why do homosexuals exist in nature in the ratios they do? I can understand bisexuality, heterosexuality, and most/all of the less common sexualities, but my current understanding of the literature doesn't really explain homosexuality.
>>7965553
homosexuals don't exist
like pedophiles, they're just mentally ill people who need serious rehab or execution
>>7965561
>serious execution
>as opposed to lighthearted execution
>>7965561
>citation needed
>>7965561
aside from the fact that your two statements are literally mutually exclusive, I'm not particularly interested in your explanation because homosexuals themselves will explicitly tell you they were born that way, that nothing could ever make them change, etc.
Taking them at their word for the moment, there doesn't seem to be any basis for their claim. This then raises the issue of why a psychological deviation like homosexuality is so common when the genetics and epigenetics don't seem to account for it. The whole issue seems stuck in a loop of implausibility - it seems implausible there could be a non-cultural reason for it, but there doesn't seem to be a compelling cultural reason for it either.
>>7965573
Homosexuals: Nothing's wrong with me! I was born that way!
Pedophiles: Nothing's wrong with me! I was born that way!
I see no difference. Both are also degenerate as fuck, as expected.
>>7965575
>what is consent?
>>7965575
I see the difference as this: there are a shitton more homosexuals than pedophiles, and in any case there's probably a pretty decent (and revolting) evolutionary reason for the existence of pedophiles.
>>7965575
you do realize the criteria of degeneracy is subject to eras and ubpringing, and is not viable through the scientific method, right? also if you see no difference between someone that states they always enjoyed being around the same sex and someone who is attracted to the inhibition of adolescence, then why even browse /sci/? you're showing your inability to think, and it's laudable.
>>7965585
I'm going to assume you meant laughable instead of laudable, lol
>>7965585
>I go on 4chan out of every place on the internet and expect a serious discussion with formal arguments and valid reasoning.
>>7965581
>consent to think about something
>>7965595
why even have /sci/?
>>7965599
Because this boards attracts all the /b/, /biz/, /int/, /pol/, /r9k/, /s4s/, /x/, and /v/ crossboard shitposters. If this board were to vanish, they'd fuck up every other board on this site.
>>7965553
I see it as this: as long as homosexuality doesn't brings the reproduction rate of the species to the point of unsustainability, the trait survives in the population.
Homosexuals exist, because nature knows females ain't nothing but hos and tricks, but for reproductive reasons nature can't get rid of them on its own. So it's hoping man can find a way to solve that problem and then just reproduce homosexually.
check mate faggots
>>7965604
are there any other traits which so seriously affect the reproductive fitness of an individual and which yet survive in a population at similarly prevalent rates?
I can't think of any off the top of my head; it seems insane. From a genetic standpoint, homosexuality should breed itself out of a population quickly, unless there's some external factor that keeps reintroducing it with every generation.
>>7965620
>homosexuality should breed itself out of a population quickly
Not if it occurs randomly.
>>7965627
that's what I'm saying, though. What is the explanation for this random trait to be so prevalent compared to other random traits? Why is this trait random?
If it is random, why don't we just acknowledge that, like many other random physical disorders, this is a disease which removes the healthy heterosexual sex drive from an individual, causing them to fail to pass on their genes?
Why does it seem to be associated with smart/artistic people, and thus not random? Is it because being persecuted makes you smart/artistic? Should we therefore expect average intelligence/creativity among gays to go down as we become more accepting? Or is it actually somehow genetically or epigenetically linked with intelligence/creativity?
If it's truly random, how come it affects males more than females?
>>7965641
fug I really needed to put a comma after "this is a disease"
so basically what I'm getting from this is that fags are magic; we have no idea how homos work.
>>7965553
Carbon dioxide levels on gene expression during gestasis.
Fucking global warming is makin people gay
>>7965553
Gay people cant be born gay because "Gay" genes cant be passed on simply because you cant make babys by fucking ass.
Homosexuals are physically and / or mentally weak and nature has decided that their genes are not worth passing on.
There is a switch in your brain and when you lose a lot of battles in your personal life you seek for a strong person to protect you after your parents are gone.
