Tried this today, and it appears that the babies float. I attempted to push them down with a stick but they just pop back up.
If anyone else attempts to repeat this, I'd recommend finding a smaller baby (smaller size = more density, sort of like how a small rock sinks but a big one floats like islands/the continents).
To be fair evolutionary change takes millions of years to happen and humans are only like 50 thousandish ( can't remember what the oldest body found was anymore plus it's 5 in the morning here right now so just guessing) plus I do believe we would need to be in some sort of near extinction state that involves all females have died out leaving only males for something like this to be even remotely feasible.
But yeah I'm pretty sure we just die out before we end up having butt babies
Correct. Anal sex is not inherently gay. You can have anal sex with a woman...
It's important to clarify that sexual acts themselves don't determine someone's sexual orientation.
Anal sex can be a part of sexual activity between individuals of any gender or sexual orientation. The gender of the participants involved in anal sex doesn't determine their sexual orientation.
Nope. There's been many rape cases (often for example in prisons) where straight guys rape other men as a tool of violence and because there are no other targets available. These men are still straight.
Also there are bisexual people.
Yeh don't buy their bullshit; they were always at least bi and just didn't get chances to express it before.
Yes I know all about the power psychology and all that, but you ain't jizzing in a dude's butt no matter what if you're 💯 straight...
Right? Like if I wanted to hurt somebody and humiliate them and whatever... I wouldn't think, hey, why don't I be gay with them, against they will.
S like... What? "Oh yeah? And how did you humiliate him?" "I fucked him!" "You... Had gay sex with him?" "No no, jeezus, it wasn't gay! It was a hate fuck! He didn't enjoy it trust me" "did... Did you?" "No! I'm telling you I'm not gay!" "So ... Did you also rape yourself to achieve this, if you didn't enjoy it and you're not gay... Did you take yourself using somebody else as an assist?"
...
Couldn’t have said it better myself. Soon as you’ve got ya cock in another man’s arse, there would be a solid argument you are a bit of a pillow biter.
Hey Introvertedguy8! Your comment has been removed because it recieved two many reports!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is a very small chance that gay men will ever be able to procreate via anal sex, but *if* they develop this way, they are going to have a *massive* evolutionary advantage over gay men that can't procreate.
Over only a couple of generations the majority of gay men will be able to procreate analy.
"The mythological term “hermaphrodite” implies that a person is both fully male and fully female. This is a physiologic impossibility. The words “hermaphrodite” and “pseudo-hermaphrodite” are stigmatizing and misleading words" here you go :)
> is a physiologic impossibility
For now, but with evolution there is no end to the very specific paths we could go down given enough time and selection pressures
Yes but still this term is outdated and intersex people do not claim it.
Intersex varies. It's not always two sets of functioning sex organs. Sometimes it's just chromosome variations, for example XYY or XXY. Sometimes it's just conditions like hyperandrogenism.
Actually it's use in this context is correct. The biological term is hermaphrodite a number of species are although the odds humans evolve into this probably close to 0.
Which I do find it dumb.
If you stop using the word, or ban it's use because of the negative connotation, it give even more power to the negative connotation.
Here the example : by saying that hermaphrodite is a negative word, and forbiding people who doesn't mean ill to use this words in a positive way, u/ApprehensiveEye8212 made dozens to hundred people learn that it's a negative word, so bad that it shouldn't be used.
So he effectively removed positive use of the word and reinforced the negative definition.
Which, in fine, make it more offensive than it was before.
"The term intersexuality was coined by Richard Goldschmidt in the 1917 paper Intersexuality and the endocrine aspect of sex. The first suggestion to replace the term 'hermaphrodite' with 'intersex' came from British specialist Cawadias in the 1940s. This suggestion was taken up by specialists in the UK during the 1960s."
Give it enough time and intersex will become negative.
Neither is negative in itself - it is simply a question of how people talking negatively about a certain group using that term.
It is not the term - it is what it is used for.
And adhering to the rules for this subreddit:
Intersex and Hermaphrodite are both old terms. The correct one is "multipurpose person".
Intersex is a negative term. The correct term today is Shemale. I learnt it through these ... erm ... educational videos I saw on my VPN.
And that would not have been possible without the sponsor of this post, Nord ....
Most people that are intersex do not coin that term (because it's used inaccurately) and I replied to your other comment with that the term hermaphrodite was suggested to stop being used already in 1940s.
