4 ms·

> There is zero evidence that this actual reason for the continued existence of non-heterosexual humans in the population. I'm not looking for evidence of thei

by flukus 7y ago

> There is zero evidence that this actual reason for the continued existence of non-heterosexual humans in the population. I'm not looking for evidence of their continued existence, I was correcting the parents incorrect claim that evolution would eliminate homosexuality. > rather than a fairly obvious consequence of the fact that people of the same gender can get each other off and have feelings for each other. The fact that we want to get each other off at all is driven by evolution, a species that doesn't have an urge to get each other off goes extinct pretty quickly. > Honestly, we gays seem to have the worst luck in this respect. A couple hundred years ago people didn't think we fit into "God's plan". Now they agonize over how exactly to fit us into evolutionary theory. Really, you think quest for knowledge is at all comparable to the 2000 years of active persecution?

foldr 7y ago
> The fact that we want to get each other off at all is driven by evolution, This begs the question. Gay sexual desire is a counterexample to this claim. > a species that doesn't have an urge to get each other off goes extinct pretty quickly. Evolutionary considerations may set boundary conditions. It doesn't follow that the sexuality that humans in fact have has an evolutionary explanation. There's a dilemma here. If you're going to paint a picture of evolution as a ruthlessly fitness-optimizing process, then you have to take gay sexual desire seriously as a counterexample. If, on the other hand, you accept that evolutionary theory per se only rules out extreme possibilities (e.g., a completely asexual species that reproduces sexually), then you also have to accept that the specifics of human sexuality may not have any explanation in evolutionary terms. >Really, you think quest for knowledge is at all comparable to the 2000 years of active persecution? The persecution of gay people continues. Non-religious bigots will often justify it on alleged evolutionary grounds ("it's not natural"), just as religious bigots will often justify it in terms of Biblical proscriptions.

by flukus 7y ago

foldr 7y ago

> The fact that we want to get each other off at all is driven by evolution, This begs the question. Gay sexual desire is a counterexample to this claim. > a species that doesn't have an urge to get each other off goes extinct pretty quickly. Evolutionary considerations may set boundary conditions. It doesn't follow that the sexuality that humans in fact have has an evolutionary explanation. There's a dilemma here. If you're going to paint a picture of evolution as a ruthlessly fitness-optimizing process, then you have to take gay sexual desire seriously as a counterexample. If, on the other hand, you accept that evolutionary theory per se only rules out extreme possibilities (e.g., a completely asexual species that reproduces sexually), then you also have to accept that the specifics of human sexuality may not have any explanation in evolutionary terms. >Really, you think quest for knowledge is at all comparable to the 2000 years of active persecution? The persecution of gay people continues. Non-religious bigots will often justify it on alleged evolutionary grounds ("it's not natural"), just as religious bigots will often justify it in terms of Biblical proscriptions.