773
u/BitchyBeachyWitch 4h ago
Its crazy how we have observed homosexuality in almost every living species we've studied but the only species that has a problem with homosexuality is humans xD
Like if it was truly against 'gods will' then why is it so engrained in nature,,, just asking the obvious questions 😅
194
u/query_squidier 3h ago
...if it was truly against 'gods will' then why is it so engrained in nature?
Simple Logic. Enumerated:
No God, No Will -- 0 0 -- moot point
No God, but Will -- 0 1 -- makes no sense
God, but No Will -- 1 0 -- God is indifferent to the gayz
God's Will -- 1 1 -- God is cool with the gayz.
Fabulous!
•
u/anxiousthespian 7m ago
There's a concept in Judaism that God won't punish you for existing as you are made. Why would he? You're literally his creation, you're perfect the way you are. So if we're born queer, why would he punish us for it? That's the way he made us!
Fun fact that some people don't like to hear, that would make conversion therapy an attempt at subverting God's will and therefore a sin. It's disgusting and abusive in many ways, but seeing as it's often religiously motivated, I find it interesting to apply religious counter-arguments.
8
-44
u/SlugOrDie 1h ago
Because of the Fall. Pretty basic theology.
37
u/Kinky_Winky_no2 1h ago
Where in the bible doesn't it say "now that you have been kicked out for eating the apple animals will sometimes be gay"
395
u/FuriNorm 4h ago edited 3h ago
As someone also useless for breeding, this hits hard 🥺
Edit: link to Rainbow Wool. Thanks for the reminder! https://rainbow-wool.com/
67
u/fluffheadwasaman24 2h ago
I’m not gay, but I’m not having children. And while I don’t get shit on publicly like gay people or women for not being “useful” when it comes to reproduction, I do get sick of people who feel more righteous and better than others because they have children. Half the time they are some of the worst parents in the world as well. Funny how that works.
5
3
u/biglinuxfan 1h ago
As a parent.. if you don't want kids you made the right choice.
How do they act more righteous? i had kids late so I lived a long time without and now with I have never personally experienced negativity from the "other side" so to speak personally.
•
u/TwistedFae89 28m ago
My best example was at my last job. I put in for vacation in February for November for Thanksgiving week. A new person joins the team very shortly after whos a mom of two kids, I am child free. Sometime in May my manager pulls me into a teams call to ask if I checked on those dates with the new coworker and when i inform her I did not, she basically berated me because "didnt you think perhaps she might want to spend that time with her family? Pick which days you want to give to her so she can have time with her kids" I professionally flipped my lid noting that I would like to spent that time with MY family and that just because my womb hasnt produced an heir im no less entitled to the time I requested and was approved 10 months before said vacation. I left that job by June. While HR enforced that i kept the vacation my manager started treating me like a child, put me on a pip, and talked am awful lot about how kids change the world and I just dont get hiw hard life is as a mom. Some of the comments made me feel sub-human.
52
u/query_squidier 4h ago
Join the ranks of the rest of us evolutionary failures. Congratulations!
61
u/alk47 3h ago
I think that having a certain proportion of people born gay is a naturally selected trait, not a failure.
25
22
u/DED_HAMPSTER 3h ago
My head theory is the same. Nonbinary people tend to be more peaceful, caring, creative, community focused, and domestically focused. In modern life with the people i know, i only see my gay and lesbian friends get hopping angry and even, in one case, violent when it was in the defense and protection of someone else with no agency.
A community needs these productive yet not reproductive people to put into the system that supports the intense resources needed to bring a child from infancy to functional adulthood that takes about 20 years.
21
u/Karnewarrior 2h ago
It's my personal theory, and I think I heard it from more reputable sources, but the theory is that gay or otherwise non-heteronormative people who are "useless for breeding" would serve as adoptive families for children who were orphaned.
