It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Homosexuality, nature's way of population control

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I have been watching a bunch of threads recently on the topic of gay people. Personally I have no problem with gay people, we are who we are, but I recently came across a thought that I've been pondering.

Before 1804 , the Earth's population had not been over 1 billion. Since then it has increased almost 7 fold. I assume that with the higher amount of people being born there will obviously be more gay people being born as well. THIS IS SPECULATION.

Anyways, Since the earth's population is clearly growing faster than ever before, this means we will need more resources/services etc. Anyways, the thought I have been pondering is, what if Homosexuality is actually natures way of trying to help reduce the amount of child births that occur. People who are homophobic often say that it is because gay couples can't have children (not true, sperm banks, adoption, ask a woman to carry the baby for you) but what if that is actually a GOOD thing. There are ALOT of people on this planet, I'd go so far as to say too many people on this planet to the point where her resources are being spread to thin and wasted to frequently. The other reason I liked this thought was because it gave a lot more of a natural vibe to this supposed "unnatural" occurrence. The thing about human nature to anyone who says things are "unnatural" is that it isn't set in stone. Anyways, what are your thoughts ATS?
edit on 22-3-2011 by SpreadLoveNotHate because: (no reason given)


This thread is not for opinions on what is morally right/wrong or gay bashing, it is merely for open minded thoughts being presented thank you kindly.
edit on 22-3-2011 by SpreadLoveNotHate because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
that is definitely an interesting theory that i have never taken into consideration, but that is definitely...a good theory!


i always figured (and no i am not a homophobe) that homosexuality was like a severe chemical in balance in the brain causing the person to go against self preservation and the continuation of the species.

but with your theory, it does make me think. did nature creature a random mutation (i.e. the gay gene) to form some type of population control or is it just because of a larger world population, there are more gay folk?

maybe its the non viral form of sterilization? i dont know anymore. damn you for making me ponder this



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by XelNaga
 


Thanks for the feedback, I know I don't have the credentials to back up what I'm saying I just decided to use the wet noodle for something, and try and bring a perspective that I haven't yet heard. I hadn't even considered this a possibility until the thought went through my head some 30 minutes ago.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
I've considered that myself on a few occasions. It could be a built-in population control method. I mean, I've not seen any scientific literature to that effect, but most of that seems to study what causes homosexuality than how it originated.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by SpreadLoveNotHate
 


By that theory, wouldn't asexuality work just fine?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Gay people are malfunctioned undeveloped whiners.They are gay because they did not develop right in the womb,it is a disease no different from any other mental issue.Gay people constantly demand people accept their way of life..I do not agree..if you're gay you're gay just shut up about it already, the only people mad about being gay are gay people themselves.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Had never thought of this before and its a good idea and will no doubt create some discussion, thinking about it like natures response to population explosion is interesting and will surely mean the gay population increases ahead of the general one.

I have nothing against homosexuality but I think it has to be pointed out if the gay population grew and grew surely we would not be making enough babies and thus lead to a population crisis of completely different proportions.



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nebulous1973
Gay people are malfunctioned undeveloped whiners.They are gay because they did not develop right in the womb,it is a disease no different from any other mental issue.


ya talking like that is not ok......it dosent matter if you dont like that but hating someone for the way they were born and talking about it on the internet kind of makes you the "malfunctioned undeveloped whiners".....no offense



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Nebulous1973
 


I ask that you don't spread unnecessary ignorance on this thread, it is for discussion, not opinions on right/wrong.

Maybe you developed wrong in the womb for thinking that homosexuality is wrong... See your logic?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by AngryOne
 


If humans could reproduce asexually then it would work, but this is as of yet, not possible



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpreadLoveNotHate
reply to post by AngryOne
 


If humans could reproduce asexually then it would work, but this is as of yet, not possible


What the...?

Read the title of your thread.

NOW do you understand my question?



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   
If you read 'the evolution of desire' by (evolutionary psychologist) Dr David Buss, you will find that the theory which you have proposed/suggested has been discounted. I am sure that Buss discusses this and states that this theory has already been dismissed.
Obviously, there must have always been individuals who are gay, they have had to hide their sexuality because of the social norms of their society. It's sad that people think that homosexuality is abnormal and such. Aren't there more aborant aspects of the 'human being' that are much worse than falling in love or lusting over someone of the same sex?



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by SpreadLoveNotHate
 


I dont think so, I know a lot of gay guys who want to reproduce (have their own children), and can do so with the right resources. I also know of a few successful cases.

I guess being gay doesn't necessarily mean you dont want children.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 10:34 PM
link   
It's the religions that play with people's minds. Long before the
abrahamic religions, homosexuality was part of many cultures.
Even in Africa, it was part of many rituals.

There is no goal to homosexuality. Nature is simply not perfect.
In a society where sexuality would be zero-repressed, where
different sexual orientation would be not only accepted but
regarded as natural and "cool", the gay and bisexual
percentage of society would rise up to 30%. And
it would be a normal number, because, indeed
most people are more bisexual than they allow
themselves to be, and there is only a fraction
of society that is 100% gay or 100% hetero.
Desire and affection are stronger than gender.
Males have sex easily with other males
when in prison. It's the taboo that makes
that there is less gays.

Also, the recipe to create a man is slightly
more complicated in the belly of a woman.
I think that's why there is more gay men
than gay female, because the recipe is
easily messed up. This is all ok, though,
because men want to have sex 10 times
more than women. So with all the women
refusals, it is very tempting for men
(in a pre-religion context: think prehistory)
to just go at it with other men. And I think
that's why the anus is rightly serviable,
wrether you find it disgusting or not.
It's way too easy to have anal sex to
not ponder if nature didn't make it
so to make sexual addicts just have
a go without indeed creating too
much babies. And I'm sure women
used it for pregnancy control too.

But I don't think it's so much a way
to have less baby made than a way
to pare with the problem of men
wanting to have sex so much.

In fact, more argument for anal sex
being something that nature wants:
after the initial pain, men can both
reach the female G Point or the man
prostate through the anal, which can create
pleasure (straight men may experiment
this with toys). Why would anal sex
create pleasure for the receiver if it
wasn't intended by nature????

I'm not an anal sex practioner, by the way,
because I do find it a little yucky, but I
find a biological logic to anal sex.
















edit on 24-3-2011 by Teorema because: typo

edit on 24-3-2011 by Teorema because: responds = pare.. not sure of the word to use (me no anglo).

edit on 24-3-2011 by Teorema because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join