Evolutionarily speaking, homosexuality is puzzling. Homosexual intercourse produces no offspring and is a waste of time and energy (again, evolutionarily speaking). Nevertheless, many species exhibit this behavior. Let us explore the possible reasons why homosexuality persists.
One theory is the “Gay Uncle” theory. Although, your gay uncles and aunts don’t have biological children of their own, they can help raise you while your parents are busy hunting and gathering food. You still share a quarter of your uncle’s genes so if you have at least three other siblings or first cousins being taken care of, then the evolutionary math adds up. The problem with this theory is that gay men and women do not spend much of their time taking care of their nieces and nephews.
Another is called the “Sneaky Fucker” theory. Let’s say that caveman Fred is off to hunt for the day but wants to protect his lover Wilma from predatory animals and interested men while she stays home. Fred feels safe though since he asked his gay best friend Barney to protect her while he’s gone. Although Barney is almost exclusively gay, he is infatuated with Wilma; he also knows that Wilma wants Barney as well. Unbeknownst to Fred, Barney and Wilma have a secret affair. However, straight men tend not to ask gay men to protect their wives and girlfriends. (However, kings did have eunuchs to protect their concubines; “Eunuch” literally means “bed keeper” in Greek.)
A far more convincing theory has to do with genetics. The groundbreaking sexologist Alfred Kinsey found that human sexuality is not black-and-white but a spectrum with a lot of gray area. While most people are sexually attracted to the opposite sex, sometimes they do feel same sex attraction and act upon them. We can think of homosexuality as a recessive trait that straight individuals can carry. Therefore, full-blown homosexuality may be the result of someone receiving the recessive gay genes from both parents.
Some may even argue that we can skip the genetics part and solely rely on Kinsey’s spectrum theory. As long as a lesbian feels an attraction to one man to have sex with him at least once, she has a chance of passing on her genes. The idea: you only have to be “straight enough” make it through to the next round in natural selection.
One more possibility is worth mentioning: homophobia. Because of the rampant discrimination that exists around the world, many gay men and women stay in the closet and have heterosexual relationships. I went through a fascinating book called Gay in America by Scott Pasfield and I was amazed by how many of these gay men had biological children with their ex-wives, especially ones from the South and Midwest. I also asked my parents if they personally knew any gay Koreans back in Seoul. They said they couldn’t think of a single one and everyone there eventually gets married and has kids. According to my dad, most gay Koreans are in the closet because of the intense homophobia and strong Confucian values that permeate Korean culture.
One thing that is unclear is if the percentage of homosexuals will decrease as time goes on. As we become more tolerant of gays in our communities, fewer gays will be pressured into heterosexual relationships. On the other hand, we now have the technology and means to enable same-sex couples to have biological children of their own so the percentage of gays could increase.
As a final note (in case it wasn’t clear), I’d like to remind readers that I am not making any moral justifications for homophobia. Just because it may have a served an evolutionary purpose does not mean that it is right.
There are three main positions concerning the "cause" of homosexuality: nature vs. nurture vs. combination of both.
ReplyDeleteEthics prevents experimenting upon persons from birth through adulthood to nurture homosexual behavior compared to some control group. So we can never know if the behavior psychologists are correct. Thus placing the burden upon the biologists to identify the "natural" cause for homosexuality.
Instances of men in isolation e.g. 15th century transatlantic merchant ships and modern day prisons demonstrate homosexuality can emerge amidst a strictly straight male population so even if having a biological cause, there are non-biological based situations that coax homosexual behavior.
Even if demonstrative proven that certain nurturing environments can produce homosexual tendencies, that does not negate the possibility of some biological aspect, no matter how minor.
Thus leading to the middle position that homosexuality is caused both by nature and by nurturing which shifts the debate to how much blame may be assigned, e.g. 50-50 or 20% nature and 80% nurturing.
In this respects, homosexuality gets placed in the same elusive category as 'intelligence' and 'talent'. The question assumes there is some potential within all of us but how much depends upon what: proper nurturing environment?
Heck, after 45 some years actress Kristy McNichol, as of less than 24-hours of writing this comment just came out of the proverbial closet. How long does it take becomes the next question. (How long until Sue Hecht from the TV comedy "The Middle" discovers her 'boyfriend' has been less than straight with her?)
Then there are the types of homosexuality. Not akin to Kinsey's spectrum, they are different types of homosexual love. Pausanias from Plato's Symposium addresses one kind, but then there is another like what the English _gentlemen_ experience in their early adult years nothing carnal but a genuine love for another guy e.g. Sebastian and Rider from Waugh's Brideshead Revisited or the contemporary fashion of 'bromances'.
All this to say does not matter the cause or types of homosexuals, instead focus on how society should/must (you choose the modal) adjust to -- for want of a better word, accommodate homosexuals within the public sphere and society.