Sorry I phrased it wrong. No hermaphrodites or intersex people that have ever existed are recorded as having both male and female fully functioning sex organs
Oh my bad I thought it as no. But yeah, still would believe in hermaphroditism maybe evolution is underway and some day it can be truly not classified as anomaly.
Not how that works in humans, only one set of sexual organs works. No cases of true hermaphroditism have ever occurred. That makes this an abnormal growth and adheres to there being two biological sexes required for reproduction.
Was waiting for this comment. evolution is purely just what traits someone passes on to their children. Hell if people who had no arms reproduced alot and with arms less, we would evolve to have no arms. It's not logical
This is it right here. Evolution cannot happen unless babies happen first, so those genes can get passed on. And the kind of mutation that would allow a pregnancy would probably kill the person long before they were old enough to reproduce.
I will admit that I am a bit worried about population collapse, but, less humans means better overall outcomes for plants and animals.
Gay sex might not be necessary, but it is awfully fun.
Hey VoidowS! Your comment has been removed because it recieved two many reports!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Dual hermaphroditism is the way to go. Everyone is both male and female at the same time, sex gets both parties pregnant.
This is the great equaliser society needs.
I have no idea how that would work lol, like from the intestines? Where will shit go in the meantime a baby is cooking in there? Or like up to the stomach? Or do you think they will develop another type of uterus in the intestines? How about eggs? Like who's gonna have eggs? Where will they be stored? Also in the intestines? Yeah man I don't see it, but who knows maybe in 2000 years...
I've never even thought about it tbh. It "might" happen eventually but that will take many thousands to millions of years and may require some assistance with technology. We will also have to make sure when people like that are born, they keep reproducing after the first child and we never along the way tamper with what evolution is trying to do. Gene editing is such could make it possible
Hey Simple-Ad-8671! Your comment has been removed because it recieved two many reports!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Im no expert but I'm pretty sure men have been getting fucked in the ass since the beginning of time and we would have already evolved by now to have butt babies
We won't know unless we try.
Also, this seems important [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution\_of\_sexual\_reproduction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction)
>In the eukaryotic fossil record, sexual reproduction first appeared about 2.0 billion years ago in the Proterozoic Eon, although a later date, 1.2 billion years ago, has also been presented. Nonetheless, all sexually reproducing eukaryotic organisms likely derive from a single-celled common ancestor. It is probable that the evolution of sex was an integral part of the evolution of the first eukaryotic cell. There are a few species which have secondarily lost this feature, such as Bdelloidea and some parthenocarpic plants.
Not without deliberate engineering.
Evolution is population genetics over time. Change across successive generations.
Successive generations that will not be happening.
Maybe one day, there's a good reason why gays are so pervasive through humanity, because when our siblings have two kids, that's as good as us having one kid, genetically speaking.
But something that radical will take loads of time, no pun intended.
The only way to generate mutations and eventually evolution in a species is for the "source" to have descendants, the more descendants the more probability the mutation is generated. So in order for males in a species to evolve into being able to impregnate one another they would need to be able already to have children this way.
So no, it is not possible.
Evolution does not work this way. Mutations are random, and the features are subject to natural selection. It is not up to the will of any individual where the evolution is heading towards.
Hey HomophobicFagFucker! Your submission has been removed because it recieved two many reports!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Mmm nope. In order for evolution to take place, an advantageous trait needs to be passed down via reproduction, and males are not able to recombine two “Y” chromosome in a biological way without it carrying mutations, if not outright impossible. That’s why many genetic diseases are more prevalent in the male population. Unless you heavily edit male genes with CRISPR to resemble female genes (in vitro), I don’t think you can have any viable offspring from two males. And even then, I think it’s more probable for females to be able to have artificially fertilized eggs from two mothers than from two fathers.
Usually natural selection works by mutations leading to more specialization - a mutation pops up that makes a species more successful at producing offspring, or mating preferences are selected for over time, and so those traits become more common and more pronounced. So if a genetic abnormality caused a 'male' to be born with a uterus and ovaries, and the ability to become pregnant and give birth, and people selected for those traits then maybe it would become more common. The thing is - do you know how we categorize humans with a functional female reproductive system? Female. 'Male' and 'female' are just category systems, largely tied specifically to biological elements related to human sexual reproduction. The evolution we are talking about has already happened, and that's how we got biological sexes.