Another reason is that society treats you like something you are not and you grow into that role. There was some weird ruassion girl I saw living on the street and she dressed and acted like an agressive boy to not get raped from strangers, she became a lesbian.
>>7965738
No link sadly as it's hard to get funding on this type of study however there are studies that highlight the correlation between atmospheric co2 and gene expression in rats.
>>7965734
>Gay people cant be born gay because "Gay" genes cant be passed on simply because you cant make babys by fucking ass.
>what is recessive genes?
I seriously hope this is low quality bait.
>>7965746
into the trash it goes, then :(
>>7965553
Statistics show that over 80% of people who ask this are themselves homosexuals. Combine that with the fact that you're OP.....
>>7965763
(You)
My ex identified as genderfluid, pansexual. Her father is a closeted homosexual who married her mom for a few years in order to fool his family.
>>7965561
*tips katana*
muh genetics
Honestly, I don't think Homosexuality is genetic. I think they just get sucked into it, ya feelin?
>>7965778
kawaii
>>7965793
holy shit, this is the level of discourse on /sci/?
welp, I'm not sure what I expected on a board full people posturing like tenured research fellows even though they have fewer degrees to their name than art majors.
looks like I'll have to try to get better answers out of /his/ and /lit/
you guys suck.
>>7965804
>I got answers that hurt my feelings so I'll ask my own kind on whether homosexuality is okay, faggots!!
>>7965804
>you guys suck.
Not as much as the gays.
>>7965795
Don't ever fucking reply to me again unless you're contributing to the thread.
>>7965814
Don't talk to me or my imouto ever again!
>>7965816
>>7965810
>implying OP is pro-homosexuality, which he clearly is not, if you read his comments.
>>7965641
>heterosexual sex drive
>healthy
Just chalk up my good life to vitamins, overpopulation, oversharing of limited resources, ecological damage and clean living
>>7965826
this is what faggots like you don't understand: there is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
just because there are too many people doesn't mean the drive to create more people is inherently bad, just as you may believe the drive to fuck a boy in the ass isn't inherently bad, though anal sex spreads disease more readily than other forms of sexual activity.
>>7965822
Most homophobes are closet homosexuals
>>7965828
Obviously I didn't say it was inherently bad. I used topics that only apply to modern and recent life, so it's obviously contextually not optimal, autist
Also
>what are condoms
>what are std checks
>anal sex is the only way for homos to have sex
>>7965831
This is a weak argument. If you say you hate anime, does that mean you're a closet weeaboo? no
>>7965834
>people unironically think false equivalences are good logic
>on /sci/
>>7965831
that's OK, because as you continue to focus on this instead of the actual topic of the thread, it only becomes increasingly obvious that you can't deal with this topic intelligently.
also, big surprise, OP is a faggot. that's a given.
>>7965833
and all of this helps explain the existence of homosexuals how?
>>7965836
explain how your referent is a false equivalence.
>>7965836
>/sci/ is for serious discussion
>>7965755
>>what is recessive genes?
It cant even be recessive, once the gene is actvated it removes itself from the gene pool. Imagine the first dude having the gay gene developed - it would not pass on to the next generation.If it cant be developed then where should it come from?
>>7965767
Oh (You)
*swipes right*
>>7965814
Kawaii
>>7965864
desu :3
>>7965814
This guy
>>7965931
Don't forget your meds, faggot
>>7965952
Reply to me again and I will destroy you
>>7965955
Ok, go ask your mommy for an extra 15 mins of online time. Cos its on nigga!
>>7965955
Your dubs scare me1!!
>>7965836
>If you hate X, then you actually LOVE X.
>that's faulty reasoning, here is an example why.
>FALSE EQUIVALENCE.
People like you are the true homosexuals senpai.
>>7965959
Try and chat shit to me on rumblr, pussy
@mmmmboys
>>7965970
Nobody is saying "if you 'hate' X then you probably actually are X" is true in the general case; it just happens to be true in the case of homosexuality. There was no reasoning to be faulty, it was just an empirical observation.
>>7965975
>empirical observation
Nah, you just like to call people gay.
