Science is descriptive, not prescriptive.
Nobody denies homosexuality is "abnormal" in the sense that it's relatively uncommon. But to describe any behavioral trait as good or bad is moralizing which is unscientific by definition.

>>16960810
Like 99% of everything (you) have done in your entire life is "abnormal" in the sense that the human animal didn't evolve for that purpose.
You think humans evolved to make shitpost threads on internet forums?

>>16960833
No, it was considered a pathology by the APA until 1973 when it was removed from the DSM as they no longer considered it a pathology and just saw it as a variation of human sexuality. So where are the sexual organs located on people who want to reproduce with the person of the same sex? pseudo intellectual dumb fuck.

>>16960843
So walking is abnormal? Talking is abnormal? What tf are you talking about are you stupid? So what's the 1% that's normal then?

>>16960810
>The purpose of a man and a woman
Lol, that's like saying the purpose of a warm block is to heat up the cooler block next to it. There is no "purpose" in science buddy. Things just happen cause they're likely to happen, and they're constrained from things that cannot happen.

>>16960810
I don't think it should be considered pathological given that I'm pretty sure it evolved among humans for a reason and is simply no longer beneficial. In hunter-gatherer societies, homosexuals would, in theory, work while largely not competing for sexual partners nor reproducing. I don't think it's a coincidence that homosexuality is related to birth order, nor that niger-congo peoples, who started farming 5kya, *seem* to be significantly gayer than other groups.

>>16960859
This isn't moralizing, this isn't biology, and the field responsible for pathologizing behaviors isn't concerned with whether you're breeding. You are committing three category errors at once here. The field you should be asking is psychiatry.

Pathologies are defined by the distress they cause in the person affected by them or the distress in others caused by people who are affected. This is inherently somewhat arbitrary but the reason homosexuality was removed from the DSM is because it's now generally understood that the source of distress among gays is from society's treatment of them and not the "affliction" itself. Those that are distressed by the existence of gays are now seen as the problem as the distaste is perceived as irrational.

>>16960810
Purple regions, the males must transition into females to become gay

There are species like ants where the vast majority of individuals can't reproduce at all.

>>16960810
Science does consider homosexuality an abnormality and a genetic error.
The lefties on reddit are not Scientists even though they claim they are. Lol.

>>16960884
Yes because that is how their ant species works. All humans are supposed to reproduce because we are not ants lol.

>>16960874
Maybe in pink/purple regions one of the couples could become trans without surgery.

>>16960894
Scientifically, nothing's "supposed to" do anything. They just do what they do. Either you breed or you don't. Good or bad are not scientific categories.

>>16960894
Organisms are supposed to pass on their genes, but reproducing isn't the only way to do that. Family members share genes with each other, so if you help your family member reproduce then you're also passing down some of your own genes.

>>16960859
>APA
Ah, that's your mistake. This is a *science* board, not a psychiatry one

>>16960810
The gene that makes you crave benis also makes your sister crave benis. Working as intended.

>>16960874
This has been a thing for a while in Iran where transitioning is legal but homosexuality is not.

>>16960894
>that is how their ant species works
Who decided that?

File: spincraze bf.jpg (196.6 KB)

196.6 KB JPG

>there are women who enjoyed being cummed inside

File: lesbos-tourist-map[1].jpg (907.7 KB)

907.7 KB JPG

>>16960810
Purple countries:
"No fags allowed but we can't deny a little woman-on-woman action is hot."

>>16960810
>Biologically speaking

The thing is that biology as a discipline is torn theoretically between making theoretical speculations about teleology or about a rational universe where things happen because of and for reasons and causes although the the empirical observation of nature and empirical experiment reveals disorder or chaos or difference on basic assumptions and in contrast to the methodology of the scientific method which often tends to short circuit teleology by making teleology atemporal such that to speak of purpose in biology is always to risk agreeing or starting a fight with an aristotelian, i’m not sure which outcome would be worst probably

>>16960810
>The purpose of a man and a woman is for reproduction.
are we that stupid simple ?

>>16960961
>transitioning is legal but homosexuality is not
that's actually a meme in Iran, their treatment of homosexuals is more akin to balkan/russian shitholes
>>16961561
they don't think lesbians can have meaningful sex (half right i guess)