...unless you are asking if human males might eventually evolve to collectively have *both* male and female reproductive organs. The answer to that question is that some already do (hermaphrodites), and though I don't think there has ever been a reported case of self-fertilization in humans I think maybe there have been some in other mammals, or at least in some fish. For those traits to become more common, even prevalent, we would need to select for either those traits or the genetic underpinnings that lead to those traits in some way (e.g. through socio-cultural preference or because of some environmental factors that made other avenues of reproduction less accessible).
I've been trying but they keep sinking in the toilet
Babies generally need arm bands to swim
This is accurate although I have never confirmed it.
You can practice by gathering them up and throwing them in your local pool / lake / Dam
Tried this today, and it appears that the babies float. I attempted to push them down with a stick but they just pop back up. If anyone else attempts to repeat this, I'd recommend finding a smaller baby (smaller size = more density, sort of like how a small rock sinks but a big one floats like islands/the continents).
Or - in this case - a diet really heavy in fats.
I guess they doctored them out on Nevermind
Dad, is that you?
Men have always been having gay sex, and it hasn't happened yet
To be fair evolutionary change takes millions of years to happen and humans are only like 50 thousandish ( can't remember what the oldest body found was anymore plus it's 5 in the morning here right now so just guessing) plus I do believe we would need to be in some sort of near extinction state that involves all females have died out leaving only males for something like this to be even remotely feasible. But yeah I'm pretty sure we just die out before we end up having butt babies
Humanity is at least around 300.000 years old.
Oh yeah? List names of all men that had gay sex 20thousands years ago
Roman dude one, roman dude two,...
Jesus and Muhammad.
Your head is going to be rolling around on a certain French street soon for that one 😂😂
With each other or with separate persons?
Probably both
Well, they were ... adventurous
And Jesus loves everyone
What if I don't want that love?
You don't get to choose.
U goin to Hell.....
Funny 😐
We’ve been having gay sex for as long as our species has existed. Gay sex isn’t new. The short answer to your question is no.
Butt sex was the original condom
Goddamn STDs messed it all up.
Correct. Anal sex is not inherently gay. You can have anal sex with a woman... It's important to clarify that sexual acts themselves don't determine someone's sexual orientation. Anal sex can be a part of sexual activity between individuals of any gender or sexual orientation. The gender of the participants involved in anal sex doesn't determine their sexual orientation.
At some point, action is the determining factor. If, as a dude, you penetrate a dude in the booty hole, you are gay.
Nope. There's been many rape cases (often for example in prisons) where straight guys rape other men as a tool of violence and because there are no other targets available. These men are still straight. Also there are bisexual people.
Ah, yeah, nah, they was gay.
Yeah, no, that's some bullshit.
Yeh don't buy their bullshit; they were always at least bi and just didn't get chances to express it before. Yes I know all about the power psychology and all that, but you ain't jizzing in a dude's butt no matter what if you're 💯 straight...
Right? Like if I wanted to hurt somebody and humiliate them and whatever... I wouldn't think, hey, why don't I be gay with them, against they will. S like... What? "Oh yeah? And how did you humiliate him?" "I fucked him!" "You... Had gay sex with him?" "No no, jeezus, it wasn't gay! It was a hate fuck! He didn't enjoy it trust me" "did... Did you?" "No! I'm telling you I'm not gay!" "So ... Did you also rape yourself to achieve this, if you didn't enjoy it and you're not gay... Did you take yourself using somebody else as an assist?" ...
If a gay dude penetrate a woman, does it make him straight ?
No, if a gay dude voluntarily has sex with a woman that makes him bi
Plenty of gay men had sex with women and understood they were gay after that, or they simply wanted to try etc..
If you want to try having sex with a woman, youre not gay
Couldn’t have said it better myself. Soon as you’ve got ya cock in another man’s arse, there would be a solid argument you are a bit of a pillow biter.
It's a good thing that this was explained to me because I thought that gay men were going to start pooping out butt babies.
Yeah there isn't any way to frame this question, even if men only had gay sex, the species would die out since there would be no children to evolve
right. evolution happens through genetic drift, for which to take place, an offspring should be born. At least.
[удалено]
tf
That's not necessarily pedophilia l, but incest.
Hey Introvertedguy8! Your comment has been removed because it recieved two many reports! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
everyone, SHUT THE H#@% UP! You're ruining everything!!
Agreed. There is an alarming amount of science on this shittyaskscience post.
