Jump to content
Gian

homophobia and evolutionary psychology

Recommended Posts

Is homophobia a consequence of natural selection? viz heterosexual men are evolutionarily required to be attracted to the opposite sex because if they weren't they wouldnt reproduce and so the species wouldn't survive.

 

At the same time the heterosexual male animal needs biologically to be reasonably repelled by homosexual sex, because if he weren't he wouldn't spend so much time reproducing and the species wouldn't survive so well; an example of Evolutionary psychology( as indicated by darwin and developed by William James et al..)

 

I only ask because a lot of psycho-babblers, pundits and gay-rights people imply that homophobia is culturally constructed. But this doesn't explain why some heterosexual men are reasonably comfortable with the idea of gay rights and gay men, but are repelled by the sight of gay sex.

 

Of course even if this is true, we don't have to act on our biological instincts. Any ideas anyone? (Im not a scientist)

 

Gian smile.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homosexuality occurs in many other animals and they show no signs of homophobia...

Edited by Moontanman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is homophobia a consequence of natural selection? viz heterosexual men are evolutionarily required to be attracted to the opposite sex because if they weren't they wouldnt reproduce and so the species wouldn't survive.

 

Don't forget the consequences of overpopulation. Humans reproduce less and spend more time nurturing their offspring.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/71586-could-excess-prolificityoffspring-be-maladaptive-nurturance-distribution/

 

At the same time the heterosexual male animal needs biologically to be reasonably repelled by homosexual sex, because if he weren't he wouldn't spend so much time reproducing and the species wouldn't survive so well; an example of Evolutionary psychology( as indicated by darwin and developed by William James et al..)

 

Why must he be repelled by it? Can't he just lack any sort of interest in it? I think this argument assumes that a male would like homosexual relations if he were to try them.

 

 

I only ask because a lot of psycho-babblers, pundits and gay-rights people imply that homophobia is culturally constructed. But this doesn't explain why some heterosexual men are reasonably comfortable with the idea of gay rights and gay men, but are repelled by the sight of gay sex.

 

Now the argument is changing. I can imagine how a man would be more likely to reproduce if he were disinclined toward homosexual interactions, for he might actually like it if he tried it, and his decision to continue the behavior might lower his fitness. However, I can't imagine a biological explanation for oppressing the gays. First, his own genes aren't at stake. Second, the presence of nonreproductive individuals doesn't threaten society. It might even prevent overpopulation.

Edited by Mondays Assignment: Die

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homophobia is something learned and/or taught. It is not something we are born with. This speaks against your core suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget the consequences of overpopulation. Humans reproduce less and spend more time nurturing their offspring.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/71586-could-excess-prolificityoffspring-be-maladaptive-nurturance-distribution/

 

 

Why must he be repelled by it? Can't he just lack any sort of interest in it? I think this argument assumes that a male would like homosexual relations if he were to try them.

 

 

 

Now the argument is changing. I can imagine how a man would be more likely to reproduce if he were disinclined toward homosexual interactions, for he might actually like it if he tried it, and his decision to continue the behavior might lower his fitness. However, I can't imagine a biological explanation for oppressing the gays. First, his own genes aren't at stake. Second, the presence of nonreproductive individuals doesn't threaten society. It might even prevent overpopulation.

Well I only ask because some men DO seem to be repelled by the actual idea of say anal sex, even if they are well disposed towards gays -they may know some personally. I just thought natural selection might favour those who are not only heterosexual, but also distinctly turned off by gay sex. Probably a difficult thing to prove either way.

This does not of course excuse any sort of active homophobia.

 

Homophobia is something learned and/or taught. It is not something we are born with. This speaks against your core suggestion.

evidence??

 

Homosexuality occurs in many other animals and they show no signs of homophobia...

But the difference is that we are more 'aware' than the rest of the animal kingdom, so natural selection may favour those who are not only heterosexual but have a genetic aversion to gay sex.

Doesn't mean that homophobia is acceptable of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homophobia is something learned and/or taught. It is not something we are born with. This speaks against your core suggestion.

 

OK...I hate the fact that I am even going to say what I am about to say...but since there is a scientific basis to it...I am going to say it. When I first read your above post I misread it because my damn CAT jumped on my lap top and distracted me. I thought I had seen the word...Homosexuality instead of your first word in the above quoted statement which is...Homophobia.

 

I quoted you and actually started typing...this...WOW! And exactly what science are you basing this upon?

 

I then noticed the first word was Homophobia and I quickly deleted my reply...until now as I have just put it back out there.

 

I live in Massachusetts where Gay Marriage is Legal and there have not been any issues as far as what some said would be...THE END OF THE WORLD!...if our state went ahead and legalized it. Obviously the world is still turning and Gay Marriage is not even anything a straight person as myself even thinks about on any day to day basis.

