Evolutionary dynamics of male homosexuality., page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 07:40 AM by JPhish

reply to post by dave420

i'm merely sharing my thoughts and trying to be constructive . . . there's really no need for me to edit my post unless you see some sort of obscene grammatical error (which i just found ^_^). I'm not claiming to know anything about him . . . i'm proposing possible explanations for why he (and everyone else!) might be "attracted" to boys when he's/they're younger . . . i'm postulating . . . nothing more.

[edit on 6/22/2008 by JPhish]

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 08:19 AM by dj howls

Do 6 year olds have a sexual awareness? I am not convinced this is not hindsight conveying false memories from a later (puberty) age

sorry

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 10:05 AM by MrBender

reply to post by JPhish

I am a bit confused about males being considered more beautiful being the reason he would be attracted to boys.

What about 6 or 7 year old girls who find themselves attracted to other girls? What you are saying wouldn't really account for that.

My best friend is a lesbian who wanted a girlfriend when she was 7.

reply to post by schrodingers dog

Okay I read the paper and I'll admit that much of it is over my head. What I am basically hearing is that male homosexuality rises as maternal fertility rises. This accounts for what seems like a paradox in an evolutionary model: Basically the more fertile a population, the more likely hood of male homosexuality.

If I got that right, then I would theorize that male homosexuals might be natures way of balancing population growth. For an oversimpliefied example: For every X number of offspring born, there will be Y number of gay male offspring - therefore removing some offspring from the future generation's breeding pool.

This would resolve the paradox - the incidence of gay men actually slowing the rate of overpopulation in a fertile group, leading to better chances for the over all survival of the species.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 11:40 AM by stfger

Who cares?

Let people be people, why is everyone always trying to find a genetic reason for every behavior and personality trait.

Who cares what causes people to be gay, just accept people for who they are and stop trying to find a reason.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 11:55 AM by Astyanax

reply to post by JPhish

you wanted a "boyfriend". You're 6... there is no sexual connotation to it

I remember feeling sexual arousal at the age of 5 or even earlier. My girlfriend says she had such feelings, too.

In my case (I haven't asked her about hers), the arousal was occasioned by many different stimuli - apparently this is known as infantile polymorphism or some such. These feelings vanished in mid-childhood and only reappeared in early adolescence, at which point they quickly attached themselves to members of the opposite sex.

It is, I think, quite normal for infants and small children to have sexual feelings.

To state the obvious for decency's sake, I do not think it is right or normal for infants and small children to have sex.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 01:32 PM by RuneSpider

reply to post by dave420

I think you misunderstand me. I meant some of the people I've met. I've not met many who are homosexual or have chosen an alternate gender, and I'm not at all saying all of the cases are the result of upbringing, or a choice. In fact, most evidence points to the contrary.
I'm saying that for some people, it's possible.
As for basing it on my own experiences, sorry, but they are mostly all I have to go by when it comes to understanding mentality.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 03:54 PM by WhatTheory

Being homosexual is a mental disorder, period!
This was scientifically proven by the American Psychiatric Association until it removed homosexuality from its diagnostic list of mental disorders in 1973.

It was removed from the list NOT because of evidence to the contrary, but because of political pressure and protests. This is really sad because science is supposed to be above this sort of thing. Once political pressure starts interfering with scientific studies, then science renders itself useless.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 05:01 PM by ALLis0NE

Basicly, we are all clones. Just like the movie "the island". We all were just fed the same scripture, and movies and videos, our entire life. It's time we grow up. We are all the same.

You are the bubble boy in the movie "bubble boy".

It's ALL in the mind.

en.wikipedia.org...

Love thy enemy. Overcome your fears.

The birds are my eyes, the dogs my ears and nose, cats are my lookout. We are all designed to work together. You can do it too.

[edit on 22-6-2008 by ALLis0NE]

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 05:08 PM by Halicarnassus

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Yes, but the article the OP presented is evidence of homosexuality not being a disorder and rather an evolutionary trait to balance population.

