RObert, I’m still laughing at your characterization of a monotheist god obsessed with human orifices. You make a very important point: many religions have an absurdly egocentric view of the universe, attributing the most profound cosmic significance to the most banal and ludicrous of human obsessions.

Rainer, your point about “homophobia” being at the root of why this question even arises outside of arcane scientific circles is spot on. I used quote marks because the term itself is controversial, but it’s the best word I can find to describe what is to me a strange and deeply irrational human emotion. Perhaps one day evolutionary psychology will make some sense of this, too.

Strongly held but rationally unjustifiable beliefs are part of what makes us human. Sometimes they are charming and harmless, but sometimes they can be very harmful.

Obviously, I have a personal interest in challenging a particular pervasive, irrational belief about human sexuality (and believe me, it is only one of many). What is sometimes frustrating is the very irrationality of it. It’s very difficult to get some people to move beyond the mental framework that human variation is a result of something “going wrong”. An example of this thinking is the apparently unshakeable idea that homosexuality is a kind of sexually transmissible disease that you pick up from someone who is already “infected”. To me the idea that sexual abuse can reverse the polarity of sexual orientation is patently absurd, and goes completely against the experience of people who have suffered such abuse. I suspect that such a belief is, at the deepest levels of the human psyche, one of the root causes of homophobia.

As w pointed out, the existence of homosexuality has been an apparent paradox in evolutionary models. However, the birth order study by Bogaert (see http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0005A6D3-7ADC-14A0-B6C483414B7F4945) goes some way to solving that paradox.

I think what biology and particularly evolutionary psychology teaches us is that diversity is not just a sooky left wing ideal – it is the natural order of things. And understanding our own nature is hugely liberating – for everyone.

Snout

Do you believe that the ratio of gays has increased over some 40 years or is it simply due to gays now publicly acknowledging their sexuality?

This is a question I've pondered over my 5 years research into hormonal disruptors such as dioxin where clinical researchers hold these chemicals responsible for feminization of hormonal and behavioural responses on the unborn fetus.

snout, you mentioned root causes of homopobia. I've often wondered how much of it has to do with modesty as well.

A lot of people have issues with the idea of someone who might find them sexually appealling (or not) looking at them when they are doing certain activities. The reasons that womens only gym's seem to do well and that women and men generally have seperate toilet facilities outside the family home may well contribute to the fear that some people have of homosexuals. The idea that the guy standing next to you at the urinal may have a look out of sexual interest is not one that a lot of guys are comfortable with. Pretty much in the same way that a lot of women are OK with being exposed with other women but not with men (other than a partner).

Anybody else pondered that and have any thoughts on the issue?

R0bert

Dickie, I think it’s hard to say, but my guess is that the incidence of a primarily male homosexual orientation is either stable, or may in fact be dropping in Western societies if the older brothers theory hold – a smaller proportion of men born in the last few decades actually have older brothers. It’s ironic that many of those religious groups that are most vehemently opposed to homosexuality also tend to have the largest families and may thus have the greatest proportion of gay sons! Kinsey did his study of orientation in the 1940s and came up with a 10% figure. More recent estimates are lower than that (generally under 5%), although this may be due to more accurate methodology than reflecting a true decline.

Two important things to bear in mind: as Laurie pointed out earlier, orientation tends to lie along a gradual spectrum from exclusively homosexual at one end to exclusively heterosexual at the other. My impression is that most people do identify with one end or the other, but the biologically determined intrinsic orientation might actually allow for a more even spread. The second thing is that intrinsic orientation, behavior and self identity don’t necessarily line up, and this is one of the problems with using a term like “gay” – which are you talking about?

My guess is that the increased visibility of homosexuality is probably more likely to be to do with increased acceptance and a more generally open attitude to sexuality, rather than a true increase in numbers, although I reckon these days a lot more people who are intrinsically gay are also gay by social identification. Whether actual homosexual behavior has increased as a result is an interesting question!

Snout

An interesting topic - that of gay children born to religious parents.

I worked in a college with a religious ethos for some 10 years, however, one of my children attended the local state school.

A colleague and I often mused over our perception that there were more gay kids at the college than the state high school. History has proven us correct.

There is nothing more just, I believe, than righteous parents discovering their child is gay.

This revelation more often than not, gives the parents an opportunity to exit their indoctrinated convictions and become accepting of those they previously regarded as unacceptable members of their community.

Of course, not all the intrinsically gay kids we knew lived happily ever after. Mainly they were the ones who attempted to conform to their parents' beliefs and their own religious background by endeavouring to survive in a small, fairly intolerant society by covering up their sexual orientation, which only resulted in much misery for some.

Snout I do not believe a gay gene exists,or that seduction can alter a person's biological sexual preferences. I believe there would be heaps of kids seduced by an older brother which did not result in the victim "turning" gay.

I remain fascinated by the hormonal disruptor theory and the role that these environmental factors have in the procreation of all species.

One wonders why there is an increase in infertile women? Communities are constantly bombarded with hormones in the beef, fish and chicken they ingest (I'm not a vegetarian), contraceptive pills, fast foods and the uncontrolled, unregulated emissions of hormonal disrupting industrial pollutants.

On a more frivolous note (and probably inane), is nature rebelling against population explosions? Apart from the generous contribution that most homosexuals make to societies in the way of their proven, inherent talents, could they also contribute to a decrease in population by their reluctance to procreate?

Hopefully, not too many will donate to the invitro-fertilisation programmes!

However, my limited research has revealed that committed homosexuals make excellent adoptive parents as shown on a TV programme a couple of years ago.

Bugger, I find this topic very interesting but noticed this thread rather late and most of the things that I would have addressed have already been commented on by others.

I’m lacking time now so I’ll be quick but may be back later.

A few things I’d still like to comment on are:

Have there been any similar studies done at all about female homosexuality?

I once read that the percentage of homosexual animals seems to be close to that of human homosexuality.

In China, where there is a one-child policy, and where no one has younger siblings, would there be less occurrence of homosexuality than in other nations?