Around half of all people, including straight men and women, could carry “gay genes”, meaning that they continue to be passed down the generations despite the tendency of homosexuals not to have children, new research suggests.
The sisters of gay men tend to have more children, helping explain the persistence of homosexuality in larger populations, while straight men may also carry genes predisposing them to being gay, the study found.
Research by Giorgi Chaladze, of Ilia State University in Tbilisi, Georgia, used a computational model to look at the influence of genes and heredity on homosexuality, and its presence throughout human history and in all cultures.
Dr Chaladze sought to find out why genes associated with homosexuality don’t die out, even when – unsurprisingly – straight men have five times more children than gay men. He took into account previous research that gay men are more likely to come from larger families.
Based on Chaladze's calculations, published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, male homosexuality is maintained in a population at “low and stable frequencies” if half of the men and roughly more than half of the women carry genes that predispose men to homosexuality.
Dr Chaladze said: "The trend of female family members of homosexual men to have more offspring can help explain the persistence of homosexuality, if we also consider that those males who have such genes are not always homosexuals.”
The number of men who engage in same-sex sexual behaviour or report same-sex sexual attraction consistently outstrip estimates of those who self-identify as homosexual or bisexual – suggesting that many straight men carry the “gay genes” too.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/half-of-all-people-could-be-carrying-gay-genes-a6982381.html
>>38543
Looks like the gay bomb was a success
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jun/13/usa.danglaister
I didn't know the gay got their own type of pants
>>38543
There you go. I knew it. You're all totally gay.
Being, "gay," is a life choice.
Not me
>>38611
Liar
Being gay is a genetic predisposition
either activated or invalidated by psychological events
which trigger chemical imbalances
generally during the person's youth.
It's in the same vein as left handedness, autism, or colour blindness.
It IS unusual, it IS a genetic mishap, but just like any of those other things it doesn't necessarily have to fuck up your life.
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/identical-twin-studies-prove-homosexuality-is-not-genetic
It isn't genetic.
>>38610
Honestly, you're right. Of course people are restricted by their physical appearance, but ultimately sexual orientation is completely a creative endeavor. Which is to say that being homosexual and being a flamboyant piece of shit are two different things.
>>38611
Faggot detected!
>>38566
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkFfK-mh1kQ
fake and gay
There are no gay genes, is a mental disorder, deal with it faggots
>>38616
>“At best genetics is a minor factor, [...]"
read the post above you.
I prefer to think of people turning out gay as more of a psychosocial cause rather than a genetic disposition. There may be genetic factors that make a man more feminine, but that does not necessarily make them gay. I believe many people end up being gay simply because they have been told they are that way over a number of years (or various other social occurrences). More simply put (although less accurate) they are conditioned by their peers over a number of years to be gay. Although, this does not make it a conscious choice in their part.
>>38722
Why not both?
>>38722
agreed, heterosex as well
were all one big mental disorder
>>38722
There's genes for everything though...
Foucault argues that the homosexual is a social construct invented in the 19th century. Before this point literature, culture, and legal documents only refer to sodomy (indeed, the most famous US "anti-gay" laws don't mention homosexuals, but merely ban sodomy). Foucault's assertion, then, is that western culture didn't treat people as "gay" (as having a new identity as homosexual) before this point, only spurning them for having engaged in a dishonorable act. This act, while considered bad, didn't change their identity. He uses the word "species" to indicate how we view homosexuals as entirely different from hetereosexuals. The search for a gay gene is an extension of the cultural need to prove that homosexuals are fundamentally, biologically different than "normal" people.
The gay identity - (past defined as) society views you entirely differently after committing sodomy, (now defined as) your personal identity is defined purely by your sexual preference - therefore emerged, in Foucault's view, at the time of otherness during the period he refers to as The Great Confinement.
During the past it would have been a BAD THING to be considered a "different species" for being gay, but now the gay movement has seized this identity and made it their own. They want to be different. Their rallying cry is "we can't help who we are - we were born this way", "it's biological".
Does Foucault's argument hold up? That's up to you to decide. But know he's one of the most influential postmodern writers of all time and a complete headache to read, so you can now impress ALL the hipster girls at parties.
>>38908
>so you can now impress ALL the hipster girls at parties
i'd rather impress all the hipster boys and get that bp
>>38614
>Being gay is a genetic predisposition
Really? you've found the "Gay Gene"?
