The things my acquaintances send to each other on twitter made me realize how little I mean in their eyes...

submitted by lazy-summer-godSuper Gay from i.imgur.com

all 46 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 39 insightful - 5 fun39 insightful - 4 fun40 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

Explains why they’re acquaintances and not friends. No friend of mine would say that, because if he did, then we’d no longer be friends. I dunno why gay people exist, we just do. But I do know that we’re not here to please mentally ill crossdressers who have damaged their bodies beyond repair.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I have heard of cases of animals (especially penguins?) having homosexual couples adopt orphaned young and caring for them. Homosexuality may have the advantage of saving resources within a community by allowing orphans to be cared for. And that is something that we see being possible but often blocked in humans, as we have an overwhelmed foster care system in many places and gay couples unable to have their own children willing to adopt those children into loving homes.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That’s true about the penguins. Even if it’s true that every child needs a mother and a father, a child who’s lost his parents is still better off permanently living under the guardianship of his two gay uncles than becoming a ward of the state. I’m all for gay adoption and gay guardianship for this reason. You don’t see transsexualism in any species except in certain types of invertebrate fish.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I do believe that some frogs and clownfish can also do it, but they actually manage to legitimately do it because their DNA is programmed to allow it. Similar to how the fish have gills for breathing water and frogs are born as tadpoles, which are basically fish.

Humans lack SEVERAL of the abilities of many animals, so the existence of a property in the animal kingdom is not evidence for its existence in humans

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly. Just because some animals can get sex changes doesn’t mean that all animals can. Humans can talk, and we are the only animals who can talk. We are also one of the few species with opposable thumbs, alongside some other species of apes. That’s why humans rule the world. But we can’t get sex changes. Nor can we breathe while swallowing nor see in the dark.

[–][deleted] 39 insightful - 1 fun39 insightful - 0 fun40 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I couldn't give a flying fuck about the "evolutionary reason" for being gay to be quite frank, it will not make me have sex with someone I am not sexually compatible with.

[–]our_team_is_winning 37 insightful - 4 fun37 insightful - 3 fun38 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

There's no evolutionary reason for being trans. That's the part they've missed. How do fetishes benefit the species?

[–]ChodeSandwichtender and moist 34 insightful - 9 fun34 insightful - 8 fun35 insightful - 9 fun -  (0 children)

Sex dysphoria doesn't exist in animals and evolution doesn't give a shit about you. If you don't breed, that's that, there is no SantaBiologyJesusGod making sure everything's fair and fun and sexy for everyone.

[–]deliciousdogfoodmy name isnt a puppyplay reference i swear 28 insightful - 3 fun28 insightful - 2 fun29 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

So If I understand correctly, they're trying to say that somehow, evolution dictates that homosexuals only exist to be fucktoys for trans people?

Vile. At least these people won't be having children.

[–]just_lesbian_things 16 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

At least these people won't be having children.

Oh they are. Nothing can stop them, tbh. All these pregnant "dads" and men who discovered after fathering 6 children that they're women deep down. A lot of them are even freezing their sperm/egg before transitioning.

[–]chupacabrawitchI'm super thanks for asking 18 insightful - 3 fun18 insightful - 2 fun19 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This literally happened to someone my wife knows. The couple just had a baby, then all the sudden tada he comes out as trans. And he acts exactly how you think he would, obnoxious and self involved... I feel bad for the baby tbh..

[–]deliciousdogfoodmy name isnt a puppyplay reference i swear 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

As long as they completely lose their grip on reality after their children are old enough to disavow them.

[–]just_lesbian_things 14 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Nope. Wasn't there that guy who wanted to be a five year old girl after fathering like 7 children and abandoning his 7 children to live out his fetish full-time.

[–]Rosefield 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Stephonknee Wolscht

[–]reluctant_commenter 21 insightful - 2 fun21 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

If you really think about it there's no evolutionary reason for having lesbians and gays in society

^ I actually heard that one today from a conservative guy. Fucking hilarious to log onto this sub and hear almost the exact same thing from a liberal... fuck this.

[–]deliciousdogfoodmy name isnt a puppyplay reference i swear 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I thought the observed phenomena and subsequent hypothesis was that in mammals homosexuality often emerges in areas where population outstrips sustainability and acts as a form of population control to avoid ecosystem collapse.

