Natural homophobes? Evolutionary psychology and antigay attitudes

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ ^ | March 9, 2011 | By Jesse Bering

[Erasmus]

Allow me to amend that last sentence to

"And in certain other cases where it is fear, this fear is not irrational, and thus once again not a 'phobia.'"

There are certainly cases where the term 'homophobia' is technically correct.

[Erasmus]

Part of the theory of evolution is the concept of ‘group’ of ‘collective’ fitness.’

The evolutionary researcher looks at a given behavior and tries to fit it into some kind of advantage. Usually he attempts to show an advantage to the individual in the sense of increasing that individual’s progeny.

However, when he can’t find an advantage to the individual, he looks for an advantage to the group, or even the entire species.

‘Altruism,’ whatever one takes that to mean, is the number one type of behavior that evolutionary researchers seek to explain with their group fitness theories.

[Flag_This]

"However, when he can’t find an advantage to the individual, he looks for an advantage to the group, or even the entire species."

Thank you for that explanation, but I have to ask: if those assumptions really do drive researchers, doesn't that suggest that the researchers have an underlying belief that there must always be some benefit somewhere in a given trait?

I think a cursory glance at the fossil record shows that there were all kinds of dead ends and that would belie the researchers' apparent assumptions. If I understand you correctly, it sounds like researchers try, in some cases, to make a square peg fit into a round hole - which doesn't sound very scientific.

[RegulatorCountry]

Well, he's actually fairly honest, a rare thing in any “political science” where symbolism and approved foregone conclusions are the rule.

History shows us that sexuality is to greater or lesser extent malleable. A descent into decadence when a given civilization has peaked invariably leads to widespread incidence of homosexual behavior as well as increased acceptance of that abberrancy. Maybe honest evolutionary biologists, that rarest of breeds, would view this as a safety valve of sorts, preventing the replication of a corrupt, lazy, diseased evolutionary dead end of a society, for the protection of the species as a whole.

The Bible puts it differently, being given over to a reprobate mind because they have no inclination to good. The inclination to unrepentant sin becomes so great that God just allows them to descend further into the ultimate decadence, with men burning with lust for one another and even the women giving up the natural use for one another. The widespread embrace of homosexual behavior follows the decline and accelerates it.

Societal taboos against homosexual behavior are a survival mechanism, no matter how you approach the matter, scientifically or religiously. And again, being honest, all the leftist advocates of accepting homosexual behavior are not working for the survival of our society, they're committed to destroying it, as demonstrated in various communist tracts and manifestoes. They're in opposition to God and are using homosexuality as just one more way to break it all down, to remold it into their supposed egalitarian utopia. Like all revolutionaries who have outlived their usefulness, there are going to be some very surprised people when they're lined up and shot, or gassed, or starved.

Willful blindness.

[Chainmail]

"And the knowledge that a homosexual is in private contact with one of your children of the same sex is highly disturbing. "

More than disturbing: unacceptable. If a homosexual tries to approach my children, he or she (or it) will be repulsed. If one of them tries to seduce or molest one of my children, sex modification surgery will be performed for free and immediately.

[Maelstorm]

That was my surprise. I try never to get into the non-scientific ‘evolutionary story telling’ where many evolutionary scientists try to assign value judgements to evolution. Based on my study I believe there are several paths to homosexuality. One path is seemingly a transmission of ‘evil’. Where a child (especially male) ones are targeted by siblings,parents, relatives, or those who have access to them for molestation and usually it is the younger smaller more accomodating children that are targetted. Homosexual men especially report an abnormaly high incidence of having sufferred child abuse which there are many studies that show this affects the sexual imprinting of the child and how they associate arrousal pain and self image. I could go into more detail but time doesn’t permit. I do believe there are other avenues to homosexuality and that is the retrobate mind. One example I know of personally is a Professor who always had a endless appetite for young co-ed women. He cheated on his wife for years and finally ended up with a young man in a homosexual relationship. That said considering the male homosexuals I’ve known personally have all sufferred molestation at a young age. One in particular where I know personal details had normal interest in girls before his uncle molested him the guy also tried to burn the town down incidently. This case makes me feel particularly badly. I’m personally just tired of the insistence of the lgbt activists on maintaining what is absolute lie where this is concerned. I understand why they cling to it and I do believe there are greater forces at work. The deceiver keeps busy and not just in this area. The full scope of deception in our current culture is jaw dropping.

[central_va]

You misunderstand. This is my theory: The bad genes are just a bad random combination causing mental problems that mother nature has deemed horrific. The homosexuality is just the vehicle, not the causation.

[Erasmus]

Thank you for that explanation, but I have to ask: if those assumptions really do drive researchers, doesn't that suggest that the researchers have an underlying belief that there must always be some benefit somewhere in a given trait?

Oh, no. It shouts it out loud. ≤}B^)

I think a cursory glance at the fossil record shows that there were all kinds of dead ends and that would belie the researchers' apparent assumptions.

I believe that there is universal agreement that there are many dead ends in the fossil record. I do not believe that this in itself belies the evolutionary workers' assumption. Just because a species was adapted to a particular environment doesn't mean that it will survive forever, because the environment changes.

(Here I mean 'environment' in the general sense meaning the entirety of the bisophere, which includes for example the rise of competing species.)

[Lady Lucky]

The bad genes are just a bad random combination causing mental problems that mother nature has deemed horrific. The homosexuality is just the vehicle, not the causation.

I hope to hear more about your theory because your second post is less clear than your first!

You said homosexuality is mother nature's way, iow a natural thing with some ostensibly beneficial purpose, did you not?

Now you say homosexuality is some sort of vehicle, but of what? Bad genes? Elimination of bad genes? What?

My position is that it is unnatural and a consequence of circumstances. Animals are adaptable to some extent, naturally; and adaptation entails the possibility of poor adaptation. A classic example would be the "imprinted" gosling that takes a human for its mother and thereafter finds its own kind unattractive.

[hosepipe]

Being gay is a sexual dysfunction like being frigid..
except this dysfunction comes from wrong information..
accepting wrong information..

Being gay is WRONG... its not just queer ... its WRONG..

[OldEarlGray]

Healthy humans know not to eat rotten food simply because their instincts and senses tell them it will make them sick.

That’s not a phobia, it’s common, healthy, sense — just like the rejection of homosexual behavior.