 

Now here is the thing...and I would ask those who are Gay or have family members who are Gay to bear with me a bit as I have no issues with a person who is Gay.

 

I am a Male Internationally touring and recording Musician...and I will be going back on tour in a few weeks...that has done and just about seen it all. I absolutely LOVE everything about WOMEN and in fact...if I was born a woman I would probably be a Lesbian. Despite this fact as well as the fact that I am straight...because of the fact being Good Looking and in great shape is kind of a prerequisite for performing in a band of the level that I have done shows with Ozzie, Black Sabbath, Heart, Aerosmith, Robin Trower, Tool, Staind, Audio Slave....and many many more.

 

We were VERY big in the late 80's and early 90's and although I am wealthy and no longer do super long tours...I am a bit older know and the money is just no longer a driving force to have me out on the road for 8 months to 2 years! LOL!

 

Anyways...because of who I am and what I do...I have to keep myself in top physical condition. I am 6 ft ! inch...a muscular 225 lbs...Dirty Blonde hair with Blue Green eyes and I am considered Very Good Looking. I am not boasting as such things for us in the music industry are things that are talked about by us and to us from everyone from the Marketing Group of our Label all the way to MY MOM...telling me..."You should wear those Black Leather Pants with the Silver Studs going all the way up the outside of your leg...those pants make you butt look good. LOL! NO $#@^!

 

So since I am used to being talked to and labeled as such a Marketing Tool...one would think that I would not have an issue with a couple of GAY MEN attempting to slap my ass as they make cat calls as I was coming off stage at the end of the show after an encore. These two Gay Men had won Back Stage Passes from a Local Radio Station and they were allowed with others to watch the show from Stage Right.

 

Now I also on occasion work with members of the U.S. Military as my Dad is Military and my Mom is..."CIVILIAN" as well as I am..."CIVILIAN" in the manner the quotes denote. I have done this other...JOB...from time to time over the course of several decades and I was recruited right out of High School. The fact that I was also an International Touring and SIGNED Musician by my early 20's sweetened up the pot for the people I occasionally do work for. After all...what better way to get in and out of a Country without raising suspicion than playing in a Rocking Band?

 

So these two Gay Men started to try to grab my ass and at first I just laughed it off and I am a VERY patient and tolerant person who is also trained and if need be capable of great violence...although I HATE violence and if I do my Other JOB correctly...there is no violence asI am brought in as a Problem Solver. So needless to say I had been in and experienced much worse situations than a couple of drunk Gay Men trying to grab my ass and calling me sweety and honey and a few other much more R-Rated words. I laughed it off and went about my business....UNTIL...one of the gay men called me a HOMOPHOBE and then in a sing song overly Gay voice....you know...the kind of voice that some Gay Men purposely obtain just to irritate Straight Men for whatever reason.

 

The thing was I had not given these two any reason to do what they were now doing and this still was NO WHERE NEAR any level that a person would consider my breaking point. I used some of my other...JOB skills and walked up to them as they had to stay in a back stage roped off area that was open and our dressing room which was very large had it's door open as usual and they could see me and I could hear and see them.

 

I walked up to the rope separating us and said..."Is there something about me that threatens you or have I done something to you that I don't seem to know about...because this is a Party and I am sure all the people here and that includes you two Gentlemen....would be much happier having some of the great food here and a few drinks than arguing over something stupid...RIGHT?.....99.999% of the time...THIS WORKS....along with the fact I am NOT the person anyone would want to throw down with...RIGHT?....WRONG!

 

Next thing I know the....more effeminate of the two men is screaming out loud....and LISPING QUITE POSSIBLY TO A GREATER EXTENT THAN I THOUGHT POSSIBLE FOR HUMAN SPEECH...."You just want to get us thrown out because we are GAY and you pretend to be Homophobic but what you REALLY ARE IS A CLOSET QUEER!....then he turned around bent over and grabbed both cheeks and said to me..."YOU AIN'T NEVER GETTIN' ANY OF THIS BABY!"....and he did this said this and rose doing that ghetto thing by jerking his neck sideways without tilting his head and making a circle with his arm and hand presented in a traffic cop STOP hand signal....and then snapped his fingers.

 

Now here I am...a non-homophobic straight man who supports Gay Marriage as well as I am secure in my sexuality thus there is no amount of words anyone could use upon me that would make me react or be ashamed or embarrassed in some thought that someone MIGHT THINK I AM GAY...because neither do I care whether a person thinks that about me as well as given who I am as well as how I act and handle myself....if anyone here knew me....just to present the idea that I might be gay would be laughable given my extreme interest in ALL THAT IS FEMALE...LOL!

