Overpopulation and homosexuality

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by cheetah

No matter what in this case, a male should always love a female moreso than he could love a male.

Why put limitations on love?
Why should a male "always love a female moreso than he could love a male?"
Is it not a personal preference?

[cheetah]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Why put limitations on love? Is it not a personal preference?

That's kinda what we're arguing here, hence the title "Overpopulation and homosexuality".

[ughaibu]

Cheetah: Thanks for the reply. I am assuming that overcrowding doesn't change the sex ratio so reproductive opportunities will be unchanged. This suggests that reproduction is neglected purely for reasons of environment, not competition. It would be interesting to know what theories are proposed to account for an animal's "decision" to become homosexual as such behaviour is in opposition to the propagation of genes often claimed when discussing the search for a sexual partner. I can imagine that there would be a reluctance to extrapolate the genetic arguement as the implication for homosexuals in human populations would be rather un-PC.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by cheetah

That's kinda what we're arguing here, hence the title "Overpopulation and homosexuality".

Thanks Cheetah... I was pretty well aware of this already. Can you answer the questions now?

[cheetah]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Can you answer the questions now?

I believe I already have:

You said: "Why put limitations on love? Why should a male always love a female moreso than he could love a male? Is it not a personal preference?"

My statement of a male always loving a female moreso than another male was taken out of context. I was using your own theory that homosexuals are simply very "horny" people who like the same sex simply because their sexual appetite range is so great. Based on this, a "homosexual" person could not have no attraction to the opposite sex, while having a large attraction to the same sex.

I hope this clears up what I was trying to say before, and sorry I wasn't clear enough.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by cheetah

I hope this clears up what I was trying to say before, and sorry I wasn't clear enough.

Actually, the lack of clarity was on my end. The theory as you described it is not what I meant to entail at all. It's not that homosexuality is just hornier people, by no means...

Just that, through several generations the ones who desired sex more have reproduced more often, and hence this trait is now more common. As a result of this trait being continually selected for, there have been some possible overlaps in desire. Obviously, all heterosexual people are the result of successful sexual parents too. The thought is that since the horny trait has been selected for, the chances for homosexuality has simultaneously gone up alongside the selection of this trait.

Not sure if this clears it up at all, but, I kinda came up with the idea while I was writing the response to the original question so hadn't thought it through completely. Hope this helps.


Cheers.

[TheFaithfulStone]

For the record, the sexual proclivity spectrum is not neatly divded into two parts.

I wish I could find the graph (it was in my college Health text) that showed a six part bar graph. Basically it goes like this.

1 = 90% - Exclusively Hetero
2 = 4% - Mostly Hetero, accidental Homosexual contact.
3 = 3% - Largerly Hetero, some homo
4 = 2% - largely homo, some hetero
5 = 1% - mostly homo, accidental hetero
6 = >0% - exclusively homosexual (very, very few people)

So Buffy's theory that it's an effective "preserve the species" strategy has some merit. As population pressure increase, the scale slides more and more to the homosexual side, but never completely eliminates the breeding population. In otherwords, the graph can swing both ways.

I wish I could find the book, where I saw this, but I seem to have lost it.

TFS

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by TheFaithfulStone

For the record, the sexual proclivity spectrum is not neatly divded into two parts.

I wish I could find the graph (it was in my college Health text) that showed a six part bar graph. Basically it goes like this.

1 = 90% - Exclusively Hetero
2 = 4% - Mostly Hetero, accidental Homosexual contact.
3 = 3% - Largerly Hetero, some homo
4 = 2% - largely homo, some hetero
5 = 1% - mostly homo, accidental hetero
6 = >0% - exclusively homosexual (very, very few people)

So Buffy's theory that it's an effective "preserve the species" strategy has some merit. As population pressure increase, the scale slides more and more to the homosexual side, but never completely eliminates the breeding population. In otherwords, the graph can swing both ways.

I wish I could find the book, where I saw this, but I seem to have lost it.

Thanks for the data, but a couple of quick points on the percentages...

• When was the data collected? Over time preferences shift (as is clearly being articulated by almost all posters in this thread).
• How large was the sample?
• What was the region of the sample? (was just Kentucky? whole US? just north/south of the equator? whole globe? just tribes in Africa...???)
• How representative was the sample? (i.e. Is it an accurate cross-section of the population being studied)
• What was the error of the sample?
• What was the percentage of people who have sex with animals, dead people, holes in random walls, relatives, floatation devices, apple pies, transvestites, soda bottles, chinese finger traps...

[TheFaithfulStone]

Man, I got no idea. I can't find the book at all.

And even if I COULD find it, it was only a survey course!

I'm not guaranteeing those percentages to be accurate, either, those are just what I remember.

On the other hand, it was a text book. On the other, other hand, I don't live in Kansas. On the other, other, other hand - I just like symmetry, so I need four hands.

TFS

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by TheFaithfulStone

On the other hand, it was a text book. On the other, other hand, I don't live in Kansas. On the other, other, other hand - I just like symmetry, so I need four hands.

LOL TFS...

I forgot another key question: What was the situation in which the survey was conducted, and how confidential did respondents perceive their responses to be? Many people will flat out lie, especially concerning homosexuality, if they don't feel 100% and completely safe in their anonymity and the confidentiality of their responses.


Four hands.... You'd make one hell of a bartender!