If Homosexuality is Genetic ......

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gunny

Gold Member
Dec 27, 2004
44,689
6,857
198
The Republic of Texas
... and not behavioral, then how come it is since homosexuals cannot reproduce that the defective gene has not been bred out of humans through natural section?
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: 007
... and not behavioral, then how come it is since homosexuals cannot reproduce that the defective gene has not been bred out of humans through natural section?

No offense, but that sentence should be taken out and shot.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Gem
... and not behavioral, then how come it is since homosexuals cannot reproduce that the defective gene has not been bred out of humans through natural section?
There have been a few scientific studies that explain the supposed paradox between 'homosexuality genes' and Darwin's theories. See here for an article about one study and here for the Proceedings of the Royal Society article on that study.

Of course, if you read either article it specifically states that the genetic effect only accounts for a small percentage of homosexuality and more study is needed in order to better determine the role that genetics plays in determining if a person will become homosexual or not.

I hope that answers your immediate question.
 
There have been a few scientific studies that explain the supposed paradox between 'homosexuality genes' and Darwin's theories. See here for an article about one study and here for the Proceedings of the Royal Society article on that study.

Of course, if you read either article it specifically states that the genetic effect only accounts for a small percentage of homosexuality and more study is needed in order to better determine the role that genetics plays in determining if a person will become homosexual or not.

I hope that answers your immediate question.

Those articles are all fine and dandy, but you have to keep in mind homosexuality has never been proven to be genetic.

I think that's Gunny's point.
 
That's true, it hasn't been proven, but the study I linked to gives the indication that genetics plays some role, minor as it may be. More studies are needed, I think, before we can be more sure of that role.
 
Even if it's not genetic, it might be a psychological result of certain circumstances that form the individual. And they may not be able to control their feelings. Every gay I know says it was always present in them. The idea that gays choose that lifestyle to be wacky or rebellious doesn't make a lot of sense to me based on my personal observations.
 
I may be way wrong, but think there is a genetic component in majority. With the new standards in our secular world, where kids as young as 10 and 11 are giving bj's and see bi-sex as normal, I'm more uncertain on the totality of such.

I will say, more obvious for males than females, it's pretty easy to spot the genetic predestined in k-1, than heteros. Some that seem hetero, may take one by surprise, rarely those that seem homosexual.
 
Even if it's not genetic, it might be a psychological result of certain circumstances that form the individual. And they may not be able to control their feelings. Every gay I know says it was always present in them. The idea that gays choose that lifestyle to be wacky or rebellious doesn't make a lot of sense to me based on my personal observations.


Some obviously don't choose it as a lifestyle. But some do. They choose being gay just like they choose to be vegetarians, animal rights activists, or any other "cause" they find appealling.

True homosexuals do exist, but it's very rare. Most people who call themselves "gay" today are bi-sexuals. But they hate being described that way because it totally screws up their arguments for special rights.
 
Some obviously don't choose it as a lifestyle. But some do. They choose being gay just like they choose to be vegetarians, animal rights activists, or any other "cause" they find appealling.

In my experience what you are saying here applies much more to lesbians than to male homosexuals.
 
I will say, more obvious for males than females, it's pretty easy to spot the genetic predestined in k-1, than heteros. Some that seem hetero, may take one by surprise, rarely those that seem homosexual.

I agree. I am doing my own personal study. I know two boys who I suspect will end up being gay. One is 3 and the other is 8. Later on I will find out if my instincts are correct. Too late for this thread though!
 
In my experience what you are saying here applies much more to lesbians than to male homosexuals.

I think you are right. I'd also venture to guess, no more than that, that there are more genetically inclined homosexuals than lesbians. I've no clue why, but will say that at very tender ages one can see this in some boys; much more rare in girls.
 
There have been a few scientific studies that explain the supposed paradox between 'homosexuality genes' and Darwin's theories. See here for an article about one study and here for the Proceedings of the Royal Society article on that study.

Of course, if you read either article it specifically states that the genetic effect only accounts for a small percentage of homosexuality and more study is needed in order to better determine the role that genetics plays in determining if a person will become homosexual or not.

