Evolution

[HonestJoe]

So if there is no offspring produced because of being gay, transgender, or whatever...

Being gay or transgender doesn't automatically prevent people having biological children, be that by being in a mixed-sex relationship at some point or by artificial means.

Also, evolution isn't just about genetics, environment (which includes human society and childhood upbringing) can be relevant too, something anyone is involved in, regardless of whether they have children of their own or not.

Genetics are also not simply binary or direct. Just because an individual has no children of their own doesn't mean all of their genetic elements are lost, since they could still exist and be passed on via other close relations.

But I'm labeled cis for doing all the above.

No your not. Cis just means your gender identity is the same as you biological sex. It has nothing to do with having children or sexual orientation. The term only exists because saying "not transgender" all the time would be unwieldy. Of course, that label is only relevant or useful in the context of discussions about gender issues. Most of the time it will never be used.

Honestly speaking from several I know, labeling us is where you lost some support. You can be trans, gay, unidentified, etc... But you dragged us into your world when you labeled us.

We're all in the same world. If you want to define "us and them" divisions, you'll inevitably use labels to distinguish them. Every one of us could legitimately have multiple labels applies to us in all sorts of different contexts. The only question is how much you make of them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Nietzsche and Allan Turing had no kids either, but they tremendously influence us today. As does Tesla.

 

[exchemist]

They aid her survival without adding to the gene pool. Could you not figure that out?

Me? My object in asking the question is to lead you to understand how members of a population that do not themselves procreate may enhance the prospects of survival of their portion of the gene pool.

If they enhance the survival chances of those genes, they contribute to the evolutionary process.

That is the point I am trying to get you to grasp, because you seem not to have realised it.

In the case of humanity, survival of genes is a team effort, in which many members of the family and wider social group (the tribe, in earlier times) may take part. Maiden aunts, single men etc. are part of this.

 

[ChristineM]

There is no
-contribution to the gene pool
-contribution to evolution
-envolvenent in the evolution of humans.

Why must everyone contribute to the gene pool?

Humanity has been around for about 2 million years, over that time a percentage of people have not reproduced for a variety of reasons. Yet still there is enough genetic diversity to ensure humans continue to develop and evolve.

 

[PureX]

Historically being key there. Not so much anymore.
In the past many gays lived in the closet,married and has kids. Not so much any more.

You are also ignoring the fact that these descriptions are defining a scale, not absolute conditions. Most people land somewhere on a scale between the labeled extremes. So there are and always will be lots of people with homosexual inclinations built into their DNA that live a heterosexual lifestyle, including procreation. So that tray does not 'die out' as you seem to be presuming that it would. Not to mention that sexual disposition is based on more than genetic predisposition, alone. It's also an emotional and a cultural choice.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Just because..(I'm being nice)

Evolution; is the process in which populations (or gene pools ) evolve as gene frequencies change; individual organisms cannot evolve. Variation in populations is determined by the genes present in the population's gene pool, which may be directly altered by mutation

So if there is no offspring produced because of being gay, transgender, or whatever...

There is no
-contribution to the gene pool

False. Gay people can - and often do - have children. What's more, with advancements in fertility treatments, it's becoming easier and easier to do so, either through artificial insemination or surrogacy.

-contribution to evolution
-envolvenent in the evolution of humans.

This is a nonsensical statement. Anything that plays any role in any selective process which may potentially influence future allele frequencies can be said to "contribute to evolution". As a part of our culture, and people who can procreate, raise and influence children, they can influence future evolutionary outcomes.

This may sound like I am being a prick, but its fact.

But I'm labeled cis for doing all the above.

Um... No. You're labelled "cis" for... not being trans... I assume?

Because that's what that means.

Unless, you are trans? Are you?

Which according to science is natural.
Honestly speaking from several I know, labeling us is where you lost some support. You can be trans, gay, unidentified, etc... But you dragged us into your world when you labeled us.

Huh? Now you're just not making sense. Are you being "dragged" into a particular "world" when people label you as "straight" or "tall" or "short" or "kind" or "smelly"?

I mean... Kind of. But you can't help being what you are. That's all these labels are used to identify. I'm not sure what the issue is here.

