why are there gays and other questions
Well I thought up this theory a couple of years ago and became soooo excited working stuff out , then I listened to a radio 4 show where a don from cambridge was discussing exactly the same subject !!
It ranges from exceedingly trivial to quite profound, the problem is finding the questions.. rather than getting the answers .
My ideas became formed , when I left my car on dark cold night and nearly wet my pants with the sooo urgent need to urinate.
In mid stream, I wondered why this phenomenon occurred and overnight came up with the solution .
Basically , the idea is that evolution has formed certain genetic imperatives in our body , to help survival .
So once you find the question , you have to formulate the reason why its in our genes.
In case you havent worked out the above yet ...
In stone Age times , the main reasons for going from warm to cold is either entering water or leaving a warm cave/building. In the latter, it helps the clan hygiene if people urinate outside rather than inside , so this would help [ its also probably why urine/faeces smell badly]. In the latter , it helps if the urine is diluted/dissipated quickly so predators cant use it as a homing beacon, hence it helps survival.
I have been told that this is more urgent in males than females , which would indicate possibly that males and females had different functions in early life .
One concern of mine was that females live longer than males , but the more urgent question seeme d to be why do women have a menopause ?
The answer is that ova are formed at birth so after a few years they degrade and any foetuses formed after a certain time would use more resources than they formed - ie the ratio of viable young:stillborn or unviable offspring
Ok : so why dont women die instead of the menopause ?
Obviously these females will not procreate any further , so the only reason is that their existing offspring will get more young . Also it has to be quite a large extra resource as these old females wouldnt do much to create wealth within the clan .
The only reason is that the eldest woman would have great status as the best repository of experience or even heading the clan maybe ? It thus goes that her offspring [ maybe only one] could have many mates .
THUS POLYGAMY WAS RIFE IN STONE AGE TIMES .
OK what does that tell us about society . basically there would have been a surplus of males in society and would have been thrown out . One of 2 things could have happened at this point . Presumably , the first is that one dominant male tried taking all the females for himself as happens in most societies like that [eg horses, elephants etc] , with the odd female sometimes being stolen to create new clans . This would have continued till territory was being fought over.
The other is that a clan had several large families within it.
In the former case , as territory became smaller , there would have been fights, and any clan that had more males would gain at the expense of those that didnt .
The end result would have been the same , ie several families /clan [ evolution again].
Thus societies grew , although whilst man was a hunter/gatherer , this could not go beyond a certain size.
At this point [ or possibly before/after ] , if gays were in society , then although they wouldnt breed , they would offer better defensive/offensive properties for the clan , and as such would give better survival characteristics for their siblings .
If before , then a pair of gays in the clan would offer 3 times the manpower compared to a single male - a HUGE survival chance increase
If after, say when we became settlers, then less so , but the % usage of resources for maintaining a non reproductive pair[s] would be much less .
Either way , gays should increase the size of the 'clan' [reproductive pool of genes] and as such gays are a normal , albeit genetically out of date part of society .
The corollary of this , of course, is that groups of animals that are/were similar to stone age humans, should have the same characteristics in terms of sexuality .
Thus finding that 10% of sheep are gay should not be a surprise . In fact considering our society came out of the stone age only about 5000 years ago , that % should be almost the same in humans as the number of generations since then wouldnt have materially affected that gene responsible .
I read somewhere that 8% of male humans were gay [ was years ago] , that figure is maybe lower due to some males being 'in the closet' perhaps.
Female gays ? In Stone Age terms , this would have made zero difference to reproducing [being blunt] and as such if the gene responsible occurred in the x chromosome rather than the 'Y' would not have required extra genes to stop females becoming gay .
The fact that 10% of females arent gay , may well be other genetic imperatives [ children] overriding the sexuality gene .
The above is rather convoluted , but the evolutionary ladder is quite long to account for gays being in our society .
For a laugh try finding out automatic things you do , and work out how they came to be genetic-
It ranges from exceedingly trivial to quite profound, the problem is finding the questions.. rather than getting the answers .
My ideas became formed , when I left my car on dark cold night and nearly wet my pants with the sooo urgent need to urinate.
In mid stream, I wondered why this phenomenon occurred and overnight came up with the solution .
Basically , the idea is that evolution has formed certain genetic imperatives in our body , to help survival .
So once you find the question , you have to formulate the reason why its in our genes.
In case you havent worked out the above yet ...
In stone Age times , the main reasons for going from warm to cold is either entering water or leaving a warm cave/building. In the latter, it helps the clan hygiene if people urinate outside rather than inside , so this would help [ its also probably why urine/faeces smell badly]. In the latter , it helps if the urine is diluted/dissipated quickly so predators cant use it as a homing beacon, hence it helps survival.
I have been told that this is more urgent in males than females , which would indicate possibly that males and females had different functions in early life .
One concern of mine was that females live longer than males , but the more urgent question seeme d to be why do women have a menopause ?
The answer is that ova are formed at birth so after a few years they degrade and any foetuses formed after a certain time would use more resources than they formed - ie the ratio of viable young:stillborn or unviable offspring
Ok : so why dont women die instead of the menopause ?
Obviously these females will not procreate any further , so the only reason is that their existing offspring will get more young . Also it has to be quite a large extra resource as these old females wouldnt do much to create wealth within the clan .
The only reason is that the eldest woman would have great status as the best repository of experience or even heading the clan maybe ? It thus goes that her offspring [ maybe only one] could have many mates .
THUS POLYGAMY WAS RIFE IN STONE AGE TIMES .
OK what does that tell us about society . basically there would have been a surplus of males in society and would have been thrown out . One of 2 things could have happened at this point . Presumably , the first is that one dominant male tried taking all the females for himself as happens in most societies like that [eg horses, elephants etc] , with the odd female sometimes being stolen to create new clans . This would have continued till territory was being fought over.
The other is that a clan had several large families within it.
In the former case , as territory became smaller , there would have been fights, and any clan that had more males would gain at the expense of those that didnt .
The end result would have been the same , ie several families /clan [ evolution again].
Thus societies grew , although whilst man was a hunter/gatherer , this could not go beyond a certain size.
At this point [ or possibly before/after ] , if gays were in society , then although they wouldnt breed , they would offer better defensive/offensive properties for the clan , and as such would give better survival characteristics for their siblings .
If before , then a pair of gays in the clan would offer 3 times the manpower compared to a single male - a HUGE survival chance increase
If after, say when we became settlers, then less so , but the % usage of resources for maintaining a non reproductive pair[s] would be much less .
Either way , gays should increase the size of the 'clan' [reproductive pool of genes] and as such gays are a normal , albeit genetically out of date part of society .
The corollary of this , of course, is that groups of animals that are/were similar to stone age humans, should have the same characteristics in terms of sexuality .
Thus finding that 10% of sheep are gay should not be a surprise . In fact considering our society came out of the stone age only about 5000 years ago , that % should be almost the same in humans as the number of generations since then wouldnt have materially affected that gene responsible .
I read somewhere that 8% of male humans were gay [ was years ago] , that figure is maybe lower due to some males being 'in the closet' perhaps.
Female gays ? In Stone Age terms , this would have made zero difference to reproducing [being blunt] and as such if the gene responsible occurred in the x chromosome rather than the 'Y' would not have required extra genes to stop females becoming gay .
The fact that 10% of females arent gay , may well be other genetic imperatives [ children] overriding the sexuality gene .
The above is rather convoluted , but the evolutionary ladder is quite long to account for gays being in our society .
For a laugh try finding out automatic things you do , and work out how they came to be genetic-
Comments