I hope that answers your immediate question.

I already know the answer to the question.

So these studies not only claim homosexuality is hereditary, but because it does not die out through natural selection that it is also a "special" hereditary gene. Guess that about covers it, huh?:scratch:
 
Even if it's not genetic, it might be a psychological result of certain circumstances that form the individual. And they may not be able to control their feelings. Every gay I know says it was always present in them. The idea that gays choose that lifestyle to be wacky or rebellious doesn't make a lot of sense to me based on my personal observations.

Sure, if you put it within the parameters of conscious choice. It has been my observation that young people; especially teenagers, don't apply a whole lot of logic to their choices and even less consideration to the possible consequences resulting from them.
 
Those articles are all fine and dandy, but you have to keep in mind homosexuality has never been proven to be genetic.

I think that's Gunny's point.

Exactly my point. Those who argue the pro-homo side make absolute statements when there is no evidence to support them.

My "study" is every bit as valid. Natural selection would weed out most abnormalities; especially, when those who carry them are themselves incapable of reproduction due to their lifestyle. Guess there's just too much logic involved.
 
I already know the answer to the question.

So these studies not only claim homosexuality is hereditary, but because it does not die out through natural selection that it is also a "special" hereditary gene. Guess that about covers it, huh?:scratch:

Sorry, I didn't realize that your question was rhetorical in nature. Irregardless, I don't believe that is what the articles are getting at - it isn't, if I am reading the articles correctly, strictly genetic in nature. If the female parent is more fertile when producing offspring, it is more likely that said offspring will be homosexual, so it has something to do with the hormones that are produced by the mother while the child is in gestation.

According to that theory, if you controlled the conditions while the child was in gestation, you could 'control' whether or not they were 'predisposed' towards homosexuality / bi-sexuality.
 
Sorry, I didn't realize that your question was rhetorical in nature. Irregardless, I don't believe that is what the articles are getting at - it isn't, if I am reading the articles correctly, strictly genetic in nature. If the female parent is more fertile when producing offspring, it is more likely that said offspring will be homosexual, so it has something to do with the hormones that are produced by the mother while the child is in gestation.

According to that theory, if you controlled the conditions while the child was in gestation, you could 'control' whether or not they were 'predisposed' towards homosexuality / bi-sexuality.

No you DIDN'T just call me on a rhetorical question then use the word "irregardless." :rotflmao:

Honestly, I do not give much credence to the article. Every argument, study, article, et al I have ever seen is either slanted hard for, or hard against.

Just thought I'd throw out a little logic based on an accepted theory and see where it went. What I DON'T see, are any of the board's usual suspects
(pro-homo faction) rushing in to defend genetic stance.
 
Sorry, I didn't realize that your question was rhetorical in nature. Irregardless, I don't believe that is what the articles are getting at - it isn't, if I am reading the articles correctly, strictly genetic in nature. If the female parent is more fertile when producing offspring, it is more likely that said offspring will be homosexual, so it has something to do with the hormones that are produced by the mother while the child is in gestation.

According to that theory, if you controlled the conditions while the child was in gestation, you could 'control' whether or not they were 'predisposed' towards homosexuality / bi-sexuality.
'More fertile'? Hello? Where is this coming from? New one here. That's not 'genetics' btw, but endocrineology. Hello????
 
What I DON'T see, are any of the board's usual suspects
(pro-homo faction) rushing in to defend genetic stance.

Well I guess I must be one of the "pro-homo faction" because I lack that charming virulent hatred and abhorrence of gays due to knowing gays and having gay friends.

I think there is a genetic factor. But it can be triggered by other circumstances. Take Downs Syndrome for example, it is much more prevalent in children of older women. Maybe there is something like that which triggers homosexuality.

I don't think any of us should be too hard and fast in our opinions about this unless we are medical or psychological professionals.
 
'More fertile'? Hello? Where is this coming from? New one here. That's not 'genetics' btw, but endocrineology. Hello????

I was merely trying to interpret the article and help further the discussion. The article was referring to women who are more fertile than others, and the effect that had on whether the offspring was homosexual.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top