Replies

Look, these arguments are based on a situation that did not breed homosexuality, namely the current condition.

But these arguments do show that homosexuality is associated with incredibly high incidences of sexually-transmitted disease, promiscuity, physical violence, and emotional problems. It may be a coping mechanism but so is alcoholism.

If it hadn't had its uses it wouldn't exist, nature is parsimoneous that way.

What uses do alcoholism, drug abuse, pedophilia, bestiality have? Your argument that homosexuality exists to parse out scarce resources makes no sense given the miniscule portion of the population in which it exists. Science has found no biological etiology, pointing more toward environmental/behavioral factors, such as abuse.

If you want to argue with me, you'd be better served to try to show why my arguments are incorrect.

I did. You didn't answer my question as to when the "separation of rear openings" occurred; presumably because you have no answer.

Your argument that homosexuality exists to parse out scarce resources makes no sense given the miniscule portion of the population in which it exists.

That is a totally mis-directed refutation, caused by far too casual reading of the argument I have presented. Of course it is a small percentage now. Times are good now, and that favors pair-bonding over the alternative scheme: harem-keeping by the alphas and redirection for everyone else.

Science has found no biological etiology, pointing more toward environmental/behavioral factors, such as abuse.

And again, lots of words--no sign of comprehension. The gist of my argument is that scarce resources produce stress in the young in a manner that is emblematic of scarce resources: missing parents-uncertainty-neglect-resentment-rejection, and that stress determines gender choice.

As usual, you are re-enforcing my argument when you think you are attacking it--which comes from not being bothered to understand it.

I did. You didn't answer my question as to when the "separation of rear openings" occurred; presumably because you have no answer.

It probably happened sometime after monotremes hit the stage, which would probably put it sometime between 45 and 30 million years ago. What's your point? They are both sensitive for similar reasons. If we didn't still like the feel of large things going through our anal sphincters, we'd be pretty stove up by now. Do you go into a panic at the thought of a bowel movement?