First of all, sexual attraction isn't so simple as gay or straight. Second, as has been brought up already homosexuals are in fact, perfectly fertile. So to answer your question, most every living thing is genetically programmed to produce offspring, humans of all orientations are no different. Most people I know, including my mother who has now been married to and loved both a man and a woman wanted children, and so she has them.

Its silly to believe that they wouldn't be mutually exclusive.

Its my opinion, that sexual attraction is likely a combination of factors, most of which are genetic; resulting in countless possible orientations, all of which still feel the baser instinct to reproduce.

Know the right people and you will quickly begin to see the trend, so many women I know who are gay tried for so long to be with a man even though it didn't feel right, usually made worse because having children felt right. The past millennia until pretty recently has been incredibly sexually repressed. Give it a hundred years, old stigmas die hard.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

 
The gay uncle theory is fairly popular. There is an evolutionary advantage to males who don't compete with the husband, but still provide, educate and protect the kid. There are a couple schools of thought on this. "Gay uncles" may still have occasional hetero sex, but prefer the companionship of other males, maybe even the father. Or maybe the gay uncle gene is passed from mother to father instead of father to father, because it would provide an evolutionary advantage to the children. Or both.

The first case suggests that homosexual/heterosexual behavior is a choice, even if the proclivity is genetic. But that shouldn't be surprising or controversial to the nature or nurture people. The second case does not, which is the "safer" theory because it doesn't raise questions about whether sexual preference should be viewed as a choice. And of course, if both are true, then it stands to reason that both "sides" are right - for some people, its genetic, and for others, its more of a continuum from gay to straight, instead of an either/or.

 
Run It Up said:
First of all, sexual attraction isn't so simple as gay or straight. Second, as has been brought up already homosexuals are in fact, perfectly fertile. So to answer your question, most every living thing is genetically programmed to produce offspring, humans of all orientations are no different. Most people I know, including my mother who has now been married to and loved both a man and a woman wanted children, and so she has them.

Its silly to believe that they wouldn't be mutually exclusive.

Its my opinion, that sexual attraction is likely a combination of factors, most of which are genetic; resulting in countless possible orientations, all of which still feel the baser instinct to reproduce.

Know the right people and you will quickly begin to see the trend, so many women I know who are gay tried for so long to be with a man even though it didn't feel right, usually made worse because having children felt right. The past millennia until pretty recently has been incredibly sexually repressed. Give it a hundred years, old stigmas die hard.
Click to expand...
Good post.

 
Some of it may have to do with genetics, some of it may have to do with lack of a proper role model of a specific gender. I've heard it bandied about that in many cases, a gay man didn't have a father figure prevalent in their lives, and sometimes seek a lifestyle where they get that bonding through various partners.

 
Kal El said:
Some of it may have to do with genetics, some of it may have to do with lack of a proper role model of a specific gender. I've heard it bandied about that in many cases, a gay man didn't have a father figure prevalent in their lives, and sometimes seek a lifestyle where they get that bonding through various partners.
Click to expand...
There may be cases like that... but in MANY of the "gay male" cases I know well, it was pretty obvious very early on that they were not straight. 3 in particlar came from great homes with strong father figure... but exhibited "gay" traits at a very young age.

 
Being gay might even be an evolutionary advantage, because no one really wants to conquer the gay outposts (and conversely, gays don't seem to put much value on putting their lives at risk on military adventures to expand their empire). So gays end up being seen as neutral and not a threat, kind of like the Switzerland of people, and the gay gene was able to live out relatively long lives compared to others. Imagine some noob conquerer saying "hey guys I have an idea, lets attack the Isle of Lesbos" he'd be laughed out of the room, what would be the point.

 
bostonfred said:
The gay uncle theory is fairly popular. There is an evolutionary advantage to males who don't compete with the husband, but still provide, educate and protect the kid. There are a couple schools of thought on this. "Gay uncles" may still have occasional hetero sex, but prefer the companionship of other males, maybe even the father. Or maybe the gay uncle gene is passed from mother to father instead of father to father, because it would provide an evolutionary advantage to the children. Or both.

The first case suggests that homosexual/heterosexual behavior is a choice, even if the proclivity is genetic. But that shouldn't be surprising or controversial to the nature or nurture people. The second case does not, which is the "safer" theory because it doesn't raise questions about whether sexual preference should be viewed as a choice. And of course, if both are true, then it stands to reason that both "sides" are right - for some people, its genetic, and for others, its more of a continuum from gay to straight, instead of an either/or.
Click to expand...
Both sides are right if the "sides" are nature vs nurture. However, anyone claiming that being gay is a "choice" is wrong. To the extent that sexuality is a product of environment rather than genetics, it's generally determined at an early age and involuntarily.

Which is why the entire debate is dumb to begin with. In almost every case it's not a choice, even if it's not determined genetically. Few if any people simply choose to be gay in adulthood.