Seems to me like homosexuality serves a pretty important biological purpose in society now that humans number in the billions and we refuse to think to the future beyond our tiny bubble when we have children.

[–]ThrowMeAway2879 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I believe people often forget that "survival of the fittest" does also mean "survival of the fittest group" in social animals. Which group has the better survival prospects as a whole? The one where every adult produces offspring (which then compete for limited resources) or the one that has a few 'extra' adults who contribute to resource gathering without putting a drain on group resources with their own offspring?

I am oversimplifying of course, but that's how it always made sense to me.

[–]fuck_reddit 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

To put a finer point on it, “survival of the fittest” is a crude way of saying “pass on your genes.” You can share anywhere from 1/2 to 1 of your siblings genes, so being gay and providing for your siblings/nieces & nephews becomes evolutionary beneficial when you have more than two siblings or four nieces/nephews (if i did the mental math right). There’s an equation to figure out the evolutionary benefit of helping relatives.

[–]reluctant_commenter 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's an interesting point... thank you. I'll have to keep that in mind. I honestly have not really had to counter those sorts of comments before, having been almost universally in the closet, so I wasn't prepared to debate it well. This was someone who also believes that the primary purpose of sex is procreation, though, and that homosexuality (and transgenderism) are both "lifestyles", so I'm not sure how successful I would've been, anyway.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I thought the observed phenomena and subsequent hypothesis was that in mammals homosexuality often emerges in areas where population outstrips sustainability and acts as a form of population control to avoid ecosystem collapse.

Personally, I think that same-sex sexuality (which is widespread in the animal kingdom) has different meanings-- and probably different causes-- according to species. Especially for the most intelligent ones in general (and us in particular).

The more intelligent a species is, the more important the non-reproductive aspects of sexuality become. And not just in a recreational sense-- as an expression of individual personality, and a means of social bonding. And these aren't minor things, either: look at one of our two closest relatives, bonobos. Their entire society is shaped by sexuality... most of all the kind that's not only non-reproductive, but same-sex (specifically between females). In fact, it's probably the main thing that differentiates them from our other closest relatives, chimpanzees.

It also seems to me that intelligence necessarily results in the creation of complex individual personality. Basic biological drives (like sexuality) are filtered through this, which interprets and shapes them, under the influence of experience and social forces.

So put all these things together in humans, and you get... a sexuality which is deeply connected to individual personality and emotional/social bonding. And therefore likely to transcend its reproductive role (essential though that is). Notably through same-sex sexuality. Which is, when viewed this way, just as natural and valuable as the opposite-sex kind. Because, while homosexuality doesn't make more humans, in these respects it is-- like any sexual orientation-- part of what makes us human.

[–]deliciousdogfoodmy name isnt a puppyplay reference i swear 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a far more intricate take on it than mine. You might very well be right. Even if I am unreasonably wary of talks about the importance of sexuality to the self, given that the last time these talks were commonplace an extremely vocal demographic took it much too far.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If you really think about it there's no evolutionary reason for having lesbians and gays in society

So that means they're not the result of evolution? Just where the fuck did they COME from, then, pray tell? Some prehistoric mad scientist's lab?

Anyone who's ever said this: YOU FAIL BIOLOGY FOREVER. And, clearly, the last thing that you did was "really think about it" (or think at all, apparently).

Evolution doesn't NEED a "reason", beyond: 1.] it was biologically possible, and 2.] it wasn't selected against, thus ended up being perpetuated. It's not as if there's some master plan. Or ANY plan. There's just random mutations, natural selection, and the fact that evolution is the only fucking game in town.

So, there obviously WAS an evolutionary "reason" for having lesbians and gays in society, since, yanno, THEY EXIST. And, basically, if you know anything about evolution, the reason comes down to... why not?

[–]reluctant_commenter 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Evolution doesn't NEED a "reason", beyond: 1.] it was biologically possible, and 2.] it wasn't selected against, thus ended up being perpetuated. It's not as if there's some master plan. Or ANY plan. There's just random mutations, natural selection, and the fact that evolution is the only fucking game in town.

I think this is a key point people who put evolution on a pedestal will tend to miss. There is not necessarily benefit to every single phenomenon that you see in a population, sometimes variation just arises for variation's sake.

