What's the purpose of homosexuality in humans?

[MikeW]

[COLOR="Red"]Let me answer an earlier question you asked first. Evidence of homosexuality (sex variances) in early human civilization. The answer is yes.

If there wasn't there wouldn't be any trace of it in ALL cultures regardless of where they are.[/COLOR]

I was asking about prehistoric evidence, not evidence within ancient history. Yes, I've heard of the "two spirit" peoples documented in native american cultures and I would say this is about as close as we've come. But even so it is extrapolating from observations of contemporary tribal customs and cultural attitudes and making the assumption that a) they are [or were] universal and b) similar customs and behaviors existed going back into the deep prehistory… that is, going all the way back to 200.000 years ago when the survival of our species really mattered.

And of course, you're right. We have almost no evidence of human habitation AT ALL going back that far. A few bone and tool fragments that have been identified by paleontologists as belonging to truly ancient (but biologically completely modern) humans.

The point I'm making is that we can extrapolate from our current perspective as much as we want, based on anthropological observations of attitudes and customs of 'primitive' tribal people existent today (which vary WIDELY, btw) but we still DO NOT KNOW. We can make reasonable assumptions but *they are assumptions*.

Why am I doing this?

You're putting forward a hypothesis that homosexuality is largely hormonal and provided an EVOLUTIONARY survival advantage to families, clans and tribes in very ancient prehistory. I've acknowledged that it is a reasonable and interesting hypothesis. I'm 'challenging' it a bit because we need to think very carefully about *what*, exactly we're talking about.

FIRST, we need to acknowledge that we modern humans are the only surviving members of our genus of the hominin clade, "a branch of great apes characterized by erect posture and bipedal locomotion; manual dexterity and increased tool use; and a general trend toward larger, more complex brains and societies." [wiki]

Skulls of 1. Gorilla 2. Australopithecus 3. Homo erectus 4. Neanderthal (La Chapelle aux Saints) 5. Steinheim Skull (Archaic Homo sapiens) 6. Caucasoid (H. Sapiens)

The closest living [not extinct] relatives of humans are chimpanzees (genus Pan) and gorillas (genus Gorilla). With the sequencing of both the human and chimpanzee genome, current estimates of similarity between human and chimpanzee DNA sequences range between 95% and 99%. By using the technique called a molecular clock which estimates the time required for the number of divergent mutations to accumulate between two lineages, the approximate date for the split between lineages can be calculated. The gibbons (Hylobatidae) and orangutans (genus Pongo) were the first groups to split from the line leading to the humans, then gorillas (genus Gorilla) followed by the chimpanzees and bonobos (genus Pan). The splitting date between human and chimpanzee lineages is placed around 4–8 million years ago during the late Miocene epoch.

The earliest members of the genus Homo are Homo habilis which evolved around 2.3 million years ago. Homo habilis is the first species for which we have positive evidence of use of stone tools. The brains of these early hominins were about the same size as that of a chimpanzee, and their main adaptation was bipedalism as an adaptation to terrestrial living. [Emphasis: at this point we're no longer arboreal creatures living in the relative safety of tree branches.] During the next million years a process of encephalization began, and with the arrival of Homo erectus in the fossil record, cranial capacity had doubled. Homo erectus were the first of the hominina to leave Africa, and these species spread through Africa, Asia, and Europe between 1.3 to 1.8 million years ago. One population of H. erectus, also sometimes classified as a separate species Homo ergaster, stayed in Africa and evolved into Homo sapiens. It is believed that these species were the first to use fire and complex tools. The earliest transitional fossils between H. ergaster/erectus and archaic humans are from Africa such as Homo rhodesiensis, but seemingly transitional forms are also found at Dmanisi, Georgia. These descendants of African H. erectus spread through Eurasia from ca. 500,000 years ago evolving into H. antecessor, H. heidelbergensis and H. neanderthalensis. [All now extinct.] The earliest fossils of anatomically modern humans are from the Middle Paleolithic, about 200,000 years ago such as the Omo remains of Ethiopia and the fossils of Herto sometimes classified as Homo sapiens idaltu. Later fossils of archaic Homo sapiens from Skhul in Israel and Southern Europe begin around 90,000 years ago.

