Thread Husband of 9/11 Hero Returns Woman of the Year Award

shit I swear I didn't read helena's post before I wrote mine :lol: I almost said doctor but changed to lawyer at the last minute for some raisin
was it a good raisin?

:fly:

@Amstel just thinking you're being a bit under sympathetic. Something like that is bigger IMO than what you are making it out to be. That's all. Not wanting to argue though so we can agree to disagree on this point and move on :)
 
Thats a confusing one.

From a purely biological standpoint, the brain serves a singular function: Drive the body to reproduce.

Gay people, asexual people, all violate that singular function. If you're going to use that biological drive as the measure of normality, anyone not conforming to it does indeed have some "illness"

difference of course is, we're humans, not animals, so maybe we've moved beyond the core measure of normality being "reproduce". Things that impede reproduction, but increase net happiness for all involved, maybe not "illness" by new definition.
 
Thats a confusing one.

From a purely biological standpoint, the brain serves a singular function: Drive the body to reproduce.

Gay people, asexual people, all violate that singular function. If you're going to use that biological drive as the measure of normality, anyone not conforming to it does indeed have some "illness"

difference of course is, we're humans, not animals, so maybe we've moved beyond the core measure of normality being "reproduce". Things that impede reproduction, but increase net happiness for all involved, maybe not "illness" by new definition.

I don't know if it can be considered an illness if it doesn't cause direct harm to the person

also humans are indeed animals :p KINGDOM ANIMALIA RE% :boobies:
 
I don't know if it can be considered an illness if it doesn't cause direct harm to the person

also humans are indeed animals :p KINGDOM ANIMALIA RE% :boobies:
yeah, i couldnt find the right word there. Not disorder, imbalance, illness.

But based on solely biological drive, its definitely a negative effect.
 
yeah, i couldnt find the right word there. Not disorder, imbalance, illness.

But based on solely biological drive, its definitely a negative effect.
hmm...maybe

I can imagine a situation in which natural selection favors a population with lots of members that are not part of the breeding pool and can devote time to other things that sustain the population

but I'm just ass pulling that, I ain't no gosh darn evolutionary biologist.
 
hmm...maybe

I can imagine a situation in which natural selection favors a population with lots of members that are not part of the breeding pool and can devote time to other things that sustain the population

but I'm just ass pulling that, I ain't no gosh darn evolutionary biologist.

in a scarce world, where curtailing population growth is better for the species as a whole, that might apply.

Think ants. One breeder, tons of sterile individuals.
 
Think ants. One breeder, tons of sterile individuals.

Is this better for the species or the breeder? Seems a breeder will survive longer if vast majority of offspring are sterile (especially in that #) and non-competitive. It may just be the way the species evolved.

Either an anomaly has become a current massive species asset, or it's by design. I'm guessing the former.
 
hmm...maybe

I can imagine a situation in which natural selection favors a population with lots of members that are not part of the breeding pool and can devote time to other things that sustain the population

but I'm just ass pulling that, I ain't no gosh darn evolutionary biologist.
This is basically altruism, which has indeed been shown to be biologically beneficial

Note for the mouth breathers: altruism is not being gay. Being gay is not altruistic.
 
Is this better for the species or the breeder? Seems a breeder will survive longer if vast majority of offspring are sterile (especially in that #) and non-competitive. It may just be the way the species evolved.

Either an anomaly has become a current massive species asset, or it's by design. I'm guessing the former.
now, i know you dont science. But ants are the most populous "intelligent" species on the planet, both in numbers, and pure biomass. So id say the species.