Xref: utzoo sci.bio:3356 sci.med:18874 sci.psychology:3082
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!muttiah
From: muttiah@cs.purdue.EDU (Ranjan Samuel Muttiah)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.med,sci.psychology
Subject: Re: The persistance of homosexuality in a gene pool
Message-ID: <11236@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>
Date: 29 Jul 90 19:46:22 GMT
References: <1990Jul23.022511.28161@mtcchi.uucp> <11095@netcom.UUCP> <10615@cs.utexas.edu>
Sender: news@cs.purdue.EDU
Reply-To: muttiah@howell.cs.purdue.edu (Ranjan Samuel Muttiah)
Followup-To: sci.bio
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University
Lines: 21

In article <10615@cs.utexas.edu> turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin) writes:
>realities that shaped human evolution.  Throughout most of the
>human past, the desire to have children did not mean diddly
>squat.  People copulated for desire or social reason, and lo and
>behold the kids came along.  Planning births or avoiding it was
>not really a factor.  Indeed, there is good reason to think that
>early humans did not even know the connection between sex and
>pregnancy.  

As long as it helped in their survival, why should they ?

It might be interesting that the pygmy mongooses located in parts
of Africa may have something to teach us.  They live in closely
knit groups and only one female is allowed to reproduce.  The
rest, male and female, are somehow (instinct ?) condemned to a life
of looking after the growing little ones.  They live in ant hills and the 
care takers spend their life looking out for potential predators.
They have really excellent tactics and signals of communication to avert
impending danger.  In fact, even food priorities are such that the little ones 
have the first choice.  Now here are a of smart bunch of rodents if ever 
I saw one :-).