Fuckin poofter.
>>7965734
well I'm a fat fuck who looks disgusting with so many problems, that I will probably never have sex in my life
I'm not gay tho
why am I not gay if I'm that weak and my genes are not worth passing on
>>7965971
Are you actually this retarded? are you going to "win" at texting insults?
Btw, wtf is rumblr? Is that the WWF variant of tumblr?
>>7965575
Pedophiles don't necessarily rape children, most just jerk off to children porn or something.
I've thought alot about this, and also read around alot on the subject, and I think that most likely we have several "types" of homos, firstly into two groups, those who are from nature and those who are from nurture. With nurture you have those who didnt have a father or had a strained relationship to their father and they end up seeking comfort in other men to fill the void left by their father. Then there are those who became it through abuse as a child, vampire syndrome, most of these end up as pedophiles too. Hence the high rates of pedophiles within the gay population. And plenty other things that could traumatize both men and women into homosexuals. Some for comfort and safety, some perverted, some stockholm syndrome-ish.
Then there are those who are born with the same gene that some women get that makes them extra set up for carrying children, those who have massive hips at a young age, and huge tits before they hit 15, etc. When this gene ends up in a man, they usually end up gay.
Sorry if my horrible writing gave you a headache, but those were my two cents.
>>7966066
Oh and gl finding the ratios, but these ARE the types, I'm pretty damn sure.
>>7965984
its because of denial and fear
all men are gay
>>7965986
>baited this hard
O P E R A N T C O N D I T I O N I N G
>>7966277
Holy shit
>72 posts 24 Posters
Why is /sci so full of Commies all the time?
TRUMP2016!!!
This Triggers the nigger.
>>7965553
I recall a study basically saying that homosexuality is a combination of ambiental and genetical factors. They also noted that, on brothers where one was homosexual, the heterosexual brother was significantly more promiscuous than average. Homosexuality may be a side effect of an advantageous gene. In any case, homosexuals do have offspring, both in the human and animal kingdoms.
The allele relating to homosexual men is a polygenic trait resulting from hormones in vivo, genetic triggers, epigenetic effects and conditioning. The reason homosexual behavior is kept in the tree of life is due to the capability for homosexual males, especially in tribal or familial groups, to care for children when females of child caring capacity are low as well as hunt for food. This is indicative in the generalized higher level of estrogen and testosterone compared to most heterosexual males.
>>7966066
Is somewhat close although your first premise of the nurture group stinks of Freud which is not a good place to start when trying to form a useful theory on human interaction. There have been some studies that link a gene that causes promiscuity in females with homosexuality in the males who carry the same gene. The problem is your attempt to decisively group, the fact that the homosexual condition is a result of polygenic traits make grouping neigh impossible. You may be able to assign relative ratios of influence on a given homosexual male but producing stable groups that correlate to behavior and body type is just as bad as most any sociological study and therefore unlikely to have much support beyond "This one group of white college students in Minnesota I ran this study on indicates xyz". Moreso this would imply that those people in your first group would benefit from therapy and the pray away the gay camp, however the rate at which homosexual men become permanently straight is extremely low and even those who report such results are suspect due to societal and religious pressure. It has been demonstrated that it is impossible to induce attraction to a gender one is not attracted to but it is possible to form an aversion to a gender a person is attracted too. This would cast further doubt on those numbers as it implies the possibility that bisexual males are being conditioned instead of homosexuals becoming straight.
>>7965596
> being this full of autism
>>7965599
to have science related trolling
how fucking dense are you
>>7965553
frankly, with the amount of idiots & overpopulation on the planet i'm upset there isn't more homosexuality to stop them from producing offspring
>>7965553
It turns out to be, biologically speaking, very difficult to create a system that builds brains that like dicks and brains that like tits that doesn't occasionally slip up, especially when all you've got to regulate the process is some hormones and all the ones that aren't supposed to like dick can't be completely turned off by it or they'll go flaccid every time they see their own boner.
