Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is gayness a disease?

  1. Oct 1, 2004 #1
    I think it is. Gay people trend to do what organism suppose not do. organism should **** the opposite sex.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 1, 2004 #2
    Homosexuality is a freedom. I think it's kind of cool our human race can decide which ... sex to ****. I don't think it's a disease, as in like a virus. Just because I hang around homosexuals doesn't mean I myself am going to be one. It's free will, to choose who you want your lover to be, not depending on their gender. It is only natural for species who are sexual to mate with the opposite sex, but humans can choose this natural way or a different way. To put it straight without fussing around, I'm married to a dog named scooby (he's a shihtzu) and we're very happy together.

    .. Last part was a joke.
     
  4. Oct 1, 2004 #3
    I have several gay friends. From what i can glean from their comments, it is a genetic predisposition. to me this means they wanted to be gay for this lifetime.

    FWIW, I belive in reincarnation and freewill. We decide prior to birth the nature of the life we wish to experience. I became much more tolerant when I realized that I might be gay in another life. Somewhere, someone said that we are all one within the universe. What if the distain you show toward a gay in this life is causing you problems in your gay life???

    Why not work together to help each other deal with the problems of being gay. Afterall, from what i've seen of animal behavior, it is natural to seek any port in a storm. Ever see the alfa male exile another male for being amorous??

    love&peace,
    olde drunk
     
  5. Oct 1, 2004 #4

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Our closest relatives, a species of chimpanzees, has sex all the time:
    Males+females, males+males, females+females, mothers+sons, etc.
    They use sex as a language of emotion; reproduction is merely the by-product of some of those dialogues.
    Kinda like humans, really..
     
  6. Oct 1, 2004 #5

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    1) The word is spelled 'disease.'

    2) A disease is a condition which causes the bearer of the disease discomfort or physical harm. Homosexuality causes neither of these.

    - Warren
     
  7. Oct 1, 2004 #6

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Sure it does. It causes the same physical harm as impotency or a low sperm count. And I don't just mean having sex, I'm talking about the result of sex.
    I agree that that is most likely, but thats still problematic. Combined with what I said above, if homosexuality were simply a genetic trait, it should be quickly filtered out by evolution: homosexuals tend not to have heterosexual sex and as a result tend not to have offspring, so they don't pass on that trait.

    So wouldn't that make homosexuality a common genetic defect...?
     
  8. Oct 1, 2004 #7

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Excuse me? I think you'd have to explain this a bit. If you mean "it prevents a person from having a biological child," you're wrong.
    Or, like the appendix or blue eyes, it will stay around forever, because it does not actually provide any negative selection pressure.

    Your argument is based on the idea that some subset of the population has a "gay gene" and doesn't reproduce, while all the rest of us don't have the "gay gene" and do reproduce. This is fallacious logic. Obviously, if heterosexual women can beget homosexual childen, the "gay gene" resides in the heterosexual population, too, like the genes for other genetic traits like blue eyes.

    If, in fact, homosexuality has a genetic cause, it means that all people, in general, carry one or more of the alleles involved.

    If it turns out that there is no gay gene and homosexuality is instead a result of fetal hormonal environment, it means that any child, regardless of genotype, could potentially become homosexual. It's effectively the heterosexual mother's "fault," since she provided the fetal hormonal environment. Rarely are all of a women's children homosexual, however. Even if a woman is capable of causing the fetal hormonal environment that leads to homosexual children, she is also capable of having heterosexual offspring, and thus it provides her no evolutionary disadvantage. If normal, healthy heterosexual women can spontaneously have homosexual offspring, it essentially means that homosexuals have been around forever, and will continue to be around forever.

    This is consistent with thousands of years of demographics -- homosexuality has been around since antiquity, and likely will always comprise a segment of the population.

    - Warren
     
  9. Oct 2, 2004 #8
    Homosexuality is strictly caused by the environment they have been raised in, and the people with the most influence on them. It is not a gene. It has been studied for years, and not one scientist found valid proof for this. Homosexuality, whether it is women or men, is either the foolish experimentation of the sex drive, or emotional harm leading to sexual confusion.
     