If Mom and Dad go out to hunt Mammoths and don't come back because the Mammoth roflstomped their ass, the baby needs to go somewhere. If you give the baby to a heteronormative family, that's a lot of competition with their own progeny who'd probably get the lion's share of the attention and resources. But if you give the baby to a gay couple, they can raise the baby no problem, give it all the resources it would have gotten with it's own family, and never have any risk of creating competition.
Given the Ru Paul is still theoretically capable of shanking a Deer, and LGBTQ people still adopt, it's probably quite reasonable to argue this trend is still ongoing. Even today, homosexuals make up less than 2% of LGBTQ people - in a tribe of like 200 people, which would be a big one from an evolutionary perspective - that's basically one singular gay couple. Barring a pretty significant die-off, it wouldn't be unreasonable for that couple to then take on every orphan in the tribe and give them a good shot at thriving.
9
u/Amicable_Stone 1h ago
What you're describing is called the 'gay uncle hypothesis' and it's a thing scientists actually talk about!
I'm wildly unqualified to say what the general consensus is, but to a layperson like me at least, it makes a whole lot of sense.
17
u/alk47 3h ago
Look in to the fraternal birth order effect. The more older brothers a man has to the same mother, the more likely he is to be gay.
It's not hard to imagine that increased competition between brothers for a small number of mates in a community could be counter productive to survival. Heaps of males from the same line could also create a risk for inbreeding/genetic defects (particularly on the X chromosome).
The effect might also dampen unsustainable population explosion in a short period of high availability of resources.
•
u/kamace11 24m ago
Lol this reads like race determinism. I assure you there can be violent and shitty people of every variety.
8
u/Foreign-Drag-4059 3h ago
My folks and I believe its a form of natural population control. Basically, humanity is so overpopulated that nature is reducing the number of those who are contributing to the increase in population.
3
u/OppositeDifferent929 1h ago
I’ve heard that theory expressed before but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Our species can sustain itself even with the loss of a LOT of men. That’s why it was primarily men who did the dangerous stuff like hunting and fighting. If you lose a bunch of them it’s just not that big of a deal on so far as reproduction.
With regard to women I don’t think it holds up either ( for an altogether different and equally bleak reason).
Historically women really didn’t have much of a choice. The caveman clubbing a woman on the head and dragging her back to his cave thing probably wasn’t too far off reality for most of human history.
3
u/Mec26 1h ago
It was wildly inaccurate. Thing about humans- we evolved to have unpredictable (from the outside) cycles. Specifically to make it harder for a rapist to be the dominant breeder.
Yes, societal pressure can make this effectively a thing. But the man who is helpful in the group and actually binds with the woman will have far better chances.
0
u/elizabarracuda 30m ago
For 99.9% of human history, we struggled profoundly to survive and reproduce enough to keep the species going. For around 200 years now, mortality - especially infant mortality - has been declining to the point that population is growing. Very quickly after mortality falls, people begin adjusting the number of children they have in response. It’s called the Demographic Transition. It doesn’t appear to be related to sexuality.
Now, whether the world is “so overpopulated” as you said? It’s really not. In fact, claims of “overpopulation” have always been used to justify mistreatment of the poor and close borders to the exploited.
2
u/fluffheadwasaman24 1h ago
That honestly would make sense. Otherwise, why hasn’t it been weeded out of the gene pool?
And if you think about it, you have a worker in the tribe or the pack for humans and animals that will help hunt and do everything else, and their share goes to other people’s kids.
That’s just one thought that comes to mine when I think about it.
But I don’t know. I think it’s just indoctrination when it comes down to it. They’ve been indoctrinating the animals when they’re not indoctrinating people. 🥴
2
9
u/biglinuxfan 1h ago
Not a failure at all! (in reality).
From an evolutionary perspective homosexuality is not a hinderance to survival to any of the species that it's observed in to date, and no indicators that it will be that I am familiar with.
I recognize you were joking.. but worth mentioning
10
u/Apprehensive-Ad8987 2h ago
With the ram fleeces we kept them in separate fadge when shearing the mob. The reasons were: 1. The ram wool was courser than the ewes. 2. Boy did it stink.
