How would Evolutionists explain homosexuality?

Question

Survival of the fittest includes reproducing...

Answer 1

Hmmm. . . smart. But just because you proved your case doesn't give you a reason to start gay-bashing! (Which you're not doing, thankfully.)

Answer 2

You are assuming, incorrectly as most people do, that a person must be exclusively gay or exclusively straight. Historically, this has never been the case. Consider the case of Greece, of Rome, the Celts, the Zulus, homosexuality was common, but it never impacted on the birth rate. In China and Japan homosexuality have always been common and perfectly acceptable. Many young Japanese think "gaybar" (yes that is what I mean) is a Japanese word. Is it your argument that this is why China and Japan have such small populations? Anthropologically cultures which have a high homosexuality rate also have a higher birthrate, since cultures which condemn homosexuality also condem sexuality in general.

Answer 3

Homosexuality does occur in nature. It may be nature's way of limiting the size of the species. John Calhoun conducted a study in the 1960's, placing rats in a controlled space and allowing them to reproduce, unchecked. As the population density increased certain behaviors were observed; increased aggression, homosexuality and infanticide.

Now don't freak out, I do NOT think homosexuality is "wrong" - but from a biological/evolutionary standpoint it doesn't benefit the species, unless the environment is trying to match the group size to available resources.

Answer 4

Survival of the species requires mechanisms that kick in to limit numbers when population pressures become to great. Rats breed in a confined space with unlimited food, reproduced unchecked until a certain density was achieved and then same sex couplings started taking place. The fact that Human homosexuality is primarily an urban phenomenon is indicative of the same mechanisms occurring among us.

Answer 5

Your general premise has nothing to do with evolution.

It's quite common for some species to have non-reproducing individuals - in some species, large groups of individuals are not even equipped to reproduce at all. Nevertheless, those species "reproduce" very well. The arrangements by which the genes of the species are propagated are not simple rules like:"you're here, go reproduce." For some species it has worked out better to have members with non-reproducing roles.

Answer 6

There are human homosexuals and the human race is certainly reproducing. Biologists have identified homosexuality in animals and other creatures. Homosexuality does not preclude a whole, race or species from reproducing.

Answer 7

But evolution is all about survival of the genes not the individual and oddly enough homosexuals tend to have many more nieces and nephews on their mothers side than the rest of the population. So whatever makes them homosexual seems to be sometimes related to a gene in the mother which also results in her other daughters having more offspring than normal. So the evidence right now leads us to believe us that homosexuality is occasionally related to a gene in the mother. And that gene also seems to have other effects which do have evolutionary survival value.

Answer 8

Homosexuals can still reproduce and have many, many times.

In addition, I don't think there is a gene for homosexuality, but that many genetic factors play a role in being born homosexual. Thus, it would be difficult to "select out" homosexual tendencies.

Answer 9

I don't get it. We've had the Theory of Evolution for well over a hundred years now. Any biologist worth his salt knows it intimately.

Do you seriously think noone thought of this little challenge of yours before? Do you now think you've 'cracked' Evolution somehow? Are you going to move on to disproving the speed of light by flicking a flashlight on and off? "There, see, it's not as fast as they say, is it!"

Seriously. This is way out of your league. As many others have pointed out, nothing suggests that homosexuality is an inherited trait. There are lots of ways to explain this, all we're missing is someone willing to learn.

Answer 10

Being homosexual is a choice that individuals make. A lot of the time, people choose their sexuality because of society at it's current stages of development. In the 60's, if you were OPENLY gay, you were frowned upon EVEN more, as you NEVER said that kind of thing in public. Now-a-days, if you say you're gay/bi/lesiban (bad spelling, sorry), you could get a response like, "Oh, cool, I have a friend/sister/brother/cousin,etc that's gay too."

It all depends on the time at which society is in. In ancient times, there were NONE whom were gay (that was documented) because of the sheer fact that that was NOT ACCEPTABLE in any way, shape, or form whatsoever.

If you are trying to compare this fact of evolution to that of the famous "Adam and Eve" then there is no contest.

Adam and Eve, also, is a religious belief. What's to say that Adam and Eve's great, great, great, great, great, great grandchild isn't gay? They can't. There's NO way to know. Just because Adam and Eve weren't homosexual, doesn't mean that their offspring WAY down the bloodline wouldn't be also.

Answer 11

i might recommend you acquire a text cloth on the difficulty. it truly is going to likely be long and exhaustive and supply you a touch precise reaction on your question. i'm uncertain in case you're utilising homosexuality as a skill to attempt to discredit evolution, yet you're actually not even interior the comparable league (much less the comparable ball park). comparable gender charm is elementary interior the animal international. it truly is not unique to human beings.