As long as exclusive homosexuality isn't too common, there's no strong evolutionary reason to avoid it, and judging by the wide occurrence of animal homosexuality it's almost an inevitable consequence of how mammal brains handle sex
>>7965581
> implying children can't consent
>>7966479
>The reason homosexual behavior is kept in the tree of life is due to the capability for homosexual males, especially in tribal or familial groups, to care for children when females of child caring capacity are low as well as hunt for food.
This is really the only thing in the thread that makes sense.
>>7965563
Kek
>>7966702
So homosexual men are superior?
If homosexuality turns out to be a genetic defect, what would the result be of any attempts to fix it?
So can you explain why someone would choose to be unable to have children as well as choose to have been ostracized up until the paste few years?
>>7965553
I'll give you a less douchey response, OP.
In college, we did research on this exact topic and found pretty much no evidence to support that it was an advantageous trait to be homosexual in animals. However, it's a mutation that doesn't impact your ability to reproduce (technically) and can also mutate independently, meaning it does not have to be inherited for you have the trait.
There is strong evidence that the most male offspring a human female has, the greater chance the youngest son will be homosexual. There is also correlation between having a maternal uncle who is gay and that woman's son also being gay. As far as lesbianism is concerned, there's no similar correlation. However, women who state they are "more homosexual" share genetic markers more commonly found in males that they did not inherit from their parents.
I guess the takeaway is this: Biology is very complex, and one phenotype can be the result of a variety of different genotypes, some of which are even just random mutations. And even with Darwinian Evolution in play, traits that seem nonsensical or maybe appear "diasdvantageous" can still be inherited as they don't impair an individual organisms' ability to function or reproduce.
Homosexuality is probably simply just a freak mutation that occurs quite often in animals, and since there (so far) hasn't been a selective pressure against it... it will just keep popping up.
Does it mean that you can "carry the gay gene"? Probably not.
Does it mean that gays are "born that way"? Probably.
Does it mean that gays choose to be deviants or result from deviant behavior? Likely no, but some genes (mutated or not) don't turn on until certain factors trigger them. And there's no doubt that throughout human history, social psychology and emotional health DO play a role in human sexual development.
So does it mean we need to kill homos? No. It's just another random mutation, and they have a right to pursue their happiness as they see fit.
>>7966741
Holy shit. I have have three older brothers, and i'm homosexual. Also, I don't know why but I always suspected my uncle from my mother side to be closeted even though he's married.
>>7966741
Shut up sjw kike
>>7965575
>Heterosexuals: Nothing's wrong with me! I was born this way!
>Obnoxious shitposters: Nothing's wrong with me! I was born this way!
>>7965595
>>I go on 4chan out of every place on the internet and expect a serious discussion with formal arguments and valid reasoning.
Yes, I do, because unlike reddit, I expect to have a serious discussion without wasting time on politically correct bullshit, but when stormweenies fuck everything up, it makes everything go to shit.
>>7966759
Obviously they just need to shitpost reeducation camps.
>>7966741
Thank you for being the only decent post ITT.
>>7966832
>>7966741
>>7966845
> implying you're not the same poster
Save us from further overpopulation.
They're necessary, bear with it.
My understanding is that it comes down to kin selection. The female relatives of homosexual men tend to be more fertile.
>>7966851
if it is, i respect that move, may use it sometime
>>7966741
>tfw i had an uncle on my mom's side who never married well into his 40s despite being an award winning teacher who made good money and he was the youngest boy
>he died alone from 'messing up his medication dosage'
>im on track to carry on the family tradition
>>7966712
Lel, where does this conclusion even come from
A specific example I'm aware of in the animal kingdom is that there are well documented cases of homosexual couples in certain penguin colonies. Said homosexual penguin couples will often adopt and care for the chicks of other penguins that have been abandoned - and in some cases they've even been observed stealing chicks while the actual parents' backs are turned - indicating that the homosexual penguins retain a brooding instinct. The result is that the chicks of colonies with gay penguins are more likely to survive and so propagate the colony as a whole. Thus, even though the homosexual penguins do not pass on their specific genome, whatever it is in the penguin colony's gene pool that results in a certain optimal percentage of gay penguins being born will be selected for over multiple generations.