 

So at that point I did what I should have done from the start....tell my security guy's to escort them out. Because my security guy's know what I sometimes do as well as what I am capable of...I am, allowed a great deal more leeway compared to any other of the guy's in the band as my security guy's know....I like to handle things myself and I feel you create more problems by throwing someone out as they will perceive they were wrong or slighted than if I was to take a couple minutes and do what I did by talking to these IDIOTS....and as I said...it usually works...99.999% of the time.

 

Now here is what I want to get off my chest. As progressive as I believe myself to be....as well as the fact I support Gay Rights and Gay Marriage...for some deeply seated TRIGGER in my GENETIC MEMORY....I am admitting that when that Gay Man did his Bend Over and Ain't Gettin' Any speech with the Limp Hand Motions and the Neck Jerk and ESPECIALLY THE EFFEMINATE SING SONG VOICE....for a moment...and folks....I HAD NO CONTROL OVER MY GENETIC MEMORY BASED REACTION...of which that reaction was limited to just a THOUGHT and not any PHYSICAL REACTION...as I am just too disciplined to react in a physical manner just because I might get angry or have adrenaline sent pumping through my veins....

 

......in that MOMENT....I visualized snapping his neck like a twig and then turning into a Spin Kick that would break the other guy's sternum....and then the moment was gone and I was back to being me.

 

Now THERE IT IS! The question remains...was I having such a moment because these two were acting like ass#@&%$? Or was I having this moment as a Genetic Memory response to the Physical Actions and Audio Stimulus that pushed me over the top?

 

I will hold back my answer for now and PLEASE....do not judge me too harshly. I am not that GUY...but I can be...I just choose not to be.

 

Split Infinity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so much reproductive overcapacity in male human sexuality that selection pressure against the mere diversion of any of it would be practically nonexistent by assumption.

 

 

And we have evidence for that absence, as well: Human females hide their fertility, for example - making most male heterosexual behavior a waste of time from a strict fertilization perspective.

 

There's obviously plenty to spare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so much reproductive overcapacity in male human sexuality that selection pressure against the mere diversion of any of it would be practically nonexistent by assumption.

 

 

And we have evidence for that absence, as well: Human females hide their fertility, for example - making most male heterosexual behavior a waste of time from a strict fertilization perspective.

 

There's obviously plenty to spare.

 

You know....personally I could care less nor would I assume to judge anyone whether they be Biologically and Genetically assigned to be Homosexual, Bisexual or Heterosexual...I know who and what I am and as long as no one is trying to tell ME what I can or cannot do...I would never assume to to tell anyone else what they can or cannot do.

 

Many who are a part of the Religious Self-Anointed DETERMINATORS...who have decided either by their own convictions or convinced to be so by being the tools of others and those others convictions...that what a person's actions are must come into compliance under this groups rules.

 

Now one of this groups arguments is that Homosexuality is a Learned or coerced activity of which the practicing Homosexual has been DUPED or LEAD ASTRAY and is not responsible for their actions. And in these groups minds if such people could be REEDUCATED and shown the proper and righteous path....they would no longer be Homosexuals or practice the activities specific to.

 

This argument presented by such a group can be easily broken down and shown to be without any scientific merit using some basic LOGIC.

 

Now under the presented argument and presented solution of this group...a person of a specific sexual orientation can be reeducated and informed as to their proper or correct sexual orientation...and in their argument...only those who have a sexuality specific to same sex attraction or Bi-Sexual Attraction are considered candidates for Sexual Reeducation and Proper Direction or Orientation of their sexuality that will be determined by this group.

 

The thing is by LOGIC...if Homosexuality is a learned activity or is the result of coercion...then it could be said that sexual orientation is a learned or coerced state of reality and since we can point out from a Genetic Standpoint as well as a Human Developmental standpoint that shows us in the later that in the womb all human life starts off as FEMALE in it's gender and due to the Sex Chromosomes we carry and the Sex Hormones that are secreted in development...this determines what sex a child will be and this is not constrained to just Male and Female but on occasion conditions and Genetics will create a Human with both Male and Female organs as well as either in addition to these organs or as individual aspects of a human born with either male or female sexual organs but with conflicting hormonal issues or brain development specific to the opposite sex of the human in developments organs...ie...a penis with a female mental and or hormonal makeup or the opposite for a female sexual organs.

 

Anyways since we have great understanding of exactly what is occurring and has occurred for a person to be born a Man or Woman or born as a man or woman with biological and mental and hormonal traits of say a woman in a mans body or a man in a woman's body...as well as every possible combination of humans born with both sexual organs and humans born with other duel biological, psychological, hormonal, mental...etc....

