3 ms·
It seems like this line of reasoning perhaps conflates sexual arousal with attractiveness? To illustrate, if you're looking to marry (and have kids), and you h
by awt 15y ago
It seems like this line of reasoning perhaps conflates sexual arousal with attractiveness?
To illustrate, if you're looking to marry (and have kids), and you had a choice between a physically attractive but dull porno actress, and an attractive and intelligent writer (you know because she's fun to talk to and wrote a very popular book), you'd go with the porno actress?
Most porn I've seen isn't very creative, and being in a porno is not something I have on my checklist for attractive mates. I think that's true for most people. I would wager to say that the most effective form of art is the most creative, not the most sexually stimulating.
- zerostar07 15y agoI will refrain from commenting on theories that resolve all moral decisions through reasoning about natural selection (as i said i am biased, and this is already off topic). Just this: One study of the biographies of 1004 eminent people found homosexual and bisexual people overrepresented (11 percent of the sample), especially among poets (24 percent), fiction writers (21 percent), and artists and musicians (15 percent) (Ludwig, 1995)[1] Surely if artistic creativity was evolutionarily so advantageous it wouldn't hide itself in the least-reproducing subpopulations [1] http://www.davidmyers.org/davidmyers/assets/Sex-Orient-9e.pdf http://www.davidmyers.org/davidmyers/assets/Sex-Orient-9e.pd...
- hythloday 15y agoAre bisexual people "non-reproducing" now?
- Drbble 15y agoPeople with non-mainstream careers are less likely to conceal their sexuality, and also the converse.
- awt 15y agoI'm not talking about natural selection, I'm talking about sexual selection, which is a completely different animal. Sexual selection leads to really bizarre adaptations, like male peacock tails and mating dances that seem maladaptive in the context of natural selection. Natural selection is about finding enough food to live long enough to mate. Sexual selection is about competing within the same species for mates. Because slightly more highly creative people are homosexual doesn't necessarily mean creativity isn't attractive. It could just be that homosexuals have more time to devote creative tasks due lack of childcare responsibilities. I would say that people often aren't consciously aware of why they are exhibiting creativity. On top of that, I would guess that homosexuals value finding mates just as highly as heterosexuals, which would be at least one reason why they would exhibit creativity, consciously or unconsciously.
- zerostar07 15y agoSexual selection also requires reproduction. Whatever way one sees it, the data doesn't support the view that nature selects for creativity.
- awt 15y agoHomosexuals also have eyes. Does this mean that nature doesn't select for eyes?
- zerostar07 15y agoLet me put I bluntly if all homosexuals had third eye, it would never be selected for.