Homosexuality interview question

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
It seems kind of a stretch for homosexuality to actually evolve. I mean, doesn't homosexuality mean your fitness is virtually zero? If a gene did evolve, how would it be passed on if the carrier doesn't reproduce?

It's been shown that women with higher fertility tend to have a greater chance of having gay sons. The logic behind this is because the females reproduce and have many children, having gay sons would increase the number of individuals able to help support the family without producing even more. It may not be an advantage to that particular gay man, but it does help the family, and thus his genes, be passed on through an increased survival of the nieces and nephews. This isn't a new thing in nature.

As it seems that humans have been wired to work as a group (there's not a large number of lone wolves in the human population), it would make sense that we would also evolve ways to collectively help raise our children.
 
It's been shown that women with higher fertility tend to have a greater chance of having gay sons. The logic behind this is because the females reproduce and have many children, having gay sons would increase the number of individuals able to help support the family without producing even more. It may not be an advantage to that particular gay man, but it does help the family, and thus his genes, be passed on through an increased survival of the nieces and nephews. This isn't a new thing in nature.

As it seems that humans have been wired to work as a group (there's not a large number of lone wolves in the human population), it would make sense that we would also evolve ways to collectively help raise our children.

The idea is to balance cost/benefits and optimize the number of offspring you can successfully raise, thus passing on your genes. One of the premises of natural selection is that it always acts on the individual, never a group or society. Thus one cannot give up reproduction to benefit society or another individual unless the benefit to their own fitness is greater than the energy expended. It has been shown that animals in some groups give up reproducing to maximize their siblings offspring (see the famous example of Belding ground squirrels). In this sense, what you are discussing is possible. I have not seen any research into this area to explain homosexual behavior in humans, but I am not suprised since this sort of study would be very difficult to conduct. Great response.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The idea is to balance cost/benefits and optimize the number of offspring you can successfully raise, thus passing on your genes. One of the premises of natural selection is that it always acts on the individual, never a group or society. Thus one cannot give up reproduction to benefit society or another individual unless the benefit to their own fitness is greater than the energy expended. It has been shown that animals in some groups give up reproducing to maximize their siblings offspring (see the famous example of Belding ground squirrels). In this sense, what you are discussing is possible. I have not seen any research into this area to explain homosexual behavior in humans, but I am not suprised since this sort of study would be very difficult to conduct. Great response.

If you think about it...technically, the mother and father aren't giving up their genes by producing gay offspring. While the gay offspring don't reproduce, they are helping the mother and father's other offspring survive, so it is a benefit to the parents to produce some homosexual offspring...possibly increasing the likelihood that more of their young survive. Heterosexual offspring probably carry a gene giving them a certain odds of producing a homosexual offspring that would further assist with the caring of the young. So, I suppose that would be a version natural selection by the parents, similar to having a lot of babies in hopes of a few surviving to reproduce only instead the few that don't reproduce actually help the ones that will rather than just being sacrificed to hungry animals. Having the ability to produce a helper uncle would give your offspring a benefit over having to raise all your young on your own. Particularly if you had to go hunting for food or do other activities that you couldn't really bring your young along with you.

There is a lot evidence of this type of cooperation in nature, where only a limited number of the population is allowed to reproduce for the benefit of the group.
 
kind of. but male gynos are relatively normal people (except for the fact they chose to go into gyno). dont forget that homosexuality was once categorized a psychological disorder in the DSM but was taken out in the latest edition because society is so PC now.


Has this guy been banned yet? I don't think I have ever encountered a more hate-filled, arrogant, close-minded, unaccepting person in my life! I really hope this person will not be practicing medicine any time soon. He reminds me of one of those loser rednecks who run around in white sheets burning crosses.
 
Has this guy been banned yet? I don't think I have ever encountered a more hate-filled, arrogant, close-minded, unaccepting person in my life! I really hope this person will not be practicing medicine any time soon. He reminds me of one of those loser rednecks who run around in white sheets burning crosses.

People are entitled to their opinion. Don't you think you are being a bit harsh?
 
