Population and orientation?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 9:27 AM GMT
    Behold...the human population by the CB:
    http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
    The world population is approaching 7 billion.
    I firmly believe that homo- and asexuality exist to prevent overpopulation.
    Without them, I guess the pop would be about 15 billion now.
    I think it is natural balance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 9:37 AM GMT
    I have heard a lot of people say something similar, but there is nothing to support this claim.

    There are species of animals where groups will have same-sex sex(SSS) despite the low population and even until the community dies out.

    There are species where individuals who primarily engage in SSS produce more off spring than individuals who primarily engage in opposite-sex sex(OSS). Citations for both are available as soon as I finish moving and I get a cock picture.

    So, there is no generally utility in sexuality, not even reproduction. It accomplishes so many tasks: reproduction, social, pleasure, emotional.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 9:46 AM GMT
    If we let the Muslims into Israel and the Mexicans into the US we'll hit 7 billion in about a month.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 9:51 AM GMT
    JB has started his early morning postings after a night out icon_lol.gif
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Sep 18, 2010 9:54 AM GMT
    There is no precedent that homosexuality or asexuality will be used as a prevention of over population in fact the opposite is true in that human populations will continue to grow
    until there is a crisis stage where the economy and the ecology collapses
    and there population deterrent there becomes famine and starvation
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 10:47 AM GMT
    Lostboy saidJB has started his early morning postings after a night out icon_lol.gif


    I stayed in editing a video.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 11:05 AM GMT
    awww /hugs/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 11:08 AM GMT
    Yeah, now I'm just being emo watching videos of M83 on YouTube
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 11:10 AM GMT
    JB... you should go to bed and sleep your little heart out.

    iz very late 4 u
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 12:49 PM GMT
    serioushat saidWith the world population approaching 7 billion, I firmly believe that homo- and asexuality exist to prevent overpopulation.
    I've been saying that for a few years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 1:06 PM GMT
    I'm not so sure about that:
    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/111843.phpGenerally, homosexual males reproduce less than heterosexual males, so a genetic basis for male homosexuality is difficult to explain. However, work published in 2004 by Camperio Ciani and collaborators indicated that females in the maternal line of male homosexuals were more fertile than other women.
    ...
    This model could potentially change the focus of opinions on male homosexuality. For instance, perhaps homosexuality should not be seen as a trait that is detrimental to a population because of the reduced male reproduction it implies, but rather in context of providing gender specific benefits by promoting female fertility. This could be an explanation for the evolutionary origin of this genetic trait in humans.
    ...
    Notably, if the genetic mechanism behind male homosexuality is as described in this model, there are interesting implications on the overall fertility of a population. That is, the proportion of male homosexuals in a population could signal a corresponding proportion of females with higher fecundity -- this alone could account for a positive net increase in the fertility of a whole population when compared to populations without such a system. This increase will become higher as the population baseline fertility decreases, meaning that these genes could provide a buffering effect on factors that would otherwise lower the overall fertility of a population.


    So the Catholics should be happy we exist. And if people want to reduce world population, it's our evil female relatives they should be focusing on, not us. icon_lol.gif
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Sep 18, 2010 2:05 PM GMT
    serioushat saidBehold...the human population by the CB:
    http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
    With the world population approaching 7 billion, I firmly believe that homo- and asexuality exist to prevent overpopulation.
    Without them, I guess the pop would be about 15 billion now.
    Agnostic, I think it is natural balance, maybe divine.



    I too have always viewed homosexuality as a natural genetic response to over-population.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 2:47 PM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    serioushat saidBehold...the human population by the CB:
    http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
    With the world population approaching 7 billion, I firmly believe that homo- and asexuality exist to prevent overpopulation.
    Without them, I guess the pop would be about 15 billion now.
    Agnostic, I think it is natural balance, maybe divine.



    I too have always viewed homosexuality as a natural genetic response to over-population.


    So does this mean the world really is getting gayer? In response to more people?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 3:38 PM GMT
    Gay people who bring children into the world as twice as likely to go to hell when they die.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Sep 18, 2010 4:08 PM GMT
    Dtimshell said

    So does this mean the world really is getting gayer? In response to more people?



    Not necessarily. It depends on the proportional rate of population increases between gays and again between heterosexuals.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 18, 2010 7:50 PM GMT
    How would a species even know there are too many of them?
    I live in a dense city, which should be sending signals that there are too many humans. However, I have plenty of food and water. So, how exactly is it being communicated to me that there are too many individuals if I have plenty of resources?

    Further, what does the world population have to do with it? In rural Nebraska the population density is quite low. Yet gay individuals come from there. How would some signal that there are a billion people in China get communicated to my genes?

    Nature has a perfectly good way of dealing with overpopulation, it is called the Malthusian catastrophe.

    I just find reasoning the why of homosexuality to be a bit homophobic.