The human population growth rate has always been of concern to me. Through compassion and innovation we have cut the death rate drastically without doing anything to reduce the number of babies we create. The amount of humans that this planet can support is probably tremendous, but we won’t be able to reach that maximum number without destroying whatever life we don’t simply transform into fuel for the human engines. I don’t believe it is ethical to sacrifice this planet so we may continue our unnatural multiplying, nor do I agree with the shortsightedness that prevents us from taking the painful steps to resolve this issue. It would involve overcoming instinct, and making a conscious choice not to procreate.
I have made that choice as a result of divine inspiration. I love children, but I am gay. Rather than believing this to be an unnatural state, I recognize what any gay person does, that it is part of their nature, and born to them. My beliefs do not accept things that occur in nature as being without reason, so it occurred to me that homosexuality must be intended as a method of population control, albeit one that isn’t terribly effective. The instinct to procreate is simply too powerful, and so we continue to have babies. Even if no gay people had children (and quite a few do) I’m sure that gays would continue to be born, as this mechanism is built into our genetic code to manifest proportionately to our population density.
You see, I believe strongly in Intelligent Design: a divine intelligence created man, using a tool we call evolution. But I digress.
When I discovered a few days ago that soy creates gays and shrinks penises, I was intrigued. There is some research out there about soy being used to slow the growth of prostate cancer because of its estrogen levels or somesuch, so could this article have value?
Others asked the same question and, turning to the research of Kinsey, found that “. . .homosexual men reported larger penises than did heterosexual men.” So when science is shone upon soy beliefs, they fail, at least in the penile department. As for orientation, I know a boy of fifteen that nursed on soy and hasn’t exhibited anything less than a full interest in girls, but that’s just anecdotal.
So where are we? We know that gay men have large penises, that soy may cause gayness, and that gayness may be a method of population control. Add to this the revelations from India that men there have smaller than average penises. We’ve always been led to believe that this is the case in China and Japan as well. Sounds to me like small penises can be correlated with large families. Whether this is due to compensation, or if it’s that sperm lose motility swimming that extra inch or so, I can’t say, but the evidence for this link seems fairly compelling. Being that gays have larger penises, this lends credence to my theory.
Now we have established that small penises increase population, and gayness exists to reduce it, which is why gay men have such large penises. Perhaps a link between soy and homosexuality can be established, so that we can feed our baby boys soy formula, engorging their members and reducing the chances of them ever having children. If soy does not, in fact, cause gayness (and, logically following, increased penis size), we should investigate other methods of increasing penis size to determine if they also reduce fertility, including hormone treatments and surgical engorgement.
This could result in a win-win situation. All men want larger penises, and larger penises can be linked to smaller families. Science should focus its efforts on increasing worldwide penile dimensions as quickly as possible.