If you think about it...technically, the mother and father aren't giving up their genes by producing gay offspring. While the gay offspring don't reproduce, they are helping the mother and father's other offspring survive, so it is a benefit to the parents to produce some homosexual offspring...possibly increasing the likelihood that more of their young survive. Heterosexual offspring probably carry a gene giving them a certain odds of producing a homosexual offspring that would further assist with the caring of the young. So, I suppose that would be a version natural selection by the parents, similar to having a lot of babies in hopes of a few surviving to reproduce only instead the few that don't reproduce actually help the ones that will rather than just being sacrificed to hungry animals. Having the ability to produce a helper uncle would give your offspring a benefit over having to raise all your young on your own. Particularly if you had to go hunting for food or do other activities that you couldn't really bring your young along with you.

There is a lot evidence of this type of cooperation in nature, where only a limited number of the population is allowed to reproduce for the benefit of the group.

Hmmm, I think we should call this trait "Interior Designers at the Nest"

I don't know if this theory has been posited yet (didn't bother to read them all) but it could be that the fecundity of a group of brothers with limited female partner choices increases if those brothers have varied sexual preferences (within the heterosexual range). The genetic/environmental combination that contributes to this variety could be responsible for the occasional homosexual in the bunch, and the trait persists because of the benefit to the 'fitness' of the brothers. It would certainly help explain the relationship between homosexuality and male birth order. Just a thought.
 
Has this guy been banned yet? I don't think I have ever encountered a more hate-filled, arrogant, close-minded, unaccepting person in my life! I really hope this person will not be practicing medicine any time soon. He reminds me of one of those loser rednecks who run around in white sheets burning crosses.

Yep.

People are entitled to their opinion. Don't you think you are being a bit harsh?

No. Don't be ridiculous. Replace "gay" with "jew" or "black" in that guy's rant and then tell me that people are entitled to their opinion.

If he wants to be a biggoted dingus he can express his "opinion" somewhere else.

That, by the way, is my opinion.
 
Yep.



No. Don't be ridiculous. Replace "gay" with "jew" or "black" in that guy's rant and then tell me that people are entitled to their opinion.

If he wants to be a biggoted dingus he can express his "opinion" somewhere else.

That, by the way, is my opinion.

Your hypocrisy astounds me. Just because he has a different opinion than yours, does not mean he won't be a good doctor. His motives for his opinion are unknown by yourself, me, or any others here. Before you pass judgement, that should at least be explored.

I think posting on the internet usually brings out the worst in people. Most people are usually much more opinionated on SDN than you would normally encounter in real life.
 
It astounds me that you believe that all gay men had a dysfunctional childhood. That is just absurd.
 
I regularly post on SDN, but I don't want to post under my normal name since I have not completely come out of the closet (I am a homosexual).

I was at an interview, and we some how got on the subject of doctors treating homosexuality. I said I didn't believe that homosexuality should be looked at as a disorder since it may be genetic. He asked me "how homosexuality would evolve if it was genetic". I gave a pretty good answer (I think), but he asked it in a really condescending way. Overall, I think his attitude towards me was hostile. I'm worried now that I won't get in because I mentioned I was gay in my personal statement. Should I call the school and complain? I have very good STATS and got positive feedback on my personal statement from other schools.

It's the good cop/bad cop scenario, it's the ask an unanswerable question technique, the pressure interview!! It's okay...this is how interviews get to what makes candidates tick. You're fine and I am sure if you feel you gave a good answer, that you indeed did.
 
Just because he has a different opinion than yours, does not mean he won't be a good doctor.

If his opinions lead him to treat people with varying degrees of quality care then yes, his opinions do mean he will be a horrible physician.
 
I was initially shocked at how much discrimination I was told occurred in the med school admissions process towards gays. I am sorry that you guys/gals face this, one more thing you can help fix once you're higher up on the totem pole.



It's too late, these things have to be handled quickly. For future reference, don't mention things like your homosexuality in your PS. Discrimination towards gays is supposedly worse than any other group in this process, mum's the word until you get in. It's not right, but you can't help fix things until you're on the inside.