Does anyone know an expanation for this? :

Challenged by all these empirical data, the authors of the new study published in PLoS ONE considered a range of different hypotheses for the genetic diffusion of male homosexuality. These included: the genetic maternal effects on sons, the heterozygote advantage (as is found in malaria resistance), and "sexually antagonistic selection." The latter is a particular aspect of Darwinian evolution, in which genetic factors spread in the population by giving a reproductive advantage to one sex while disadvantaging the other. This type of evolution has been previously found in insects, birds, and some mammals, but never in humans

Honestly I had not heard obout that "type of evolution" before. Does anyone know any theory that explains how this very complex development happens?

I mean, I could come with the simplistic conclusion that if a mother is very fertile, then there is a chance her descendants are going to be homosexual, but from what I understand, this adaptation is related to an entire population, not a single blood lineage. That is how evolution works, of course, but still:

the interaction of male homosexuality with increased female fecundity within human populations, in a complex dynamic, resulting in the maintenance of male homosexuality at stable and relatively low frequencies, and highlighting the effects of heredity through the maternal line.

See, they just say a complex dynamic, within human populations. Is there really a model for this dynamic? Because I want to know how can genes be so intelligent?

Oh, and by the way...

Who cares what causes people to be gay, just accept people for who they are and stop trying to find a reason.

Who cares? People who care about science, and this is the Science/Technology forum. If you have any ethical/humanistic/religious opinion to share, take it to the Creationism forum, they love that nonsense in there.

[edit on 22-6-2008 by Halicarnassus]

[edit on 22-6-2008 by Halicarnassus]

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 05:14 PM by schrodingers dog

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Being homosexual is a mental disorder, period!
This was scientifically proven by the American Psychiatric Association until it removed homosexuality from its diagnostic list of mental disorders in 1973.

It was removed from the list NOT because of evidence to the contrary, but because of political pressure and protests. This is really sad because science is supposed to be above this sort of thing. Once political pressure starts interfering with scientific studies, then science renders itself useless.

Being ignorant and a homophobe is not a mental disorder, it is a conscious and fear based personal choice which you have embraced.
Unless you have proof of such "political pressure" I'd suggest you retreat back to your personal cave.
Many things have been removed from the list of conditions by the American Psychiatric Association. It's called scientific and intellectual progress. Though it always seems to leave some individuals behind hoping for "the good old days."

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 05:34 PM by ALLis0NE

Every single 0ne of us has a unique birth place on the Earth. No two people were born in the same place/time.

This means the forces from the Sun, the Moon, the Stars, the Planets, they all effect our "water" at birth. This decides what type of mind we start with.

Go watch videos about the effects of Love and Hate on water.

You see, when two people mate, its best they do it while "in love", if not, their starting water won't be as strong at birth.

You wouldn't exist if homosexuality was "right". But, you wouldn't have brotherly love, if you didn't see the beauty in a mans accomplishments.

Maybe homosexuality is curiosity. I personally couldn't tell you because I'm straight. I would have to ask what homosexuals like as I am not sure, "whatever makes you happy", I would say.

[edit on 22-6-2008 by ALLis0NE]

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:04 PM by WhatTheory

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Being ignorant and a homophobe is not a mental disorder, it is a conscious and fear based personal choice which you have embraced.

Huh? What? Just because someone does not agree with your warped sense of reality does not mean they are ignorant and a homophobe.

I'm sure you feel better about yourself when you make such idiotic statements because it helps you deal with your disorder.

Unless you have proof of such "political pressure" I'd suggest you retreat back to your personal cave.

Look, this is common knowledge and fact. I realize you wish it were not true but the fact remains is that it is true.

Source 1

Source 2

I could go on and on and on......
You just need to accept that it is a mental disorder plain and simple.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:14 PM by forsakenwayfarer

reply to post by Nyteskye

off topic, but ATS as a website has not even been around for ten years.

let alone the message board.

so everything else you say is truthful and not in any way embellished to support your (correct or incorrect is not the issue) viewpoint?

[edit on 6-22-2008 by forsakenwayfarer]

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:15 PM by schrodingers dog

reply to post by WhatTheory

Oh dear,
You are getting research from NARTH (National Association For Research & Therapy Of Homosexuality). That's like a pedophile getting his research from NAMBLA.
Way to go!

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:28 PM by WhatTheory

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Oh dear,
You are getting research from NARTH (National Association For Research & Therapy Of Homosexuality). That's like a pedophile getting his research from NAMBLA.
Way to go!