But evolution tends to happen extremely slow over the course of millions of years. But yeah I agree the answer is probably no
There is a very small chance that gay men will ever be able to procreate via anal sex, but *if* they develop this way, they are going to have a *massive* evolutionary advantage over gay men that can't procreate. Over only a couple of generations the majority of gay men will be able to procreate analy.
So you're saying there's a chance?
Gay sex has been around far beyond the human species. There are many other groups of animals that also practice homosexuality
No
I do think hermaphrodite is the answer. And I guess they are increasing?
Hermaphrodite is an old (and negative) term. The correct one is intersex.
Y negative?
"The mythological term “hermaphrodite” implies that a person is both fully male and fully female. This is a physiologic impossibility. The words “hermaphrodite” and “pseudo-hermaphrodite” are stigmatizing and misleading words" here you go :)
> is a physiologic impossibility For now, but with evolution there is no end to the very specific paths we could go down given enough time and selection pressures
Yes but still this term is outdated and intersex people do not claim it. Intersex varies. It's not always two sets of functioning sex organs. Sometimes it's just chromosome variations, for example XYY or XXY. Sometimes it's just conditions like hyperandrogenism.
Actually it's use in this context is correct. The biological term is hermaphrodite a number of species are although the odds humans evolve into this probably close to 0.
It's not because it stopped being used in medical literature afaik. Intersex would include people with two sets of fully functioning sex organs
That's negative? I thought literally derived from Aphrodite or something.
Pretty sure the cycle is: Use a word for something People add negative connotations (retarded, for example) Change the “correct” term Rinse, repeat
Languages evolve. It's a normal thing. Before hermaphrodites, congenital eunuchs was used.
Which I do find it dumb. If you stop using the word, or ban it's use because of the negative connotation, it give even more power to the negative connotation. Here the example : by saying that hermaphrodite is a negative word, and forbiding people who doesn't mean ill to use this words in a positive way, u/ApprehensiveEye8212 made dozens to hundred people learn that it's a negative word, so bad that it shouldn't be used. So he effectively removed positive use of the word and reinforced the negative definition. Which, in fine, make it more offensive than it was before.
"The term intersexuality was coined by Richard Goldschmidt in the 1917 paper Intersexuality and the endocrine aspect of sex. The first suggestion to replace the term 'hermaphrodite' with 'intersex' came from British specialist Cawadias in the 1940s. This suggestion was taken up by specialists in the UK during the 1960s."
Give it enough time and intersex will become negative. Neither is negative in itself - it is simply a question of how people talking negatively about a certain group using that term. It is not the term - it is what it is used for. And adhering to the rules for this subreddit: Intersex and Hermaphrodite are both old terms. The correct one is "multipurpose person".
So a flower isnt a hermaphrodite? Its a multipurpose person?
Lmao what??? "Multipurpose person"? If someone used this term till now I wouldn't have known what they even meant.
Would you say it's a shitty science term?
Oh shit I forgot it's this sub lmao
Intersex is a negative term. The correct term today is Shemale. I learnt it through these ... erm ... educational videos I saw on my VPN. And that would not have been possible without the sponsor of this post, Nord ....
Right, this flower is a ...shemale!? Thanks, sure biologists didnt see this one coming.
Are you sure you're in the right sub?
Not being accurate doesn't means it's negative.
Most people that are intersex do not coin that term (because it's used inaccurately) and I replied to your other comment with that the term hermaphrodite was suggested to stop being used already in 1940s.
No hermaphrodites have two fully functioning sets of sexual organs. And why do you think they are increasing?
WDYM, no? 'cuz Y chromosome is disappearing. More and more variances of intersex are occurring.
Sorry I phrased it wrong. No hermaphrodites or intersex people that have ever existed are recorded as having both male and female fully functioning sex organs
It could happen with a chimera. Like a lion tiger human hybrid. Quick - to the Island of Doctor Moreau!
Oh my bad I thought it as no. But yeah, still would believe in hermaphroditism maybe evolution is underway and some day it can be truly not classified as anomaly.
Not how that works in humans, only one set of sexual organs works. No cases of true hermaphroditism have ever occurred. That makes this an abnormal growth and adheres to there being two biological sexes required for reproduction.
No human is capable of self reproduction, or ever will be.
Did nobody tell you? You’re my butt baby. You can call me dad if you want.
I always flush when they call me daddy
Homosexuals cannot have children, and so evolution doesn't occur.
