The origin of homosexuality

[frigidweirdo]

Bonobos, our closest relatives, practice homosexuality so it is probably safe to assume humans always have too.

Yes, we're animals and other animals do it, so it's clearly something natural for a certain number of the species.

 

[rupol2000]

Bonobos, our closest relatives, practice homosexuality so it is probably safe to assume humans always have too.

The connection between humans and monkeys is also not as obvious as it seems, except for morphology there is little in common, a negative Rh factor is not found in monkeys, biochemistry and the human cardiovascular system is closer to that of a pig (although this may not be true for all populations)
A monkey is several times stronger than a person and is an order of magnitude inferior in endurance. The body of explosive athletes such as sprinters approaches the monkey

 

[rupol2000]

Yes, we're animals and other animals do it, so it's clearly something natural for a certain number of the species.

It would be logical to assume that these are just those animals that live like prides. But there is no such information

 

[frigidweirdo]

It would be logical to assume that these are just those animals that live like prides. But there is no such information

Well, we know the homosexuality isn't because of higher intelligence, like, for example, suicide.

So, it's natural. It exists in other animals.

So it would follow that humans have had homosexuality of some kind since, well, the beginning of humans.

 

[rupol2000]

So, it's natural. It exists in other animals.

the word "naturally" is not suitable here, because such animals also use it only as a surrogate

 

[braalian]

trying to read rupol2000’s post always makes me feel,like I’m having a stroke

 

[rupol2000]

As for the pork herd, there is another interesting fact: seasoned females interfere with the sexual relations of young animals. I heard that in the German forests where there are many pigs, the violation of this mechanism leads to a strong increase in the population, and then the shooting of pigs is stimulated, because they begin to harm the economy, overturn monuments, dig under poles, and so on. That is, the females themselves support this organization of the herd.

(I heard it from the hunter)

 

[alang1216]

The connection between humans and monkeys is also not as obvious as it seems, except for morphology there is little in common, a negative Rh factor is not found in monkeys, biochemistry and the human cardiovascular system is closer to that of a pig (although this may not be true for all populations)
A monkey is several times stronger than a person and is an order of magnitude inferior in endurance. The body of explosive athletes such as sprinters approaches the monkey

Are you confusing monkeys with apes? Regardless of physical factors, we are mentally closest to the Bonobos.

 

[rupol2000]

Are you confusing monkeys with apes? Regardless of physical factors, we are mentally closest to the Bonobos.

It is usually considered that the closest relatives are chimpanzees, and bonbo is its pygmy subspecies
Why do you think bonbo is mentally closer?

 

[alang1216]

It is usually considered that the closest relatives are chimpanzees, and bonbo is its pygmy subspecies
Why do you think bonbo is mentally closer?

They are genetically the closest and, from what I know of their behavior, pretty close to humans. Humans are probably somewhere between chimps and bonobos behaviorally.

 

[miketx]

No this is what happened.

 

[rupol2000]

They are genetically the closest and, from what I know of their behavior, pretty close to humans. Humans are probably somewhere between chimps and bonobos behaviorally.

Yes, I read a little about them, among other things they show a strong sexual promiscuity comparable to dogs. But the patriarchal human population did not show anything like that.
This suggests that the theory of the single origin of man from Africa is not correct. There are alternative theories on this score. Perhaps it was America that was the birthplace of the second branch of humanity.
This explains the difference in anthropology. The North European populations were identical to the Africans, while the Eastern ones were not.

 

[whitehall]

The most important function of a species is reproduction. Without reproduction the species dies out. Therefore homosexuality is an abnormal condition.

 

[rupol2000]

It seems that the patriarchal society followed the type of multi-male structure that is characteristic of another group of primates, not chimpamzies

 

[rupol2000]

In general, a lot of signs are accumulating that testify against the origin of a human from one place.

 

[alang1216]

The most important function of a species is reproduction. Without reproduction the species dies out. Therefore homosexuality is an abnormal condition.

Too simplistic a view. 99% of honeybees will never reproduce, only the queen will. Survival is at the gene level not the individual level. I think it is safe to say that it is beneficial (or at least not harmful) to our species for a small percentage of individuals to be gay. Otherwise it would have been wiped out by evolution or cultural pressure.

 

[rupol2000]

Survival is at the gene level not the individual level.

This is absolutely idiotic plebeian logic. Firstly, you put survival above morality, but bacteria also have survived, secondly, such a survival of the "species" will lead to the extinction of "subspecies" and give rise to a monster, and thirdly, the ideal of an anthill itself, where the members are reduced to slaves, is a mockery of man.

 

[danielpalos]

Birth control?

 

[rupol2000]

In fact, homosexuals could be allowed to cultivate this within their closed community, but instead they behave aggressively on the contrary, try to impose their culture on the masses, demonstrating their vices in public, influencing the minds of others and the like, thereby destroying the traditional culture, that is proved by time.
Moreover, many of them use it for humiliation, and such cases cannot be investigated due to the sensitivity of the issue, which leads to suicides and so on.

 

[alang1216]

This is absolutely idiotic plebeian logic. Firstly, you put survival above morality, but bacteria also have survived, secondly, such a survival of the "species" will lead to the extinction of "subspecies" and give rise to a monster, and thirdly, the ideal of an anthill itself, where the members are reduced to slaves, is a mockery of man.

We are the carriers of our genes. Period. That is a fact of biology and evolution. If you want to mix in religious, moral, or spiritual factors you have left the realm of biology and entered the world of philosophy.