Developing these ideas, R. Kirkpatrick and F. Muscarella emphasize the need for direct analysis of homosexual behavior, and not an amorphous concept of homosexuality as such. They give an overview of the historical and ethnographic data, from which it becomes apparent that bisexual behavior is the norm, exception and pathology. Many people showing a blatant homosexual behavior, gays themselves do not believe.
Thus, the conclusion that homosexual behavior is in the process of human evolution gradually acquired adaptive significance and maintain strong alliances between men and directly increasing the likelihood of their survival. According to Kirkpatrick, homosexual behavior is the result of individual selection for reciprocal altruism, sharing of resources and reducing magsasawa aggression. Similar to what we see in many Primate species (baboons, guenons, macaques, gorillas, orangutans, etc.), teenagers and young men in communities hominin could occupy peripheral social position.
In this situation the ability to establish lasting homosexual relationships could provide them with a reliable and alliances directly contributed to survival. Strong male alliances provide favorable conditions for the promotion on the hierarchical ladder and in the end provided the best reproductive opportunities.Theory R. Kirkpatrick and F. Muscarella does not discuss sexual orientation as such, but rather pay attention to the selection associated with behavioral reactions. In the framework of these concepts it is assumed that the tendency to such homosexual behavior has a genetic basis, and manifests itself in different individuals in varying degrees.
Genetic variability provides for the formation of a certain percentage more feminine in their behavior and bisexual orientation in males. These characteristics contributed to the strengthening of friendly relations with representatives of their sex. The behavior of such feminized males were also more attractive to females because it is correlated with decreased aggressiveness and risk of infanticide and more effective paternal behavior
In the evolution of hominin could be a sustainable selection of women in the direction of increasing femininity, resulting in the steel to be selected and the alleles associated with homosexual interests. In a population could arise and be maintained by a balanced polymorphism alleles for bimodal homosexuality.
Thus, according to a number of researchers in human evolution were fairly consistent selection for bisexuality in men. If they are right, then why in modern human populations, the proportion of bisexual men is small? For example, today in the U.S. there are about 0.8% of men with this kind of orientation, while heterosexual men — the majority — was 96.9%. Perhaps the modern predominance of heterosexual behavior in men is a result of cultural restrictions.
This paradox is quite understandable against the background of another contradiction: recall that, in accordance with the predictions of evolutionary psychologists, men are predisposed to promiskuiteta relations, but in practice the majority of modern men who practice monogamy and remain faithful to their wives. Apparently, in this case we are talking about the influence of powerful cultural constraints acting contrary to evolutionary predispositions.
Summing up, it should be said that modern research in the field of homosexual behavior and its neuroendocrine bases suggest that it is a product of evolution. Over a long period of human history, the manifestation of some bisexual orientation was beneficial. Pure homosexual orientation, we mark the small percent of men is a consequence of genetic polymorphism
It is also possible that the increase in the frequency of men with a homosexual orientation somehow associated with a General increase in population density and resource limitation of power (real or anticipated, in the short term). The homosexual strategy may have correlation with the need for men's cooperation (for example, in long-term, sometimes multi-year, military campaigns — as it did in ancient Greece, Sparta, or Rome). The manifestations of homosexuality are closely linked to social and cultural factors that prohibit or deter such practices in a particular society.
It's amazing how people try to think only in one plane – good or bad. However, such approach is incorrect - we cannot say that homosexuality is better or worse than heterosexuality! It's just the differences are worth taking, judging on a scale of "bad" or "good". Being gay is more than just some action... It's inner aspirations, needs, values, and they can not be "better" or "worse" – they are just different.
We are a web development team with a concentration on open-source Content Management Systems (CMS), especially Drupal.
We provide web services from small products: Drupal themes, modules...