 

https://www.boundless.com/psychology/gender-development-and-sexuality/development-gender/genetic-influence-on-gender/

 

Thus saying a person who is born with a Genetic or even Genetically determined psychological propensity toward a mental state mirroring the opposite sex of that person physical sexuality....CAN BE REEDUCATED AND RE-ORIENTATED is like telling me...a 6 foot 1 inch 225lbs Heterosexual ALPHA MALE that as a teen from about the age of 11 or 12 would get sexually aroused by just looking at ANYTHING that resembled a WOMAN OR GIRL....the curves of a tree trunk....looking at a sliced open apple...just looking at two side by side small mountains of equal height and width would cause my body to start to sweat pondering the mysteries of a Woman's Breasts....and since Gay's and Bi-Sexual's that are Biologically and Genetically Predisposed...AND I AGREE THAT NOT ALL CLAIMING TO BE GAY AND BI ARE PREDISPOSED PHYSICALLY BUT JUST TO BE MENTALLY PREDISPOSED IS STILL PREDISPOSED....so if such Gay and Bisexual people are just as sexually aroused to the same sex or either sex in the manner I was and still am to WOMEN....well then...THERE IS NO REEDUCATION CAMP ON THIS PLANET OR PLAN OF ACTION THAT WILL CHANGE EITHER MY SEXUAL ORIENTATION OR THEIRS!

 

Split Infinity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

evidence??

 

There are no infants or toddlers who hate other groups or classes of people.

It is taught to them by their parents or surrounding community.

Show me one human child who hates an entire class of people for no apparent reason without being taught to do so and I will concede the point.

 

 

 

 

417676_10150632564328713_815333712_89368

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just thought natural selection might favour those who are not only heterosexual, but also distinctly turned off by gay sex.

 

With natural selection, it always boils down to what selection pressures they're under in that particular environment. A strategy that works in one palce may not work in another.

 

Probably a difficult thing to prove either way.

 

Sexologists have frequently made use of a technique called penile plethysmography. Here's a famous example, an experiment conducted by Adams, Wright, & Lohr, "Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?" I haven't read the full summary, but I've heard of the experiment.

I never considered that those results might be explained by population genetics. Such 'degaying' genes, if they exist, might appear in populations with more gay genes. However, I doubt such an hypothesis would prevail. Homophobia, in the typical sense of the word, seems to be a malleable trait that will change depending on environmental influences.

 

response to erotic imagery - - - - unchangeable, perhaps genetic

response to sexual interaction - - unchangeable, perhaps genetic

opinions about homosexuals - - malleable, probably environmental, probably not genetic

 

Of course, the fact that it's malleable doesn't mean it cannot be influenced by genetics. We are all influenced by the environment AND genetics. However, it may be a higher order phenomenon with many contributing factors, thus it may elude such simple descriptions.

 

This does not of course excuse any sort of active homophobia.

 

Yeah, HIV / AIDS gives them enough to worry about without murderers pleading the homophobia defense.

 


 

There are no infants or toddlers who hate other groups or classes of people.

It is taught to them by their parents or surrounding community.

Show me one human child who hates an entire class of people for no apparent reason without being taught to do so and I will concede the point.

 

There's also the possibility of an interplay between genetics and culture, but we could rule that out by showing that homophobia is new.

Edited by Mondays Assignment: Die

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no infants or toddlers who hate other groups or classes of people.

It is taught to them by their parents or surrounding community.

Show me one human child who hates an entire class of people for no apparent reason without being taught to do so and I will concede the point.

 

 

 

 

417676_10150632564328713_815333712_89368

children are not sexually mature, and hopefully have never seen gay sex (or any sex) or even know what it involves. So this feeling of revulsion may occur whether they like it or not after puberty because of a genetic predisposition, and not solely as a cultural construct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Massachusetts where Gay Marriage is Legal and there have not been any issues as far as what some said would be...THE END OF THE WORLD!...if our state went ahead and legalized it. Obviously the world is still turning and Gay Marriage is not even anything a straight person as myself even thinks about on any day to day basis.

 

Now here is the thing...and I would ask those who are Gay or have family members who are Gay to bear with me a bit as I have no issues with a person who is Gay.

 

[snip]

 

So these two Gay Men started to try to grab my ass and at first I just laughed it off and I am a VERY patient and tolerant person who is also trained and if need be capable of great violence...although I HATE violence and if I do my Other JOB correctly...there is no violence asI am brought in as a Problem Solver. So needless to say I had been in and experienced much worse situations than a couple of drunk Gay Men trying to grab my ass and calling me sweety and honey and a few other much more R-Rated words. I laughed it off and went about my business....UNTIL...one of the gay men called me a HOMOPHOBE and then in a sing song overly Gay voice....you know...the kind of voice that some Gay Men purposely obtain just to irritate Straight Men for whatever reason.