  10. Oct 2, 2004 #9
    On the contrare, I know nothing of this subject, if it is or if it isn't. But when it comes to anything that relates to health, the human body, and genetic defects, I ask my mother, a nurse for countless years. She, along with the majority of her staff, believes that it is a genetic defect.

    Paden Roder
     
  11. Oct 2, 2004 #10
    Possibly a poor choice of words. While inutero(sp) when the mothers harmones are released, they go slightly awry. Testosterone may be released to determine the sex of the child, but the other relesased harmones also overehelm the gender selection with other tentencies.

    There have been men born with female genitalia and vice versa.

    Bottom line for me, it is no cause for discrimination. It would be like discriminating against red heads just because they have red hair.

    love&peace,
    olde drunk
     
  12. Oct 2, 2004 #11

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Yes indeed olde-drunk, gay is a human condition, not different in kind from the human conditions we all find ourselves in, and no more than ours can, theirs shouldn't depend on whether it's genetic or environmental.
     
  13. Oct 2, 2004 #12
    Countless gay men and women have children. Just because one is gay does not mean you cannot reproduce or ever have sex with the opposite sex. The record number of children born to the same father is over 450. I suppose the rest of us, not just gays, are sick then for not wanting anywhere near as many children.

    Nature loves variety, the more the better. Throughout the history of life on earth, the more variety a species can support the better chance it has to survive in the long term as environmental changes occur.
     
  14. Oct 2, 2004 #13
    The only thing I can think of that this does happen is when people physically hurt homosexuals. I don't think this happens often, but it does. But I doubt that's what you meant, Warren.


    I believe you mean bonobos, and you're right. They use sex as a social tool instead of just a means for reproduction. If a female wants to become a part of a particular group, all she has to do is initiate sex to the other females or males.
     
  15. Oct 2, 2004 #14

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Thank you for providing the name!
    I am quite disgusted by those who try to portray human sexuality as primarily focused on reproduction.
    It is simply false; anyone who has been in a love affair knows quite well the range of emotions/situations in which it felt "right" to have sex.
    Sex goes far beyond reproduction, and those who prefer to have consensual&non-reproductive sex (as gays prefer) should not be discriminated against.
    (Just for the record, of the several hundred intercourses a man&wife have during their lives, nets only 1.7 offsprings in average..
    Perhaps they have sex for other reasons?)
     
  16. Oct 2, 2004 #15
    It's kind of ironic how I got that question wrong on an anthropology test, but oh, well. I learned it.

    Anyway, I agree with you. It makes sense, really. I mean, what's the main reason people want to have sex? For the sheer pleasure of it. It's fun, as some would say.
     
  17. Oct 2, 2004 #16

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    For fun, comfort, tenderness, relaxation ..whatever.
    Very rarely do persons go to bed in order to make a baby.
    (This rather strange motive is probably the one getting a gay man and lesbian into the same bed occasionally..:wink:)
     
  18. Oct 2, 2004 #17
    Exactly. They want to test the water. To see what it's about and if they like it. And if they do, they'll keep doing it.
     
  19. Oct 2, 2004 #18
    several hundred intercourses????

    that would drive me to drink!!!

    love&peace,
    olde drunk
     
  20. Oct 2, 2004 #19

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    52*20=1040..
     
  21. Oct 2, 2004 #20
    Yes, you're right on the sexual sense in terms of healthy human proliferation.

    But in terms of the full human sense, they are more like every other human significantly. Why? Sex is not what we do all day long. If you count all the human activities of every human accross the planet over a day and divide that by the number of humans you'll find the ratio with someone who is gay is not very far off, because sex accounts for a small part of everybodies minutes of the day, so they are more like us than not like us most of the time, based on the average count of their human behavior.

    Sex is a private matter to most humans most of the time, and their sex really is none of our business. It's private minutes, not public minutes for the most part.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Is gayness a disease?
  1. Social disease (Replies: 6)

  2. Obesity a disease? (Replies: 6)

  3. Gay Penguins (Replies: 33)

  4. Lyme Disease (Replies: 18)

  5. Incurable diseases (Replies: 9)

Loading...