 

[sayak83]

Just because..(I'm being nice)

Evolution; is the process in which populations (or gene pools ) evolve as gene frequencies change; individual organisms cannot evolve. Variation in populations is determined by the genes present in the population's gene pool, which may be directly altered by mutation

So if there is no offspring produced because of being gay, transgender, or whatever...

There is no
-contribution to the gene pool
-contribution to evolution
-envolvenent in the evolution of humans.

This may sound like I am being a prick, but its fact.

But I'm labeled cis for doing all the above. Which according to science is natural.
Honestly speaking from several I know, labeling us is where you lost some support. You can be trans, gay, unidentified, etc... But you dragged us into your world when you labeled us.

First point
How many members in a bee or ant colony reproduce? This shows that there are several extremely evolutionarily successful species where the majority of individual members do not reproduce.
Second point
Contributing to the gene pool is not the cardinal objective of human existence. Mistaken ought statements from a superficial understanding of evolutionary biology has been the cause of some of worst moral evils of modern history.
Third point
There is nothing derogatory in a cis vs trans label; male or female label, American or Italian label etc. What is your objection to such labels?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

So if there is no offspring produced because of being gay, transgender, or whatever...

There is no
-contribution to the gene pool
-contribution to evolution
-envolvenent in the evolution of humans.

This may sound like I am being a prick, but its fact.

It's not only not a fact, it's incorrect.

Honestly speaking from several I know, labeling us is where you lost some support. You can be trans, gay, unidentified, etc... But you dragged us into your world when you labeled us.

What does this mean? What happened to you and how were you harmed by it? Or were you threatened or offended instead?

If you don't contribute to the gene pool....you don't contribute to future humans. Its that simple.

That's too simple, if by contribute to the gene pool you mean add to it by reproducing.

art, politics, technology, simple things like how we're treating others doesn't contribute to the gene pool.

They don't? Do things like the Holocaust affect the gene pool? How about in vitro fertilization?

They aid her [queen bee] survival without adding to the gene pool. Could you not figure that out?

You don't seem to recognize that her survival affects the gene pool.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

View attachment 71189

I personally know 3 gay couples.

3 out of 4 from 2 couples have biological children from a previous relationship.
The 3rd couple, 2 gay men, will have a biological child a couple of months from now, through a surrogate mom, using their own sperm.

So that's 3 gay couples. 4 out of the 6 people with biological children.

What you are you talking about?

 

[SomeRandom]

Tell me what humans do that contribute.to the gene pool without contributing their genes.

Protecting the offspring maybe? Or like I said, being “back up parents” just in case. Evolution does require more than simple reproduction, you are aware of this, no?
Like I said, this is beyond basic level stuff. I remember learning about this back in high school biology class.
Just how awful is the US education system, if you don’t mind my asking?

And may I ask. Are you okay?

 

[SomeRandom]

Tell me what humans do that contribute.to the gene pool without contributing their genes.

You do know that overpopulation of a species can lead to its overall destruction, right? And humans have been considered overpopulated (relative in terms of food distribution) for like 50 years now. It’s probably not a good idea to be rushing out to produce as many children as humanly possible. Just saying

In social species it’s actually fairly common not for every single individual to “contribute” to the gene pool, if you like. That’s just how nature and biology works. There are multiple survival strategies in place.
Not everything is about having kids. I think our species is more than good on that front. It doesn’t need any more. If anything not having kids is the better idea for our overall survivor at the moment.

I thought you said you were all for science? This doesn’t seem very pro science at all. Seems like you’re upset
Maybe have some chocolate or something?
Or here have a virtual hug

 

[F1fan]

Again.....
If you don't contribute to the gene pool....you don't contribute to future humans. Its that simple.

Gays get surrogates to have biological offspring, so problem solved.

 

[Windwalker]

If you don't contrite to the gene pool....you don't contribute to future humans. Its that simple.

Is it? Do you reduce humanity down to just biological skin sacks? Are we just meat? Do you think evolution might not also relate to things like cultural and social evolution? Progress in the humanities? Let alone evolving higher states of consciences for the species.

How many great minds for instance, how many great humanitarians, have helped the human species to grow and evolve collectively without themselves ever having biological babies? Evolution applies to a whole lot more than just biology.