 

You mean the one and only true Gay? The Gay Men that we hold above all other gay men? The Gay Marriage that is superior to all other forms of gay marriage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no infants or toddlers who hate other groups or classes of people.

It is taught to them by their parents or surrounding community.

Show me one human child who hates an entire class of people for no apparent reason without being taught to do so and I will concede the point.

 

 

 

 

 

OK...after reading a few posts here I have to say that even though I support Gay Rights as well as Gay Marriage....I will also ADMIT that as to my above story of my confrontation with two drunken Gay Men....their BEHAVIOR SPECIFIC TO GAY MEN ACTING OVERLY EFFEMINATE...seemed to trigger some Genetically stored violent tendencies and emotions that are not associated to a person being Homophobic....as I am NOT...but rather specific to Alpha Male Dominance specific to Clan Survival and probably created to protect the Clans Breeding Population.

 

Given I was dealing with two IDIOTS...I took this into consideration but after pondering how I would act as well as how I would react or Feel Emotionally if two other people either 2 Hetero Males or a Hetero Male and Female or 2 Gay or Bisexual Females or any combination of Hetero Male or Hetero Female with a Gay or Bisexual Female...and even if these two new combinations of people were to act like IDIOTS in either a manner specific to their gender or sexual orientation or even if the Gay Females or Hetero Males were to act and say the exact same words....I AM CERTAIN TO A POINT OF 100 % CERTAINTY that I might get angry and might even say a few choice words which is not in my very disciplined nature to begin with....but I WOULD NOT HAVE EXPERIENCED SUCH A VIOLENT EMOTIONAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL DESIRE AND ALMOST NEED to perform an act of battery against both Gay Men to the point of visualizing both of them bloodied and on the ground.

 

Now I WOULD NEVER ACTUALLY DO THIS as a response to such violent emotions but given my training as well as my restraint....such an emotional state bringing itself to the surface in such a quick and unexpected way....made me understand why some men of a lessor ability given for restraint might actually REACT IN A VIOLENT MANNER....even if such Men were not prone by their nature to act in such a manner.

 

So there it is.

 

Split Infinity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this feeling of revulsion may occur whether they like it or not after puberty because of a genetic predisposition, and not solely as a cultural construct?

Almost certainly not. Not all people who witness two people of the same gender expressing love for one another find it revolting, even after puberty. No, the hatred is taught/learned.

 

......in that MOMENT....I visualized snapping his neck like a twig and then turning into a Spin Kick that would break the other guy's sternum. <snip> ...their BEHAVIOR SPECIFIC TO GAY MEN ACTING OVERLY EFFEMINATE...seemed to trigger some Genetically stored violent tendencies and emotions that are not associated to a person being Homophobic...

Probably because they were mocking you and baiting you, not because of anything to do with their sexuality. Your (very long) post is quite moot IMO, but thanks for sharing.

 

Hatred is something learned. We have a genetic predisposition to categorize things and to see us/them dichotomies, but we must be taught which groups to treat differently and we must be taught which to hate.

 

Human children are not born racist. Human children are not born sexist. Likewise, human children are not born homophobic. It is learned and reinforced by the society and community around us... It is nurtured, not natured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should also be pointed out that not even most homosexual men act effeminate, in fact unless you knew them most homosexual men could pass under the "gaydar" quite easily and being effeminate doesn't make you homosexual either. The entire premise of identifying homosexuals through their overtly feminine or masculine behaviour for both male and female homosexuals is just another stereotype that is easily debunked....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No, the hatred is taught/learned.

 

You have presented an incomplete argument and no actual citations to support this position.

 

gian meanwhile has received two negative ratings for simply continuing to ask questions that, in the absence of presented evidence, seem quite reasonable to him.

 

While I happen to agree with your position I believe it is incumbent on you, as it is on all of us, to provide evidence when called upon to do so. Your earlier argument, in crank ridden massive font, fails. I hope you will return to character and provide that evidence for gian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is so much reproductive overcapacity in male human sexuality that selection pressure against the mere diversion of any of it would be practically nonexistent by assumption.

 

 

And we have evidence for that absence, as well: Human females hide their fertility, for example - making most male heterosexual behavior a waste of time from a strict fertilization perspective.

 

There's obviously plenty to spare.

well until quite recently there wasn't. With very high mortality rates until the end of the 18th century men and women had to go on attempting to procreate all their lives in order to have 3 or 4 children who survived to maturity

 

You have presented an incomplete argument and no actual citations to support this position.

 

gian meanwhile has received two negative ratings for simply continuing to ask questions that, in the absence of presented evidence, seem quite reasonable to him.

