Re: New Arvorec words

Nik Taylor wrote:
>
>Andreas Johansson wrote:
> > Obviously, a gene for homosexuality would be in trouble.
>
>Not necessarily.  Closet homosexuals can still have children.  Also,
>some genes can have multiple effects.  One theory I read about a
>homosexual gene is that it might have the effect of making for stronger
>same-sex friendships, which could, conceivably, lead to higher social
>status and greater reproductive success.
Hm, what does "closet homosexual" mean? Your arguments seem perfectly valid
for BIsexuality - indeed I've heard more than one researcher claim that
bisexuallity arose to strengthen social bonds - but higher social status
would hardly translate into reproductive success for persons who are
strictly homosexual, not wanting to have sex with people of the opposite
sex. From the evolutionary POV, (strict) homosexuallity does seem quite
suicidal.

>However, I really doubt it's so simple as either a gene or the
>environment, probably a mixture of many factors.
I agree. Genes, environment, culture, exposture to chemicals all almost
certainly play a part in my opinion.

                                                  Andreas
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Replies