Quote: (03-20-2013 11:01 AM)lurker Wrote:
Quote: (03-20-2013 08:28 AM)Teedub Wrote:
Homosexuality occurs in many animals, but I agree with Lemmo that it is sort of a defect as it negates the ability to reproduce. I'm interested in the evolutionary reasons for it.
If I had to guess - and it would be exactly that - the prevalence of homosexuality in the population acts as a brake on reproduction frequency to ensure a smooth generational cycle relative to population resources.
If this is true, there should be more gays in harsher environments.
The currently accepted "explanation" for homosexuality among Evolutionary biologists is that being homosexual >>> No children>>>more time and achievement>>> better able to help near kin like nieces and nephews get ahead. So they help their own genes resident in near kin, rather than their own children.
Seems a bit of a stretch to me. When biologists explain why a birds wing is swept back at 19 degrees rather than 20 degrees because it helps it fly very slightly faster, but are then happy to maintain that not reproducing at all can still be squared with evolutionary theory I don't know. Sounds more like a political explanation to me. It is a genuine biological puzzle which I don't think has been solved yet.
PS: The bit about harsh vs other environments is irrelevant. For mammals we only care about our own genes, not about the genes of the group. If we cooperate in a group it is only because we expect a personal payoff down the line. i.e there is no group selection in mammals. I understand it is different among bees and ants were most bees/ants in a group share almost identical DNA so communality can thrive there.