 

While I happen to agree with your position I believe it is incumbent on you, as it is on all of us, to provide evidence when called upon to do so. Your earlier argument, in crank ridden massive font, fails. I hope you will return to character and provide that evidence for gian.

Thankyou. I'm still working through all the above life-stories, but Im just asking if there's any published research either way to indicate whether HOMOPHOBIA (NOT HOMOSEXUALITY!) is socially constucted or endogenous perhaps due to natural selection. And I don't know why enyone would want to vote me down for just asking. I only want to learn.

 

 

 

 

Thanks to everyone for the sometimes lengthy life stories above, still working through them. I doubt children are born hating anyone or anything. These certainly are taught by society. Of course children aren't born hating communism!

 

But surely both humans and other species have endogenous fears and aversions presumably there due to natural selection. If they didn't they wouldn't survive.

 

 

I do know of one experiment where newborn kittens were found to be afraid of heights and had not been born long enough to have been taught it. May this not account for human homophobia in terms of improving the reproductive capacity of the species?

 

Please if possible refer me to some published research in replies. I only want to learn.

 

Giansmile.png

Edited by Gian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

but Im just asking if there's any published research either way to
indicate whether HOMOPHOBIA (NOT HOMOSEXUALITY!) is socially constucted
or endogenous perhaps due to natural selection.

If it were endogenous due to natural selection at the species level it would be found in the species as a whole. It isn't - there are entire geographical areas of the planet (the Pacific Islands around Papua New Guinea, regions in pre-Colombian Americas, the pre-Christian cultures around the Mediterranean, etc etc etc) in which homophobia is vanishingly rare if existent at all (it would be an individual's symptom of mental illness) and no cultures in which it is not socially constructed and closely mediated in its expression.

 

You can learn this from any elementary anthropology text, encyclopedia, decent television documentary on the topic, attention paid to the newspaper, etc.

 

May this not account for human homophobia in terms of improving the reproductive capacity of the species?

That would be a possibility if homophobia improved the the reproductive capacity of the species. But it doesn't, at least not in any direct way that anyone can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If it were endogenous due to natural selection at the species level it would be found in the species as a whole. It isn't - there are entire geographical areas of the planet (the Pacific Islands around Papua New Guinea, regions in pre-Colombian Americas, the pre-Christian cultures around the Mediterranean, etc etc etc) in which homophobia is vanishingly rare if existent at all (it would be an individual's symptom of mental illness) and no cultures in which it is not socially constructed and closely mediated in its expression.

 

You can learn this from any elementary anthropology text, encyclopedia, decent television documentary on the topic, attention paid to the newspaper, etc.

 

That would be a possibility if homophobia improved the the reproductive capacity of the species. But it doesn't, at least not in any direct way that anyone can see.

well as far as I know we don't need to follow genetic impulses, but what Im talking about is repulsion at the actual sight of it.

This is an example of what I mean (from 03.55-06.44 and 09.33-end)

 

 

I suspect that what these rugger players are feeling at the sight of gay intimacy goes deeper than social construction. They don't seem particularly badly disposed to gay men. As the guy at 05.19 says while accepting it, the actual sight of it seems to awaken some sort of revulsion which runs v deep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the guy at 05.19 says while accepting it, the actual sight of it seems to awaken some sort of revulsion which runs v deep.

For us to have evolved such an aversion to homosexuality, then wouldn't we be equally revolted by female homosexuality? I'll confess myself, I prefer not watching two men having sex with each other. But is that down to my immeasurable hatred towards gay people, or something else? And if so, can that "something else" have aided in building the social construct of homophobia?

 

Now, I don't have any numbers, but one claim I seem to hear a lot is that quite a lot of men are grossed out by homosexual male sex, while enjoying watching, for example, lesbian porn (or well, porn involving two or more women, which definitely isn't the same thing. But still!). How would you explain this in evolutionary terms? Sure, one can say that the men are still looking at female bodies, which excites us. But then, wouldn't male homosexuality just make us go "meh, whatever" instead of "kill the gays!"?

 

I've read we have also got sort of an inborn (so in this case evolved) sense of what food should look like. For example, slimy greenish/yellowish goo isn't all that appetizing. Apparently, this is due to the likeness of puss, which signifies infection and generally bad stuff. So assuming this is right, and we do have some idea of how the world works in this regard. Now, translate this to male homosexuality.

 

Is it too far-fetched to think that the strong aversion to male homosexuality is simply down to the "ick factor" of the act? After all, the homosexual male act involves putting the pee pee in the pooper. Perhaps our evolved wirings simply screams at us that "that place is dirty thus can kill you!". Not in the sense that "gay sex is wrong and God will strike you down", but simply down to the same evolved behavior that makes us not want to lick someone else's open wound.

