Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum The Genetic Mystery of Homosexuality

Edpsy- i have no expertise in this area, but I think you have made an incorrect assumption in your argument. Homosexuality is not the same as infertility. Thus male homosexuals can and do father children, and female homosexuals can and do give birth to children.

Thus, one can only conclude that reproduction is one of a plethora of motives for sex and it may not even be the primary biological motive of sex in our species.

I am not a genetics expert but I do find homosexuality a mystery ....................>
.............>theories suggest that all sexual desire is fundamentally motivated by the desire to procreate.
Yet, homosexuality has no ability to procreate.
Obviously, homosexual behavior can not reproduce.

Could keep down the numbers of unwanted, unloved and uncared-for children in the world. Not my personal choice of method, but quot homines, tot sententiae, and all that.

Mike Kremer said...
Yes it definately would keep down the numbers of unloved
and uncared-for children in the world.
Except that an increasing number of Goverments are allowing
Gay-partners to adopt those uncared for children.
No-doubt in the belief that gay-partners as-parents....
...would be better for them, than no parents?
In this fast moving modern less caring world of today,
I wonder how a child brought up by a couple of queers, could have the best chance in his/her adolescent life, and future?

Contrary comments on the last two sentences welcomed.

Here's something for you to chew on, Mike.

I will chew on it and give it my best shot, Amaranth.

Amaranth Rose II wrote:-
"If you want what’s best for your kids, one surefire way to provide them with a healthy, happy home is to make sure they have lesbian parents. In the longest-running study of lesbian families to date, zero percent of children reported physical or sexual abuse—not a one. In the general population, 26 percent of children report physical abuse and 8.3 percent report sexual abuse."

"Studies that purport that straight parents are superior are largely flawed. Instead of comparing straight coupled parents with same-sex coupled parents, these studies contrast straight married couples with straight single mothers and ignore other family-structure variables that have nothing to do with gender."

But we know already that having a mother and father is not the best opportunity we can give a child—having loving parents is.
Yes, I have to absolutely agree with that Amaranth.

Amaranth Rose II continued:-
And there’s an argument to be made that if intentional and thoughtful parenthood is an indicator of parental and family happiness, then having gay parents—parents who weren’t able to “accidentally” have a child—may be, in fact, among the better circumstances there are for a child."

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/04/gay_couples_have_happier_kids/

Mike Kremers thoughts and replies:-

Yes, I was expecting a couple of replies similar to the lines you have written Amaranth.
Your reply is not only good but very interesting, the problem here with me is that I am a product of the "old school".
An era where Mothers rarely, if ever went to work.
My mother was always around, She never worked, she was the old fashioned housewife, and I only saw my Father at weekends, since by the time he came home from work, I was already
in bed, since there was no distracting TV, or other labour saving devices.
For I am a product of a very different era.
People then, were too busy getting on with their lives, and preparing for the next day, to have time to argue or fight.
I am not suggesting that everything was perfection, but problems were minimised, it was a forgive and forget, society, life had to go on.
There are so many local Goverment and Council places in existence today, to whom you can just pick up the phone and make a personal complaint (not everyone had a phone back in those days, we had a shared party phone). Anyway nobody came around to investigate home problems or suggest that the children might be better off in temporary care, until things got sorted out.
With no phone there were few complaints, either to friends or police

One wonders if things are made so much easier today, that people simply dont worry about their future anymore.
I believe some deliberately contact and use the marriage counseling and child Guidiance services, knowing to well that the stresses of the modern day burden and the day to day living will be eased by the the interaction of the very welcome Social Services and Child care Units.

With the help of Social services....Medi-care, malutrition, health flue injections, and even money will be thrown at those families, that ask for help.
Its no wonder the divorce rate is sky high. Marriage, to some, has become a temporary happy condition, that can be changed when the going gets rough, with a quick divorce.

If marriage dos'nt work for couples, then as you intimate Amaranth, prehaps couples living together in partnership as Gay's or Lesbians are the way forward for them.
I suppose I hav'nt realised how the world has moved forward and on, to accomodate partnership couples, that have adopted or have been "given" children.
Originally gay couples were not allowed to adopt children, (over here in the UK), unless they were the natural children of one or the other Lesbian/Gay couple.
Yes I think its getting altogether too easy to put forward personal complaints and get some thing done with help.

I suppose Lesbian/Gay partnerships must have many of the same problems that hetrosexual couples have? Like money problems, one or both would need to go to work....difficulties there could allow Child services to step in. Partnership couples can get fed up with each other, like everyone else.
Prehaps when a partnership wants changes, or have difficulties living together....Because they are two men or two women they come to a more mutual agreement, with far less unruly problems, than a hetrosexual couple?
I cant imagine two Gay men having a violent disagreements, nor a Lesbian couple either.
I could be wrong, I'm only guessing. Prehaps the whole idea of marriage and stability is coming to a slow end. Prehaps in 50 or 100 years marriage will just become an archaic word.
Prehaps people will live happily together in groups, or groupies, like the Mormons in South Utah, or gravitate to having a number of wives, as in ancient times, or like some Moslems today.
I can see a future where couples live together in peace harmony and happiness, a kind of Kibbutz, where everyone contributes and does what they like best to do, for the good of the community.
The whole scheme does not fit in well with the type of upbringing I have had.
But is it a possibility that we will all have to accept one day?

My mother was always around, She never worked

since there was no distracting TV, or other labour saving devices.

