No, Bel. It simply hosts some posters who are propagandists for the "life style" -- some, for personal reasons and some for bad philosophy...
And a question to peopes knowledgeable in gene stuff: Genes are stuff that transfer from parents to offspring, right? Gays, being gays, don't beget offspring. So, supposing there is such a thing as the gay gene, it came about and is sustained how exactly?
Supposing there is a collection of genes that can lead to homosexuality, it would be sustained by a small percentage of homosexuals providing a competitive advantage to those who broadly share their genetics (including the small chance of bearing a homosexual child). I imagine that most deviations from the norm are primarily a consequence of the physical environment, such as their parental epigenetics combined with the hormones and food available in the womb and to a lesser extent early life. Secondarily of course there's a child's social situation, although I rather have my doubts that can make anyone gay.
Being parents, they cannot transmit gayness in genes, because, being parents, they are not gays.
Someone needs to learn about recessive genes.For example: supposing all blondes were sterile, it wouldn't extinguish the blonde gene, and prevent blondes from existing all around.
However, soon the gene would die out
Scientists presenting at the 2015 meeting of the American Society of Genetics announced the discovery of a gene-based algorithm that could predict male homosexuality with 70 percent accuracy. It's the first time a gene-based model has been used to predict sexual orientation, giving credence to the idea that homosexuality has a biological basis.Exciting as the claim may be, it's crucial not to oversimplify the findings.The scientists from UCLA's David Geffen School of Medicine discovered that methylation, a form of DNA modification, in certain regions of the genome differed between homosexual and heterosexual identical twin brothers. What they did not find were the elusive "gay genes." Amid the ever-present "homosexuality is a choice" chants of the anti-gay community, it is, naturally, tempting to claim that this study is concrete proof that sexual orientation is entirely genetic. To say so would be simplistic and, well, wrong. But it does constitute evidence that homosexuality has a biological basis.
Quote from: ersi on 2016-07-04, 10:10:06However, soon the gene would die outNo.
Not sure how non-propagating features can remain in recessive potential too long.
Except that something like a colony of gay DNA may very well be helpful by providing extra manpower to the tribe, so tribes with said gay DNA would be more successful than those without.
something like a colony of gay DNA may very well be helpful by providing extra manpower to the tribe
Quote from: ersi on 2016-07-04, 17:36:27Not sure how non-propagating features can remain in recessive potential too long.Provided they don't cause any harm they can theoretically stay around forever. Some genes are advantageous and therefore multiply more fruitfully, others aren't and are selected against. Most are basically neutral, either not doing much of anything or not doing much of anything that matters.
Biological basis for homosexuality is a delusion on many levels.
Also, theoretically, if it ever emerged at a point in time, it will perish at some point in time. If it doesn't propagate, it will disappear faster than you can say "blueberry pie". And no harm, you say? Lack of propagation is the very definition of harm, insofar as the theory of evolution is concerned. In the theory of evolution, reproduction is all that matters.
it will perish at some point in time.
Here you're betraying your like of knowledge of both sociology and genetics. Barulheira already noted recessive genes.
BBC has an interesting article on the evolutionary puzzle of homosexuality
Rather he knew it or not Befrager evoked Emile Durkheim organic theory of sociology when he compared society to an orgasm.
...part of society serves a function much like an organ in a human body.
therefore it cannot exist, not even as a recessive gene.
Quote from: ersi on 2016-07-05, 10:46:09therefore it cannot exist, not even as a recessive gene.Wrong again.
Dominance in genetics is a relationship between alleles of one gene, in which the effect on phenotype of one allele masks the contribution of a second allele at the same locus. The first allele is dominant and the second allele is recessive. For genes on an autosome (any chromosome other than a sex chromosome), the alleles and their associated traits are autosomal dominant or autosomal recessive.
Your icky mind is grossly slipping into your typos, I'm afreud
Group minds, like in beehives and anthills the way I and Frenzie have discussed.
he gay gene, if it were to exist, cannot provide such advantage, therefore it cannot exist, not even as a recessive gene.
One is either a male or a female, not "with a recessive male gene, dominantly female" or whatever.
Maybe I should just answer like Barulheira. "No." "Wrong." "Wrong again. Quote from: ersi on 2016-07-05, 15:28:17One is either a male or a female, not "with a recessive male gene, dominantly female" or whatever.Okay, one more semi-real answer. How do you explain intersexed babies than, ie with XXY chromosomes?
Even biological sex is not necessarily binary.
Page created in 0.066 seconds with 40 queries.