 

Again, I really don't think there's much evidence for anything other than homophobia being a social construct. But if it isn't, I'm boldly throwing this out as some kind of alternative idea, fully expecting people to read it as me thinking homosexuality is unnatural or something (which I don't). But I'll take that risk.

 

Edit: Also, I apologize if this seems like a lengthy bit of a "personal theory". I'm just throwing it out as an attempt of an explanation, and while I'd be happy to have it criticized, I'm fully aware that I might be very wrong.

Edited by pwagen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For us to have evolved such an aversion to homosexuality, then wouldn't we be equally revolted by female homosexuality? I'll confess myself, I prefer not watching two men having sex with each other. But is that down to my immeasurable hatred towards gay people, or something else? And if so, can that "something else" have aided in building the social construct of homophobia?

 

Now, I don't have any numbers, but one claim I seem to hear a lot is that quite a lot of men are grossed out by homosexual male sex, while enjoying watching, for example, lesbian porn (or well, porn involving two or more women, which definitely isn't the same thing. But still!). How would you explain this in evolutionary terms? Sure, one can say that the men are still looking at female bodies, which excites us. But then, wouldn't male homosexuality just make us go "meh, whatever" instead of "kill the gays!"?

 

I've read we have also got sort of an inborn (so in this case evolved) sense of what food should look like. For example, slimy greenish/yellowish goo isn't all that appetizing. Apparently, this is due to the likeness of puss, which signifies infection and generally bad stuff. So assuming this is right, and we do have some idea of how the world works in this regard. Now, translate this to male homosexuality.

 

Is it too far-fetched to think that the strong aversion to male homosexuality is simply down to the "ick factor" of the act? After all, the homosexual male act involves putting the pee pee in the pooper. Perhaps our evolved wirings simply screams at us that "that place is dirty thus can kill you!". Not in the sense that "gay sex is wrong and God will strike you down", but simply down to the same evolved behavior that makes us not want to lick someone else's open wound.

 

Again, I really don't think there's much evidence for anything other than homophobia being a social construct. But if it isn't, I'm boldly throwing this out as some kind of alternative idea, fully expecting people to read it as me thinking homosexuality is unnatural or something (which I don't). But I'll take that risk.

 

Edit: Also, I apologize if this seems like a lengthy bit of a "personal theory". I'm just throwing it out as an attempt of an explanation, and while I'd be happy to have it criticized, I'm fully aware that I might be very wrong.

thanks

Well precisely, I think the sight of two men having anal sex may be the "euuuugh" factor we feel when we see unappetising food which is actually perfectly good to eat. That's why the guys in the clip i've indicated above react the way they do. But then the 'icky' reaction to food no doubt developed becasue it protected us from foodstuffs which may be bad for us. Similarly with homosexuality

Men being attracted to female homosexuality is different becasue it still involves heterosexual attraction to women which is what the reproductive intention of nature wants.

 

I don't know wether any of this is accurate, Im hoping someone can point me to some research which will indicate it either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have presented an incomplete argument and no actual citations to support this position.

 

gian meanwhile has received two negative ratings for simply continuing to ask questions that, in the absence of presented evidence, seem quite reasonable to him.

FWIW - Those neg reps weren't from me.

While I happen to agree with your position I believe it is incumbent on you, as it is on all of us, to provide evidence when called upon to do so. Your earlier argument, in crank ridden massive font, fails.

The massive font was an image, not something I typed, but you are correct. It was a little obnoxious.

 

You are also correct in that I have not yet presented evidence in support of my point. I find it to be self-evidently true, and completely reinforced by the basics of human behavioral conditioning, both classical and operant. While we recognize that there may be an evolutionary reason for some phobias like fear of snakes or heights, that would not extrapolate to "fear of some subset of other humans who are not identifiable in any way." Homosexual humans look (and most often act) exactly the same as heterosexual humans, so there is no mechanism by which such a person could be quickly identified to trigger that phobia, nor is there any mechanism by which it would be selected for.

 

Human children are taught to hate, not born with that hatred. As I shared above, we may be born with a predisposition to categorize things and to parse the world into dichotomies, but 1) those dichotomies or groupings must be defined by our teachers and community, and 2) how we treat those groups must be taught to us via social learning.

 

Just because we see differences doesn't mean those differences manifest themselves as in the form of hatreds or phobias. Even wiki has a link on the environmental factors that influence phobia development: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobia#Etiology

 

I stipulate that the following is also not the most robust source, but here's a reference from WebMD (see the Nature or Nurture section) that says in no uncertain terms that phobias are learned. That's my central point. It's not a contentious one, no matter how forcefully others fail to understand it.