 
Short answer to the OP:

Humans who don't outwardly express a given trait often carry the genes for that trait. Bowdlerized example -- brown-haired man & woman can have a blonde-haired child if both parents had unexpressed blonde-hair genes.

 
It's not 'genetic' like you think of genetic. It may be influenced by genes, pre-natal environment, post-natal environment etc.

There is no gay gene. Human sexuality is far more complex than hard genetic determinism.

 
If they were able to isolate a gay gene and safely deactivate it during pregnancy, what % of gay people would choose to have non gay kids? 98%? 99%?

 
My sexual orientation totally influences my religion.

Dishonor my free expression of religion and you dishonor my sexuality.

 
[icon] said:
Kal El said:
Some of it may have to do with genetics, some of it may have to do with lack of a proper role model of a specific gender. I've heard it bandied about that in many cases, a gay man didn't have a father figure prevalent in their lives, and sometimes seek a lifestyle where they get that bonding through various partners.
Click to expand...
There may be cases like that... but in MANY of the "gay male" cases I know well, it was pretty obvious very early on that they were not straight. 3 in particlar came from great homes with strong father figure... but exhibited "gay" traits at a very young age.
Click to expand...
If you talk to gays, almost all of them say this (that they were always attracted to members of the same sex) -- from as early an age as they had an attraction.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science has shown we all start out female..Therefore my guess is somewhere during development the men who end up gay probably didn't fully develop man traits and retained some female traits....It is also shown through science that the female brain and homosexual brain are very similar to each other and different from a heterosexual brain.

 
wdcrob said:
[icon] said:
Kal El said:
Some of it may have to do with genetics, some of it may have to do with lack of a proper role model of a specific gender. I've heard it bandied about that in many cases, a gay man didn't have a father figure prevalent in their lives, and sometimes seek a lifestyle where they get that bonding through various partners.
Click to expand...
There may be cases like that... but in MANY of the "gay male" cases I know well, it was pretty obvious very early on that they were not straight. 3 in particlar came from great homes with strong father figure... but exhibited "gay" traits at a very young age.
Click to expand...
If you talk to gays, almost all of them say this (that they were always attracted to members of the same sex) -- from as early an age as they had an attraction.
Click to expand...
According to PEW:

The survey finds that 12 is the median age at which lesbian, gay and bisexual adults first felt they might be something other than heterosexual or straight. For those who say they now know for sure that they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, that realization came at a median age of 17.
Click to expand...
 
jon_mx said:
One reason is because it isn't purely genetic. /thread
Click to expand...
Or because it is, but the genetic makeup is not "I'm 100% gay, no attraction / desire to the opposite gender and/or desire to procreate"

If you are a bit curious, you'll likely make a few babies. If you are bi, you'll likely make a few babies. If you are "straight curious" you may make a baby or two and if you are gay, there's still a decent chance that you will have some sort of straight intercourse.

 
jon_mx said:
wdcrob said:
[icon] said:
Kal El said:
Some of it may have to do with genetics, some of it may have to do with lack of a proper role model of a specific gender. I've heard it bandied about that in many cases, a gay man didn't have a father figure prevalent in their lives, and sometimes seek a lifestyle where they get that bonding through various partners.
Click to expand...
There may be cases like that... but in MANY of the "gay male" cases I know well, it was pretty obvious very early on that they were not straight. 3 in particlar came from great homes with strong father figure... but exhibited "gay" traits at a very young age.
Click to expand...
If you talk to gays, almost all of them say this (that they were always attracted to members of the same sex) -- from as early an age as they had an attraction.
Click to expand...
According to PEW:

The survey finds that 12 is the median age at which lesbian, gay and bisexual adults first felt they might be something other than heterosexual or straight. For those who say they now know for sure that they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, that realization came at a median age of 17.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
So you're confirming his point?
 
Consider all of the social and cultural pressures on people in years past NOT to be gay- the terror of being discovered, the feelings of moral guilt, the belief that it was a sin, etc.- and yet there were gay people despite all of this.

Of course it's hard wired.

 
Ditka Butkus said:
Science has shown we all start out female..Therefore my guess is somewhere during development the men who end up gay probably didn't fully develop man traits and retained some female traits....It is also shown through science that the female brain and homosexual brain are very similar to each other and different from a heterosexual brain.
Click to expand...
That doesn't explain lesbians though.

 
Downs Syndrome is genetic, people with Downs rarely reproduce, yet it still remains around today...

Could be a similar trigger.

Obligatory Edit: In no way am I suggesting homosexuality is a disease, merely giving an example of a "genetic" difference that is not operated the same as red hair or blue eyes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wooderson said:
Ditka Butkus said:
Science has shown we all start out female..Therefore my guess is somewhere during development the men who end up gay probably didn't fully develop man traits and retained some female traits....It is also shown through science that the female brain and homosexual brain are very similar to each other and different from a heterosexual brain.
Click to expand...
That doesn't explain lesbians though.
Click to expand...
I think lesbians make a choice......I mean at least as men we can understand why...right.

