Why Are There Gay Men?

[En_Route]

So who or what set up natural selection to achieve this  hitherto unsuspected purpose?

Each and every participant, it's a personal choice.

You've lost me here completely.

[Sweetdeath]

I think it is genetic, and nature may be trying to correct the over population of humans by shifting a few genes around. Wish she had shifted a few genes in the religious rights brains before she shifted the sex genes. It would have made it a lot easier to live with them on the same planet. 

There is no purpose or end- game underpinning the laws of nature.

Nonsense, nature is always adjusting and making directional changes. It is called Evolution.

I don't agree, natural selection has no purpose it is a mindless natural process in a sense like gravity which cares not what it draws together.

The purpose of natural selection is to maximise sexual gratification. Having sex with beautiful is apparently more satisfying than having sex with ugly.

So who or what set up natural selection to achieve this  hitherto unsuspected purpose?

Population control, maybe?

who honestly cares why.




for some i do believe they choose to like both genders or the same. For others, i'm sure it's biologically encoded.

why make such a fuss? are gays and bisexuals REALLY hurting anyone?

[Stevil]

So who or what set up natural selection to achieve this  hitherto unsuspected purpose?

Each and every participant, it's a personal choice.

You've lost me here completely.

Tell me,
When you are physically attracted to someone, are you thinking about the advantageousness of your offspring or are you thinking about how great the sex will be?
As a collective this is all it is about, individual preference, personal choice. There is no greater purpose, no objectivity, just simply the individual desire for great sex.

[En_Route]

So who or what set up natural selection to achieve this  hitherto unsuspected purpose?

Each and every participant, it's a personal choice.

You've lost me here completely.

Tell me,
When you are physically attracted to someone, are you thinking about the advantageousness of your offspring or are you thinking about how great the sex will be?
As a collective this is all it is about, individual preference, personal choice. There is no greater purpose, no objectivity, just simply the individual desire for great sex.

I made the original point that natural selection has no underlying puroose to which you countered that the purpose was to have great sex. In fact, what you seemed to have meant, was that the desire to have great sex which is in your view a purpose of human beings ,  is the engine for natural selection, which is quite different. I think your account of human sexual behaviour is rather one- dimensional and misleading but that is a another days work, or possibly several weeks' work.

[Sweetdeath]

Why are we still arguing this?  ??? ???

[En_Route]

I think it is genetic, and nature may be trying to correct the over population of humans by shifting a few genes around. Wish she had shifted a few genes in the religious rights brains before she shifted the sex genes. It would have made it a lot easier to live with them on the same planet. 

There is no purpose or end- game underpinning the laws of nature.

Nonsense, nature is always adjusting and making directional changes. It is called Evolution.

I don't agree, natural selection has no purpose it is a mindless natural process in a sense like gravity which cares not what it draws together.

The purpose of natural selection is to maximise sexual gratification. Having sex with beautiful is apparently more satisfying than having sex with ugly.

So who or what set up natural selection to achieve this  hitherto unsuspected purpose?

Population control, maybe?

who honestly cares why.




for some i do believe they choose to like both genders or the same. For others, i'm sure it's biologically encoded.

why make such a fuss? are gays and bisexuals REALLY hurting anyone?

I agree that the whys and wherefors of people's sexuality is of no significance in terms of how they should be treated. Discrimination against gay and bi-sexual people is founded on fear and ignorace, often exacerbated or entrenched by religious teaching. The argument has however  broadened out to discuss more generally the fallacyb that natural selection is a mechanism guided by some unseen force which seeks to  benevolently restrain population numbers.

[OldGit]

Why are we still arguing this?  ??? ???

Because they like arguing. 

[En_Route]

Why are we still arguing this?  ??? ???

Because we consider there is an issue on which we disagree.

[En_Route]

Why are we still arguing this?  ??? ???

Because we consider there is an issue on which we disagree.

And as the sage Mosieur Git notes, also because we like arguing.

[Stevil]

I made the original point that natural selection has no underlying puroose to which you countered that the purpose was to have great sex. In fact, what you seemed to have meant, was that the desire to have great sex which is in your view a purpose of human beings ,  is the engine for natural selection, which is quite different. I think your account of human sexual behaviour is rather one- dimensional and misleading but that is a another days work, or possibly several weeks' work.

