tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post4599512117829387788..comments2024-03-22T15:55:34.030-04:00Comments on Evo and Proud: Is this the Gay Germ?Peter Frosthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04303172060029254340noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-37588235424237966382021-12-06T16:03:19.117-05:002021-12-06T16:03:19.117-05:00Another problem about your approach is
how can yo...Another problem about your approach is<br /><br />how can you prove that heterossexuality or sexuality per si is not also the result of pathogen manipulationAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-52725595007436718872021-12-04T12:35:27.593-05:002021-12-04T12:35:27.593-05:00"the only common denominator being the gay li..."the only common denominator being the gay lifestyle" - what is the evidence for this assumption?<br /><br />Your sources don't mention (or indicate) anything like that, at least I've never seen<br /><br />I guess you're lying again as usualAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-84308724184459599942021-11-29T13:48:20.918-05:002021-11-29T13:48:20.918-05:00I am alarmed at some of the comments on this blog ...I am alarmed at some of the comments on this blog passing for scientific discussion--you are speaking of people as if they have a disease. The way some of the commentators have talked about homosexuality reminds me of 19th century discussions of eugenics regarding Black people--where the speaker is completely unaware of their bias and power in the discussion. Be careful about that--if you speak about a group of people as if they were statistics or lab experiments, it will discredit anything you are trying to say. It's fascinating for example how many assumptions have been included in the discussions--that homosexuals are weaker than heterosexuals (regarding indigenous cultures) or that homosexuality implies a feminization of men (really? is that always the case?) or the fact that homosexual women have been conveniently left out of the conversation entirely. Constructing a thread along these lines says more about the contributors than it does about the topic! For my part I would suggest that 1) sexual identity is not reducible to sexual activity, it is not the same thing, and what constitutes sexual identity is far more complex than is being understood in this thread. 2) evolution and natural selection could be twisted into explaining homosexual ACTIVITY, perhaps, as has been shown, by additions that are far fetched at best (viruses for example) but it does not explain sexual identity (love idealization, spirituality, worldview). 3) Because of this, a biologistic explanation of sexual identity will inevitably fail under the weight of its own presumptions and lack of complexity that must factor in non-biological variables.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-82465217042857409202021-11-11T13:04:04.083-05:002021-11-11T13:04:04.083-05:00I sign under everything Santo wrote:
Two reasons ...I sign under everything Santo wrote:<br /><br />Two reasons why conserfs like you and Coch want to spread this theory<br /><br />- first: homophobia<br />- second: incapacity to fully understand natural selection..<br /><br />First of all, humans evolved to be capable to differentiate sex from procreation. To control sex impulse as well to use it in recreational related-activities. It's mean non-reproductive sex desire seems to be in-selection among humans, too. Broader is the sexual behavior spectrum, more diverse it will be;<br /><br />Secondly, sexuality is correlated with cognition and personality. Humans evolved to be psychologically and cognitively diverse because it's better have different specialist types to solve different problems. So it's expected a mix among so-called masculine and so-called feminine traits, and it's also mean about sexual desire. A matter of probability;<br /><br />Thirdly, only very strong and specifically-defined natural selection can ''clean'' population's related phenotypes from ''debris'' as homossexuality.<br /><br />There are some anecdotal evidence of more common bissexual behavior among heterossexual african-descent men... R-strategy or huge fertility to attacks environmental challenges also mean trends to higher phenotypical variation or hyper-sexuality maybe;<br /><br />Fortly, your evidences sound very weak, like a incident correlation... only way to prove it it's finding direct association between fungus and behavior. Like, in the exact way, a homossexual guy feel sexual desire to another male, so-called ''germ'' manifest in the brain. Also, what i already said in Pumpkin Person blog. If you find some microorganisms, unusual ones, in healthy homossexual male sperm, so, this theory also possibly will have some breath.<br /><br />Fifhtly [whatever]: you know we have the similar number of bacterias and cells, right*<br /><br />I don't believe if there is a ''gay germ'' will not have a ''sexual germ''.<br /><br />That's the problem about science without philosophy, i mean, not verborragic crap lots of white thinkers had produced, and i'm including many ''non-liberals''. Scientists put their personal biases over ethics.<br /><br />To fully understand homossexuality we must understand all sexuality. Why not try to understand the biological origins about heterossexual behavior**<br /><br />Still about heritability. Autism seems pretty heritability and some people also believe it's a kind of ''brain infection''. Higher or lower heritability may mean less than we bet. And all the time people is confusing heritability with inheritance levels, what's matter for selective processes.