Congratulations, because you've succeeded where hundreds and hundreds of other studies have failed.
Prepare to be lauded, because that's an unprecedented find. Particularly in the face of so many previous failures.
>>38543
So pure supposition on the part of Dr. Chaladze, with no other studies or models to back up his statement. Science journalism and grant hunting at it's finest.
>>38610
Why do people parrot this idiocy?
Way more than half the people on the planet have sucked a dick in their life if you think about it.
So did straight people just choose to be straight, or is it genetic?
Fucking idiots
>>38543
It makes sense biologically. Large families could use a couple sexual dropouts to help raise the kids. Gay people allow straights to safely have more kids, so the sisters of gay men have more kids. This selects for the recessive gay gene(s).
I doubt there is a sole gene that expresses homosexuality onto a person. Its probably a bunch of different genes working in coordination with each other, as well as epigenetic markers, that do this.
>>38610
if you like men and women, then it's a choice
if you don't like women since forever, then it's genetics
also happens on nature and it's absolutely normal
>>38722
A mental disorder is something that makes it difficult to carry out daily tasks, or causes some kind of harm to the person. Being gay isn't a mental disorder because it doesn't do that.
>so being teased and beat up for being gay isn't harming them? Sounds like a mental illness
The harm stems from others' intolerance, not the gay
>>41826
I haven't ever sucked dick but I sure as fuck tried to suck mine.
>>38610
Yeah. You can absolutely choose what you are attracted to. Fag
>>38908
Ok fine, I'll bite. I'm gay. I don't just prefer buttholes over vaginas. Everything that exemplifies masculinity is what I'm attracted to. I lust over and fall in love with men. This is what it means to be homosexual. The occurrence of sodomy between two gay men who are attracted to each other is merely a function of the fact that there is no other hole to stick it in. Tl;dr you (or, I guess, Foucault) are confusing cause with effect.
There's no way there isn't some innate biological difference. I would ask all the straight guys in this thread to earnestly contemplate the totally involuntary and biologically-driven nature of their attraction to women.
>>43767
>Yeah. You can absolutely choose what you are attracted to. Fag
I refuse to believe that people like you actually believe the nonsense you're spouting.
>>43779
You are born with your sexuality, you can't choose it no matter how much you think you can. It just isn't true.
So if you have a choice of liking both sexes, you were born bi.
If you like the opposite, you were born Hetero.
If you like the same, you were born Homo.
If you don't like any, you were born a special snowflake.
>>43630
To play doubles advocate for a bit...
Anal sex is actually harmful to an individual, so at least in the case of homosexual Men, they are practicing something that has negative health affects.
Furthermore, it could be argued, that life's prime directive is to continue life, and that this "mental disorder" prevents these life-forms from completing one of their basic essential life missions: reproduction.
>>43783
reproduction leads you to investing resources into raising a child as well as making a home for a mother because of the law. ie reproduction has negative health consequences as you invest your well being and resources into an indeavor that has no positive benefit for the organism depending on where it lives and what the laws are in the society.
Many "gays" end up having children anyways and then settleing with their desired sexual partners on the side or seperating from their heteropartner.
having anal sex can be completely benign given proper precautions such as lubricant and stretching of the rectum used. anal sex need not be the desired form of intercourse and female homosexuals have less real health risks.
>>43783
pregnancy leads to females becoming increasingly sickly/vulnerable as it progresses leading to them consuming more resources and requiring protection/medical resources to ensure they do not die.
Child birth itself is extremely risky and has proven to have an extremely high mortality rate within women who do not have access to modern medical facilities.
Essentially every time a woman has sex prior to lets say 1900 and is fertile she is gambling that she wont die during childbirth, preservation of self being the #1 priority of most life forms.
>>43783
psychologically people are driven to have sex primarily for pleasure, sex is found pleasurable to our species and many others because it leads to procreation. The mental disorder is that some women and men may find members of the same sex to be prefered partners from their mating instincts.
Now somone may not like the taste of pizza so they choose not to eat it as eating pizza causes them to feel discomfort and causes them distress. The real mental instability is if a person chooses to consume the pizza because other people have a preference for pizza as a food choice and pressure the individual to eat it or the individual chooses to eat the pizza because they want to appear normal and pretend to enjoy it when all they want is sushi.
