The wonderful Slate magazine, purveyor of articles that help me procrastinate and waste the oceans on time the Navy wants me to waste, has a neat article about one of my favorite issues. Is there some sort of explanation from an evolutionary standpoint, for homosexuality? It seems like there can't possibly be one. But Slate says that there is.
To be honest, I read an article about this in Psychology Today, or something such magazine, and I thought it was pretty unlikely, but this Slate article makes the case seem a little more plausible.
I tend to think that homosexuality is more of an inclination than a genetic predisposition, but I am willing to be wrong on that and am always looking for the information that proves the subject. (Though when I say that I am looking for it I really mean that I am reading things when I notice them and then think about whether I believe if they are true.)
The issue that I have always had is something along these lines:
Suppose evolution is true and evolution moves from less complex to more complex.
Suppose homosexuals can't reproduce, and as couples they can't. There are sperm banks and donated ovums and what have you, but that's going to be a hard sell evolutionarily. (Or a hard cell?)
Suppose as is so frequently suggested, that homosexuality is genetic.
Supposing all this, homosexuality seems to be some sort of negative, non-productive mutation. And if that is the case, don't we almost have a Survival of the Fittest right to get rid of them?
(The following paragraph was in the original post, a so-called friend of mine decided to be an asshole and erase it when he had access to my computer and is about to be stricken from my life. I apologize to anyone who read this post and was offended, it was not my intention and without this paragraph it is a very real possibility.)
I am not suggesting that we OUGHT to get rid of homosexuals at all. There is no reason, other than the case outlined above, which rests on some tenuous assumptions, to do so. All I am saying is that the assumptions above seem to be popular with a lot of people and when put together in that light... well, they don't look the best.
So, while I am always looking for an answer to this question, I do not currently have one. That Slate's article suggests that there is one makes me momentarily fascinated. But then I read the article and it is firmly speculative and further, it sounds like stretching to accept a point. I mean, it sounds kind of like someone had the same line of reasoning that I had, and then came up with anything that they could think of to deny it. And I almost approve of just doing that, but at the same time, it seems like poor science. It might be great science and the two articles I read might simply be poorly written or poorly reasoned, but they seem like poor science to me.
Thoughts?
9 comments:
Maybe homosexuality has evolved to help control human population.
Nice photo.
I have seen this issue raised time and again, and the science behind it is always shot down. The fact of the matter is, there are many psychological factors that have been shown to lead to homosexuality. These factors don't have to lead to homosexuality, but psychologists can point out several factors, like a bad relationship with your father or mother, sexual abuse, sexual abuse by your father or mother, etc., that are common in the majority of homosexuals. Homosexuality would only have died out if it were a genetic mutation. As it is, there are always bad fathers.
Homosexuality evolving to help control human poulation implies some intelligence guiding evolution which negates evolution as random.
So have you ever heard of the Kinsey Scale? Sexuality is a preference according to Kinsey some people on the scale are totally heterosexual, some totally homosexual, and most some place in between. If this is at all true, and from my experience it is the closest to the truth I have ever heard, reasoned, or felt, then it would depend who you ask if homosexuality is a choice or not.
For an evolutionary explanation I present this. How many people do you think we need on this planet? How many people do you think the planet can support? Maybe homosexuality from this point of view is a form of planetary birth control.
Why are strait men so worried about homosexuality anyway? The totem pole theory suggests that men in a patriarchy are superior to women, or at the top of the totem pole. Homosexual men are viewed as less then women because they give up the power position they hold by being submissive to other men like a woman. Perhaps from this point of view the problem of homosexuality is one of power and is a threat to male dominance.
I have been with women and with men sexually and there is something to be said for each kind of relationship. Once I was brave enough to take the chance of going after what I really wanted which in my case was a man, there was no going back, kinda like that black thing although that wasn't true for me.
Lastly why aren't you concerned or worried about being heterosexual what if you are the one who is screwed up? But that is impossible because you know in your heart of hearts that your sexual choice is just who you are, it is exactly the same for homosexual people only we are told we are: bad, wrong, sick, dirty, disgusting, loathsome, inferior, bent, queer, strange, an abomination, different, scary, less than, deserve to die, deserve to have AIDS, unloved by god, of the devil, mentally disturbed... so we have some issues to work through before we feel comfortable with ourselves.
Everyone is born a sexual being-with the capacity to love both men and women. It is our society that controls/defines what is "right" vs. what is "wrong." It's not that homosexuality is "growing"-it's just that more people are feeling that they can "come out." As far as the "psychological factors" that LEAD to homosexuality? Many gay people, if asked, have known they were gay or had feelings for the same sex since they were kids. IF they were abused as children, they knew prior to the abuse. Unfortunately, abuse of any form is far too prevelant and is just a good excuse to tag on to what is already negatively perceived. However, you're also overlooking all the gay people that have grown up in a perfectly functional, loving family.
what you don't see is that being gay is becoming more "acceptable." kids in school are saying they are "bi" or gay. there are peer groups for them. straight people are hanging out at gay restaurants/bars. Jaimie's 8 yr old neice (having grown up knowing us to be together all her life) said "i hope you guys are together forever." she didn't even have the knowledge of the term "gay" or any of it's negative stereotypes.
why is it that there has to be a scientific or evolutionary or genetic explanation for homosexuality? what is the basis or research for heterosexuality? what are the negative aspects of being heterosexual? i think it depends on who you ask and who is doing the research. i think there will always be those who try to find something negative to attach to it. let's "blame" the mother or the father, or the mother's mother or the father's father.
i love that you are having an open dialogue about it. i just happened to google grandpa and came across this. based on that intuitive article, i'm not sure if it's granpa's fault i'm gay or grandma's....
i didn't mean for my post to be anonymous. had trouble getting it to post.
jen
I am writing to accept responsibility for how I raised my five children. I can only say how very proud I am of all of them. They are all intelligent, independant, successful, funny, have a great love of family, and all have earned degrees which they paid for themselves. How many parents can say that? So, yes, I am taking the "blame".
Fran
Frank aren't you a christian? If so. are you wondering about evolution because you believe in divinely inspired evolution? If you believe in divinely inspired evolution you must also believe that god is Omnipotent. If so, then God has a plan for homosexuals and it isn't for you to understand, or take action. If you want understanding you should pray for it.
My big issues with what you wrote are this. I am glad you found it in your heart not to want to kill off 10% (at least) of the world population because somehow they are a threat to heterosexuals.
I also wonder how you can come up with the idea that homosexuality is an inclination?
Do you know the history or at least the histories I have read of the word faggot for gay men?
Gay, queer, homosexual, men, (you choose the name you like) were added to the fire when burning witches as the only thing foul enough to dispel the soul of a witch from her body.
Gay men and to a lesser degree gay women because they are women and in a patriarchy not worth bothering about have been persecuted, murdered, beaten, impaled, burned, tortured, ostracized, rejected, cast out, hunted down, taunted shamed, isolated, all through history and most often in the name of a "loving" god. Don't you think that is a lot to put up with for an inclination? I would chose to golf instead.
How come I always get blamed for the bad stuff Owen does? Here I am minding my own business and WHAM!(haha) my Christianity is called into question by my Gay, queer, homosexual, men, uncle. Now if anyone wants to have a real debate come talk to me at my blog, imbttrthanu.com.
Post a Comment