<br /><br />How explain one of the identical twin pairs with no ''fungus/pathogen/germ infection''*<br /><br />AND MORE<br /><br />Sexual abuse or maternal stress don't cause male homosexuality<br />https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11091252_Prenatal_Stress_and_Gender_Role_Behavior_in_Girls_and_Boys_A_Longitudinal_Population_Study <br />https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26619850/<br /><br />And if there is a "gay germ", then surely there would also be a heterosexual germAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-32888822672089758002019-10-12T04:18:24.379-04:002019-10-12T04:18:24.379-04:00https://static.businessinsider.com/image/596cd260a...<a href="https://static.businessinsider.com/image/596cd260a47cb56b008b4a01-1200/image.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://static.businessinsider.com/image/596cd260a47cb56b008b4a01-1200/image.jpg</a>.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-81971340545990501522019-10-11T15:24:20.112-04:002019-10-11T15:24:20.112-04:00I've never heard of baldness being culturally ...I've never heard of baldness being culturally associated with gayness. The gay culture seems to place a premium on a very youthful male appearance that's been relatively unaffected by the development of certain secondary sexual characteristics such as facial and body hair, and by the decline or loss of heard hair:<br /><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twink_(gay_slang)<br /><br /><i>Twink is gay slang for a young man in his late teens to early twenties whose traits may include: general physical attractiveness; little to no body or facial hair; a slim to average build; and a youthful appearance that belies an older chronological age. </i><br /><br />There is a gay subculture involving so-called "bears", which refers to older, physically large and imposing men with body and facial hair and often head hair decline or loss, but a major aspect of this subculture is that these "bears" don't physically resemble stereotypical gays.<br /><br />"People are psychologically biased to see bald men as dominant leaders"<br /><br />https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/people-are-psychologically-biased-to-see-bald-men-as-dominant-leaders-a7872761.html<br /><br />"according to research from the University of Pennsylvania, there's something powerful about having a smooth dome. <br /><br />In three experiments, researcher Albert Mannes found:<br /><br />• "Men with shaved heads were rated as more dominant."<br /><br />• "Men whose hair was digitally removed were perceived as more dominant, taller, and stronger than their authentic selves."<br /><br />• "Men experiencing natural hair loss may improve their interpersonal standing by shaving."<br /><br />Now a data scientist for the US government, Mannes argues that the shaved-and-dominant link comes from cultural associations, in the same way that being tall and having a deep voice each signal dominance. <br /><br />"In US society ... shaved heads are often found on men in traditionally masculine professions," he writes, "so dominance may emerge through stereotypical associations with these figures." <br /><br />When guys decide to shave off their hair, they're tapping into a cultural history of close-cropped dominance, from Michael Jordan imposing his will on the basketball court to Bruce Willis saving the day on the silver screen. <br /><br />In fact, Mannes says that he was inspired to do the research when people were more deferential to him after he shaved his head. <br /><br />It's not all good news, though: Mannes also discovered that while men with shaved heads are seen as more dominant, they're also perceived as looking four years older than guys with hair. Not only that, but the bald dudes are found to be less attractive."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-31447037993480989242019-10-11T07:36:36.695-04:002019-10-11T07:36:36.695-04:00Everyone identifies criminal violence with hetrose...Everyone identifies criminal violence with hetrosexuality, just as everyone associated baldness with being harmless and a bit gay. And now we know they were right. Another one of the gay snps has to do with smell. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGCZB8jUxRc" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGCZB8jUxRc</a>Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-42300918389589867502019-10-11T00:20:23.073-04:002019-10-11T00:20:23.073-04:00This low-estrogenic look seems similar to the way ...<i>This low-estrogenic look seems similar to the way North-Western Europeans (Netherlands etc.) look - tall, thin, but not particularly muscular, with women having small boobs. They also have longer development times (eg. Hajnal Line), which is good for the brain. </i><br /><br />Southern Europeans and Mediterraneans tend to be more gracile than Northern Europeans, who aren't just taller but have larger bones. Strength athletes, strongman, American football linemen, etc., tend to be dominated by Northern Europeans. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-56505525770787395532019-10-10T21:01:58.616-04:002019-10-10T21:01:58.616-04:00About: "studies have found that women who are...