>>43785
>reproduction has negative health consequences as you invest your well being and resources into an indeavor that has no positive benefit for the organism
You don't really believe this statement in earnest do you? There are so many ways this statement is incorrect, I'm not sure where to begin refuting it. I recognize this is a poor argument, but I'm going to leave it at that.
>Many "gays" end up having children anyways
They have to engage in heterosexual activity for this to happen.
Your last statement is theoretical, in practice, homosexual Men experience many direct health problems associated with Anal sex, not just possible damage to the digestive system, but also increased exposure risk to STIs. Homosexual Women are a debatable phenomenon in and of themselves.
>>43786
>preservation of self being the #1 priority of most life forms
I would classify this instinct as "preservation of life" not "self", to which reproduction plays a key role. Parent animals will give their lives to save the lives of their offspring, in some situations, which somewhat invalidates the claim that self preservation is the top priority. The rest of your argument boils down to the same things I didn't touch on from the previous poster - which I'll briefly outline: the reward of reproduction more often than not outweighs the risks. I'll let you do the mental legwork to figure out why that is the case.
>>43789
Wanting to fit in with the in-group is not mental instability though, it's normal human behavior. Not wanting to have reproductive sex is not normal human behavior, even if the reasons we engage in the activity is not always explicitly for the end result, but the pleasure of the act. I think to claim that humans and other animals only engage in sexual activity for the pleasure of it, is a bit of a stretch. At least with Humans, they absolutely do engage in the activity with the intent of producing offspring, at least some of the time.
This is so fucking retarded, genes can't exactly determine sexuality stone cold. It's more behavioral and environmental factors that determine being one sexuality from the other.
>>43797
I want you to read what you wrote and then honestly believe theres no errors in what you are argueing as you switch from scientific to then sociology which is kind of bs. Your last arguement has been a hotley contested point for a long time and in many previous societies it was considered "normal" to have homosexual sex. The anti homosexual sentiment still lingering in society is a byproduct of christian religion. Are you going to argue that having christian values is mentally sound because the majority of society believed in life after death, god, jesus christ and the bible etc.
What i am arguing is that homosexuality is fundamentally a part of a person's biology and not the byproduct of a mental illness that can be cured.
The potential for health risks is purely that potenital a result of risky behaviour. As someone who has sex often and has had sex with both genders and has spoken with sexual health doctors there is literally no health risk to being homosexual if you engage in the act safely just like heterosexual sex ie both vaginal and rectal linings can be torn by overly aggressive/forceful sex.
Just another case in point women can have anal sex as well. they engage in it and enjoy it.
Are you going to claim that all women who engage in receptive anal sex are mentally ill?
Are infertile people who engage in sex mentally ill? Perhaps they should never have sex because they cannot have children and sex without the posibility of having offspring is a sign of mental illness.
>>38610
This.
>>43797
At this point ive come to conclusion my error. 4chan is a website where people love to shitpost and troll. Trying to have intelligent discourse on this site is just as impossible as it is on reddit
where as on reddit people are just wholly retarded and believe in dogma and attack any idea that does not fit in with their social idealogy on 4 chan expert predators lurk waiting for a someone serious and then expertly craft a a post with logical fallacies with the intent to get the fool to try to attack back and lure them into a circle trying to get them to emotionally attack.
My hat is off to you sir 7.5/10 well done.
/Sci/ here
There are only FOUR nucleotides that make up the DNA in all living creature. Adenine (A), Thymine (T), Cytosine (C), and Guanine (G). Genes are a distinct sequence of nucleotides. Chromosomes are sequences of genes. Ergo, ALL STRAIGHT people have the same genes as GAY people. Just not in the same order. Its the order that determines the genetic expression and its the genetic expression that determines behaviour. To talk about the same genes is completely meaningless without considering the ordering. I suspect this is just another cynical attempt to normalise homosexuality. Homosexuality is genetically determined by mutant genes. It is natural. But it is not normal. Honestly, I want to slap these so called scientists when they come out with this cr@p.
Again, the news media proves they know nothing about genetics, or science in general.
I wish we lived in a time where 99% of news wasn't just click bait.