People then, were too busy getting on with their lives, and preparing for the next day, to have time to argue or fight.

knowing to well that the stresses of the modern day burden and the day to day living will be eased by the the interaction of the very welcome Social Services and Child care Units.

and even money will be thrown at those families, that ask for help.

Yes I think its getting altogether too easy to put forward personal complaints and get some thing done with help.

I cant imagine two Gay men having a violent disagreements, nor a Lesbian couple either.

I could be wrong

[quote] My mother was always around, She never worked

Mike Kremer says .."Bill S, you missed out the important part,
hopefully it was'nt deliberate"
My Mother was always around, (comma)she never worked (went out to work) she was the old fashioned housewife.
And believe me with no labour saving devices in the home or invented yet, do you realise that Women worked very hard to keep house and home together before and during WW.2.

Lucky you!! Mine was widowed when I was about 12 month old, courtesy of Hitler’s lot.
Have you ever thought of the untold harm done to children of our generation (maybe you’re not that old) by wartime evacuation.
/quote]

[Quote=Mike Kremer]
Mike Kremers reply to the above.
"I am both sad and sorry to hear that you lost your Father during the WW.2 Bill S. That you were also an evacuee.
Yes I was an evacuee for a much shorter time than most, as my Mother came to visit me twice...then I was allowed back to live with my Mum, who had moved to Maidenhead.
My Dad was not allowed to enter WW2....since he was doing valuable work building and designing plywood Mosquitoe Aircraft, in the East end of London.
He told me many years later the East End was devoid of children. So at least many evacuees got the chance of life in the country.
If you mean untold harm and even death caused by the noise of bombing and death,m plus putting on "Mickey Mouse" gas masks when the sirens went off ..well yes, it was stressful for kids.

I was lucky; I already lived in the country. I was three when I met my first evacuees; almost 70 years on, I can still see their lost, frightened expressions. The “good old days” were certainly not always good for children without “silver spoons”.

Yes you were very lucky Bill S. You seemed to have turned out rather well, ----for an evacuee with one parent.
As I said, there was no distracting TV, or other labour saving devices. Plus you had the company of other evacuees living in the quiet bombless country side.

I too grew up without these luxuries, including, for much of my early childhood, electric light and flush toilets; but I don’t see that as an excuse for using such judgemental and offensive expressions as “a couple of queers”.

Not so much the 'judgmental' please Bill S.
I had previously written Gay,....and then finished with Queer, hopeing some youngster would rise to the bait.
Prehaps you are not old enough to realise that there was no such word as Gay in those days.
I believe I am somewhat older than you, there fore I know that there was no such thing as Political correctness before the War, Its obviously recently brought in to stop peoples with differences, having 'goes' at each other, that might develop into something more serious, .
Every one used the term queer, It was the life-style then,
just after the war that was considered queer, thats why the name stuck and was always used every-where.
Except in Ireland today...where the term queer is used far more than Gay.
Words change their meaning, dependant upon which country, and the length of time used. prehaps 'Pooftah or Clone'y will replace Gay in the future?
Political correctness does not exist in every country (Some one should start a new thread on Political correctness)
Negroes are now called Black....not Golliwogs or Sambo's or Fuzzywuzzys, (your take on political correct words will depend very much where you are brought up) You may call an African Black...But don't call him a 'Black-boy'...You may get shot.
Here is something interesting I have seen an advert for the new Nokia phone that has just come out. Its called the 'Nokia Lumia'.Prehaps it my funny mind, but a know a little of the Thai language....anhd I'm thinking in Thai.... Lu means woman, and Meea means hole. eg Lumia
So I can see many Thai men having a laugh over this.
You see words have different meanings for different peoples.
Remember there are no swear words in the Bible (I find that interesting) While the Israeli's resort to using Egyptian sw words (which are plentiful)

Does your ivory tower have an address? Could it be that your early life was that sheltered from the reality of daily life?

Mike Kremer did say:-
knowing to well that the stresses of the modern day burden and the day to day living will be eased by the the interaction of the very welcome Social Services and Child care Units.
"I mean the familys in a virtual war, families who's bickering damages the kids, families who need and welcome the intervention of Social Services, and need to separate or get a divorce.

My guess is you were never a Child Care Social Worker! Had you been you would almost certainly have omitted “very welcome”.

You guessed right. But I was a member of a Canadien Goverment "Think Tank " in my hey-day.
I did say that:-
money will be thrown at those families, that ask for help.
Bill S.....There will come time when you will welcome the daily arrival "Of Meals on Wheels" that provides you with the one hot meal a day in your old age.When you are too old and infirm to go out. Dont knock British Social Services, they do a wonderful job.

Ever thought of booking yourself a place in the real world, Mike? The problem of finding the funds to provide adequate, necessary care, right across the Social Care spectrum was a rapidly growing problem three decades ago. Although I am no longer in Social Work, I am assured it is far worse now.

Yes if you mean Social Care is worse and getting thinner on the top, you are probably correct. Its something to do with the Worlds populations aging, and less babys being born
Yes I think its getting altogether too easy to put forward personal complaints and get some thing done with help.
Yes well remember Bill S. as the British Parliament ages , (and the Japanese for that matter)They tend to vote themselves more goodies, at the expense of others. Another words..those in power make sure they get enough!.All British parents get given money every month, from the time of their birth until they reach 16 years old. As I mentioned above the "aged" Parliament is debating whether this money should stop at the birth of the third child.