What's the purpose of homosexuality in humans?

[Cuddly]

Homosexuality in humans has a natural purpose related to survival of the social groups and the species. It's real clear when you think about a family clan of early humans with ten children, twenty adult breeders... and five related adult non breeders. The survival rate of the offspring just shot up 10%. Five non breeding adults give a definite advantage in defense and competition with other clans or tribes.

This is what I don't get. Wouldn't it be easier to either limit the number of females or reduce the succesful fertilization chance? You know, make our semen bad swimmer or give 1 woman per 10 men. That would also give more men per children, to help them survive, but wouldn't require/depend on curious abnormal hormonal production.

Just to be clear, I am not disagreeing with anything (or agreeing for that matter...), merely trying to follow and feed the discussion.

Oh and nice shiny balls ETOTE.

[Virge]

I'm improvising a means of replying fast to all this so I can get ahead. You'll catch on.

Borg wrote
"What you say here kinda goes along with my theory that most guys/people already are at least somewhat bi, and predominately for the last 2000 years it was suppressed by Christianity telling us/brain washing us into being against it - It's EVIL/A sin !!! "
That's the short incomplete glance at the issue of the history of homophobia. Here's a better understanding of ithttp://gayspeak.com/showpost.php?p=463271&postcount=67

Mike asked about
"I was asking about prehistoric evidence, not evidence within ancient history. "[COLOR="Red"]That's a tough call. I'll go back to what Leakey, the younger said about all the prehistoric fossil evidence of early humans. It will all fit in the bed of small pick up truck with room to spare. To the best of my knowledge no tangible evidence has been discovered of homosexual (sex variations) in prehistoric men and not sure it ever will be found. The best indication of it in early homo sapiens is that sex variances were carried to North America around 40,000 years ago, to Australia and Polynesia 50,000 years ago and spread in a surprisingly stable percentages through every other human culture on earth. Would it be considered to proof if a grave was found of men as much as 90,000 years ago laying side by side with arms interlocked? Let's get busy and find that! I know where prehistoric evidence most likely will not be found and where it could most likely be found.

It won't be found in any of the truly prehistoric cave dwellings in Europe that have been used as home since the beginning of history up to this day. They were ransacked and made worthless long before the concept of archeology came about in the 18th century. Evidence might be hidden in caves such as the ones found along the coasts of Serbia and France with mouths that have been submerged by the Mediterranean since sea levels rose at the end of the last ice age. The ones that have been found have been in better condition than any on land.[/COLOR]

Mike said,
"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. " In my rush to keep up with all the comments I forgot something time and time again last night. I kept talking about the sex variation that is found in humans would give them a considerably higher chances or preserving the bloodline of a clan AND the species over clans without a sex variance. I wasn't clear to anyone if Mike didn't understand what I was leading to. I believe homosexuality and sex variances were very possibly part of the reason homo sapiens competed neanderthals and Denisovans into extinction. This does depend on there being no sex variances (homosexuality) in neanderthals or Denisovans.

[COLOR="Blue"]You guys have to forgive me for my weird problem with expressing complex abstractions in words that are as clear as I seem them in my head. I didn't start out on this in a haphazard way but with a lot of research trying to disprove it rather than prove it and constant attention to something often lost in heterocentric thinking.

They try to fit the model to the heterocentric "accepted wisdom" rather than work as nature does, In nature nothing is more complicated than is required for it to fulfill the purpose it is designed to perform. That covers everything from a peacock's tail to the different shapes of pollen. Back in the 13th century a guy named William of Occam came up with his "Law of Parsimony" We use it today in the acronym K.I.S.S. "Keep It Simple Stupid." The more I have worked with this idea the more something has become apparent to me. It's unbelievably simple (parsimonious) and answers far far more questions than it creates.... once you stop thinking heterocentrically. [/COLOR]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I've got to go prep for a really important BIG DEAL I'm doing tonight and will get back to this later. I promise!

Thanks for all the interest and GREAT questions and challenges. Please do your best to understand this,,, and help me see how it's wrong, if it is!!!!

See ya laters masturbators.

[Virge]

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!

Hey.... I find them more likable than the common chimpanzee, known as Pan troglodytes A troglodyte = a cave dweller. LOL and suits the brutish personalities of common chimps.

What say we all go Bonobo on each other????

[Virge]

I didn't expect so much interest in this subject. Most people, even gays, usually go psycho about some of the stuff I've brought up... but all that means is that another high priestess of "accepted wisdom" is having a hissy fit. If you know anything about the history of "accepted wisdom" you know it's wrong more than right.

I didn't bring this up hoping for people to agree with me. I want this to be challenged. How do you test the strength of rope or glass? You try to break them. The same applies for ideas.

I know lots of this is hard to wrap a brain around at first... but that's from thinking in terms of heterocentricity --- which describes the entire modern interpretations of evolution, human biology and sexuality...

I've already run this idea past some tough critics... doctors, psychologists, biologists... all looked at me at first like I was the stupidest person on earth and laughed at the idea... but after they understood the whole picture they all changed and are really giving it some thought now...

I'm asking you guys to do the same.

[ETOTE]

so basically you're saying gays had their place in the cave man days to serve as extra hands to baby sit, fight and gather food without risking creating more mouths to feed?

[Virge]

That's the short version... yes

That really doesn't win any points with "heterocentric" thinkers but so what?

It fits with the role homosexuals have filled in other societies besides homophobic christian ones that have lost all their credibility with their ridiculous traditional stands against homosexuality based completely in lies and superstition.

[ETOTE]

while it would make sense when societies first started organizing, in today's world, specifically regarding children, with all the bs religious dogma still lumping anyone who isn't a straight female into the category of a pedophile, most people don't trust their children around single straight men, let alone gay people for fear they will molest them....

So, that stigma really doesn't help matters, but it is still largely a reality.

[ETOTE]

^case in point...

Using Bing as a search engine just now, typed in Gayspeak to get to this site just now and the auto-fill drop down menu that highlights popular related searches....the search term that popped up was:
"map sex offenders in my area"....

yep, our society is really going places, enlightenment is not one of them, however.

[MikeW]

At what point does pansexuality become split along heterosexual / homosexual lines (meaning, more ore less same or opposite sex attraction and activity ONLY)?

Are there strictly homosexual Bonobos? I don't know but I'd be very surprised if there are (the three word search string in quotes certainly gathered no results).

[Virge]

^case in point...

Using Bing as a search engine just now, typed in Gayspeak to get to this site just now and the auto-fill drop down menu that highlights popular related searches....the search term that popped up was:
"map sex offenders in my area"....

yep, our society is really going places, enlightenment is not one of them, however.

That gets me into another issue about the fundamentalists and dominionists who want to make a democratic theocracy of the the USA are
#1. The greatest potential enemy ever of this nation
#2. No different from Taliban and other Islamic fundamentalists once you change just a few nouns in their rhetoric.
#3. If you aren't actively fighting them now, you're helping them.