3 ms·

In all situations except extreme crisis, having cousins is good Ah, but genes are selected in times of extreme crisis! We have all sorts of genes that only ma

In all situations except extreme crisis, having cousins is good Ah, but genes are selected in times of extreme crisis! We have all sorts of genes that only make sense in times of extreme crisis, but which we nevertheless carry with us through times of prosperity when they are often a liability. That's why instinct generally tells us to help cousins, not compete with them. So having a gay uncle is bad for you, sorry :-) It also tells us to help nephews and nieces. So, no, having a gay uncle is actually GREAT for me. The question is whether being gay is great for the proliferation of gay genes. I started writing a model to play with some probabilities, then realized that I'm just procrastinating and have real work to do. :) Maybe I'll come back to it some day, or maybe it'll just rot on the back burner with so many other bits of nerdery... Anyway, even if you could show that being gay is definitely bad for any hypothetical gay-causing genes, it wouldn't rule out evolutionary causes. It could be an emergent property of a collection of individually beneficial genes. Or it could be the result of hormonal features of the mother that are otherwise beneficial. (I mean "beneficial" here in the evolutionary sense, as in "likely to cause a certain gene to be passed on", not in any kind of normative sense.) Of course I'd agree to allow gay marriage if we abolish taxes at the same time Would you agree to allow gay marriage if the taxes are left as they are? Why should a gay couple be any different, from a society's point of view, from a heterosexual couple that adopts or doesn't have children at all? Hell, many gay couples DO raise their own biological offspring (or at least, the biological offspring of one of the partners.) Seriously, what's the justification argument against gay marriage that doesn't come down to: "Yeah, but like, who's tha wife, then? Ew." I mean, here you are arguing for analysis over ideology, and it's pretty obvious that gay coupling is ethically and legally fair, it's a natural thing primates do, and it's economically beneficial for society. ???

cousin_it 18y ago
So, no, having a gay uncle is actually GREAT for me. In the hedonic sense yeah, in the genetic sense no (like obesity), because you could have cousins with extra copies of your genes. But that was just a digression - I wasn't trying to argue that homosexuality should eradicate itself genetically, I don't even believe that. Why should a gay couple be any different, from a society's point of view, from a heterosexual couple that adopts or doesn't have children at all? It's different because it has no chance of having biological offspring, while for hetero couples society can't know it in advance. On your other points - I'm going into a corner to think. You made many correct statements.
- IsaacSchlueter 18y ago
  no chance of having biological offspring, while for hetero couples society can't know it in advance. What about hetero couples where one or both of the partners are known to be sterile, possibly due to elective surgery? Also, as I noted above, many gay couples do in fact raise (one of) their biological offspring. On your other points - I'm going into a corner to think. You made many correct statements. A winnar is you, then, if you get new thoughts. Thanks for prodding me to justify all this. It's been fun. Conversations like this are why I love HN.

cousin_it 18y ago

So, no, having a gay uncle is actually GREAT for me. In the hedonic sense yeah, in the genetic sense no (like obesity), because you could have cousins with extra copies of your genes. But that was just a digression - I wasn't trying to argue that homosexuality should eradicate itself genetically, I don't even believe that. Why should a gay couple be any different, from a society's point of view, from a heterosexual couple that adopts or doesn't have children at all? It's different because it has no chance of having biological offspring, while for hetero couples society can't know it in advance. On your other points - I'm going into a corner to think. You made many correct statements.

IsaacSchlueter 18y ago
no chance of having biological offspring, while for hetero couples society can't know it in advance. What about hetero couples where one or both of the partners are known to be sterile, possibly due to elective surgery? Also, as I noted above, many gay couples do in fact raise (one of) their biological offspring. On your other points - I'm going into a corner to think. You made many correct statements. A winnar is you, then, if you get new thoughts. Thanks for prodding me to justify all this. It's been fun. Conversations like this are why I love HN.