Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!hou5h!hou5a!hou5d!hogpc!houxm!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!mcdaniel From: mcdaniel@uiucdcs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: RE: Gay response response (semi-f) - (nf) Message-ID: <2658@uiucdcs.UUCP> Date: Sun, 28-Aug-83 23:27:31 EDT Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.2658 Posted: Sun Aug 28 23:27:31 1983 Date-Received: Tue, 30-Aug-83 21:39:26 EDT Lines: 46 #R:houxz:-45100:uiucdcs:26600056:000:2332 uiucdcs!mcdaniel Aug 28 14:04:00 1983 In the absence of net.evolution or net.biology . . . I've heard one theory that limited levels of homosexuality in a family may help that family. Plants, insects, and other "lower" creatures usually have a great deal of offspring without helping any of them survive. More "advanced" animals, especially primates (that's us, among others), concentrate on having just a few offspring with a great deal of nurturing given to each. (To have a culture, you must train each member carefully. Thus, we don't have time for a great deal of offspring.) Suppose that homosexuality is genetically determined by some recessive gene, say. Suppose also that we have 2 families: one con- sists of 2 parents and some heterosexual offspring, and the other is the same, but a few of the offspring are homosexual instead. The idea is that the few homosexual offspring would help care for their brother's or sister's children. Thus, these children would have a better chance of survival, in comparison to the children of the other family. Furthermore, each heterosexual offspring might have more children, thus making up in part for the homosexual's lack of chil- dren. I am rather skeptical of this theory. For one thing, it is assumed that homosexuality is genetically caused. There is an contro- versy in human psychology, the "nature/nurture" problem: is most human behavior caused by genetics or upbringing? This feud has gone on for many years, and thousands of pages could be (have already been!) writ- ten about it. (So don't just assume off the top of your head that homosexuality is a "learned tendency".) Also, it is assumed that the nurturing of other's children by homosexuals makes up for the children that they don't have. In the U. S., homosexuals do not usually nur- ture children, so homosexuality may no longer have survival value. I can't say anything about prehistoric cultures, though. I will with- hold judgement until somebody does a mathematical model of it -- any- one like a term paper topic? But who cares whether homosexuality has survival value??? Tim McDaniel, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, CS dept. (UNIX mail: . . . pur-ee!uiucdcs!mcdaniel) (CSNET: mcdaniel.uiuc@RAND-RELAY) /* ---------- */