stdnt428@hampshire.edu wrote:
>
> Yes, there is a chicken-egg issue. However, if one takes an evolutionary
> perspective, for trait to be that persistant (2-8% of the population,
> depending on who's opinion you ask) and that consistant (throughout
> human history)... there must be an evolutionary advantage. My suggestion
> is that the advantage is on a social level - that the benifit is to
> society...
>
> However, the fact that homosexuality exists in the rest of the animal
> kingdom goes against this thesis since animals probably don't make the
> same social contributions...
Comparing homosexual behavior among animals to that of humans leads one to the
conclusion that human homosexual behavior is merely a matter of dominance games,
pecking order politics (which is interesting in that we see so many politically
active homosexuals). I don't think this is a conclusion that would go over very
well in some circles (and the reverse in others), but there is also the fact
that evolved behaviors or faculties in humans may not have the same use or
meaning in humans as they were originally intended in other species or even in
human progenitor species, so comparing the two is rather risky.
If it is merely of evolutionary advantage to humans at a social level, then
those most tolerant of homosexuals should be the most advanced societies on
earth, if tolerance aids homosexuals in contributing to society. It may be that
keeping homosexuals 'in the closet' is actually a social defense mechanism
against reactionary forces, if the society can derive benefit from the mere
presence of homosexuals, keeping them in the closet prevents or reduces the
chances that those societies will be attacked and destroyed by other less
tolerant societies (the ever present problem of barbarians at the gates). The
old stories of Sodom and Gommorah, of course, should be testament (pun intended)
to the presence of this mechanism.
Mike Lorrey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:15 MDT