SMBC Comics Forum

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2310

While I am unable to locate it now, there was a study that concluded a couple years ago about how there was a correlation that showed gay men often had promiscuous aunts. The study did not find any similar correlation for gay women.

I remember dealing with this on YouTube once. A guy came out with roughly the same argument in roughly the same...I don't know, timbre, I guess.

I thanked him for actually coming up with a relatively coherent argument, which is oodles more than you could say for anyone else, but also pointed out that in actual genetics no one gene has any one given effect; they're recipes for proteins more than 'traits' per se, and if a different effect of any, y'know, 'gay' gene was more beneficial to reproduction (particularly when occurring in women, as mentioned above), then said gay gene could well survive. Clearly a bit of maladaptive trait is not unheard of in any human. After all, you don't get more maladaptive than spending your days whining on You...er...on YouTube...

He didn't get back to me. I assume he got hit by a bus in his rush to thank me for my insightful rebuttal.

I'm just not seeing how this comic works.

If he were arguing against Homosexuality being genetic, then showing what a loser he is has no bearing on whether or not it's a choice, and given the existence of Homosexuality he couldn't be arguing that choice wasn't a factor in whether we achieve our GENETIC DESTINY or whatever.

If he were an evolution denier, then according to his view he would only be further evidence that evolution was a biologist conspiracy.

...i'm fat, unshaved long haired nerd wearing green shirt. Damn you, Weiner.
But! It is entirely possible for both evolution, and umh...genetical gayness to be true. For hundreds of years, men hid their homosexuality, especially in highly religious communities/coutries, and even when not attracted to opposite gender, they had families and procreated, just to prove how good and righteous they are. Even today we hear stories "I found my husband with a man".
Assuming homosexual can be born of heteorosexual parents, like albino can be born of dark skinned parents, there is no conflict between evolution, and 'homosexuality gene'.

/forgive my poor english/

If anyone wonders hwo this actually works, or how such a trait can continue to exsist, keep in mind that survival is about survival of the group that carry that gene, not about the individual. Individuals who are homosexual are less likely to reproduce, and thus allow their genetic setup to continue to exsist. However, they share their genes with their siblings and the children of their siblings. The question would be: Do homosecuals give the group (aka families) a bigger chance to survive? (which means his genes, including part of the 'gay genes').

The question might actually be yes. Individuals who do not get children can help other couples who do have children, relieving the work load and giving the children a bigger chance of survival. I'll be honest here - I don't have links to scientific research to back up my point, but I might look into it some more later.

Girly wrote:If anyone wonders hwo this actually works, or how such a trait can continue to exsist, keep in mind that survival is about survival of the group that carry that gene, not about the individual. Individuals who are homosexual are less likely to reproduce, and thus allow their genetic setup to continue to exsist. However, they share their genes with their siblings and the children of their siblings. The question would be: Do homosecuals give the group (aka families) a bigger chance to survive? (which means his genes, including part of the 'gay genes').

The question might actually be yes. Individuals who do not get children can help other couples who do have children, relieving the work load and giving the children a bigger chance of survival. I'll be honest here - I don't have links to scientific research to back up my point, but I might look into it some more later.

Could not wait twelve minutes for me to activate its account.

I swear to God I'm going to make a usergroup for these impatient people.

edit:
and now i have

Hmm I wonder if it's just because none of them bother to introduce themselves and they just want to hear their own voices, but I can not bring myself to read any of these posts.

Maybe I should stop complaining though. Just a thought.

I'm confused about this comic. apparently what it says is that anyone who makes a coherent argument against homosexuality being genetic is a fat loser? Why on earth would anyone ever want to read this?

not wrote:I'm confused about this comic. apparently what it says is that anyone who makes a coherent argument against homosexuality being genetic is a fat loser? Why on earth would anyone ever want to read this?

welcome to post-nerd-reboot SMBC you must be new here

it is all terrible

not wrote:I'm confused about this comic. apparently what it says is that anyone who makes a coherent argument against homosexuality being genetic is a fat loser? Why on earth would anyone ever want to read this?

I think the joke is that the guy in the comic has about the same chance of procreating as a homosexual.

Gay men have on average more siblings than the general populace, i.e. their mothers are more fertile: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3735668.stm

This *can* be interpreted as there being a "gay gene", at least for male homosexuality, which would be passed on by the siblings.

But genetics is not the only possible explanation. The most convincing attempts of explaining homosexuality (and, by the way, also transsexuality) seem to me that the hormons the unborn baby is exposed to in the womb play a role, with different amounts of different hormons at different times resulting in different sexual orientations, gender identities and development of sexual organs. The last thing (hormon levels being responsible for certain types of intersexuality, especially the "main" type with ambiguous genitalia) is proven. The others are still theories.


About the comic: The joke is obviously that evolution also resulted in fat unshaved gamers who do not leave their basement and thus will not procreate, so it can equally well result in homosexual people. Maybe that gamer has a lot of attractive siblings .

Comic unregarded, if evolution is about survival of the fittest, and we accept that males are stronger than females, then having a group with two homosexual couples and one hetrosexual couple is regarded much safer than three hetrosexual couples (5 males, against 3 males), having more men around means being safer.
A gene battle between more offsprings against protecting the few offsprings?

nr22 wrote:Comic unregarded, if evolution is about survival of the fittest, and we accept that males are stronger than females, then having a group with two homosexual couples and one hetrosexual couple is regarded much safer than three hetrosexual couples (5 males, against 3 males), having more men around means being safer.
A gene battle between more offsprings against protecting the few offsprings?

fittest != strongest

nice try tiger better luck next time

nr22 wrote:Comic unregarded, if evolution is about survival of the fittest, and we accept that males are stronger than females, then having a group with two homosexual couples and one hetrosexual couple is regarded much safer than three hetrosexual couples (5 males, against 3 males), having more men around means being safer.
A gene battle between more offsprings against protecting the few offsprings?

Survival of the Fit Enough, which doesn't even refer to strength, not some plateau that only holds the most effective survival forms possible. Look at Girly's answer for why homosexuality can survive in the group even if homosexuals don't always procreate (though they still can even without the romantic component).

As someone similarly confused about why SMBC would resort to ad hominem in an attempt to prove that a point is invalid

About the comic: The joke is obviously that evolution also resulted in fat unshaved gamers who do not leave their basement and thus will not procreate, so it can equally well result in homosexual people. Maybe that gamer has a lot of attractive siblings .

helped me understand the joke; thanks for taking the time to clear that up. Also, I think that this comic is useful in explaining why the portrayed character's argument is faulty.