Whether or not you get in, once a decision has been made I STRONGLY encourage you to call the dean (or visit if the school is close). Don't call the press, don't get angry - tell the dean what happened and don't ask for any change in admissions status. That is the way to approach this problem and actually have the guy get what's coming to him. The dean may know that the interviewer is gay and was trying to give you a hard time b/c he has been given a hard time, etc. You just never know where people are coming from.

For what it's worth, I look at older homosexual physicians like I view older female surgeons. They both put up with a TON of crap during residency and had to be that much better than everyone else. In reference to a 50 year old surgeon, I'll take a female over a male because all the ones I've met had to be that much more on top of their game.


Dig out from under that rock you live under and stumble onto our planet, it's 2008. Get real.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Just another perspective:

Sometimes the interviewers are hostile on purpose to see how you react. I wasn't there, but it's possible he was trying to see how you think and was not being discriminatory. If you gave a good answer to his question, then I think you will be alright.

On another note (just curious I was having this discussion with my friend the other day), what is the evidence that homosexuality is genetic?

PubMed, Nature Journal Online, etc. . . there is amazing science out there about genetics, Darwinian Paradox of homosexuality, cortisol-implication, etc. You should look it up, it rules. :luck:
 
Personal attacks are the most stressful kind. I think that a stressful interview should have boundaries, but one that is truly stressful should be close to the line.

I don't think you should write a letter - this kind of issue requires face to face contact in my opinion.
:thumbdown:


Please Max, go back to "everybody gets a ribbon day."
 
It seems kind of a stretch for homosexuality to actually evolve. I mean, doesn't homosexuality mean your fitness is virtually zero? If a gene did evolve, how would it be passed on if the carrier doesn't reproduce?


No---search "Nature" Journal for an awesome piece of research outlining the ways in which homosexual men tend to have HIGHER reproductive fitness than heteros. It's called a Darwinian Paradox by some, but a little thought and a little reasoning later, it's easy to understand.
 
If his opinions lead him to treat people with varying degrees of quality care then yes, his opinions do mean he will be a horrible physician.

That's an enormous assumption. Did he say he would treat them with "varying degrees of quality care"?
 
That's an enormous assumption. Did he say he would treat them with "varying degrees of quality care"?

Using the language he does, it is not an "enormous assumption" to conclude that he has a bias against this community.
 
Using the language he does, it is not an "enormous assumption" to conclude that he has a bias against this community.

Unless he did it just to see how the OP reacts to hosility and pressure. Which happens in interviews.
 
Using the language he does, it is not an "enormous assumption" to conclude that he has a bias against this community.

Give me a break. You know as well as I do that going from some slightly negative remarks against homosexuals to saying he will be a "horrible" doctor is a huge jump.
 
I regularly post on SDN, but I don't want to post under my normal name since I have not completely come out of the closet (I am a homosexual).

I was at an interview, and we some how got on the subject of doctors treating homosexuality. I said I didn't believe that homosexuality should be looked at as a disorder since it may be genetic. He asked me "how homosexuality would evolve if it was genetic". I gave a pretty good answer (I think), but he asked it in a really condescending way. Overall, I think his attitude towards me was hostile. I'm worried now that I won't get in because I mentioned I was gay in my personal statement. Should I call the school and complain? I have very good STATS and got positive feedback on my personal statement from other schools.

Man that sucks i'm sorry you had to go through that. I'm going to try to be positive though. Sometimes these interviewers act like dicks just to see how you'll react. I know that at some of my interviews (including one that I got into), he was a total prick to me, answering all of my questions sarcastically and basically acting like a total D bag and yet I got in. Maybe he wasn't homophobic or anything just seing how you will react.
 
maybe he was trying to prepare you for what you're gonna be facing when you are practicing. i wouldn't doubt you'd get a lot of patients that will request another doctor when they see you come in with your purple scarf and clay aiken voice

well im just saying, if he comes crying here after the interview instead of having plowed through the interviewer, one can only wonder when he starts seeing patients, many of whom no doubt will be reluctant to be operated on by a homosexual (would you let your son get a physical by a gay doctor? HES TOUCHING YOUR SONS BALLS :mad: ) how he will handle it.

kind of. but male gynos are relatively normal people (except for the fact they chose to go into gyno). dont forget that homosexuality was once categorized a psychological disorder in the DSM but was taken out in the latest edition because society is so PC now.

