Lesbianism explained at last
Oh yes, oh yes – a male researcher has worked out (to his own satisfaction at least) that lesbianism is something to do with pleasing men.
A new study that attempted to reveal the origins of lesbianism, is claiming that same-sex relationships in women only exist because it turns men on.
Published on Science Direct, the report by Menelaos Apostolou, a male professor at the University of Nicosia in Cyprus comes to the conclusion that lesbian and bisexual attraction all stems from male desire.
Well that does make sense if you think about it, because only men are actually human. Women are just simulacra, remotely operated from the planet Androcentro.
“My argument in the paper is this: A considerable proportion of men desire same-sex attractions in women, and this is one possible reason why many women have such attractions,” Apostolou told Pink News.
The study also suggests another possible reason for men being attracted to lesbian or bisexual women, is that if their partner cheats on them, they’re still in with a chance of having children.
Deffo. Say you’re a man. You don’t want Your Woman getting pregnant by another man, because kids are expensive, dude. What to do, what to do. Solution! You make it so that she has sex with women instead of men.
Ok but how? How do you make it that she does that?
With the magic of your mind, of course.
“A woman, driven by her sexual desires, may seek sexual contact outside of her long-term intimate relationship,” it writes.
“When this woman has sex with another woman she does not have sex with another man which translates into same-sex contact reducing the risk of cuckoldry.”
Totally. If there are any kids, they’ll be your kids, and thus the expense won’t be so irritating.
What research was involved in this? Does sitting around thinking about stuff count?
So then why are men attracted to men? So that they can have sex outside of marriage without worrying about impregnating Another Man’s Woman? And possibly risk alienating an Alpha Male? Who might have a big gun?
Damn, these people really stretch it to make everything women do about men, don’t they?
Judging from the abstract, it’s again doing the bad evo-psych bit of coming up with a genetic explanation with a just-so story about our ancestral environment – while completely ignoring obvious alternative explanations based on common-sense.
In other words he made shit up based on what makes him hot. great research. Still, at least it’s social science research that the liberal sceptic bro’s can actually get behind.
So uh… how exactly is this trait supposed to be passed down, if it is caused by same sex – and hence non-reproducing – couples?
Holms, Probably through the perpetually horny male line…
(remember, only one party has to be consenting) /s
Well yes, there’s the range of questionable consent. There’s also sexual orientation/preference as a spectrum. If you take the question to be how you can have any surviving heritable interest in any bit of same-sex attraction, then selection by males in favor of women with some same-sex attraction with a heritable basis is a possible answer (for women). The women with practically nothing but same-sex attraction would represent the sort of excessive expression of the trait that may pop up now and then for some trait for which some degree of expression is adaptive. Or it may work as some sort of awful, compelling “RAPE ME” sign, that’s all kinds of bad for that woman and no good for men but hypothetically effective for getting the relevant genes into the next generation.
It’s a remotely possible answer. It’s certainly possible to heap even more scorn on him than is merited. But nurture is, as often, a huge, clear, confounding variable that is breezed right over.
It would’ve been better if he was stationed at the University of the Aegean’s Lesvos campus. (Note, modern Greek has undergone a vowel shift wherein ‘b’ turned to ‘v’.)
I rang my lesbian daughter earlier and told her that research has proved that she and her wife were lesbians because it turned men on. Before she had chance to chew me a new one I explained the reason for my call in context. After a short but informative chat with the two of them my daughter suggested that the researcher needs to watch less lesbian porn, do less masturbating, and do more, you know, actual research. I can further report that neither my daughter nor my daughter-in-law had ever given men’s thoughts on lesbianism a moment’s thought before, and now that they have, they still don’t give a fuck about their wank-fantasies.
@Acolyte #9
Well, to be absolutely fair, if this guy was right (and I very much doubt he is) then there’s no reason that lesbian women would be consciously aware of what’s happening or the reasons for their behaviour – after all, mostly we eat because we are hungry, not to consciously supply our body with certain nutrients.
Bet he’s very, very unlikely to be right. More likely to be right are 1) a developmental pathway going awry focussing sexual desire on a nonproductive object (this assumes sexuality is 100% biological and can also be applied to paedophilia), 2) that there is something in early childhood that focusses on the same sex (100% nurture, applies to quite a lot of paraphilias), 3) a combination of the two, and 4) something akin to the “grandmother” effect which has already been suggested as what might be termed the “gay uncle” effect and aplliues just as well to the “lesbian aunt”.
The theory is that, just as a mother who becomes non reproductive towards the end of her life may pass on more copies of her genes by helping her daughters raise and feed their children, so producing a couple of non-reproductive children may benefit the survival of your other children thus maximising the number of your descendents who survive. It is suggested the “gay uncle” might share more of his food and time with his siblings’ children. The same could also be suggested of the lesbian aunt. Thus the genes that promote this behaviour survive, and stay within the gene pool.
There’s some (small) evidence for the grandmother effect. But all of those hypotheses rest on the assumption that all apparently congenital behaviour is genetically based and we know that isn’t true.
COULD you come up with a shallower example of Texas Bullseye-ing? Two, count ’em, two online surveys indicate that his male respondents were more likely to approve of partners with same-sex attraction than women were. And THIS is supposed to express some deep, biologically significant fact about human nature?
These men seemingly fell off a turnip truck uninfluenced by decades of squishy ‘girl on girl’ pseudo-sexual media?