Re: OT: What? the clean-shaven outnumber the bearded?"YerUgly Mug," etc.

John Cowan wrote at 2003-05-26 17:14:58 (-0400)
 > Tim May scripsit:
 >
 > > I think this is inaccurate.  Natural selection doesn't operate on
 > > the level of the species, or the individual, but the gene.
 >
 > This is to say the least controversial: Darwin wrote about
 > individual selection, and even group selection is far from dead,
 > though the claims made for extreme forms of it have been
 > discredited.
 >
Well, it's something of an oversimplification, I'll admit.  But I
think it's a better description of the mechanism than "[the survival
of the species as a whole] is what's important, not the survival of
some selected line of individuals".  On the other hand, I can't claim
expert knowledge in the field.

 > > However, I can see a number of ways in which a non-dominant gay
 > > gene could be adaptive:
 >
 > [good list snipped]
 >
 > What seems most likely to me is that sexual behavior exists on a
 > continuum (it's no accident that Alfred Kinsey was a wasp
 > taxonomist) and that all of it is essentially epiphenomenal.
 >

I'm inclined to agree.  Certainly it's a complex system which doesn't
lend itself to simple, definitive explanations.