Has this guy been banned yet? I don't think I have ever encountered a more hate-filled, arrogant, close-minded, unaccepting person in my life! I really hope this person will not be practicing medicine any time soon. He reminds me of one of those loser rednecks who run around in white sheets burning crosses.

People are entitled to their opinion. Don't you think you are being a bit harsh?

No. Don't be ridiculous. Replace "gay" with "jew" or "black" in that guy's rant and then tell me that people are entitled to their opinion.

If he wants to be a biggoted dingus he can express his "opinion" somewhere else.

That, by the way, is my opinion.

Your hypocrisy astounds me. Just because he has a different opinion than yours, does not mean he won't be a good doctor. His motives for his opinion are unknown by yourself, me, or any others here. Before you pass judgement, that should at least be explored.

I think posting on the internet usually brings out the worst in people. Most people are usually much more opinionated on SDN than you would normally encounter in real life.

If his opinions lead him to treat people with varying degrees of quality care then yes, his opinions do mean he will be a horrible physician.

and.... BAM. Good guys win again (thanks Robbiekins). Seriously Concubine, what are you thinking? You're as bad as that Lukkie clown was. You can't be openly hostile to a group of people (whether it's race, sexuality, gender, or religion) and be a good doctor. The end. Quit being a jackass and writing it off as an innocent "opinion".
 
and.... BAM. Good guys win again (thanks Robbiekins). Seriously Concubine, what are you thinking? You're as bad as that Lukkie clown was. You can't be openly hostile to a group of people (whether it's race, sexuality, gender, or religion) and be a good doctor. The end. Quit being a jackass and writing it off as an innocent "opinion".

So, by your logic all Iranian muslim doctors are bad (since Islam is openly against homosexuallity). Cool.
 
and.... BAM. Good guys win again (thanks Robbiekins). Seriously Concubine, what are you thinking? You're as bad as that Lukkie clown was. You can't be openly hostile to a group of people (whether it's race, sexuality, gender, or religion) and be a good doctor. The end. Quit being a jackass and writing it off as an innocent "opinion".

So, by your logic all Iranian muslim doctors are bad (since Islam is openly against homosexuallity). Cool.

O, clearly you didn't see your buddy Mahmoud Admadinejad giving his speech at Cornell. When he was asked about how his country murders gays he said that was misinformation. His country has no gays. It's an American phenomenon.

Maybe you and Lukkie would be more comfortable practicing your homophobic medicine over there.
 
I regularly post on SDN, but I don't want to post under my normal name since I have not completely come out of the closet (I am a homosexual).

If you're so worried that the fact you are gay is going to be looked at as a negative in the application process, why the heck would you say that you are in a personal statement, especially if you aren't even completely out? That doesn't make any sense to me.
 
O, clearly you didn't see your buddy Mahmoud Admadinejad giving his speech at Cornell. When he was asked about how his country murders gays he said that was misinformation. His country has no gays. It's an American phenomenon.

Maybe you and Lukkie would be more comfortable practicing your homophobic medicine over there.

Oh, so now I'm a homophobe? Great response.:rolleyes: So tell me, would you treat equally an Iranian that you knew strongly disliked homosexuals?
 
Yep, you bet.

My point is that your religon, sexual preference, race, or opinions really don't matter that much when it comes to doing your job (including being a doctor). Either you can do it or you can't. Yes, your treatment of patients "equally" is important...but not as important as being able to treat your patients in the first place. I brought up the Iranian to show that someone could potentally dislike or even hate a certain category of people, but still do great things like heal people.

Personally, I'm sure you (StealthNerd) are a great person. I'll also give Lukkie the benifit of the doubt that he/she too is a great person.
 
Top