Gay Beetles show Adaptive Purpose of Homosexuality

[Aaron the Tall]

You can read the snippet article here: Gay burying beetles show adaptive purpose of homosexuality

Concerning the scientific article here: Acceptance threshold theory can explain occurrence of homosexual behaviour

In summary, beetles were subjected to various social situations to see the effects on mating behavior. When males were placed in settings with very few female suitors, males attempted to copulate with other males. When males were placed in situations with numerous female suitors, they did not engage in same-sex attempts at all.

The conclusion is that the same-sex behavior was a mating strategy. With a lack of female mates, the males were less choosy as they attempted to mate with any potential suitor in hopes that one might be a female.

This is all well and good, but it of course becomes a spring board for propagating the "adaptive purpose of homosexuality" in general - and it becomes a "proof" that homosexuality is "natural."

Although the researchers didn't make this claim in the scientific paper, they were quoted in the popular article as saying

"It still shows it's natural and happens in nature all the time and even can be a strategy to circumvent problems."

The problem is that the term "homosexuality", and the phrase used in the article "same-sex sexual behavior" are loaded with innuendo that don't apply to the study. The beetles were not "homosexual" as we would apply the term to humans. This is obvious by the fact that the purpose in attempting to mate with other males was to find a female! That is quite the opposite of human homosexuality.

Despite this fact, the popular article still calls the beetle's "gay" - another term loaded with inapplicable innuendo. Even though the article admits that the application of these findings to humans is limited because humans can visually recognize the opposite sex, the headline is what will stand out: Being Gay has an Adaptive Purpose.

 

[GFR7]

It would seem to me that it reveals homosexuality to be unnatural: Only if there are shortages does it occur.

And we know many gays such as Andrew Sullivan had no shortage of willing women, and went gay anyway.

But yes, it will become more spin for the rainbow crowd. :think:

 

[Jonahdog]

It would seem to me that it reveals homosexuality to be unnatural: Only if there are shortages does it occur.

And we know many gays such as Andrew Sullivan had no shortage of willing women, and went gay anyway.

But yes, it will become more spin for the rainbow crowd. :think:

Still frightened of all those "gays".

 

[aikido7]

Nature is filled with natural examples of same-sex pairings and relationships. This is something many anti-gay folks are not aware of.

 

[GFR7]

Still frightened of all those "gays".

Frightened by false fire? No.

 

[The Barbarian]

Gay beetles?

 

[Sherman]

This is called a non sequitur. Humans are not beetles. Does not follow.

 

[aikido7]

This is called a non sequitur. Humans are not beetles. Does not follow.

Living things in Creation are either plants or animals. In that sense, a comparison between humans and beetles is perfectly valid.

The male seahorse is the one who gets pregnant.

Of course that comparison can be ignored or argued against.

 

[Dan Emanuel]

"...the male sometimes does not know if it is mating with a male or a female."


"...depends upon how many of the opposite sex are around. If there are not many, males are more likely to engage in same-sex sexual behaviour (SSB)."

So bugs have their excuse, whats humanities' excuse.


Daniel

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Nature is filled with natural examples of same-sex pairings and relationships. This is something many anti-gay folks are not aware of.

Nothing wrong with a same-sex friendship.

You won't find examples of exclusive homosexual behavior between animals in nature.

Any "homosexual" acts between animals do not portray a "homosexual" bent. The animals that display some sort of "homosexual" behavior are otherwise "heterosexuals".

It seems to me that the examples in nature are usually viewed through the lens of human homosexuality, and are infused with meaning that probably isn't there.

 

[This Charming Manc]

I thought this is another one of those naz threads..

 

[The Barbarian]

"...depends upon how many of the opposite sex are around. If there are not many, males are more likely to engage in same-sex sexual behaviour (SSB)."

Kind of like beetle prisons.

 

[aikido7]

Any "homosexual" acts between animals do not portray a "homosexual" bent. The animals that display some sort of "homosexual" behavior are otherwise "heterosexuals" The studies and interviews done with animals are difficult to It seems to me that the examples in nature are usually viewed through the lens of human homosexuality, and are infused with meaning that probably isn't there.

The recorded studies with animals are sometimes hard to decipher. And the interviews and polls taken of insects are printed on paper that is often too small to read properly.

 

[aikido7]

Years ago, several fundamentalist and evangelical folks in my experience actually believed that the Beatles (not the beetles) were definitely girls.

"Not all conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservative."
--Economist John Stuart Mill

 

[Nick M]

You can read the snippet article here:

So you are like a beetle? Is that your claim? You fag.

 

[Word based mystic]

John Lenon, George and Ringo would disagree.

that i know of they did not have those tendencies.

 

[Word based mystic]

consider that if a species started towards the tendencies of being homosexual they would eliminate themselves as a species.

The individual homosexual within society produces no life.

produces confusion in the production of life and role modeling of mother/father examples for children.

Has to steal from a life producing couple any children that they desire to nurture.

does not comprehend true agape/God inspired love.

Only promotes carnal, emotional, chemical sponsored responses to be fulfilled by purely eros and philia expressions.

true agape/God/Spirit sponsored love does not promote unnatural and perverted expressions of the purpose and design for mans nature.

The expression of such unnatural eros and philia love only results in

gender confusion
lack of life/death in the sense of continuation of that individuals future generations.
societies lowering of future population.
the abuse of using surrogates as life producers. Thievery and exploiters.

also may very well bring sodom and gommorah wrath.

 

[aikido7]

consider that if a species started towards the tendencies of being homosexual they would eliminate themselves as a species.

The individual homosexual within society produces no life.

produces confusion in the production of life and role modeling of mother/father examples for children.

Has to steal from a life producing couple any children that they desire to nurture.

does not comprehend true agape/God inspired love.

Only promotes carnal, emotional, chemical sponsored responses to be fulfilled by purely eros and philia expressions.

true agape/God/Spirit sponsored love does not promote unnatural and perverted expressions of the purpose and design for mans nature.

The expression of such unnatural eros and philia love only results in

gender confusion
lack of life/death in the sense of continuation of that individuals future generations.
societies lowering of future population.
the abuse of using surrogates as life producers. Thievery and exploiters.

also may very well bring sodom and gommorah wrath.

We moderns make a profound mistake when we read ancient texts through contemporary categories. We tend to impose our modern cultural views onto texts that do not support our views.

Man-on-man intercourse was either about temple rites or phallic aggression. Anal sex was common between warriors on the battle field, those that owned slaves and was a way of telling others that they were inferior.

There definitely are loving relationships in today's world, but we have not found anything biblical or writings outside the Bible that mention this.

Perhaps the relationship between David and Jonathan was a loving same-sex relationship. The translation certainly points to that, but we cannot always be entirely sure.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

So you are like a beetle? Is that your claim? You fag.

????

 

[aikido7]

So you are like a beetle? Is that your claim? You fag.

So you resort to immature name-calling? Is that your personality?

Affixing denigrating and mocking labels to others does not help communication. IF, of course, that is your intention all along.

But as for a way to influence and dialogue with others it is a shameful and ineffective way to do so.