Why hasn't homosexuality been wiped out by evolution?

Question

Homosexual mates obviously cannot reproduce. So how has homosexuality been able to survive in the face of evolution? Wouldn't the genes that produce homosexuality fail to be passed on over the generations? Apparently homosexuality has been around since the ancient Greeks.

Answer 1

This is a good point and I would think like you do as well, that this should have been long extinct years ago, but I think as answerer number 1 pointed out, because of social pressures and other factors, they have married and reproduced over the years. This would be logical to deduce. It is a fact, regardless of feelings or connotations, that in a true homosexual society, if this was the norm, it would be dead after one generation simply because this is not the way nature has enabled reproduction. People can twist and turn it around to paint any picture they wish, but in the end it's still an incontroverible fact, independant of feelings or personal points of views. By marrying/reproducing in a non homosexual manner, this has enabled the genetics of homosexuality to survive over the generations. Please do NOT try to twist this into gay bashing or anything of that nature. Leave it on the science level only. I do advoate and believe to treat others as you would want to be treated just as God told us. This statement is not treatment of anything, it is a logical scientific statement not geared at doing anything other then being objective. Homosexual or not, I would still treat a person of that orientation as another human being.

JV

Wow look at those thumbs down. I think this proves that modern society, homosexual or not really doesn't stress one good quality of something called critical thinking. It doesn't take excessive intelligence to realize, it's very simple, if men and men or women and women were mean to reproduce without outside help, then it would be natural for that to happen, but it is not. I see I'm really gaining support here from those who think this is some sort of cut against people who are homosexual, which really itterates people have trouble seperating facts from feelings. Maybe my punishement will be to be brought back as homosexual in nature and I'll do my best to be a true homosexual, so sorry unless nature does an about face, I won't be having any offspring.

Answer 2

If homosexuality is genetic then a straight parent could have a homosexual child (which is usually the case) and if that particular parent has brothers or sister or has other kids then the "gene" would still be present in those children/brothers/sisters. So when they procreate and have kids they may also carry the gene and so on. So in a sense it would always be around, when you think about it if in this generation someone is homosexual and the whole genetic theory is correct then chances are that in the generations in the past they may of have had a homosexual relative. Even if you are homosexual it doesn't mean you do not have the ability to reproduce - many gay couples choose to have kids through invetro etc...

Answer 3

Homosexuality is actually found throughout the animal kingdom, bonobos are the usual example for this.

Since homosexuality persists this suggests that it must have a POSITIVE or NEUTRAL effect on fitness.

It has been proposed that the benefit of homosexuality tend to revolve around child rearing.

"Caring for offspring is very expensive per individual caregiver, while yielding tremendous evolutionary benefits to the population, by directly enhancing the fitness of the next generation. Because the cost to the individual is so great, many populations have evolved ways of sharing the costs of raising the offspring, such that the benefits to the population are equalized by general costs to the population. In several social mammals, this is done through wet-nursing by non-pregnant females of related newborn, sometimes even requiring the forced abortion of the litters of subdominant females to produce more wet-nurses (seen in some Wolves). Likewise, removing a portion of the population from breeding relieves the breeders of some of these costs either directly by assisting with child rearing, or indirectly by taking over other costly activities (like food collection) so that t he parents can spend more resources on their progeny.


There is also evidence of homosexual activities playing a role in maintaining dominance heirarchies, reinforcing familiarity, and playing other roles in organizing and maintaining the societies of some of the more social animals. While the absolute evolutionary value of homosexuality varies greatly between species, it is certainly common enough to suggest a contribution to fitness, even if not directly measurable."

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-06/960498851.Ev.r.html

Answer 4

There was an article about this in Discover magazine this month. According to the article they were looking of a gay gene, which they suspected because of increased instances of homosexuality among twin brothers. According to that article the reason gays continue to be around is because of prejudice that has been around and the 'need' of gays to fit-in and make some babies like the straight people. Because they've been "acting" straight and making babies, the gay gene lives on.

Answer 5

Homosexuality has been linked to both biological factors and psychological factors. The question of Nature Vs. Nurture has yet to be answered in the fact that results and theories point to both conclusions. That being said, if it were biological, homosexuality would have to be a recessive gene, in that approx. 10 % of the American population is homosexual, and in that case, it cannot be "wiped" out because recessive genes are passed regardless if the gene is the active gene in a "parent" or not. (i.e. some people carry the gene for sickle cell anemia and don't have it but their children do). In that event, it will continue to pass, especially in this new day in age where undesireable and "un-fit" (according to Darwinism) traits are not necessarily dangerous to us as humans because of our immense technological adaptions (which means the natural order of selection is somewhat undermined and comes short, allowing un-fit genes to go on to the next generation as opposed to "wiping out", not that homosexuality would be "unfit"). In the case that it is purely a "nurture" dilemma(in that one's environment and upbringing encourages or produces a trait or action) , than it cannot be "wiped out" purely for the sake that it is a development in human behavior, and although behavior, overtime can be "wiped out" or "show up" as a behavioral adaption, homosexuality is a sexual preference and does not inhibit reproduction by heterosexual intercourse, or otherwise "hurt" an individual and therefore does not pose a threat or a reason to "adapt" and become purely heterosexual or bisexual.

Answer 6

Homosexuality has been around longer than the Greeks, my friend. But what are you trying to disprove? The theory of Evolution?

Answer 7

It IS believed that homosexuality is genetic, but it is also environmental at the same time, like most things. For example height is genetic but environmental factors play a role in exactly how tall you grow (eg.what you eat). So 1.people with the genes but that do not have the right environmental factors will pass on the genes and 2. It is possible that they are recessive. So can therefore be passes on without you showing the trait.

Answer 8

This is not an answer, but an observation about the thumbs up or down. The evaluation of this question is based on belief and science. Those who believe homosexuality is a choice (maybe influenced by the devil) will indicate thumbs down to all scientific explanations. Those who trust in our senses and logic will vote thumbs down to the purely (homophobic) religious explanations.

If you believe the Bible condemns homosexuality, then you also believe that a man can sell his children into slavery and that anyone who does any work on the sabbath should be stoned to death.

Answer 9

Well, first, you're assuming that homosexuality is genetic. And, I don't think we're quite to the point where we can logically conclude that it is the answer. Second, even if it is a recessive behavior, doesn't mean it would be totally wiped out. There are plenty of genotypic traits that are recessive but are still present.

Answer 10

You cant have things both ways, kid. If homosexuality is in the genes, it would have been around long before the Greeks. If homosexuality was not around before the Greeks, it couldn't be in the genes. In fact, in other species (like ants and bees), there are males who can't reproduce who do other functions, so maybe it is in the genes. Maybe that's why all the bees have left the hive. Hmmmmm...