Vocalist.org archive


From:  "Caio Rossi" <caiorossi@t...>
"Caio Rossi" <caiorossi@t...>
Date:  Wed Jun 20, 2001  2:33 am
Subject:  Re: [vocalist] Homosexuality as an essential artifact of sexual genetics WAS: 2Be out?


Tako: shame on you!!! ( you're a geneticist! ) :-)

Linda, you're wrong, sorry, for two reasons:

1st: The primary biological purpose of sex is not procreation, but variation,
since procreation is much more easily assure by fissiparousness (
self-replication ). That's genetics 101. And gays are an obvious outcome of
that, if sexuality has anything to do with genetics, of course.

2nd: The primary biological purpose of your hands is not processing words, and
the primary biological purpose of your reproductory system is reproduction. If
you use 'primary biological purpose' as a way to determine rights and wrongs,
you must excuse a rapist who causes a nun to become pregnant. Facts are facts,
and values are values: confusing facts with values is a mistake no ethics
philosopher or religious leader would ever dare to tread. That wouldn't make
any sense.

Bye,

Caio Rossi



----- Original Message -----
From: Tako Oda <toda@m...>
From: Tako Oda <toda@m...>
To: <vocalist-temporary@yahoogroups.com>
To: <vocalist-temporary@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:46 PM
Subject: [vocalist] Homosexuality as an essential artifact of sexual genetics
WAS: 2Be out?


> Linda Fox <linda@f...> wrote:
> Linda Fox <linda@f...> wrote:
> > The _primary_ purpose of sex - biologically - is still procreation.
> > ...
> > Now, if you go along with this idea, that would make homosexual
> > attraction biologically "incorrect
>
> Just have to jump in here with a response to this (I was a geneticist
> before I pursued music)
>
> There can be a lot theories about homosexuality, and no one will ever
> know for sure exactly why some people turn out gay. That said, the
> popular notions of "survival of the fittest" are too simple to
> understand why homosexuality exists at a steady percentage in many
> species. One would think that gayness would eventually eliminate
> itself in the gene pool - after all, gays would be less likely to
> procreate if they are not as interested in straight sex.
>
> Why are there always homosexuals? There is a delicate hormonal
> balance that must be maintained in any population. Evolution wants
> males to desire females and vice versa. You couldn't pump up one
> hormonal profile for one sex and without affecting the other, since
> females and males have all but one chromosome in common. You can't
> have a population of uber-straight males and uber-straight-females
> because girls and boys are just too genetically similar.
>
> Even if all sexual orientation genes were located on the X and Y
> chromosomes, all people will still have an X chromosome (though a Y
> gene might inhibit genes on the X). That leaves precious little real
> estate on the Y gene to define straight-manliness. Inevitably, you're
> going to end up with boys who like boys and girls who like girls.
>
> In a mostly monogomous species with mostly consensual sex, there will
> develop an equilibrium where most boys want girls and most girls want
> boys, and the number of straight boys will match the number of
> straight girls. That optimizes the procreative ability of a
> population. As a society, a 2.5 on the Kinsey scale ;-) The gay
> individuals that turn up are just a testament to how little genetics
> separate women from men.
>
> I'm not even going to go into the potential evolutionary advantages
> of bisexuality in non-monogamous social species...
>
> Tako
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>





  Replies Name/Email Yahoo! ID Date Size
12763 Re: Homosexuality as an essential artifact of sex Ian Belsey   Wed  6/20/2001   2 KB

emusic.com