>>38543
Literally turning the frogs gay
Alex Jones was right all along
>>43865
affected by hormone baths in mother's womb, so mother's DNA probably more of a significant determinant of faggotry
>>43907
watching some feminized tv show and going to school learning about tolerance has a million times more effect than any of this shit
>>43865
But I should dump my fiancé that has a gay brother, right?
I don't want a faggot son.
>>43853
You sure are attributing a lot of words I didn't say to my argument... I'll just stick to your arguments.
>Your last arguement has been a hotley contested
If you mean whether that reproductive sex is "normal" and homosexual sex is not, I think it's a matter of defining the terms. Normal, how I'm using it is from a biological stand point, sex involving the reproductive organs is how it was meant to be, based on the evidence. If you mean "Normal" from a sociological stand point, well all bets are off, obviously.
>homosexuality is fundamentally a part of a person's biology and not the byproduct of a mental illness
We certainly wont come to a conclusion on this here. However, I will say this: Behavior is a choice, however heavily influenced by biological factors, as sentient beings, we always have a choice on how we behave. I suspect that a persons predisposal to homosexuality activity has a combination of biological and sociological factors involved. However, there is plenty of evidence that human sexuality is highly malleable, even beyond attraction to other humans, which suggests that sexuality is more on the mental side of things, than the biological.
>potential for health risks is purely that potenital
As I stated before, in practice, homosexuals (specifically men who practice anal sex) are at higher risk for a host of health problems directly due to their behavior. Can it be practiced safely? Sure! But so can eating broken glass. Anal sex (hetero or homo) is risky behavior in and of itself. The anus was not meant to take that kind of stress, and to suggest that the anus and the vagina are of similar elasticity is simply dishonest, and contrary to the evidence.
>Are you going to claim that all women who engage in receptive anal sex are mentally ill?
In a way, yes. Mental illness is a pretty big spectrum, and plenty of people go about their lives with some form of mental illness with no detriment to themselves.
>>43853
>>43949
>[Continued]
Depression is classified as a mental illness for example.
>Are infertile people who engage in sex mentally ill? Perhaps they should never have sex because they cannot have children and sex without the posibility of having offspring is a sign of mental illness.
No, there is no way to know you are infertile before trying to have reproductive sex (unless you get medically tested). Additionally, knowing you're infertile doesn't mean you shouldn't have sex, just like knowing you're homosexual doesn't mean you shouldn't have homosexual sex. However, it would be morally wrong for a person who knows they are infertle to lead a person who wants children on in a relationship, just as it would be morally wrong for a homosexual to knowingly pass on HIV/AIDS to a partner without advising them on the risks. There's a difference between what is morally right and wrong, and what is fundamentally right and wrong. Fundamentally, sex for any other purpose than reproduction, is wrong - it's not the reason for sex. That is essentially the basis of my argument.
Try to keep your emotional outbursts to a minimum, and engage my arguments rationally please.
>>43859
Ok, I can work with this.
>Trying to have intelligent discourse on this site is just as impossible as it is on reddit
I have seen intelligent discourse on both 4chan, and reddit, so you are incorrect about this. Furthermore, your ability to engage in intelligent discourse is fully your responsibility. The fact that you find these two places devoid of meaningful conversation, speaks more to your own intelligence than to anyone else's.
>on 4 chan expert predators lurk waiting for a someone serious and then expertly craft a a post with logical fallacies
First of all, thanks for the complement. Secondly, it would be nice if you could point out any flaws in logic so we can address them, rather than complain about their supposed existence.
>trying to get them to emotionally attack
You sound like you're arguing fully from an emotional position with this post, so - mission accomplished, I guess?
Half of all people = everyone is bisexual
>>43949
Actually theres no choice about who you are attracted to. There are hundreds of different species that practice homosexuality. Not to mention all of the tests to conclude sexual orientation is not a choice. Youre "facts" are bullshit
Itt: all of men posting in this thread were conceived as female, but nature and nurture are gamblers and some of you were always faggots.
>>43959
>Actually theres no choice about who you are attracted to.
Read more thoroughly please. Humans specifically have the ability to ignore their instinct and make choices that go against their desires. There are countless examples of Humans doing this, and it's arguable that modern society wouldn't exist if humans were incapable of ignoring their baser instincts to accomplish goals outside their direct desires. I'm not going to give a lot of examples here, but to reference an earlier statement by another poster:
>Many "gays" end up having children anyways
They have to engage in heterosexual activity for this to happen, and thus they have to choose to go against their true desires to accomplish this.