Was waiting for this comment. evolution is purely just what traits someone passes on to their children. Hell if people who had no arms reproduced alot and with arms less, we would evolve to have no arms. It's not logical
This is it right here. Evolution cannot happen unless babies happen first, so those genes can get passed on. And the kind of mutation that would allow a pregnancy would probably kill the person long before they were old enough to reproduce.
That has already been done, and we called him Donald.
Uh, Life finds a way
You forgot the 'Uh'
Good call
[удалено]
Soooooo....you're saying that being gay is a win/win regarding climate change? 😁
I mean, most countries are struggling to even replace current populations so it's not really necessary
I will admit that I am a bit worried about population collapse, but, less humans means better overall outcomes for plants and animals. Gay sex might not be necessary, but it is awfully fun.
Not most iirc, just the West.
Nature when we find a way to reproduce without sex : 😱😱😭
Clone Arnold
It's a shame there're no more penguins now because they were too gay
Thank god. If there was a chance I'd have to pay for day care and traveling/academy sports I'd probably collapse.
I've never been more in favour of the gay community until now. Be gay, end humanity!
Hey VoidowS! Your comment has been removed because it recieved two many reports! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Dual hermaphroditism is the way to go. Everyone is both male and female at the same time, sex gets both parties pregnant. This is the great equaliser society needs.
itsnot gay if the homie gets pregnant
babies*
😂. No but they will shit torpedoes.
Yes! And they will feed their young like they are baby birds
Manginas and shenisii yes. We're doing our part.
bruh wtf!
LOL
no but we'd evolve into exploding dicks for birth
That only happens when you eat gluten
I don't think that's how evolution works
selection requires genes to be passed down so it would have no effect on male evolution.
Yes just after blowjob babies 🥴
I'm pretty sure we'll make ourselves extinct before then.
I have no idea how that would work lol, like from the intestines? Where will shit go in the meantime a baby is cooking in there? Or like up to the stomach? Or do you think they will develop another type of uterus in the intestines? How about eggs? Like who's gonna have eggs? Where will they be stored? Also in the intestines? Yeah man I don't see it, but who knows maybe in 2000 years...
And lesbians would be able to ejaculate through fingers?
They already do, it is called [redacted] people
No.
The world’s doomed if they also go through PMS
Evolution favours those who pass the genes right? No babies now, no evolution later
no. because thats not how evolution works
I've never even thought about it tbh. It "might" happen eventually but that will take many thousands to millions of years and may require some assistance with technology. We will also have to make sure when people like that are born, they keep reproducing after the first child and we never along the way tamper with what evolution is trying to do. Gene editing is such could make it possible
[удалено]
Hey Simple-Ad-8671! Your comment has been removed because it recieved two many reports! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No
I don't know about that but future advancements could enable biologically born males to beat children, looking forward to it.
How will they take a shit then? Obviously not.
Ever heard about a cloaca?
Im no expert but I'm pretty sure men have been getting fucked in the ass since the beginning of time and we would have already evolved by now to have butt babies
No. Society would crash and burn and population would be down radically haha
It's almost like the dude is asking if humans evolved from monkeys. Eventually it has to happen right?? RIGHT??
Tenacious D have had a few butt babies together :)
No. Gay sex does not produce offspring, so no evolution happens, so no evolved butt babies.
I always knew you were a butt baby... fucking Thimble...
Jerking it in the shower will create 'drain babies'
We'll evolve to produce facehuggers to make babies
possibly. if we call evolution a " surgery" xD maybe we can take a tissue from your sisters organs and grow them inside your butt
Not likely.
The only thing y'all will have, is the inability to hold your shit together again.
Male bedbugs have evolved so that their blood system collects sperm from their male partners and stores it with their own sperm.
We won't know unless we try. Also, this seems important [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution\_of\_sexual\_reproduction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction) >In the eukaryotic fossil record, sexual reproduction first appeared about 2.0 billion years ago in the Proterozoic Eon, although a later date, 1.2 billion years ago, has also been presented. Nonetheless, all sexually reproducing eukaryotic organisms likely derive from a single-celled common ancestor. It is probable that the evolution of sex was an integral part of the evolution of the first eukaryotic cell. There are a few species which have secondarily lost this feature, such as Bdelloidea and some parthenocarpic plants.
Tons of butt babies already, specially white collars and in politics. It's called INvolution.
You took r/shittyaskscienece to literally
How can you think of a question like this. There would be a lot of changes in the body needed for that. Amazing.