Oh boy, just as I thought. You will find a problem with every source. Nothing will be good enough for you. You did notice I had two different sources right? I wonder why you ignored the second one. Look, I only listed two but I could list an entire page full of links stating the same thing. So guess what??....You have a mental disorder......Deal with it.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:30 PM by forsakenwayfarer

reply to post by WhatTheory

Homosexuality, from an objective viewpoint is indeed a DISORDER.

Disorder \Dis*or"der\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Disordered; p. pr. & vb. n. Disordering.]
1. To disturb the order of; to derange or disarrange; to throw into confusion; to confuse.

Disordering the whole frame or jurisprudence. --Burke.

The burden . . . disordered the aids and auxiliary rafters into a common ruin. --Jer. Taylor.

2. To disturb or interrupt the regular and natural functions of (either body or mind); to produce sickness or indisposition in; to discompose; to derange; as, to disorder the head or stomach.

A man whose judgment was so much disordered by party spirit. --Macaulay.

3. To depose from holy orders. [Obs.]

--Dryden.

Syn: To disarrange; derange; confuse; discompose.

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

By definition, homosexuality is indeed a disorder. Men were not designed with the intention to have sex with other men.
Men cannot impregnate in a natural fashion another man.

Why does honest research into the cause and function and ultimate END of the nature vs nurture debate have to degenerate into slurs and (albeit loosely) comparing honest research to NAMBLA?

This is ignorance.

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:34 PM by scepticsteve

Surely its not genetic, but simply some kind of mental aberration that occurs during foetal development.

Simply enough, just some "faulty wiring" similar to dyslexia for example.

I'm trying to avoid saying that Homosexuals have something wrong with them, because I don't believe that theres anything morally wrong with how they live their lives. However, purely from a scientific standpoint surely most people can agree that homosexuality is not what we might term "normal".

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:50 PM by JPhish

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by JPhish

you wanted a "boyfriend". You're 6... there is no sexual connotation to it

I remember feeling sexual arousal at the age of 5 or even earlier. My girlfriend says she had such feelings, too.

In my case (I haven't asked her about hers), the arousal was occasioned by many different stimuli - apparently this is known as infantile polymorphism or some such. These feelings vanished in mid-childhood and only reappeared in early adolescence, at which point they quickly attached themselves to members of the opposite sex.

It is, I think, quite normal for infants and small children to have sexual feelings.

To state the obvious for decency's sake, I do not think it is right or normal for infants and small children to have sex.

wow i didn't know this . . thanks for sharing . . . seems odd; is this rare?

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 06:52 PM by forsakenwayfarer

reply to post by JPhish

Usually only as rare as people who are willing to lie about having deep meaningful memories from age five or younger.

Usually only traumatic memories can be recalled from this time period and younger, and those being unreliable to boot.

Hopefully no one takes offense to this, but I've never been one to call a spade a club.

mentalhealth.about.com...

This has more to do with hypnosis and childhood memories, but it stresses the point that;

... studies have shown that as many as 39% of adults "confuse memories of simple acts that they imagined with things they actually did." (Bowman, 1966, p. 237) This is "reality misattribution." Children are even more prone to this type of error.

[edit on 6-22-2008 by forsakenwayfarer]

Infact, as I re-read after skimming the article;

The Passage of Time It is widely known that memory fades with time for most of us. This fact raises questions about the reliability of memories from childhood. Bowman cites studies which show that the content of flashbacks include both memories and imagination. Some studies have shown that the content of flashbacks concerning an injury is sometimes more severe than the actual injury. The author concludes that "time-delayed memories that return as vivid flashbacks are not necessarily accurate." (Bowman, 1996, p. 239) Some experimentally-induced pseudomemories appear to persist for at least several weeks.

[edit on 6-22-2008 by forsakenwayfarer]

reply posted on 22-6-2008 @ 07:03 PM by Asmus

Originally posted by stfger
Who cares?

Let people be people, why is everyone always trying to find a genetic reason for every behavior and personality trait.

Who cares what causes people to be gay, just accept people for who they are and stop trying to find a reason.

Well said man! We are all sharing this space with each other, we need to accept who we are and live our lives accordingly and in harmony with one another.

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^