 

http://www.webmd.com/anxiety-panic/features/the-truth-about-phobias

 

This is a form of social phobia. That brings with it certain understandings about its source. More here: http://allpsych.com/journal/phobias.html

 

There are two postulated causes of homophobia... 1) Institutionalized (it's learned from religion or the state or the surrounding community or family) and 2) Internalized (wherein someone has feelings of attraction toward members of the same sex and represses it and exhibits symptoms common with denial and disonnance). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia#Classification

 

Again, though... Show me one single human infant or toddler that hates black people or women or homosexuals without being taught to do so and I'll concede the point.

Edited by iNow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it too far-fetched to think that the strong aversion to male homosexuality is simply down to the "ick factor" of the act? After all, the homosexual male act involves putting the pee pee in the pooper.

 

It doesn't have to, but I imagine the gentler types of contact eventually lead to that. I wouldn't assume that gay men necessarily have anal sex in their head long before they actually get to that point of intimacy.

 

I'm not attracted to males, but I don't think male-male interactions are generally 'icky'. I think of such interactions as bonding because, well, they were IME.

 

 

But then the 'icky' reaction to food no doubt developed becasue it protected us from foodstuffs which may be bad for us. Similarly with homosexuality

 

Is hard-core heterosexual pornography any less icky?

 


 

I read the summary of the Adams, Wright, and Lohr experiment last night.

http://my.psychologytoday.com/files/u47/Henry_et_al.pdf

Interestingly, they had a difficult time finding men who scored as exclusively heterosexual and scored into the "high-grade nonhomophobic range." In addition, the homophobic men appeared to be more likely to underestimate their arousal when viewing the gay videos.

More interesting yet, the arousal of homophobic men by the gay videos may have been due to anxiety. Apparently, anxiety increases sexual arousal. Here's an example. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/abn/92/1/49/

Edited by Mondays Assignment: Die

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have presented an incomplete argument and no actual citations to support this position.

 

gian meanwhile has received two negative ratings for simply continuing to ask questions that, in the absence of presented evidence, seem quite reasonable to him.

 

While I happen to agree with your position I believe it is incumbent on you, as it is on all of us, to provide evidence when called upon to do so. Your earlier argument, in crank ridden massive font, fails. I hope you will return to character and provide that evidence for gian.

I believe I did not contribute to the neg rep, but I support it. I appreciate your point, and it is very important these questions are answered with evidence rather than opinion alone, but I don't like that neutral sentence about the OPs stance.

 

Ophiolite do you believe the OP was unbiased when you posted that? that he had considered both sides of the argument? It seems to me that he was biased as was perfectly happy to use unreasonable reasoning as a supportive argument but then reject the offered comments (which were worth as much as his own arguments) here with a response demanding for evidence.

 

With regards to the suggestion that homophobia might have been under natural selection. That is something which I doubt there is any evidence either for or against. Imo, there has been no adequate reasoning in this thread that should allow one to suggest even searching for a fitness advantage.

 

What causes homophobia? like all other behaviors, a combination of genetic and environmental factors. How much does genetics contribute to population variance in this behavior? how much does environment contribute? I would imagine there is no/little direct evidence that can shed some light on the contribution of genetics or environment for homophobia, but rather I expect indirect evidence like iNow's more recent post. The lack of evidence in this thread is quite reasonable, since Science cannot explain much of the genetic and environmental contributions to the behaviour Homophobia..

 

My overall impression is that the OP came here to get a biological justification for the behaviour known as homophobia because of the one sided arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OT is flawed, it assumes a premise that is evidently not true and then tries to assume a natural reason for that false premise.

 

Then the OP goes on to say things that were meant to be shocking then tries to shock us further by showing a sexual video and using that as his evidence for his false premise.

 

First of all, name a type of sexual behavior that is unique to homosexuals, the OP assumes anal sex only occurs among homosexuals and that any heterosexual would be repelled by this.

 

The OP also ignores female homosexuality but still uses homosexuality as a blanket term without making it clear he is only talking about male homosexuals.

 

Icky has nothing to do with sexual behavior being good or bad, in fact if it's not "icky" you're probably not doing it correctly.

 

Sex is not simply "man on top get it over with quick" and the idea that homosexuals can be identified visually is flawed at the outset.

 

Sexual behavior is pigeonholed by people who want to see the world as black and white but in the real world very few individuals are really homosexual or heterosexual, it's quite possible none are, sexuality is actually a varied spectrum of behaviors that includes both males and females and sometimes only one person male or female and sometimes groups of persons and to say that homosexuals only have icky sex with other homosexuals and not just excluding female homosexuals but actually assuming everyone else thinks that way as well is IMHO very close to trolling...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.