>>7966712
No, but there is an optimal number of homosexuals for a given population and populations with that optimal number will be more likely to survive than those with more or those with fewer.
>>7965582
Most child molesters in the papers are white or mexican, and mexicans are part european from the spanish invasion.
Early europeans had to spend a lot of time in caves huddled together for warmth right? That's why they get along with each other so well and make the best societies, because people who couldn't get along with their cave-mates were made to leave the cave and freeze.
Now there's just you and your kids in the cave, whatever will you do to stay warm? I have an idea...
>>7965553
because it's so much fun
>>7965734
I wonder if this really is the truth.
>>7965573
It's actually entirely possible that homosexuality is genetical
For thousands of years (pure) homosexuality was frowned upon in most cultures, so homosexuals were peer pressured into acting like they were hetorosexual, finding a woman and procreating
Now that homosexuality is more or less socially accepted, more and more homosexuals chose to live according to what they like instead of what society thinks they should like
And whether being homosexual is an evolutionary disadvantage or not doesn't really matter, because evolution will take care of it anyways
>This thread
I am amazed that homophobia still exists in 2015. Some men like other men, why is this controversial?
>>7967685
Because we don't actually know if it's a psychological trauma or genetic.
>>7967692
There are many homosexuals who come from loving families. The whole debate is pointless, homosexuals don't cause any problems in society just leave them alone. It's just retard sheep mentality "waah why are some people different?"
>>7967695
>There are many homosexuals who come from loving families.
Is your family lovely?
Does your family have problems?
>The whole debate is pointless, homosexuals don't cause any problems in society just leave them alone.
Yeah. I was answering your question about your ignorance on the topic.
>It's just retard sheep mentality "waah why are some people different?"
No, it's a mix between that and "I don't want my kid to be like those exibicionist faggots over there".
>>7967699
>Is your family lovely?
I'm not gay
>"I don't want my kid to be like those exibicionist faggots over there"
Maybe they are doing that because they have to make their cause known or else people will kill them and no-one will know or care. If gay pride marches is what causes homophobia then by your logic there would be no homophobia in countries with no gay pride such as Uganda.
>>7967711
>If gay pride marches is what causes homophobia
Well, I hope they reach their goal with that method.
>>Is your family lovely?
I was implying that there is no perfect family.
>>7967685
Remember this fantastic argument, whenever you see homophobia on internet :
"Well, and when you're watching porn with just 2 girls enjoying each other, does it disturb you ? No ? How weird..."
So, how many of those who say "homo are shitty perv/ill people" on this thread went on /u/ and actually enjoyed themselves ?
>>7967728
I made that argument in a thread once. it was conveniently ignored. Same thing for trans really, if a woman wears a suit nobody cares but if a man wears a dress everyone goes nuts.
>>7965553
Because being a fag is actually adaptive:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_mating_strategy
This occurs in nature a whole buttload. I remember seeing some Attenborough documentary of these sharks where the females were all grouped and protected in a harem by a male alpha bull shark, anybody who wanted mating access had to fight him, but some of the super weedy as fuck males were so thin and effeminate that it was sending deceptive signals out the alpha and making it think that he was actually a female, which meant they could slip into the harem with ease and fuck as many as they liked. Gayness is this but in humans, overtly effeminate signals to confuse people, so they can pin down females and fuck them on their own and nobody shakes their head because they don't see them as a threat.
>>7967736
>>7967753
cis scum
>>7967753
>>7967757
QM has nothing on biology when it comes to weirdness.
>>7967757
>sneak-breeding
This is a killer term.
>>7967757
>>7968685
>>7965812
TopKek
>>7965563
>>7968685
What does ant sperm look like?
>>7968762
Like an eldritch abomination.
>>7968765
Pretty cool how similar it looks to human sperm, given how much change humans and ants have had since they diverged.
In case anyone hasn't noticed, gay men tend to be very similar to eachother. Feminine, find it easier to talk to women then men, tend to have girly voices. I think it's a hormonal difference between the genders, an exclusively homosexual male's brain is probably very similar to a female's brain.
