It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
since male homosexuals don't mate with the opposite sex, shouldn't any ‘genes promoting homosexuality’ have died out of the population by now?
Abstract
Several lines of evidence indicate the existence of genetic factors influencing male homosexuality and bisexuality. In spite of its relatively low frequency, the stable permanence in all human populations of this apparently detrimental trait constitutes a puzzling ‘Darwinian paradox’. Furthermore, several studies have pointed out relevant asymmetries in the distribution of both male homosexuality and of female fecundity in the parental lines of homosexual vs. heterosexual males. A number of hypotheses have attempted to give an evolutionary explanation for the long-standing persistence of this trait, and for its asymmetric distribution in family lines; however a satisfactory understanding of the population genetics of male homosexuality is lacking at present. We perform a systematic mathematical analysis of the propagation and equilibrium of the putative genetic factors for male homosexuality in the population, based on the selection equation for one or two diallelic loci and Bayesian statistics for pedigree investigation. We show that only the two-locus genetic model with at least one locus on the X chromosome, and in which gene expression is sexually antagonistic (increasing female fitness but decreasing male fitness), accounts for all known empirical data. Our results help clarify the basic evolutionary dynamics of male homosexuality, establishing this as a clearly ascertained sexually antagonistic human trait.
PET and MRI show differences in cerebral asymmetry and functional connectivity between homo- and heterosexual subjects
Ivanka Savic* and Per Lindström
Stockholm Brain Institute, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, 171 76 Stockholm, Sweden
Edited by Jan-Åke Gustafsson, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden, and approved April 30, 2008 (received for review February 27, 2008)
Abstract
Cerebral responses to putative pheromones and objects of sexual attraction were recently found to differ between homo- and heterosexual subjects. Although this observation may merely mirror perceptional differences, it raises the intriguing question as to whether certain sexually dimorphic features in the brain may differ between individuals of the same sex but different sexual orientation.
www.pnas.org...
agreed, which means a man who chooses to think he is a woman ISN'T an actual woman; or that a woman who chooses to think she is a man ISN'T an actual man.
Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by ObamaMomma
Nope. All the evidence gathered on the subject blows your narrow-minded opinion out of the water. Sorry about that. Try learning science from a science book, not a bible or some other intolerant piece of rubbish.
reply to post by RuneSpider
Nope. Upbringing has NOTHING to do with it. If someone "chooses" to be gay, they're not homosexual, any more than someone who chooses to think they're a dolphin is an actual dolphin. As for other people with gender assignment issues, the exact same thing applies.
After all, if what you say is true, then maybe you're gay and your upbringing "turned" you straight. It has to work both ways, right?
Originally posted by ObamaMomma
Homosexuality is a choice not a gene or a disease.
a simple choice that someone makes to be gay.
Originally posted by Nyteskye I found other boys my age infinitely more attractive than girls
Originally posted by JPhish
Originally posted by Nyteskye I found other boys my age infinitely more attractive than girls
what do you mean by attractive exactly? Could you clarify this for me please? I'm just having trouble grasping exactly what you mean, considering you were only 6.
agreed again...it's all mental; unless, like the anonymous poster pointed out, there is really some underlying physiological congenital condition like in some RARE cases.
Originally posted by RuneSpider
reply to post by dave420
Actually, it's fairly likely you are correct. It's possible that my uprbringing made me straight. So yeah, it makes sense that it swings both ways. I see what you mean, though. Choosing versus actually being.
As for gender reassignment... yes, good, reject, you watch South Park. Biologically, they are still a man or woman. mentally, they consider themselves female.