<br />About: "studies have found that women who are on the short side tend to have more children. In contrast, average-height men do the best, reproductively speaking, outpacing short and tall men in number of children fathered"<br /><br />Estrogen is a height growth blocker, but it is also a growth hormone for bones, especially lower body bones. In order to be a physically very strong man you need both testosterone for upper body and estrogen for lower body. <br /><br />If a man has low estrogen, or little or no estrogen receptors he can grow VERY tall, but with serious bone strenght problems.<br /><br />https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-jan-15-he-staturegirls15-story.html<br /><br />https://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/25/science/deaf-to-estrogen-s-call-a-man-s-strange-story.html<br /><br />This low-estrogenic look seems similar to the way North-Western Europeans (Netherlands etc.) look - tall, thin, but not particularly muscular, with women having small boobs. They also have longer development times (eg. Hajnal Line), which is good for the brain. <br /><br />An example Hajnal Line woman - elongated, thin, small boobs and virgin until 28, then becomes sexual<br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pusGHIzOuH0<br />tomRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05250648754955371165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-53513821167639773232019-10-10T16:27:59.114-04:002019-10-10T16:27:59.114-04:00Yes, in "advanced societies" that is a t...<i>Yes, in "advanced societies" that is a trope, but movies tend not to feature men paying for sex.</i><br /><br />Not sure what you mean here. <br /><br />I suspect it's the opposite of what you claim. That it's the impulsively violent types that you identify with heterosexuality that are more likely to engage in homosexuality, if only because they have more difficulty controlling their sex drives and avoiding to engage in predatory homosexuality. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-60537324433171725142019-10-10T16:18:01.515-04:002019-10-10T16:18:01.515-04:00Male pattern baldness is caused by dihydrotestoste...Male pattern baldness is caused by dihydrotestosterone, which is produced by testosterone. Eunuchs don't go bald. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-45658908214181072982019-10-10T14:42:51.396-04:002019-10-10T14:42:51.396-04:00The male homosexualty genes in the recent study in...The male homosexualty genes in the recent study include one associated with male pattern baldness.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-52224705289528732252019-10-10T03:42:18.972-04:002019-10-10T03:42:18.972-04:00Yes, in "advanced societies" that is a t...Yes, in "advanced societies" that is a trope, but movies tend not to feature men paying for sex. Homosexuals in work earn more than heterosexuals.These are people whose homsexual genes are just damaged genes according to the gay germ fellow.<br /><br /> I went to get Andreas Wagner's new book yesterday and bought <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/530240/the-goodness-paradox-by-richard-wrangham/" rel="nofollow">Wrangham's book</a> too. From flipping through it I am more convinced than ever that selection against violence reduces heterosexuality and leads to adult homosexuality. The domestication syndrome in mammals includes the craniofacial, skeletal and coat change (including the 'blaze' or white stripe on the forehead) and more frequent and nonseasonal estrus cycles, big sexual change right there. In the relatively peaceful stumptail manques (which go bald and lose their ruddy face colour as they age) male male mounting with anal penetration has been observed.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-34544682643007436622019-10-09T16:45:11.921-04:002019-10-09T16:45:11.921-04:00I believe that there could be men who are both imp...<i> I believe that there could be men who are both impulsively, uncontrollably heterosexual and timid, but there would be a considerable valley to be crossed before that fitness peak was reached. Natural selection never goes into the valley. Recombination does.</i><br /><br />I'm not sure why you find this hard to believe. The completely heterosexual and extremely horny guy who's nevertheless too shy and timid to directly obtain sex in some impulsive fashion is an extremely common type in advanced societies. It's a cultural trope, and movies are frequently made about this. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-46714057015144965702019-10-09T00:38:01.260-04:002019-10-09T00:38:01.260-04:00Yet another correction to Oct 8 comment:_ There is...Yet another correction to Oct 8 comment:_ There is cultural suppression of homosexuality in Western culture, which may be a case of the most advanced civilisation preventing spread of actual homosexual behaviour from the reduced masculinity genes affecting the birth rate.<br /><br />Peter, Yes. But the child a dad brings up might be a cads, if the dads let the cads live. Carlton Coon said the older men getting together and doing away with a wayward young man in the night was a common phenomenon.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-75641942528119444162019-10-09T00:16:04.946-04:002019-10-09T00:16:04.946-04:00Humans have weapons and can conspire so people who...Humans have weapons and can conspire so people who make everyone nervous can be put an end to with no risk. John Wick is killing on the pretext of avenging his pet Beagle. Think to yourself which is the more heterosexual animal, a Beagle or a wolf. Of course the domesticated dog Beagle breed didn't get that way by natural selection. If you eliminated the natural alpha males from a wolf pack the gene pool would change. <br /><br /> I believe that there could be men who are both impulsively, uncontrollably heterosexual and timid, but there would be a considerable valley to be crossed before that fitness peak was reached. Natural selection never goes into the valley. Recombination does.