Bisexual males are like in the middle.
Then you get those weird cases of men who get off to men due to other factors, like domination or mental damage. For example, in jail when Bubba rapes someone just to assert dominance. The mental damage case could be someone who formed an attraction towards men that was not initially present, which caused the male to deviate from his initial sexuality which has nothing to do with genetics.
It's a complex problem.
everyone is a little gay. some people are gayer than others. there's a spectrum.
Also, it's most likely hormonal
>>7965814
desu
>>7967728
>>7967734
guys you're not normal whatever you want to think.
women playing with each other is condoneable, lesbians don't actually exist.
also male homosexuality has nothing to do with lesbianism. male homosexuals are weak men with feminine features, while homosexual women are no more weak and feminine than any woman
>>7969174
This is just leftie propaganda.
In reality, about 1.5-2% of the population are gay.
>>7966759
>spot the butthurt lgbtfag
sorry fag, you're as mentally impaired as a pedophile. dont rape little boys ok?
>>7967685
Want to know why? Couple of reasons.
1) It spreads disease. Taking into account that many homos are bisexual to some extent, we dont want the woman getting diseased up as a result of some guys buttfucking each other and then screwing a woman for a change.
2) Homos normalize their sexual preference. So they see nothing wrong with seducing younger males. Young minds become heavily hard wired by their first sexual experiences ( which may not even involve any penetration ). We dont want our sons to have the misfortune of having thier first sexual experiences with a guy cos it may turn them into homos as well and therefore fuck up the chances of our DNA being passed on.
>>7969218
(you)
>>7968687
I love this one
>>7969240
*openly gay
As that anon said, it's more of a spectrum
>>7969283
>it spreads disease
>what are condoms
>what is a health cert
>many homos are bisexual
No
>homos normalise their sexual preference. So they see nothing wrong with seducing younger males.
Kek, where does this generalising conclusion even come from
>fuck up their chances of our dna being passed on
Given homosexuality has a genetic element, and homos are disease spreading pedophiles (apparently), wouldn't this be a good thing?
Also
>what is ivf
>what is sperm donation
ITT: generalisations (even though literally the only thing you can say about homosexuals as a group is that they're homosexual), latent homosexuality and overcompensating homophobia, people getting angry because people don't like things they like, and pure edge
Didn't some research come out a few months ago claiming that lack of certain hormones in utero could cause homosexuality? I think homosexuality could be cured in a non politically correct society. I also think there's a difference between having sex with the same gender and homosexuality. I believe homosexuality is a mind set of not being attracted to the other sex at all and having no urge to reproduce. I think having sex with a dude and then go going home and banging your wife to have a kid is much different.
>>7965553
There was a book published by an evolutionary biologist, Robin Baker, called Sperm Wars which talked about reproductive strategies in humans. You would have to read it yourself, but basically his perspective on homosexuality is that genuine exclusive homosexuals are rare and are an evolutionary disadvantage. There presence is a consequence of the reproductive advantages of bisexuality. An excerpt from the book:
"It seems most likely that exclusive homosexuality is a genetic by-product of the reproductively advantageous characteristic of bisexuality. If so, homosexual behaviour joins the ranks of a number of other human characteristics that are advantageous when a person has inherited a few of the relevant genes, but disadvantageous if they have inherited more."
>>7965585
Meaning of not seeing a difference between homosexuals and pedophiles are In terms of unnatural bias for sexual pleasure.
I'm sure you can see the reasoning of linking the two together.
>>7965641
Not sure why homosexuals have a high social status at the moment, homosexuals seem to mimic women very closely, from sexuality to female and gay rights
Not sure why its a hate crime if you call a heterosexual a faggot and an homosexual one, There taking over, just look online there are a lot of popular homosexual internet celebs
>>7965553
Were there any fags during the viking age or around the shoganate japan or maybe faggery is something that increases when humans have to much time on their hands. A bit like fapping
>>7969549
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8433527/First-homosexual-caveman-found.html
>>7969551
So a fossilized cock was found in a fossilized anus next to a inscription talking all about about?
Like 4chan!
