Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!uhccux!ronald
From: ronald@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Ronald Amundson)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: The persistance of homosexuality in a gene pool
Message-ID: <8801@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu>
Date: 31 Jul 90 23:07:18 GMT
References: <487@beguine.UUCP> <308@infopro.UUCP> <1990Jul16.052628.27210@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <328@tygra.ddmi.com> <3635.26b04aac@ccvax.ucd.ie>
Reply-To: ronald@uhccux.UUCP (Ronald Amundson)
Organization: University of Hawaii
Lines: 24

In article <3635.26b04aac@ccvax.ucd.ie> jlynch@ccvax.ucd.ie writes:

>Seriously, I doubt if sexual orientation is inherited, as many people have
>already pointed out. Wilsons theory about homosexual 'helpers ' appears to
>lose face especially when you look at modern attitudes of some people to gays,
>it is hard to imagine than primitive man would have reacted any different.
>John
>

I agree that Wilson's theory is pretty shake-and-bake, but not for the
reason John mentions.  As a matter of fact, different societies differ
greatly in their attitudes towards homosexuality, even if we confine
ourselves to those which have been studied by anthropologists.  Many
are extremely tolerant.  So there's no reason to to expect that
"primitive man" (a poor choice of terms) resembled our friend John
Palmer any more than "he" resembled the more sexually tolerant among
us.  We shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that bigotry is
heritable any more than that sexual orientation is heritable.  

Like John, I'm tempted to call homophobia "primitive."  But, in an
evolutionary sense, there's no evidence to support the claim.  For all
we know, homophobia is like investment fraud -- a newly invented bit of
moral wretchedness.  

Ron