Origin of homophobia?

[King Phenomenon]

Indeed. There is no sign for homonid to have a high tendency to form harems and there isn't any genetic known markers for homophobia or even for high conventionalism either. At best the link would epigenetic. The fact that people can get over homophobia rather easily is a definite proof that there is very little genetical root to it. You can't change you gene or to their expression, but you can overcome fear and prejudices. The best you could find a genetical cause for is a predisposition for high anxiety that could express itself in xenophobia which could express itself in homophobia if all the necessary components are there.

I think this is probably hogwash. You don't seem very knowledgeable on the subject

 

[King Phenomenon]

And another one.

I repeat,i have posted several scientific papers on homophobia throughout history, it seems you ignore them to promote your own hobby horse.

Speculation to free your own particular brand of religion of the homophobic label wont change the evidence.

Oh and we did not evolve from monkeys despite your monkeymen slight. You would be more accurate with apemen or even more on the ball with ape like men

I'm well aware we are great apes

 

[King Phenomenon]

And another one.

I repeat,i have posted several scientific papers on homophobia throughout history, it seems you ignore them to promote your own hobby horse.

Speculation to free your own particular brand of religion of the homophobic label wont change the evidence.

Oh and we did not evolve from monkeys despite your monkeymen slight. You would be more accurate with apemen or even more on the ball with ape like men

How is monkey man a slight when They have a face like a chimpanzee and walk on two legs? hahaha

 

[King Phenomenon]

saying an act is wrong doesn't mean one is homophobic. No more that if someone is going 85 mph on a 70 mph highway makes me a speedophobic just because I think it is wrong.

I deal with all types of situations - but in none of the cases have I acquired a phobia.

If I was gay and you were talking about how wrong it is to be gay I don't think I will stick around in the room. LOL

 

[King Phenomenon]

And another one.

I repeat,i have posted several scientific papers on homophobia throughout history, it seems you ignore them to promote your own hobby horse.

Speculation to free your own particular brand of religion of the homophobic label wont change the evidence.

Oh and we did not evolve from monkeys despite your monkeymen slight. You would be more accurate with apemen or even more on the ball with ape like men

Ha Ha not trying to free a religion ha ha

 

[Valjean]

I'm talking 1 million years ago

I'd be surprised if there was much homophobia a million years ago. Hunter-gatherer bands of ten or twenty can't afford to alienate others over minor peccadilloes.
Homosexuality was likely an important and functional features in such societies.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Maybe the guys that time 5000-1,000000 years ago was better in keeping their "equipment" in their clothes and was less sex fixated then so many people are today
Maybe they just focused on the task they had to do to survive.
Or maybe the society at that time was so much more advanced and spiritual then the people of today. So sex was not of important except for procreation

 

[epronovost]

I'd be surprised if there was much homophobia a million years ago. Hunter-gatherer bands of ten or twenty can't afford to alienate others over minor peccadilloes.
Homosexuality was likely an important and functional features in such societies.

If you look at our closest cousins in the animal kingdom, the bonobo, homosexual behavior aren't uncommon and the same is true for chimps. Most zoologist who study such animals believe homosexual behavior facilitate social bonding. The same is true is certain hunter-gatherer tribes of humans.

 

[Valjean]

Maybe the guys that time 5000-1,000000 years ago was better in keeping their "equipment" in their clothes and was less sex fixated then so many people are today
Maybe they just focused on the task they had to do to survive.
Or maybe the society at that time was so much more advanced and spiritual then the people of today. So sex was not of important except for procreation

What clothes?

 

[epronovost]

Maybe the guys that time 5000-1,000000 years ago was better in keeping their "equipment" in their clothes and was less sex fixated then so many people are today
Maybe they just focused on the task they had to do to survive.
Or maybe the society at that time was so much more advanced and spiritual then the people of today. So sex was not of important except for procreation

Unlikely, in hunter-gatherer tribes, sexual habits are more liberal than in any other civilisations. Fertility cults are also the eldest known religious practices in company with ritual burials and pre-date civilisation by thousands of years. Humans are intensely sexual animals. We have a lot of sex for a lot of reasons.

 

[Spirit of Light]

What clothes?

Normal clothing I do not believe we were tiny ape man who run around naked "humping" each others. I believe humanity as we know it today are much less advanced then the people in OP is speaking about.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Unlikely, in hunter-gatherer tribes, sexual habits are more liberal than in any other civilisations. Fertility cults are also the eldest known religious practices in company with ritual burials and pre-date civilisation by thousands of years. Humans are intensely sexual animals. We have a lot of sex for a lot of reasons.

As I said in my other answer, I believe today's human beings are a lot less advanced then what the timeline of the OP speaks of. I do not believe todays people are advanced

 

[Valjean]

As I said in my other answer, I believe today's human beings are a lot less advanced then what the timeline of the OP speaks of. I do not believe todays people are advanced

What do you mean by "advanced?" Ane what does that have to do with clothing?

 

[epronovost]

As I said in my other answer, I believe today's human beings are a lot less advanced then what the timeline of the OP speaks of. I do not believe todays people are advanced

That belief would be wrong, unless you want to discuss mythology or use another usage for "advanced" that what is commonly understood. Homo erectus level of technical development (there were no homo sapiens a million years ago) was very low and though there are signs of the development of some early art form, we have no trace of burial for them, but some traces of a cult of fertility already in development with talisman of pregnant belly, vulva and giant penises.

 

[King Phenomenon]

I'd be surprised if there was much homophobia a million years ago. Hunter-gatherer bands of ten or twenty can't afford to alienate others over minor peccadilloes.
Homosexuality was likely an important and functional features in such societies.

Other animal species alienate

 

[Kenny]

If I was gay and you were talking about how wrong it is to be gay I don't think I will stick around in the room. LOL

If you were gay, I wouldn't be talking about how wrong it is to be gay... I would be talking about how great is the love of God towards us.

I don't go around talking about how fast you are speeding, how living together is not the best thing et al.

Just share the love, preach the Gospel and let the Holy Spirit deal with the heart... after all, when I gave my life to Jesus, I wan't a saint.

However, my point still stands. Just because I said "lying is wrong" doesn't translate into being a lyophobic. (sp?) Then I would but upset at everybody - even myself?

 

[Spirit of Light]

What do you mean by "advanced?" Ane what does that have to do with clothing?

Primitive people use less clothes, or animal skin to cover them self. Advanced in this part is that people before was much more spiritual and morally advanced then today. I do not speak of technology when speaking of advanced people.

 

[Spirit of Light]

That belief would be wrong, unless you want to discuss mythology or use another usage for "advanced" that what is commonly understood. Homo erectus level of technical development (there were no homo sapiens a million years ago) was very low and though there are signs of the development of some early art form, we have no trace of burial for them, but some traces of a cult of fertility already in development with talisman of pregnant belly, vulva and giant penises.

I believe your version is the wrong one. Not that it is your fault at all. It is science that got it wrong, and if I understand you correctly you believe strongly in science, not in spiritual teaching

 

[Valjean]

Other animal species alienate

Huh?
Are you saying other species alienate homosexual members? What evidence do you have of that?

Links?

 

[Valjean]

Primitive people use less clothes, or animal skin to cover them self. Advanced in this part is that people before was much more spiritual and morally advanced then today. I do not speak of technology when speaking of advanced people.

More morally advanced? You haven't read much ethnography, have you?
People are tribal. Their moral consideration rarely extends beyond their own band members unless there is a considerable cultural overlay, and this is usually a feature of modern, cosmopolitan societies, not primitive ones.