Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

honmosexuality and evolution

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Reflector
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭Reflector


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Hehehehe no no :) But good idea!

    It was just an exercise in formulating what I know about the subject into essay form. A good exercise for the brain muscle, which needs more and more use as I get older to stop it going too soft!

    I just did it again but differently on the other thread with the same name:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61763311&postcount=19

    Well I do agree with your theory but the proof of brains being similar between gay men and straight woman I find quite dubious. Gay mens behaviour is more similar to straight men especially when it comes to sexual partner selection and sexual conduct. Perhaps gay men are similar to straight women in other ways.


  • Options
    #33
    phancydan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9 ✭phancydan


    I'm not gay but i think society needs gay people and always has and maybe there is an evolutionary need for gay people. It's a fantastical theory but i think Gay people are supposed to be artists thus showing all society the creative possibilities of mankind, unburdened with rearing children this is more possible. And it may be suggested that Gay people are more suited to being carers and medics as they could devote more time to these professions than those who have responsibilities to their own children. It aint no waterproof theory but its something.. anyone else agree? anyone find it very patronising?


  • Options
    #34
    Aard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,905 ✭✭✭Aard


    You assume there that homosexuals do not rear children.


  • Options
    #35
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,340 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Yes, the assumption that gay people do not rear children is clearly a little off.

    I would also add that the assumption that gay people are “supposed” to be anything is also a little off. Evolution is blind. IT does not plan for what should happen or is supposed to happen. It is essentially a random process with non-random selection.


  • Options
    #36
    Tricity Bendix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,510 ✭✭✭Tricity Bendix


    phancydan wrote: »
    It's a fantastical theory but i think Gay people are supposed to be artists thus showing all society the creative possibilities of mankind, unburdened with rearing children this is more possible.
    Cant say I know any gay people who are artistic. On the other hand, I do know artistic people who have kids. If anything, the kids are a source of inspiration, not a burden.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    LegacyUser
    Registered Users Posts: 166,026 ✭✭✭✭LegacyUser


    First off I'd like to say I'm a gay guy, but not out.

    I believe it is an evolution thing, survival of the fittest. There must be a genetic defect that causes a person to be gay. Just think about it, the penis and vagina are for reproducing. Why would nature want a man/woman who cannot reproduce? Thats why gay people dont have children.

    And thats a reason I would be against gay adoption. Gay people were not intended to be parents. If they were, they would have had a "mate" and actually had a child of their own.

    It may not seem like it, but I am genuinely gay!


Advertisement