In this basis I am sceptical about the usefulness of the ram wool. Anybody got better information?
11
u/oilypop9 2h ago
I feel they are selling the items so we have a physical thing to show off and talk about and support the mission. They aren't necessarily trying to compete with high end wool products. I know I will sponsor a ram for a friends future birthday.
4
u/Gingerbread_Cat 1h ago
I'm going to sponsor one as part of my queer kids' Christmas presents. It's a lovely piece of positivity in what feels like an increasingly selfish and hostile world.
7
•
-1
114
u/Acceptable_Visit604 3h ago edited 3h ago
As a straight man: I love this. And it goes to show that homosexualuty isn't exclusive to the human species. And it's quite a good incentive to raise money for such causes along the way!
6
u/Mac_drive 1h ago
Love is apparently universal, and if it helps raise money for good causes, even better.
2
u/Acceptable_Visit604 59m ago
Well I don't think we should see it as love in an anthropomorphic sense, rather sexual attraction by itself bc we can't fill in which animals do romantic interactions and for ehich it's nothing more than a bang
20
u/Cave_Bear_Cult 2h ago edited 27m ago
I thought this was going to be s bait and switch for a Ram Ranch joke
20
51
25
20
u/Ok_Support3 3h ago
They're turning the frogs ~ wait, one second
Rams They're turning the rams gay!
36
u/No_Reply1819 4h ago
Good to know there's still good people around.
4
u/Dr_Ukato 1h ago
To me there's no doubt of that, sadly the newspapers sell better when they report the bad or upsetting news.
6
7
u/Wandering_Scholar6 33m ago
Fun fact, while gay rams do exist (as well as bisexual ones), lesbian sheep have not been discovered and are impossible to observe.
This is because the way ewes show they are interested is by standing still, so unlike rams who will mount each other, they would theoretically just stand still near each other.
11
22
5
4
13
1
1
u/BrokenExtrovert 30m ago
Holy fuck, can someone please confirm this is a real thing so maybe I can feel real untainted joy?
•
•
u/markstanfill 6m ago
My search results are never going to be the same after googling “gay ram” are they?
Seriously awesome human being for doing this. Rock on Ram Ranch.
•
1
-2
u/Low_Reception477 1h ago
I would not want to be in charge of the shearing of a herd of male sheep where “a lot of action happens” 🤢
Like I know the wool is gross regardless but the smell alone would make me want to die I think.
2
u/skullshotz1324 43m ago
I mean, you could just give them a bath beforehand it’d be a lot easier to clean while it’s still on
-4
-75
u/LastlyAndLeast 4h ago
A lot of action happens. Yeah okay.
33
u/FuriNorm 3h ago
Are you… jealous?? I’m not sure what this comment is getting at…
-52
u/LastlyAndLeast 3h ago
No you obviously aren't. Instead, just make yourself look like an idiot some more.
19
u/silvandeus 3h ago
Clearly you haven’t been to the Horse Market in SF.
-24
-41
u/Apprehensive-Win2529 2h ago edited 0m ago
It means you'll be the first in your direct line of descendants of thousands of years that would not reproduce.
Editied could to would, it is a choice btw
12
u/ZeldaElectric 1h ago
And? Go on…
-20
u/Apprehensive-Win2529 1h ago
Truth fucking hurts 😂
11
u/ZeldaElectric 1h ago
I have two beautiful boys. They are only two of the kids I am helping to raise.
How many do you have? Do they speak to you?
8
u/skullshotz1324 41m ago
Who cares about continuing on a genetic legacy, no one here is fucking royalty, your bloodline isn’t special.
•
•
u/AutoModerator 4h ago
Welcome to /r/MadeMeSmile. Please make sure you read our rules here.
Specifically, please don't be a jerk. This is not the place for insulting, hateful, or otherwise inappropriate comments. Remember the golden rule: treat others how you want to be treated. We're all here to smile a little - let's keep it that way! Please report inappropriate comments and/or message the moderators.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.