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-14146158378596665002019-10-08T20:04:34.566-04:002019-10-08T20:04:34.566-04:00I happen to think the trend in human evolution of ...<i>I happen to think the trend in human evolution of a less robust physique (especially that marker of domestication in animals, reduced bone density) is a feminizing one.</i><br /><br />Humans still reproduce sexually, so any sort of trend you posit would have had to have coevolved with heterosexuality. Otherwise, the trend wouldn't exist. <br /><br />Bond exercises violence on behalf of a higher authority. He's "licensed" by the British government. Wick is an assassin for hire who kills out of vengeance or to protect himself or out of some sort of moral code. They're not examples of impulsive violenceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-58845735717359505522019-10-08T19:54:38.089-04:002019-10-08T19:54:38.089-04:00and those less aggressive men tending to have sexy...<i>and those less aggressive men tending to have sexy sisters rather than diesel dyke ones like the most heterosexual men, which is something that may have had a big effect if women were under a period of sexual selection</i><br /><br />That's why I suggested that your claims could probably be reduced to a fairly simple math problem. <br /><br />Natural selection produces all kinds of strange creatures and you find it hard to believe that there could be men who are both heterosexual and not impulsively, uncontrollably violent? Don't you think something like, say, a platypus is strange, not a heterosexual man who isn't impulsively violent?<br /><br />There are many animal species in which the males are completely heterosexual but not impulsively violent. They generally avoid each other, or compete against each other for mates in various non-violent ways, or engage in ritualized fights that don't end in death.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-73491763329702313312019-10-08T17:59:53.193-04:002019-10-08T17:59:53.193-04:00Sean,
You're arguing along the same lines as ...Sean,<br /><br />You're arguing along the same lines as Edward Miller. In order to increase monogamy and paternal investment, natural selection favored a higher level of feminization of male brains. "Dads" are thus, on average, more feminized than "cads." <br /><br />"The survival of a human predisposition for homosexuality can be explained by sexual orientation being a polygenetic trait that is influenced by a number of genes. During development these shift male brain development in the female direction. Inheritance of several such alleles produces homosexuality. Single alleles make for greater sensitivity, empathy, tendermindedness, and kindness. These traits make heterosexual carriers of the genes better fathers and more attractive mates. There is a balanced polymorphism in which the feminizing effect of these alleles in heterosexuals offsets the adverse effects. (on reproductive success) of these alleles' contribution to homosexuality."<br /><br />https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1001836320541<br /><br />I think Ed Miller is half-right. Men are mentally feminized to varying degrees, but normally natural selection would prevent this feminization from crossing the line that separates a heterosexual orientation from a homosexual one. That's why I think there must be an environmental factor (fraternal birth order, trauma during pregnancy, a pathogen, etc.) that pushes some men over that line.Peter Frosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04303172060029254340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-8497655852577539662019-10-08T15:43:30.720-04:002019-10-08T15:43:30.720-04:00Correction:
The selection pressure for heterosexu...Correction:<br /><br />The selection pressure for heterosexuality may have been overborne by the selection against the violence that went with <b>heterosexualty</b>, and less aggressive men tending to have sexy sisters rather than diesel dyke ones like the most heterosexual men, which is something that may have had a big effect if women were under a period of sexual selection.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-86028286432949542612019-10-08T15:38:20.769-04:002019-10-08T15:38:20.769-04:00"Claims like this regarding homosexuality can...<i>"Claims like this regarding homosexuality can be reduced to a simple math problem, no? Take the fitness cost to male homosexuals and figure out the hypothetical gain in fitness among their female siblings necessary to maintain genetic homosexuality. What do the numbers look like?"