How does biology explain the phenomena of homosexuality?

[Teddy Pollins]

I was watching a scene in Game of Thrones with my girlfriend yesterday. She asked me was there a type of hormone difference between heterosexual and homosexual people. Mind you, neither of us have a problem with homosexuality.
May we explain homosexuality as a biological deviance?
What do biologists tell us about gays and lesbians?
It is so much told about this mythical homosexual gene...

 

[Thunderbird]

A biologist can only see homosexuality as an aberration. Exclusive homosexuality, as opposed to bisexuality, doesn't exist in the natural world. Living things that are exclusively homosexual don't reproduce and their genes are not selected by evolution.

A biologist would also note the dangers of homosexual coupling: CDC Fact Sheet - Gay and Bisexual Men Gender Risk HIV AIDS

 

[cnm]

May we explain homosexuality as a biological deviance?

Perhaps that may be the case if you can define where 'deviance' starts. Care to have a go?

 

[there4eyeM]

Statistically, homosexuality involves such a small minority of people that it could be considered anomalous.
Seeing that our race is so divergent and variable, however, that alone doesn't mean very much.
This 'select' group presents no particular problem or risk to the rest, especially compared to other 'special' categories. That there is so much uproar and discussion indicates an agenda on the part of a manipulating, power-seeking element.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I was watching a scene in Game of Thrones with my girlfriend yesterday. She asked me was there a type of hormone difference between heterosexual and homosexual people. Mind you, neither of us have a problem with homosexuality.
May we explain homosexuality as a biological deviance?
What do biologists tell us about gays and lesbians?
It is so much told about this mythical homosexual gene...

I seriously doubt there's a gene at work given the ease with which people will have sex with anyone willing (or unwilling.) And as 'bi' coeds show, even if they don't personally identify as bi or lesbian, buy em a shot or put em on camera they'll do 'lesbian' behaviours readily and enthusiastically.

Instead, what's much more likely, and my own personal hypothesis instead of genes or even hormones, the entire concept of hetero/homo/bisexuality is what doesn't actually exist. Instead, there's simply 'sex.' And people will seek sexual gratification with whomever and whatever they desire at a given moment if free to do so.

Very few are exclusively gay and straight. Most people fall somewhere in the middle as with a bell curve. And while those closer to either extreme may never act physically on what they fantasize about, the fantasy is there nonetheless.

If a significant majority of men were 'exclusively heterosexual' 'lesbian' porn wouldn't be as popular as it is. And porn in general would feature men. A 'straight' man who enjoys watching another man with a woman isn't all that straight.

 

[Mac1958]

It doesn't take a great deal of effort to see and admit (although it does take some fairly blatant dishonesty to deny) what male and female bodies are biologically built to do.

It also doesn't take much effort to observe that homosexuality regularly & consistently exists and crosses lines of species.

Therefore, it's probably safe to assume that homosexuality is a regularly-occurring genetic or psychological or physiological misfire of some kind.

"..of some kind..." means that we don't yet know exactly what is going on. And if the gay rights folks think that "regularly occurring" means "normal", yeah, I can see that.

Science is so fascinating to me because such a large part of it means that we admit we don't know everything and that many exciting discoveries lay ahead. Science can also admit that gays are not possessed by some kind of demon, that they are not evil, and that maybe we spend a bit too much time thinking about the whole topic.

.

 

[there4eyeM]

You know, "Mac", with comments like that, there's a risk of being taken for rational.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

It doesn't take a great deal of effort to see and admit (although it does take some fairly blatant dishonesty to deny) what male and female bodies are biologically built to do.

It also doesn't take much effort to observe that homosexuality regularly & consistently exists and crosses lines of species.

Therefore, it's probably safe to assume that homosexuality is a regularly-occurring genetic or psychological or physiological misfire of some kind.

"..of some kind..." means that we don't yet know exactly what is going on. And if the gay rights folks think that "regularly occurring" means "normal", yeah, I can see that.

Science is so fascinating to me because such a large part of it means that we admit we don't know everything and that many exciting discoveries lay ahead. Science can also admit that gays are not possessed by some kind of demon, that they are not evil, and that maybe we spend a bit too much time thinking about the whole topic.

.

Sexuality, and reproduction aren't the same thing. Thus how an organism reproduces itself is one thing. And way the hell over there is how it may undertake sexual pleasures and enjoyments. Pleanty of animals reproduce as well as engage in homosexual 'recreational' sex for various reaons including social bonding, pure recreation, or status/dominance. Being humans, we just LOVE overcomplicating everything though.

Isn't a misfire or deviation but rather simple natural reality we invented the notion of.

But sexuality is all one thing. Isn't different depending on who you are, and who you do it with. It's all just sex. People used to admit they enjoyed sex. And who they enjoyed it with wasn't relevant. "Did you both have fun? Yes? Good." and that was it. Then Judaism, Christianity, and Islam came along and screwed that all up.

Sooner God calls ya all home, sooner the rest of us with build Eden while we're still alive fairing a helluva lot better without you.

 

[Mac1958]

You know, "Mac", with comments like that, there's a risk of being taken for rational.

Sad thing is, there are just too many people right now who appear to be afraid to say, "I just don't know yet".

.