 
By this logic, there are about 100+ genetic syndromes / diseases that should have been "bred out" by this point.

 
Well as someone has mentioned sexuality exists along a bell curve. You have flaming homosexuals on one end and flaming heterosexuals on the other. Most of us really fall somewhere in between. The latest studies suggest that homosexuality is about 40ish% determined by genetics. Homosexual men do present with similar genetic makeups. However there is also something about hormones during development in the womb at play. And nurture is part of it. Of course the whole Dad wasn't very manly doesn't hold water. It is far more subtle than that on the nurture side.

 
timschochet said:
jon_mx said:
wdcrob said:
[icon] said:
Kal El said:
Some of it may have to do with genetics, some of it may have to do with lack of a proper role model of a specific gender. I've heard it bandied about that in many cases, a gay man didn't have a father figure prevalent in their lives, and sometimes seek a lifestyle where they get that bonding through various partners.
Click to expand...
There may be cases like that... but in MANY of the "gay male" cases I know well, it was pretty obvious very early on that they were not straight. 3 in particlar came from great homes with strong father figure... but exhibited "gay" traits at a very young age.
Click to expand...
If you talk to gays, almost all of them say this (that they were always attracted to members of the same sex) -- from as early an age as they had an attraction.
Click to expand...
According to PEW:

The survey finds that 12 is the median age at which lesbian, gay and bisexual adults first felt they might be something other than heterosexual or straight. For those who say they now know for sure that they are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender, that realization came at a median age of 17.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
So you're confirming his point?
Click to expand...
A lot happens in a child's development between 0 and 12. And that is the mean, so some are much later and some are earlier. To conclude that it is hard-wired would be pretty ignorant statement concerning human behavior. There is a lot more that goes into preferences/desires beyond genetics. Despite looking, they have never found a gay gene and will never find a gay gene. There are diffinitely genetic influences, but there are also environmental and hormornal influences. Every person is different. To try to pigeon hole everyone into a hard-wired sexual preference would mean that sexual preferences could never change, and yet it does. Human sexuality is much more complex than to simply say it is hard-wired. Of course you get your scientific facts from MSNBC, so it is a waste of time.

 
GTBilly said:
If being gay is genetic or not a choice(which I believe). Then why hasn't it been bred out of humans?
Click to expand...
Nearsightedness isn't a choice, but it hasn't been bred out of humans.

About a zillion diseases that aren't choices are nonetheless still prevalent among humans. Why is that such a mystery?

There are a number possible explanations for homosexuality consistent with a genetic cause -- heterozygous advantage, sexually antagonistic selection, the genetic maternal effect on sons, etc.

There are many more possible explanations consistent with "not a choice." This one is as good as any, IMO.

 
I'd be interested in a study researching the possibility of a link between homosexual male offspring and miscarriages.

 
NCCommish said:
Long Ball Larry said:
oh great, maurile's here to screw this up now.
Click to expand...
My guess is he is going to drop some knowledge about how gay men actually seem to have more kids than straight men according to some studies.
Click to expand...
In Sperm Wars (a fascinating read), the author points out that gay men (including bisexual men) have a larger number of female sex partners, on average, than straight men. I'm not sure about more kids, but historically more kids and more sex partners were probably statistically correlated.

 
There are even some studies that say certain individuals are more likely to be gay based on how many older brothers they have. 33% increase in the possibility of being gay per older brother.

 
this is kind of interesting:

While female sexuality appears to be more fluid, research suggests that male gayness is an inborn, unalterable, strongly genetically influenced trait. But considering that the trait discourages the type of sex that leads to procreation — that is, sex with women — and would therefore seem to thwart its own chances of being genetically passed on to the next generation, why are there gay men at all?

Put differently, why haven't gay man genes driven themselves extinct?

This longstanding question is finally being answered by new and ongoing research. For several years, studies led by Andrea Camperio Ciani at the University of Padova in Italy and others have found that mothers and maternal aunts of gay men tend to have significantly more offspring than the maternal relatives of straight men. The results show strong support for the "balancing selection hypothesis," which is fast becoming the accepted theory of the genetic basis of male homosexuality.

The theory holds that the same genetic factors that induce gayness in males also promote fecundity (high reproductive success) in those males' female maternal relatives. Through this trade-off, the maternal relatives' "gay man genes," though they aren't expressed as such, tend to get passed to future generations in spite of their tendency to make their male inheritors gay.
Click to expand...
Why are there still gay people?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Chadstroma
How to Tell Someone is a Good Person by the Small Things
2 3
Replies
101
Views
2K
Chadstroma
Chadstroma
Wingnut
Vince Gilligan's new series, Wycaro 339, coming this summer.
Replies
10
Views
3K
Zow
Zow
Ministry of Pain
Stereo Set-up using basically 2 floor speakers
Replies
19
Views
664
jwb
jwb

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top