![]() |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
This is what seems intuitively to me to be the case. But I don't see how this could come about from an evolutionary point of view. [/ QUOTE ] Why not? Many things observed in nature are normal distributions. And I would be very surprised if sexuality was not normally distributed as well. If it was possible to accurately survey human sexuality I bet you'd find a normal distribution clustered around straightness. Some things may not serve a clear, obvious evolutionary purpose yet still evolve, I'd imagine. |
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Some things may not serve a clear, obvious evolutionary purpose yet still evolve, I'd imagine. [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely - which is precisely what makes these discussios interesting to me, so long as 'no clear and obvious purpose' is never confused with 'no evolutionary purpose period'. |
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Some things may not serve a clear, obvious evolutionary purpose yet still evolve, I'd imagine. [/ QUOTE ] Absolutely - which is precisely what makes these discussios interesting to me, so long as 'no clear and obvious purpose' is never confused with 'no evolutionary purpose period'. [/ QUOTE ] I thought a genetic trait could self-select as long as it did not hinder the host. ie. two genetic configurations develop that provide no advantage or disadvantage to the host. One genetic trait happens to dominate the other, it wins. |
|
#54
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] gay-straight sexuality scale [/ QUOTE ] I think both this and the binary notion are both do to our current societal structure. I find it much more plausible that there are two separate traits. Desire for same sex, and desire for opposite sex. Which would mean that desire for same sex nooky would not diminish reproductive drive. [/ QUOTE ] I suppose you could look at straight and gay as separate but that still doesn't mean you won't have a general preference, e.g., I might be 90% straight but my 10% gay side might still find Brad Pitt sexually attractive and never act on it regardless of societal pressures. The only thing my conscious mind might tell me is that I find him handsome and zero other conscious thoughts. |
|
#55
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
I thought a genetic trait could self-select as long as it did not hinder the host. [/ QUOTE ] It surely can, which is why this specific topic is particularly interesting to me. I have yet to see a convincing account of evolutionary gayness which demolishes the problem of hindering the host. It's like some endlessly intricate puzzle - fascinating, whatever the outcome. |
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
|
DNA isn't the sole source code that makes a living organism what it is. There is another set of code that rides on top of the genome. Its called the epigenome and its not hard wired like DNA. Environment and lifestyle can change and are intergal to how your epigenome evolves. It explains why identical twins(genetic clones) grow more and more distinct as they age. I suspect it is also why a heterosexual may have a homosexual identical twin.
Nova had a little segment about the epigenome. Here is a link. Stu |
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ah, now that's interesting... that definitely seems less problematic. Cheers!
|
|
#58
|
|||
|
|||
|
gayness is an abnormality like having three nipples. it just means that when you DNA was getting arranged one of the balls fell in the wrong hole or whatever. the idea that people are born gay to control the amount of breeding seems silly.
|
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
gayness is an abnormality like having three nipples. it just means that when you DNA was getting arranged one of the balls fell in the wrong hole or whatever. the idea that people are born gay to control the amount of breeding seems silly. [/ QUOTE ] Three nipples is pretty abnormal. When you talk of gay as being the same thing, what are you talking about? There’s different types of gayness: tops, bottoms, vers, bi's, twinks. Gays that are only into oral, gays that never have anal, curios gays, gays that are into shemales, people who cross dress, etc. Are they all the same? Are they all as bizarre as a fellow with three nipples? Does a mental fondness for the same sex, necessarily fall into the same category as a physical abnormality? I don’t know the answers my self. I’m just curious of those who claim to know all the answers. |
|
#60
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bonobo chimp males regularly hang from a branch face-to-face and engage in "penis fencing". And every member of the tribe engages in sexual activity with every other one (female-female, male-male, male-female), except mothers and adult sons.
That's what I read on Wikipedia today. Clearly for the bonobos it has a role in group cohesion and bonding. I don't know but I'd guess that for bonobos it's not just a cultural thing. As for humans, I'd like to hear more about the twins-separated-at-birth studies - forget any of our hypothesising - these would pretty much give a simple answer. |
![]() |
|
|