</i><br />One cannot assume modern Western upbringings are any more neutral on homosexuality than the ones in Melanesia that turn males into aggressive felators of men by the age of 11 or 12. There might have once been an advantage in these genes that had little or nothing to do with sex, which the simple mathematics of total hetrosexualty competed with total homosexuality is missing. To be specific, a man who raped and murdered would be likely to be put to death by others in his band. I don't find it implausible that AOTBE genes for reduced masculinity (sometimes even homosexual tendencies) would have resulted in men less likely to be condemned to death by mob justice. The selection pressure for hetrosexuality may have been overborne by the selection against the violence that went with homosexualty, and those less aggressive men tending to have sexy sisters rather than diesel dyke ones like the most heterosexual men, which is something that may have had a big effect if women were under a period of sexual selection. Many ancient Western societies tolerated homosexuals as much as modern primitive ones do; if anything, it seems the more advanced ones are those in which as time went on the cultures increasingly counteracted homosexuality. Modern mass culture posits extreme violence ('Licensed to kill') as the ultimate in heterosexualty (James Bond, John Wick ect). <br /><br />I happen to think the trend in human evolution of a less robust physique (especially that marker of domestication in animals, reduced bone density) is a feminizing one. The most advanced people like the Puritans could be biologically and innately of gayer propensities that Papua New Guinea tribesman in the same way the New Englanders had hereditarily lower bone density than Melanesian warriors. There is cultural suppression of homosexuality in Western culture, which may be a case of an advanced culture evolving to do the heavy lifting of preventing spread of non violence genes (with the side effect of homosexuality) affecting the birth rate. The current Brazilian president objects to gay foreigners flocking to his country for its world class <a href="http://ampost.com.br/en/2018/12/pabllo-vittar-fica-na-frente-de-secco-e-sabrina-sato-na-lista-das-mulheres-mais-sexy-do-ano/" rel="nofollow">butt boys</a>. He is also a fan of Death Squads.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-62485616201845509692019-10-07T18:00:07.734-04:002019-10-07T18:00:07.734-04:00Natural selection doesn't select just for all ...Natural selection doesn't select just for all imediately useful phenotypes specially in relaxed one. What i said previously ... <br /><br />Every selective process is likeable to result in diversity.<br /><br />Well.. again, you're suggesting a single cause. Doesn't matter how you write. A manipulation of words don't make beliefs true. <br /><br />Interestingly, the same ''traumatic effect''. <br /><br />''Traumatic effect'' must be chaotic or without pre-determined factors. <br /><br />Your language is not based on science, sorry, but about your homophobia. Unecessary offense based on your expected emotional reaction and not ''what's really mean or is''. <br /><br />Unfortunately, most of what so-called science is based on white heterossexual male biases, no matter how bright your technology shine. Santonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-28051483575901473722019-10-07T14:49:19.475-04:002019-10-07T14:49:19.475-04:00In the same way, traits that harm one sex but not ...<i>In the same way, traits that harm one sex but not the other may not be 'weeded out' by natural selection</i><br /><br />Claims like this regarding homosexuality can be reduced to a simple math problem, no? Take the fitness cost to male homosexuals and figure out the hypothetical gain in fitness among their female siblings necessary to maintain genetic homosexuality. What do the numbers look like? Are they plausible? Then compare them with empirical data. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-49724244140492620662019-10-07T13:15:35.306-04:002019-10-07T13:15:35.306-04:00Santo,
I am not arguing that male homosexuality h...Santo,<br /><br />I am not arguing that male homosexuality has a single cause. It seems to be the result of a genetic predisposition interacting with something in the environment, which may be a pathogen. But it can also be a traumatic event during pregnancy or fraternal birth order effects. Fraternal birth order seems to explain 15% of male homosexuality.<br /><br />Male brains vary in their degree of feminization/masculinization, but this variance is subject to natural selection. Normally, genetic factors alone shouldn't produce homosexual behavior. At least, that is Greg Cochran's argument. <br /><br />"Anon, a superhighway vector for homosexuality in adults in certain societies of Papua New Guinea has not affected the birth rate there, but how could it not have if there was a std bug that made men uninterested in women?"<br /><br />Over time, there would have been counter-selection to increase the population of neurons that promote heterosexual behavior.Peter Frosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04303172060029254340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-25774030830152498762019-10-07T08:35:28.099-04:002019-10-07T08:35:28.099-04:00Well, It's what you're suggesting here...
...Well, It's what you're suggesting here...<br /><br />How explain birth order homossexuality ''cases'', as mine* <br /><br />About heritability, i have a wild speculation that one possible explanation to lower heritability or whatever it mean among identical twins, about homossexuality, is that basically homossexual men don't procreate with homossexual women. It's sound very wrong, and maybe it is. I just thought about it months ago. Just like if we have a minority of light eyes among a predominant brown eyes population and they never procreate one each other. If homossexuality can be defined as in someway ''recessive''... Santonoreply@blogger.com