If being gay was genetic, how has it not been wiped out?

Scroll to see replies

I'm no biologist either. My knowledge in biology extends to GCSE level from years ago now. :lol:

So you mean being sexually attracted to one sex, but romantically interested in the other? I'm not really sure how that would work from the romantic interest perspective. Can you be romantically interested without being sexually attracted?

I'm just going to go ahead and admit that I'm speaking as an asexual, but I do experience, well, romantic feelings. Sometimes. But I'm definitely an ace, that much I'm sure of.

Perhaps it's just because this orientation is so uncommon, maybe there are different determinants/triggers?

Reply 21

Idomaths

Original post by Bealzibub

Surely, if being gay was genetic, it would get wiped out because they can't reproduce.

So it a choice? Or is there more to it?

Somebody has forgotten the GCSE Biology keyword: recessive

Reply 22

Good bloke

Original post by Bealzibub

Surely, if being gay was genetic, it would get wiped out because they can't reproduce.

So it a choice? Or is there more to it?

There is a significant difference in the meanings of congenital and genetic. Only in the latter case is the trait necessarily inherited. So homosexuality could be congenital but not genetic.

Reply 23

Alaric III

The idea that the gene for homosexuality is on a recessive allele is ridiculous, there would still be a strong correlation in families with homosexuality; given that there is no such correlation and the even correlation does not imply causation, it's an unsubstantiated claim that has no grounding in genetics. There isn't going to be just one protein that codes for your whole sexuality, and if it were a major change in the genome many other cells and proteins would be effected potentially having serious affects on the health of the individual. The only difference between a straight and homosexual person is the sexuality, and because that must be controlled by a small section of the brain only (I propose the olfactory bulb and associated areas), it can't be a systemic, hereditary change.

(It's a ramble post so sorry to all fellow biologists, I'm not thinking how best to phrase the science, just how to simplify it in as few words as possible)

Reply 24

Wade-

Original post by Bealzibub

Surely, if being gay was genetic, it would get wiped out because they can't reproduce.

So it a choice? Or is there more to it?

You're so wrong in so many ways and show such a lack of understanding of genetics.

Infertility can be genetic, that also hasn't been wiped out. People can carry a gene but not pass it on, which is likely to be what happens with homosexuality (I'm no expert on genetics but that's year 10 science). Finally homosexual people can have children, many have lived as though they were heterosexual and had children and with modern science homosexual couples can reproduce

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 25

MatthewParis

The gay uncle theory shows quite handily how it could have a genetic component.

The idea that homosexuality is a choice is pretty moronic given people continue to have gay sex even when it could result in the death penalty.

If they could simply choose not to, why on earth would they in such a situation?