I'm going to all this trouble because you're putting forward a hypothesis in answer to an evolutionary question. I'm trying to place it in an evolutionary context because from an "evolutionary" perspective the prospect of the survival of a non-procreative sexual activity is not only suspect but counter-intuitive. I also think it is quite remarkable (and possibly relevant) to consider that our species is the only surviving member of our genus.

By the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic period (50,000 BP), full behavioral modernity, including language, music and other cultural universals had developed. As modern humans spread out from Africa they encountered other hominids such as Homo neanderthalensis and the so-called Denisovans. The nature of interaction between early humans and these sister species has been a long standing source of controversy, the question being whether humans replaced these earlier species or whether they were in fact similar enough to interbreed, in which case these earlier populations may have contributed genetic material to modern humans. Recent studies of the human and Neanderthal genomes suggest gene flow between archaic Homo sapiens and Neanderthals and Denisovans.

In the post I made up-thread there is a photograph of possibly the earliest known human symbol. As old as it is (approximately 37,000), there is 4 times as much human history preceding it that we know almost nothing about. You're proposing that homosexuality was one survival mechanism that was in play during this prehistorical time period *when it truly mattered* (least we become as extinct as the rest of the hominin clade). It is very unclear to us how much "social organization" existed during these earliest and most dangerous (for the survival of our species) times. What we DO KNOW, however, from such ancient artifacts as above is that by roughly 40,000 years ago we had the capacity of thought sufficient to make symbols that, though closely tied to perceived representations of biological forms, *represented* very abstract conceptual ideas. That these most ancient symbols were often directly related to sexuality (and hunting) is likely very relevant. By this time there were most certainly forms of social organization, cultures and attitudes, that were very complex. Perhaps as complex as those of contemporary tribal people. BUT by this time, although there is some evidence that Neanderthals may have existed in Europe as late as (roughly) 30,000 years ago, *there was little threat to the survival of the species homo sapiens*. Yes, of course, there were all kinds of survival threats to different groups in differing geographical locations, but the species itself was well established and acclimated to a wide variety of climates and changing conditions.

So if you're going to posit that homosexuality has an an evolutionary survival advantage, you need to place it in the context of this ancient prehistory where it really mattered--that is prior to 50,000 years BP, prior to everything that we consider "behavioral modernity" -- which may very well include sexual variance identification *at all*.

[Bowyn Aerrow]

Homosexuality in prehistory... Its possible it existed: http://abcnews.go.com/US/oldest-gay-man/...d=13320808

The Oldest Known Gay Man?

Archaeologists in the Czech Republic have unearthed the grave of what may be the remains of the oldest known homosexual or transgender man.



The prehistoric body dates to the Copper age -- or 2900 to 2500 years ago -- and was buried in a manner that was typically reserved for women.

I recall other such finds where males were treated with female burials which suggests homosexuality or transgenderism (both?).

Unfortunately a body doesn't tell all secrets. When you have a dead straight guy and a dead gay guy lying in the morgue side by side there is no real clues as to their sexuality in life. How the body is treated by the living, as in burial, may be telling of their sexuality.

Its not until the middle-late 20th century that anthropologists and historians were actually able to talk about any finds that dealt with sex and sexuality.

I definitely do not recall being taught in history class about all of the stone penises found all over the world from ancient times.

http://www.livescience.com/9971-stone-ag...dildo.html

http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhoto...pania.html

But then we are dealing with a society that can't see that Johnathan loved David more than woman, or who flat refuse to look up the word exceeded to know that David sprung a bit of wood when Johnathan hugged him. Exceeded comes from the Hebrew word gadal (to grow) I seriously doubt David grew taller.:tongue:

Until someone invents a working time machine that at the very least allows us to spy on our an ancestors, I doubt we will have solid answers for something that doesn't leave any physical evidence behind - only circumstantial evidence, such a a man being buried with jewelry and flowers like they did with women.

[Borg69]

The Dildo
23,000 B.C.