I don't think that there is an objective mandate with regards to a purpose.
Individually it is quite different though. We seem motivated towards a desire for great sex. Thus I feel, at least on a shallow level we desire, or take action towards a person that we think will help acheive this goal. It is all part of the natural selection process. Those that survive and are desirable are the most likely to have sex with others whom are also desirable. This could be seen as a purpose.
As a species we seem to go for physical attraction, i'm not sure how people can deny this. Or course, it is not the be all and end all. Some people also go for wealth and power.
We can be selfrighteous and suggest we go for love and that connection, but all things being equal, we go for beauty, if we don't know people, we want to approach and get to know the good looking ones. Most of us feel the need to at least be physically attracted to our partners.


BTW: I wouldn't consider this as an arguement, merely clarification of opinions.

[Sweetdeath]

I made the original point that natural selection has no underlying puroose to which you countered that the purpose was to have great sex. In fact, what you seemed to have meant, was that the desire to have great sex which is in your view a purpose of human beings ,  is the engine for natural selection, which is quite different. I think your account of human sexual behaviour is rather one- dimensional and misleading but that is a another days work, or possibly several weeks' work.

I don't think that there is an objective mandate with regards to a purpose.
Individually it is quite different though. We seem motivated towards a desire for great sex. Thus I feel, at least on a shallow level we desire, or take action towards a person that we think will help acheive this goal. It is all part of the natural selection process. Those that survive and are desirable are the most likely to have sex with others whom are also desirable. This could be seen as a purpose.
As a species we seem to go for physical attraction, i'm not sure how people can deny this. Or course, it is not the be all and end all. Some people also go for wealth and power.
We can be selfrighteous and suggest we go for love and that connection, but all things being equal, we go for beauty, if we don't know people, we want to approach and get to know the good looking ones. Most of us feel the need to at least be physically attracted to our partners.


BTW: I wouldn't consider this as an arguement, merely clarification of opinions.

I agree with this whole-heartily.

[En_Route]

I made the original point that natural selection has no underlying puroose to which you countered that the purpose was to have great sex. In fact, what you seemed to have meant, was that the desire to have great sex which is in your view a purpose of human beings ,  is the engine for natural selection, which is quite different. I think your account of human sexual behaviour is rather one- dimensional and misleading but that is a another days work, or possibly several weeks' work.

I don't think that there is an objective mandate with regards to a purpose.
Individually it is quite different though. We seem motivated towards a desire for great sex. Thus I feel, at least on a shallow level we desire, or take action towards a person that we think will help acheive this goal. It is all part of the natural selection process. Those that survive and are desirable are the most likely to have sex with others whom are also desirable. This could be seen as a purpose.
As a species we seem to go for physical attraction, i'm not sure how people can deny this. Or course, it is not the be all and end all. Some people also go for wealth and power.
We can be selfrighteous and suggest we go for love and that connection, but all things being equal, we go for beauty, if we don't know people, we want to approach and get to iknow the good looking ones. Most of us feel the need to at least be physically attracted to our partners.


BTW: I wouldn't consider this as an arguement, merely clarification of opinions.

I think this is an argument given that we are advocating different conclusions. But a friendly one. Fuck, now we are arguing about whether we are arguing. Or are we merely clarifying our opinions as to whether we are arguing?

[Sandra Craft]

We can be selfrighteous and suggest we go for love and that connection, but all things being equal, we go for beauty, if we don't know people, we want to approach and get to know the good looking ones. Most of us feel the need to at least be physically attracted to our partners.

I don't know how true this is for women, tho it may be generally true for men.  When it comes to sex, women's priorities tend to be more complicated just because our end of reproduction tends to be more complicated and I think this holds true even if a woman is not consciously looking for a future father-of-my-kids, or even looking for a man.  I think evolution gears women to look more for protection and security rather than just pretty -- altho that's part of it too, esp. considering some regard good looks as a marker for good health.

Which does bring us back to the original topic, which I think was "what evolutionary function does homosexuality serve?"  Not sure, tho it sure as heck is popular all across the animal kingdom, esp. among mammals.  Of course, in the animal kingdom overall, homosexuality usually expresses itself as bisexuality and not as an exclusive orientation.  I think we humans may be unique there, and that's probably more a function of culture than evolution.

[DeterminedJuliet]

Fuck now we are arguing about whether we are arguing. Or are we merely clarifying our opinions as to whether we are arguing?

[Ali]

I think it's interesting that Stevil concludes that we look for "pretty" because pretty = great sex.  Is that everyone else's experience, that pretty = great sex?  Maybe I'm not that visual, but give me "funny" and "eager to please" over pretty any day of the week.