Homosexuals and Evolution

patio34

On Monday past, the LA Times Health section had an article on homosexuality, especially the traits visible in young toddlers. It also delved into possible causes of homosexuality and the latest research and theories.

There was an interesting comment in the article something like "It's a peculiarity in evolution that homosexuality occurs because it precludes procreation." In evolution, whoever produces the most offspring are the ones who pass on their genes. Hence, what we see today is the result of the predominant ones who produced the most progeny.

But then you have the paradox of homosexuality, which leaves no offspring. How does that fit in?

From what I've read, there have been numerous accounts of homosexuality in cultures throughout the history of humans. How did it survive the natural selection process of not leaving offspring?

Any ideas?

Pat

SanFranciscoJim

Homosexuals are not sterile. Although it is against our nature, we also have the ability to procreate. I simply choose not to engage in an activity which I find physically repugnant. However, were it necessary for me to assist in the propogation of the species, I would be physically capable of doing so.

XJWBill

The last time I studied biology, genetics, and all that, mood rings were popular and "Disco Duck" was a chart-topper. So I can't give any kind of scientific answer.

It just seems to me that the common-sense answer is that homosexuality occurs spontaneously throughout the human population all over the planet, at a certain more-or-less steady rate in each generation. Like red hair or left-handedness. I don't think the scientists have come up with any further explanation than that either, when it comes down to it. If they have, I'd like to hear it.

Footnotes:

By homosexuality, I mean the inner sense of feeling primarily or exclusively attracted to one's own gender for love and sex. Not temporary homosexual behavior that might arise in the absence of the opposite gender, as in prison or aboard ship.

By spontaneously, I mean that feeling and sense of self arises in very early childhood, not as a result of sexual abuse, mental illness, or free choice. (Hmm, let's see, what do I want to be when I grow up? Fireman, engineer, astronaut . . . I know! I'll be gay!)

Bill

"If we all loved one another as much as we say we love God, I reckon there wouldn't be as much meanness in the world as there is."--from the movie Resurrection (1979)

patio34

Thanks Jim.

Please bear with me a bit. Prehistoric men wouldn't have had procreation in mind maybe. And, animals, say chimps, our closest relatives, wouldn't have procreation in mind, either. Or would they? Because survival of the fittest is dicated by passing along one's genes.

SanFranciscoJim

I have two younger brothers. Both of them are married and have children. Buried within them is the same genetic makeup passed along to all three of us by our parents. Somewhere along the line in my family's ancestry, the right combination of genes were passed to me to cause my homosexuality. While both of my brothers are busy perpetuating the species, one or both of them may produce a gay child (or grandchild, etc.).
Frankly, genetics is still too complicated for the average lay person to fully comprehend (myself included). For what it's worth, I hope they never discover the "gay gene". Why? Because until society overcomes its homophobia, gay fetuses will be quietly aborted (or genetically altered in grotesque experiments).

patio34

Jim,

Good explanation. Genes don't always become dominant and so can pass on thru siblings.

I agree with you that in this climate of Bible-based religionists, it would be a bad thing if a gay gene were discovered.

Pat

Skeptic

"How did it survive the natural selection process of not leaving offspring?"

I read that evolutionists believe that homosexuality had/has a survival advantage for the human race as a whole. The male was usually the hunter, and men hunted in groups. Homosexuality helped bond some of these groups together, and so these men worked more effectively together as a unit. Hence, there was a survival advantage to homosexuality. Hence, more of the groups that contained homosexuals survived than those who did not.

If memory serves me correctly, the Romans encourages homosexuality in their armies. This made the men more united and they fought much better as a unit in battle.

Also, do not forget that homosexuals will have children simply because they want kids. Also, many times a homosexual used to marry and have children to hide their sexual orientation from a society that would condemn them.

Also, if homosexuality is "caused" by recessive genes the recessive genes could be passed for generations before being apparent.

Also, if homosexuality is "caused" by a combinations of genes, these genes may be passed on to succeeding generations because they provide other advantages; only when a certain combination is matched up may homosexuality become apparent.

Also, genetic variation in humans is here to stay. We have gotten so good at surviving that very little is killing us off. Hence, evolution in humans has slowed down. Hence, homosexuals are even less likely today to be "filtered out" by evolution.

I personally think that sexual orientation not just "heterosexual" or "homosexual". I suspect individuals fall into ranges, from very heterosexual to bisexual to very homosexual. I suspect that many individuals find the same sex sexually attractive, but not enough to actually pursue such desires. I know homophobes whom I strongly suspect are gay. I have seen them get quite sexually excited thinking of a member of the same sex, then suddenly "hide" their reaction. And, no, I do not believe that all homophobes are secretly homosexual and ashamed of it.

Lastly, I have written the above in a hurry. If my wording is wrong or not PC, please accept my humble apologizes. No insult or slight against homosexuals is meant. Those of you who from H2O know my views on homosexuality and that I am not anti-gay.

Richard

Mulan

I find it fascinating the attention this subject gets on this message board. The topics just keep popping up, and get 40-50 or more replies too. I have a niece who is gay, but we don't have any other gay people in the family anywhere, back two to three generations. I tend to believe that she got into a denial mode of being female after her mother died in childbirth, when this girl was 13. She was in shock for at least a year, and her own puberty seemed to stall until she was nearly 16. She is now 37 and openly lesbian. Just my opinion. She is in therapy now, trying to understand it herself. She has the love and acceptance of the entire family, so doesn't feel rejected at all. Even her militant JW grandmother, my Mom, openly accepts her and her friend. My Dad said the other day "do you think Debbie's friend is gay too." We all about died laughing.

Amazing

Hi Patio: Although I have read several things about homosexuality and some few suggestions from the scientific community about genetic issues, I have no real opinion. I do believe that we will one day discover a lot of things about genetics, and maybe even a few Criminal DNA floating around that will allow doctors to treat these.

But, there are many social barriers left to hurdle. Most homosexuals I know have expressed resentment that their sexual orientation is an issue of some defect in genetics. I disagree with them, but I don't debate the issue.

What is most interesting to me is how the premise of evolution has helped medical science to discover many things and we are poised to enjoy many major medical advances in the near future with the genome mapping completed. There will be as much fus in the future between religion and science as it becomes clear that evolution is proven to be even more of a fact than it is today.

Amazing

SanFranciscoJim

"I find it fascinating the attention this subject gets on this message board. The topics just keep popping up, and get 40-50 or more replies too."

What I find fascinating is that the few homosexuals who are active on this board (myself included) are not the ones who start the threads. We merely reply to them.

Upon examination of Watchtower literature, I may have discovered the answer:
From 1961 through 1993, Watchtower publications mention the word "homosexual" 520 times, and the word "homosexuality" 631 times! Could it be that the Society is subconsciously introducing an obsession with the subject into its membership?

Homosexuals and Evolution

Share this