Ancient Dildo

The dildo may well be humanity’s most durable invention. Only fire, weapons, clothing and beads seem to have been around longer. Even agriculture is an infant compared to crafted lumps of stone and wood modelled on our junk; 13,000 years younger, to be precise. And that’s only taking into account the ones we’ve found: the oldest known dildo (an eight inch stone behemoth discovered in Germany) dates back 26,000 years, but there’s no reason to assume there aren’t other, older models out there. Archaeologists find them all the time; it’s almost as if people in the prehistoric era found sex a natural, enjoyable thing they didn’t have to be ashamed of.

http://listverse.com/2013/01/11/10-sex-t...t-origins/

You don't think it was just the women using them... do you ???

[Bowyn Aerrow]

Homosexuality in animals is well documented, while the majority do swing both ways... eventually... a few species however have more permanent decidedly homosexual pair-mating: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_...in_animals

Bonobos are one of humans closest relatives, and it would appear they are all bisexuals.
http://knowledgenuts.com/2013/11/12/the-...s-natural/

Homosexuality, as in male to male pairings with exclusively gay couples happening are found in Rams. 8%

Laysan Albatrosses 31% are lesbians

Dolphins: a pair of gay dolphins enjoyed a seventeen year relationship, while researchers identified a whole pod of dolphins—composed entirely of males—whose members were certainly not lacking in romantic experiences.

More is found here:
http://listverse.com/2013/04/20/10-anima...sexuality/

Humans are animals, granted humans are animals capable of reasoning (not exactly the same thing as reasoning animals mind you) but still animals.

Sex in other species is used for a variety of other things, social animals tend toward more homosexual type behaviors where everyone pretty much enjoys the company of everyone else.

Other species which are more monogamous and less social tend to form lasting pair-bonds which would appear to fly in the face of survival of the DNA. I see appear because frankly we don't know why or how homosexual couplings lead to the survival of the DNA in Rams, Lions and Dolphins, and of course Giraffes.

We do have evidence of gay male penguins being adoptive parents. Which isn't they are not the only species that makes good parents - when are gay: http://books.google.com/books?id=q98IMbD...ts&f=false

Even in human studies we are finding that gay parents are slightly better at the whole raising the young thing...
http://www.livescience.com/17913-advanta...rents.html

What is survival of the species? Evolution? Survival of the DNA?

While many assume its survival of ones own personal gene set because of a simplistic view on Darwinism (the same simplicity that asserts we descended from apes, and forgets that apes and humans share a common ancestor).

The evidence in both the human and the rest of the animal kingdom (and birds too, perhaps other kingdoms) points to a shared common interest in the offspring of pretty much everyone else of the same species.

It gets weirder, as there are many cases of animals adopting other animals from other species to see to their survival: https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ani...er+animals

Survival of the DNA is not a simple cut and dry situation where every individual is only mindful of their own DNA. It would appear that mindful of life in general, the success of all lifeforms is an important thing that many species may actually strive for in their own way.

I seriously doubt homosexuality is a modern invention, or even one invented in historic times. Me thinks that humans evolved this trait as well as other species because it serves a purpose and has lead to some minor advantage toward survival.

Either that or God has a great sense of humor - albeit a black sense of humor, but we can all enjoy the joke.

[Bowyn Aerrow]

The Dildo
23,000 B.C.


http://listverse.com/2013/01/11/10-sex-t...t-origins/

You don't think it was just the women using them... do you ???

I cannot say, while I'm old I'm not THAT old.... :tongue:

[MikeW]

Homosexuality in prehistory... Its possible it existed: http://abcnews.go.com/US/oldest-gay-man/...d=13320808

I recall other such finds where males were treated with female burials which suggests homosexuality or transgenderism (both?).

Unfortunately a body doesn't tell all secrets. When you have a dead straight guy and a dead gay guy lying in the morgue side by side there is no real clues as to their sexuality in life. How the body is treated by the living, as in burial, may be telling of their sexuality.

Its not until the middle-late 20th century that anthropologists and historians were actually able to talk about any finds that dealt with sex and sexuality.