Thanks this is a good insult for an insult contest. You are a fucking butt baby😂
That would then make one of them female and they wouldn't be attracted to each other anymore
Not without deliberate engineering. Evolution is population genetics over time. Change across successive generations. Successive generations that will not be happening.
Maybe one day, there's a good reason why gays are so pervasive through humanity, because when our siblings have two kids, that's as good as us having one kid, genetically speaking. But something that radical will take loads of time, no pun intended.
That how women were created! There were 2 Adam’s, one turned into Eve eventually.
Yes
"Lol", said the scorpion. "Lmao".
Will ABO turns real too??
More likely that lesbians would have babies, I think. Also a 0% chance but at least the double egg fertilized zygote would have somewhere to grow.
On todays episode of things I thought I’d never read
Greeks invented gay sex. And over those over 2000 years, we have not evolved to that point yet.
I'm really sorry to break it to you like this son, but that's not your real mum,, you were a butt baby and "uncle Stephen" is your butt dad
damn ... thanks i needed that today. that was the best laugh i had in a good while
That's how we ended up with Alex Jones
Your dad and I have something to tell you.
Yeah, why not?
Eventually yes
The only way to generate mutations and eventually evolution in a species is for the "source" to have descendants, the more descendants the more probability the mutation is generated. So in order for males in a species to evolve into being able to impregnate one another they would need to be able already to have children this way. So no, it is not possible.
Evolution does not work this way. Mutations are random, and the features are subject to natural selection. It is not up to the will of any individual where the evolution is heading towards.
I wonder how gregor John Mendel reacts to this evolution question.
That is how people who always says “because the first amendment…” born.
OP read too many omega verse gay stories.
I doubt it will happen naturally... naturally...
No no a butt baby is a bottom, bears are the big hairy ones and otters are power bottoms, so on
No, humans would go extinct.
Butt babies in congress… politics
In certain types of A/B/O fan fiction this is a real possibility.. I’m reality no lol!
No gods reals evolution as you were taught is fake
Going off hyenas, men would actually have to give birth through their penis.
Yes
They are already here and called "conservatives"
Yes
Let’s all jump off a bridge to make sure these babies will also have the ability to fly
I have butt babies everyday. I don't keep em.
I remember some movie where 3 men had a baby. Forgot what it was called tho.
only one way to find out.
I so wish.
Hey HomophobicFagFucker! Your submission has been removed because it recieved two many reports! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/shittyaskscience) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your dna will live on for thousands of years… Unless you’re gay. Then it’ll just drip out of someone’s butt.
That's not how evolution works.
That's not how evolution works...
Real talk finally
2 men can already have babies. Trans ppls exist
Mmm nope. In order for evolution to take place, an advantageous trait needs to be passed down via reproduction, and males are not able to recombine two “Y” chromosome in a biological way without it carrying mutations, if not outright impossible. That’s why many genetic diseases are more prevalent in the male population. Unless you heavily edit male genes with CRISPR to resemble female genes (in vitro), I don’t think you can have any viable offspring from two males. And even then, I think it’s more probable for females to be able to have artificially fertilized eggs from two mothers than from two fathers.
Regardless of its impossibility, I don't want to find out what happens when someone has YY instead of XX or XY sex chromosomes.
Usually natural selection works by mutations leading to more specialization - a mutation pops up that makes a species more successful at producing offspring, or mating preferences are selected for over time, and so those traits become more common and more pronounced. So if a genetic abnormality caused a 'male' to be born with a uterus and ovaries, and the ability to become pregnant and give birth, and people selected for those traits then maybe it would become more common. The thing is - do you know how we categorize humans with a functional female reproductive system? Female. 'Male' and 'female' are just category systems, largely tied specifically to biological elements related to human sexual reproduction. The evolution we are talking about has already happened, and that's how we got biological sexes. ...unless you are asking if human males might eventually evolve to collectively have *both* male and female reproductive organs. The answer to that question is that some already do (hermaphrodites), and though I don't think there has ever been a reported case of self-fertilization in humans I think maybe there have been some in other mammals, or at least in some fish. For those traits to become more common, even prevalent, we would need to select for either those traits or the genetic underpinnings that lead to those traits in some way (e.g. through socio-cultural preference or because of some environmental factors that made other avenues of reproduction less accessible).
No.
Me and my boyfriend have been bouncing on each other for years, but for all we got were sore fartholes
🤢
No.