The part I couldn't get this person to understand was-- a. where did being homosexual/bisexual come from if not evolution? It is consistent throughout human history and it is found in animals, so it is not a purely-human sociological artefact. b. if it is selected for by genetics, then how is it a choice? He seemed to simultaneously believe that it was a lifestyle choice.

I tried to explain that there is a difference between who identifies as bisexual/homosexual and who actually is in the long-run. He said there was no difference. That's patently false, even most trans rights activists will acknowledge that some people turn out to be straight even though they thought they were gay/asexual/whatever as children. Ugh. Straight people... Just a frustrating conversation. Thanks for the sanity, I appreciate it.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think this is a key point people who put evolution on a pedestal will tend to miss. There is not necessarily benefit to every single phenomenon that you see in a population, sometimes variation just arises for variation's sake.

Yes; very well-put. Indeed, you remind me that "variation for its own sake" is of enormous value in evolutionary terms-- so much so that a process developed specifically to maximize it: sexual reproduction. (This creates unique offspring every time, because they're the result of combining two individuals' DNA; asexual reproduction-- basically cloning-- can only accomplish this through mutations, which of course occur randomly.)

So one way of looking at LGB orientations are as human sexuality variations... just the sort of thing that heterosexuality itself evolved to produce in the first place!

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 17 insightful - 9 fun17 insightful - 8 fun18 insightful - 9 fun -  (0 children)

Harming your attractiveness to others and then trying to draft the unwilling via an evolution argument is an example of natural selection in progress.

[–]les4leshomonormative 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

wow this is a moronic take

[–]Femaleisnthateful 15 insightful - 6 fun15 insightful - 5 fun16 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

What's the evolutionary purpose of pairing people with trans folk who have sterilized themselves with puberty blockers and cross sex hormones?

Seems like a bit of an evolutionary dead end.

[–]Constantine 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Not that it matters since this would be egregious anyway, but there are evolutionary reasons for homosexuality. My family raised animals growing up and every time there was a gender imbalance in the population, the next babies would turn out gay.

There is no such thing as a trans farm animal.

[–]reluctant_commenter 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

My family raised animals growing up and every time there was a gender imbalance in the population, the next babies would turn out gay.

Wait, you actually got to see this in action? That's so cool lol. Mind if I ask what kind of animals?

[–]Constantine 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I won’t go into details for anonymity’s sake, but mostly birds. And yes, it was very common for birds to pair up in same sex couples when there was a gender imbalance. They even got to “adopt” other birds’ eggs sometimes and raise the babies.

[–]reluctant_commenter 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is so awesome lol. Thanks for sharing!

[–]QueenBread 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't understand the point they're trying to make, but I think it's probably homophobia. Their point is that they're homophobic.

[–]dreamsonlyu 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

wow do you ever think about how homophobes have been dying to say shit like this and now they can because "trans rights"

[–][deleted] 13 insightful - 4 fun13 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

I don't even fucking know what they're even trying to say.

[–]Rosefield 12 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

Lesbians & gays have to date trans people because evolution. Also evolution is about trans feelings.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

"See, you HAVE to fuck us! Evolution says so!" [gestures wildly at copy of On The Origin of Species]

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't know where they even get this. Do they think they're coherent...?

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They're twelve.

[–]Seahorse 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Soooo new flavour of gay is just a choice?

[–]Rosefield 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

What the hell is this nonsense??

[–][deleted] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Since the beginning of time, we had kids in forced marriages, not with T's. Evolution doesn't give a shit about anyone finding love; it's all about surviving long enough to pass down genes.

[–]Rag3 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I used to hear this stuff from religious people and conservatives... They’ve rebranded their homophobia and made it TRA now? Disgusting.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

With this kind of rhetoric it's almost like they could've been plantation owners in a previous existence; I mean, all you have to do is swap some words and you've basically went back in time 150 years.

I don't think this self-centered person understands that transgenders don't even need to enter the equation for Gays and Lesbians to form relationships. That is, assuming they were even talking about the needs of anyone but themselves. I'm guessing this fool wasn't though, based on the first sentence.

You only exist for our satisfaction, plebs.

[–]DestructionI ❤️ adult human females 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Awww, and here is silly ol' me who thought sexuality is inherently exclusionary. Duh, I guess I'm a meanie now :CCCC