I definitely do not recall being taught in history class about all of the stone penises found all over the world from ancient times.

http://www.livescience.com/9971-stone-ag...dildo.html

http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhoto...pania.html

But then we are dealing with a society that can't see that Johnathan loved David more than woman, or who flat refuse to look up the word exceeded to know that David sprung a bit of wood when Johnathan hugged him. Exceeded comes from the Hebrew word gadal (to grow) I seriously doubt David grew taller.:tongue:

Until someone invents a working time machine that at the very least allows us to spy on our an ancestors, I doubt we will have solid answers for something that doesn't leave any physical evidence behind - only circumstantial evidence, such a a man being buried with jewelry and flowers like they did with women.

Of course I'm going to quickly point out that 3,000 years ago isn't really "prehistory". We may know little of the history of these particular people but by the time of this burial, for example, Egypt had already existed for a couple thousand years.

Still it is interesting because it shows that gender identity--as distinct from one's biological sex--is well established symbolically in ancient people and that there could be "respected" crossover. And you're right, short of a time machine, there's no way we're ever going to "know" what actually went on in the lives of people in very ancient times.

We have to ask ourselves, what was sexuality like before we even understood that having happy time with a vulva ended up producing babies some months later? Yes, of course, we're animals and animals have 'instinctual knowledge' but we're talking about the evolution of a consciousness that can differentiate itself and 'symbolize' certain animalistic features, classifying them as 'male' vs 'female' (and the many other gender categories found in some tribal groups). For all we know, all that is a relatively recent (within the past 40,000 years) development in the 200,000 year history of our species.

[MikeW]

I cannot say, while I'm old I'm not THAT old.... :tongue:

Is it a dildo or a power object? Would there be *a difference* in the minds of those who used/worshiped it?

[MikeW]

One word... FUN

I suspect this is far more accurate than you may have intended, trialbyerror.

What role does the experience of *pleasure* play in the development of a species?

What about the experience of "ecstasy" in relation to the development of consciousness?

ETA: And how are these correlated with a developing perception and contemporary understanding of "sexuality"?

[Virge]

Two big points to clear up right now before other issues.

[COLOR="Red"]#1
Homosexuality as a form of population control keeps being brought up.
Please follow me on this.
That is what I mean by heterocentric thinking. For homosexuality to function as a form of birth or population control implies that heterosexual human sexuality and reproduction is the sole motivation for humans to have sex. Trust me for a little while and I'll explain that fallacy back under the heterosexual truck they've been preaching it from for over 3000 years.

Homosexuality is to population control what a screw driver is to an ice pick. They look like they're related but try putting together a Walmart prefab futon with an ice pick.

#2
Common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)are the nearest living relatives to modern humans
More heterocentric bullshit. We are equally or more related to Bonobos (Pan paniscus) and have FAR MORE in common with them than with common chimpanzees. Why don't we hear more about Bonobos? They are completely offensive to "heterocentric family values." Bonobos are the single most freely sexual animals on earth. Females do it with females, males do it with males, and like human teenagers, adolescent Bonobos do it with any any bobnobo or if there's no one interested, then just jerk off! How do they celebrate a huge bunch of fruit? Sex! How do they resolve crises? Sex! How do they escape boredom? Sex! What do they do to help them relax and rest? Sex! How do they make new friends? Sex! Unlike common chimpanzee females, bonobo females are interested in having sex when they are ovulating or not. Bonobos exhibit way less agression, more cooperation, empathy and altruism than common chimpanzees. The first ones brought to US zoos were neutered to end their near constant sexual behavior but guess what? Like humans who've had tubes tied or clipped, bonobos kept on fucking![/COLOR]

[COLOR="Red"]There's tons of great info on bonobos on the web and in youtube. Go use that little strip of white on the top right side of your browser and you'll be amazed. They're loads cuter than common chimpanzees too. You might learn some new positions!

With that off my chest I'm going back to reading. This thread and all your responses has totally AMAZED ME!!!!!! Give me time to ketchup! Large adult size fun and brain food! I love it!
[/COLOR]

[ETOTE]

I'm a bonobo....











cute!



interesting the bonobos genus is called pan...












uh oh.....

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cy0o56f32kQ/T5...onobos.jpg


huge balls!