So no, my facts are not "bullshit" your reading comprehension is. It is a fact, that homosexuals can, and sometimes do, choose not to engage in homosexual activity, for various reasons, contrary to their desire. Maybe they can't choose who the're attracted to, but they absolutely can choose what they do with their life.
>>43968
>>Actually theres no choice about who you are attracted to.
>Read more thoroughly please. Humans specifically have the ability to ignore their instinct and make choices that go against their desires.
>Maybe they can't choose who the're attracted to, but they absolutely can choose what they do with their life.
Got me a laugh, 10/10. You sir, are a top tier troll.
>>44079
Feel free to point out where I'm wrong.
>>38543
>implying sexual deviance isn't a psychological disorder
Your Gay Agenda is showing
Just checked the dresser. No gay jeans just 100% manly ones
'gay genes'
what the fuck.
More cuck propaganda
Literal
>>44419
learn science retard
>>43968
>Many "gays" end up having children anyways
>They have to engage in heterosexual activity for this to happen
This is why I support gay marriage. If they're married hopefully it will discourage them from "cheating" on their partner. If they can never breed, their inferior genes ("gay genes existing" is a meme that, for me, will never wear out lol) will not be passed on.
Right now the Gene Pool is closed due to AIDS
What's next
Half of us have the pedosexuality gene?
>>38543
Homosexuality in male animals is caused by toxoplasma gondii.
Thanks for reading.
t. Nehiyaw patriot
>>44746
Yet another reason why men who own cats should get tested.
>>44747
Interestingly enough, there is a brain parasite that affects rodents into being attracted to cat urine. (Some sort of endocrine reaction for human males?)
So they seek out the urine and die, I claim a direct correlation between this parasite and why homosexual men like getting beat up among other foul lewdness.
I can say with 100% certainty the Sodomite vibration of this world has its origins in a microscopic disease.
God hates fags.
>>44748
>Homosexual men like getting beat up
>everything else you just said
Being gay means that you're attracted to the same sex in pretty much the same way you would be attracted to the opposite sex if you were straight. It has nothing to do with piss or getting beat up.
Why would it be a disease? How would a disease benefit from this?
>>44802
All life seeks to spread itself. Toxoplasma gondii is the disease.
"Love" is not love.
Love is perfect.
Sodomy is proven degenerate.
A myriad of statistics prove my position.
>>44802
Furthermore, toxoplasma gondii is separate from the brain parasite but they naturally are going to be overlapping due to their nature. It's because homosexuality is animalistic in the low sense of the word and exposes t.gondii subjects to the brain parasite subjects who are also virtually guaranteed to carry t.gondii.
I have a theory that says gay men and lesbian women are just infected with the attraction possessed by straight women and straight men, respectively.
That our sense of "attractedness" became so deep and powerful compared to other animals, that it just seeps into the genes of the sex that normally doesn't have it, and can even displace it.
That it, I think, the best argument against "homosexuality is immoral". The same urges are had by straight adults of the opposite sex.
Wanting cock or wanting pussy shouldn't be viewed as different depending on sex or gender.
>>38765
>the post above him
>some guy spouting his own theories, without a source or even proper formatting
This is one of those times I really miss reaction images on /news/
>>44151
Not him but
>they need to have heterosex to get kids.
>what is modern science where you can use a machine to transplant semen to a womans womb
>adoption
>born normally
>raised normally
>no issues
>like the benis
>vaginas are fucking disgusting to look at
how the fuck do you straight guys do it famalam? Women are nowhere near as straightforward as men in my experience either.
>>45112
In the first case the kid would only be one of the parents actual kid and in the second case the kid wouldn't be related to either parent.
>>43782
people like to crush their testicles and be humiliated. babies arnt born liking their balls being crushed. if its possible to change that, i dont see why not your choice of butts you fuck. oh, and my proof: "it just IS true. no matter how much you think it isnt"...or some shit.
>>42327
Just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good m8. Not saying it's bad, but I mean, polio occurs naturally, and vaccines are unnatural, doesn't mean vaccines are bad and polio is good.
I think it's more environmental than genetic, either way, it's still unavoidable.