I think that's your whole problem. You wish to ignore people as people and reduce them down to eggs and sperms cells. Sounds like you are struggling with something, where you wish to ignore that humans are more than just cells? If our only contribution to the species is sperm and egg, and limited to a couple of kids, that's a pretty sad existence.

 

[JDMS]

Protecting the offspring maybe? Or like I said, being “back up parents” just in case. Evolution does require more than simple reproduction, you are aware of this, no?
Like I said, this is beyond basic level stuff. I remember learning about this back in high school biology class.
Just how awful is the US education system, if you don’t mind my asking?

And may I ask. Are you okay?

It appears he's having some sort of psychotic break... happens to me on Sunday nights, too... But it seems he confused his hate for Mondays with a strange fear of trans people simply existing... curious.

 

[Soandso]

Yeah I'm not really familure with any others species bearing their pud or using sex toys.

Ah, so you're trolling. Nice

 

[SomeRandom]

It appears he's having some sort of psychotic break... happens to me on Sunday nights, too... But it seems he confused his hate for Mondays with a strange fear of trans people simply existing... curious.

Well we’ve all been there.
I’m usually too drunk to remember my “episodes.” Thankfully

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Just how awful is the US education system, if you don’t mind my asking?

Mine was a very far outlier and not normal by any means, but my AP (advanced placement) Biology teacher skipped the chapter on evolution because it's dumb, it doesn't make sense and we all know god did it anyways (she may have gotten away with this and kept her job had she not taught an AP course but regular Biology as AP courses have college oversight in curriculum and testing).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yeah I'm not really familure with any others species bearing their pud or using sex toys.

Fun fact, I was forced to reconsider things here years ago when a zoophiliac corrected me on something I claimed, and I learned female porcupines are known for rubbing themselves against sticks as a form of masturbation.

 

[Soandso]

Fun fact, I was forced to reconsider things here years ago when a zoophiliac corrected me on something I claimed, and I learned female porcupines are known for rubbing themselves against sticks as a form of masturbation.

I've also seen parrots do this on their perches. Also, hide your pillows around dogs

 

[rational experiences]

We are all humans first.

Scientists...human thinkers first see we are human.

So humans which we legally are say I observe we live owning dominion. In highest coldest most evolved historic place.

So coldest our saviour is ice it has least energy and us cold. Extreme cold.

That type of human said I...being self and human want to go back to the eternal.

Ok.

Are you just a human?

Yes.

Are you your owned baby creator?

Yes...human.

Do you need your parents to be human?

Yes.

Mine said the theist of science is just one. Father. A man.

Speaking on behalf of himself.

Okay.

You aren't eternal. You however want to go back to Eternal claiming it the first type...a God.

Yes.

But you're just human?

Yes.

So how do you go back to being what you personally aren't.

I'll use a machine.

Oh so machine man scientist says his human built machine invented the eternal which he'll go back to? As it's body is the eternal.

Yes.

How?

Inside the machine it will transform transport me....as he says he's alien not human.

Ok.

Is that why I saw a human vision of scientists telling family to stand inside of the pyramid for experimenting transport...yet they combusted,?

A loud voice said inferred to female life don't you tell family what we did...brothers

Errmmmm.

Same man today who says evolution as creationist. The scientist.

No he says I say cells microbe. Having come from sperm ovary.

I say cells too giant ones crop circles he says.

Natural humans not a theist hence had to fight for human rights.

Our version we live in evolution isn't a humans theory. We know we own natural dominion. We know we are one greater evolved being living than a monkey.

A monkey body says no human.

A skeleton part human.mutated monkey is exactly advised.

We don't want to time travel anywhere thanks. Theists about why you calculated only as equated data. Put a machine historic in data before us. As a biology theme and data Inferred about bio life not yet existing....when we do first.

Using not one but many machines claiming you just invented life now yourselves. As we don't exist. Is it any wonder my life was attacked by heavens changes?

No it wasn't.

Secret covert experiments he says.

Legal was the exact human spiritual position only.

Whatever a scientist as just humans first says to his science brothers just human first is man practicing false preaching as our lifes destroyers.

As no man is God the practice of man's scientific inferences.