Gay genes.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-06-2015, 08:34 PM
RE: Gay genes.
Just curious...is The Gay something new? I mean if it has evolutionary ramifications then why is it just now an issue? I thought The Gay had been around for centuries, at least as far back as recorded history. I assume most things that date back to the beginning of recorded history didn't just spring into being because someone was taking notes. I kind of figure it goes back way before recorded history.

The existence of homosexuality seems to be pretty slow at messing up the evolution of humankind.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2015, 10:10 PM
RE: Gay genes.
If anything, heterosexuality is ruining human evolution by over populating the world and letting stupid people breed.

If everyone was gay babies would be selectively bred and future generations would reap the enormous benefits of that.
Thanks a lot straight people, you are single handedly ruining our species, I hope you're happy with yourselves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 12 users Like earmuffs's post
07-06-2015, 10:35 PM
RE: Gay genes.
(07-06-2015 03:34 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  The issue as to whether gays are genetically determined that way' or whether choice is an issue is controversial Procon.org.
No gay gene has been discovered and the scientific community is split on the issue.
Indeed, some gays such as Cynthia Nixon of Sex in the City dislikes the claim that her choice isn't really one, but something pre determined.
Camille Paglia Phd , Ben Carsons Pofessor Emeritus Neuro Science et al see choice as also a factor.
It would seem that bi-sexuality adds further to the idea that many gay people choose their sexuality rather than being driven by it.

Bro, do you even epigenetics?

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.v...exuality-/

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2015, 11:18 PM
RE: Gay genes.
About Cynthia Nixon, you missed her statements that followed:

'However, to the extent that anyone wishes to interpret my words in a strictly legal context I would like to clarify: While I don't often use the word, the technically precise term for my orientation is bisexual.

'I believe bisexuality is not a choice, it is a fact. What I have "chosen" is to be in a gay relationship.'


She says she just chose to be with a woman, not that she chose to be attracted to women only.

Our sexuality is quite complicated. What is it exactly that you're trying to prove? And I'm also curious since many asked and you haven't answered, when did you choose to be straight?

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like undergroundp's post
08-06-2015, 12:13 AM
RE: Gay genes.
(07-06-2015 03:34 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  The issue as to whether gays are genetically determined that way' or whether choice is an issue is controversial Procon.org.
...

False.

The issue is not scientifically controversial. "The gay" is roughly as inheritable as left-handedness, which is to say somewhat heritable but by no means certain based on alleles alone. Twin studies are a reliable measure of the influence of genetics and we find that many many twins differ in their sexual orientation - roughly as many as differ in their handedness.

None of this is scientifically controversial. Your controversy is entirely social in nature and is driven by a hatred you just can't seem to bury. Even the social controversy is a no brainer. It sure looks like sexuality is about as much of a choice as handedness, but even if it were purely a "choice" that wouldn't make it a controversial subject.

The real social controversy here is to what extent we should tolerate the attitude you are expressing. You certainly don't do yourself any favours by distorting straightforward questions to match your agenda.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Hafnof's post
08-06-2015, 04:53 AM
RE: Gay genes.
(07-06-2015 10:10 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  If anything, heterosexuality is ruining human evolution by over populating the world and letting stupid people breed.

If everyone was gay babies would be selectively bred and future generations would reap the enormous benefits of that.
Thanks a lot straight people, you are single handedly ruining our species, I hope you're happy with yourselves.

I've often postulated that "the gay gene" could very well be a built in trait - as a "governor" for the population.

If not - it's a happy coincidence that the gaining acceptance of homosexuality happens along just as the breeders chunk out the 8 billionth person on the planet....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2015, 05:25 AM
RE: Gay genes.
Sometimes I think relationships would be a lot easier if I were gay.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2015, 06:05 AM
RE: Gay genes.
(08-06-2015 05:25 AM)yakherder Wrote:  Sometimes I think relationships would be a lot easier if I were gay.


At least you wouldn't have to worry about leaving the toilet seat up....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like onlinebiker's post
08-06-2015, 07:39 AM
RE: Gay genes.
(08-06-2015 12:13 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  
(07-06-2015 03:34 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  The issue as to whether gays are genetically determined that way' or whether choice is an issue is controversial Procon.org.
...

False.

The issue is not scientifically controversial. "The gay" is roughly as inheritable as left-handedness, which is to say somewhat heritable but by no means certain based on alleles alone. Twin studies are a reliable measure of the influence of genetics and we find that many many twins differ in their sexual orientation - roughly as many as differ in their handedness.

None of this is scientifically controversial. Your controversy is entirely social in nature and is driven by a hatred you just can't seem to bury. Even the social controversy is a no brainer. It sure looks like sexuality is about as much of a choice as handedness, but even if it were purely a "choice" that wouldn't make it a controversial subject.

The real social controversy here is to what extent we should tolerate the attitude you are expressing. You certainly don't do yourself any favours by distorting straightforward questions to match your agenda.

This reminds me of a anti-anti-gay video.
(one of the best I've ever seen actually.)



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
08-06-2015, 08:24 AM
RE: Gay genes.
(08-06-2015 06:05 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(08-06-2015 05:25 AM)yakherder Wrote:  Sometimes I think relationships would be a lot easier if I were gay.


At least you wouldn't have to worry about leaving the toilet seat up....

Dodgy so you hover when you take a shit?

"If there's a single thing that life teaches us, it's that wishing doesn't make it so." - Lev Grossman
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Nurse's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: