1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Gaydar

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by von Rothbart, Jul 8, 2007.

  1. philosophe

    philosophe Senior member

    Messages:
    4,892
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
     
  2. Manny Calavera

    Manny Calavera Senior member

    Messages:
    2,744
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    I thought this thread was going to be about our respective gaydars. Letdown total.
     
  3. JBZ

    JBZ Senior member

    Messages:
    2,281
    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Prejudice will happen anyway. Besides, for women looking to marry, it's important to quickly filter out those who might be gay.

    If prejudice will happen anyway, then what's the point of the research? It's to give women the ability to spot gay men more easily so they won't marry them?

    I see the point of doing the research in order to get a better understanding of the "nature vs. nurture" theories, but I'd like to think that scientists have better things to do then to spend money on helping women marry heterosexuals. Women have been doing this for thousands of years without the help of science.
     
  4. JetBlast

    JetBlast Senior member

    Messages:
    5,880
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Location:
    Los Angeles / London
    Seconded. Screw this, I'm going to go look at overpriced shoes at Lord & Taylor.

    JB
     
  5. globetrotter

    globetrotter Senior member

    Messages:
    20,605
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Location:
    greater chicago
    Well no. If there is a gay gene then you need gay people to reproduce in order for the trait to live on. If gay uncles never have any kids than eventually there will no longer be any gay uncles.

    I'm not a genetisist, but I don't think it works like that. I think that a gene doesn't just control one thing, it controls several. so there may be a gene that, along with several other things, makes every tenth man that has that gene by gay. if that were the case, and the assumption was that gay men make good uncles, then that gene would self perpetuate well, if the advantage of having a gay uncle raised ones ability to preproduce.
     
  6. Manny Calavera

    Manny Calavera Senior member

    Messages:
    2,744
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    Seconded. Screw this, I'm going to go look at overpriced shoes at Lord & Taylor.

    JB


    I was looking for tips on how to hone my gaydar. I'm terrible.
     
  7. EL72

    EL72 Senior member

    Messages:
    6,860
    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    I'm not a genetisist, but I don't think it works like that. I think that a gene doesn't just control one thing, it controls several. so there may be a gene that, along with several other things, makes every tenth man that has that gene by gay. if that were the case, and the assumption was that gay men make good uncles, then that gene would self perpetuate well, if the advantage of having a gay uncle raised ones ability to preproduce.

    The first part of your statement is true but not the conclusion. Genes cannot self-perpetuate; they need to be passed on to your offspring for the traits they activate to remain in the population. In other words, if every tenth gay uncle never has any kids, irrespective of the adaptive value of having gay uncles, they have no one to pass their genes to and will become extinct.

    An interesting corollary of this discussion is that if gay people today are increasingly open with their homosexuality and stop reproducing (i.e. they don't marry and have kids for show and remain closet homos as they used to) and there seems to be evidence of this, then they will remove themselves from the gene pool within a few generations - assuming of course that there is indeed a gay gene.
     
  8. Manny Calavera

    Manny Calavera Senior member

    Messages:
    2,744
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    The first part of your statement is true but not the conclusion. Genes cannot self-perpetuate; they need to be passed on to your offspring for the traits they activate to remain in the population. In other words, if every tenth gay uncle never has any kids, irrespective of the adaptive value of having gay uncles, they have no one to pass their genes to and will become extinct.

    An interesting corollary of this discussion is that if gay people today are increasingly open with their homosexuality and stop reproducing (i.e. they don't marry and have kids for show and remain closet homos as they used to) and there seems to be evidence of this, then they will remove themselves from the gene pool within a few generations - assuming of course that there is indeed a gay gene.


    ...but there isn't.
     
  9. Bandwagonesque

    Bandwagonesque Senior member

    Messages:
    2,237
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Location:
    Canada
    I was looking for tips on how to hone my gaydar. I'm terrible.

    Thin, neat and single.
     
  10. EL72

    EL72 Senior member

    Messages:
    6,860
    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    ...but there isn't.

    I have no idea. I'm not aware of the latest research in this area. I was just making an argument based on the assumption that there is.
     
  11. EL72

    EL72 Senior member

    Messages:
    6,860
    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    Thin, neat and single.

    I would add Youtube performances of Proud Mary to that list.
     
  12. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    The first part of your statement is true but not the conclusion. Genes cannot self-perpetuate; they need to be passed on to your offspring for the traits they activate to remain in the population. In other words, if every tenth gay uncle never has any kids, irrespective of the adaptive value of having gay uncles, they have no one to pass their genes to and will become extinct.

    An interesting corollary of this discussion is that if gay people today are increasingly open with their homosexuality and stop reproducing (i.e. they don't marry and have kids for show and remain closet homos as they used to) and there seems to be evidence of this, then they will remove themselves from the gene pool within a few generations - assuming of course that there is indeed a gay gene.


    Assuming for the sake of discussion that there were such a thing as a "gay gene", I'm not sure your conclusion would follow. With the reduction of societal prejudices against gay people, and with the increase in medical sophistication, gay couples are now much more able to start families with babies who carry their genes -- through the use of surrogates, in vitro fertilization, whatever.
    But there's a more fundmental problem that runs through this discussion. Concepts like "fitness" and genetic "advantages" can sometimes be deduced retrospectively, although even that is a complicated endeavor. Given the variety of factors (only some of them understood) at play and the time scales involved in evolution and Darwinian "selection", trying to make such judgments or predictions prospectively is, for a variety of reasons, generally a fool's errand.
     
  13. Connemara

    Connemara Senior member

    Messages:
    39,486
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    I would add Youtube performances of Proud Mary to that list.

    Oh come on, not even a raging 'mo would put something like that on YouTube.
     
  14. Manny Calavera

    Manny Calavera Senior member

    Messages:
    2,744
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    Oh come on, not even a raging 'mo would put something like that on YouTube.

    [​IMG]
     
  15. globetrotter

    globetrotter Senior member

    Messages:
    20,605
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Location:
    greater chicago
    The first part of your statement is true but not the conclusion. Genes cannot self-perpetuate; they need to be passed on to your offspring for the traits they activate to remain in the population. In other words, if every tenth gay uncle never has any kids, irrespective of the adaptive value of having gay uncles, they have no one to pass their genes to and will become extinct.

    An interesting corollary of this discussion is that if gay people today are increasingly open with their homosexuality and stop reproducing (i.e. they don't marry and have kids for show and remain closet homos as they used to) and there seems to be evidence of this, then they will remove themselves from the gene pool within a few generations - assuming of course that there is indeed a gay gene.


    again, I am not a genetisist, and I may have understood this incorrectly, but you don't need to have direct descendants to carry on your genes - look at animals like ants and bees, for instance, that work to allow their siblings to reproduce, on the assumption that that will carry on their genes. a gene could carry a trait that helped others that carry that gene reproduce successfully, not nessasarily every individual that carries that gene.
     
  16. globetrotter

    globetrotter Senior member

    Messages:
    20,605
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Location:
    greater chicago
    ...but there isn't.

    I don't know that there is, but we don't know that there isn't. there may be.
     
  17. EL72

    EL72 Senior member

    Messages:
    6,860
    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    Assuming for the sake of discussion that there were such a thing as a "gay gene", I'm not sure your conclusion would follow. With the reduction of societal prejudices against gay people, and with the increase in medical sophistication, gay couples are now much more able to start families with babies who carry their genes -- through the use of surrogates, in vitro fertilization, whatever.

    That's true.

    But there's a more fundmental problem that runs through this discussion. Concepts like "fitness" and genetic "advantages" can sometimes be deduced retrospectively, although even that is a complicated endeavor. Given the variety of factors (only some of them understood) at play and the time scales involved in evolution and Darwinian "selection", trying to make such judgments or predictions prospectively is, for a variety of reasons, generally a fool's errand.

    I agree with this too. I wouldn't bet my Tramezzas on predicting the outcome of any evolutionary processe but it's still interesting to consider.
     
  18. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    That's true.



    I agree with this too. I wouldn't bet my Tramezzas on predicting the outcome of any evolutionary processe but it's still interesting to consider.


    Agreed. Since I think we wear different shoe sizes, there's no incentive for me to try to sucker you into that bet. Of course, by the time we knew the outcome neither of our descendants might even have feet.
     
  19. EL72

    EL72 Senior member

    Messages:
    6,860
    Joined:
    May 11, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    Agreed. Since I think we wear different shoe sizes, there's no incentive for me to try to sucker you into that bet. Of course, by the time we knew the outcome neither of our descendants might even have feet.

    [​IMG] I think humans will evolve webbed feet given the distinct evolutionary advantage they will confer in the coming global warming era.
     
  20. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    21,825
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    [​IMG] I think humans will evolve webbed feet given the distinct evolutionary advantage they will confer in the coming global warming era.

    So I guess Kenneth Cole is really positioning the brand for the future. [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by