Is the purpose of human intimacy procreation?
If no, then why can’t we have intimacy without the unnecessary outcome of the propagation of our species?
If yes, should we require that every relationship between man and woman result in offspring? But we don’t, do we?
So, if we have the personal freedom to choose whether our relationships result in progeny and if there is more to intimacy than procreation, why are you so afraid of non-heterosexual relationships?
If a random ass crow can have a gay life partner and other crows see no problem with it. Then what’s humanities excuse?
ARE THE CROWS JUST BETTER THEN US? I mean probably but THEY SHOULDN’T BE. We should be AT LEAST on par with crows!
ARE THE CROWS JUST BETTER THEN US?
Actually, yes
Crows are genuinely fucking awesome though.
The assholes don’t want us to have personal freedom, though.
Homosexuality is a disease
Welp, guess I don’t have to work today, I’m calling in gay
This does make me wonder why we aren’t uni sex, from an evolutionary point of view. Wouldn’t it be easier to reproduce?
While it’s not the reason we have 2 sexes, there is an evolutionary reason for 2 partners to make an offspring, which is likely a big contributing factor
While asexual reproduction is easier, the downside is that the child is almost an exact genetic match of the parent. There’s a lot of reasons why this is not ideal (I don’t remember them lol, its complicated), so having 2 organisms mix their genes to create a genetically unique offspring is extremely advantageous. Having 2 sexes is likely easier than doing this with a unisex species, but as another commenter pointed out: evolution doesn’t make sense, it just does what works.
Sexual reproduction is more advantageous than asexual reproduction because it makes genes more varied and prone to mutations and changes. If, for some reason, all beings of your species without characteristic “X” die because, for example, they do not have enough resistance to cold, in the end someone with resistance to cold survives because, through the mixing of genes and other factors, this advantageous characteristic has emerged and prevails.
Whereas in asexual species, everyone is born with almost the same genes as their parents, so if it starts to get very cold, eventually everyone dies because no one has developed resistance to cold, as it is rarer for this to happen.
PS: I am not an expert and I try my best to explain what I remember.
It seems to be the demands of large terrestrial mammals. Land is a harsher environment where more genetic diversity from sexual reproduction is more advantageous. Being larger and having longer lifespans makes asexual reproduction rarely advantageous. One parent needing to gestate the offspring would exacerbate the pressures for sexual dimorphism. Almost no mammals asexually reproduce, in fact it might actually be none, but I’m not sure.
because evolution doesn’t target some optimal thing
Nature has Sequential Hermaphroditism as a thing.
Or just Hermaphroditism.
I’ll never understand why people care about what other people do with their genitals.
If you wanna stick your dick in a cactus or shove one up your puss idgaf. It’s not my fuckin problem.
While it is not aplicable to all bigots, a non-negligible amount of them are far enough from the straight wedge of the sexual orientation sppectrum that they can’t help but double down and project their self-hate and insecurities onto others. Just look at all the ever-growing lists of anti-trans and anti-queer politicians that are caught being hypocrites.
