Re: Model of how a gay gene could be propogated from generation to generation

Harvey Newstrom (
Thu, 2 Dec 1999 14:29:07 -0500

<> wrote on Thursday, December 02, 1999 2:39 am,

> So we went from 100% carrying the gay gene to 75% in the next generation.
> Or if you count percentage of breeders, it is 67%. This will continue
> to drop each generation, eventually eliminating the gene from the pool.


I did not make this model up. This is how all recessive genes work. Blue eyes are defined by recessive genes. Not all recessive genes die out. What if blue-eyed recessives are more attractive than brown-eyed dominants? They might get more reproductive chances. Similarly, straight gay-gene carriers who look like gay body builders might get more dates.

My point was merely that the reproductive habits of the gays would be a minor influence on the gene's propagation in this example. It would be the behavior of the straight gene carriers that propagated the gene to the next generation. The assumption that a gene causing nonreproduction would be selected out by basic genetics is just plain wrong. And as someone else rightly pointed out, most gays do have children.

As a biology minor, I am merely pointing out the flaws in stated beliefs about genetics. Real genetics doesn't work the way most people on this list seem to assume.

Harvey Newstrom <mailto://>
Author, Consultant, Engineer, Legal Hacker, Researcher, Scientist.