Comments on: What Causes (Male) Homosexuality? http://popsych.org/what-causes-male-homosexuality/ The Internet's Best Evolutionary Psycholo-guy Wed, 03 Jan 2018 01:05:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Is The Exotic Erotic? Probably Not… | Pop Psychology http://popsych.org/what-causes-male-homosexuality/#comment-414 Is The Exotic Erotic? Probably Not… | Pop Psychology Sat, 22 Dec 2012 23:51:43 +0000 http://popsych.org/?p=151#comment-414 [...] Last time I wrote about the likely determinants of homosexuality, I ended up favoring the pathogen hypothesis that was put forth by Cochran, Ewald, and Cochran (2000) as the theory that had the most currently going for it. What is particularly interesting about my conclusion is how much empirical evidence directly confirms the theory: none. Don’t get me wrong; the pathogen hypothesis is certainly consistent with the known findings about homosexuality – such as the widely-varying reported concordance rates and the large fitness costs associated with the orientation – but being consistent with certain findings is not the same as being demonstrated by that evidence. If the currently most plausible theory for explaining homosexuality has, in essence, no direct evidence in its favor, that clearly must not be saying a lot about the alternative prospects. The two theories I covered last time – kin selection and sexually antagonistic selection – can’t even seem to account well for the existing evidence, so a neutral point with regard to the evidence is actually preferable. There was one theory that I neglected to mention last time, however, and this is a theory that purports to be able to explain both how heterosexual and homosexual orientations come to develop, and in both sexes, no less. If such a theory proved to have anything to it, then, it would be a highly valuable perspective indeed, so it deserves careful inspection. [...] [...] Last time I wrote about the likely determinants of homosexuality, I ended up favoring the pathogen hypothesis that was put forth by Cochran, Ewald, and Cochran (2000) as the theory that had the most currently going for it. What is particularly interesting about my conclusion is how much empirical evidence directly confirms the theory: none. Don’t get me wrong; the pathogen hypothesis is certainly consistent with the known findings about homosexuality – such as the widely-varying reported concordance rates and the large fitness costs associated with the orientation – but being consistent with certain findings is not the same as being demonstrated by that evidence. If the currently most plausible theory for explaining homosexuality has, in essence, no direct evidence in its favor, that clearly must not be saying a lot about the alternative prospects. The two theories I covered last time – kin selection and sexually antagonistic selection – can’t even seem to account well for the existing evidence, so a neutral point with regard to the evidence is actually preferable. There was one theory that I neglected to mention last time, however, and this is a theory that purports to be able to explain both how heterosexual and homosexual orientations come to develop, and in both sexes, no less. If such a theory proved to have anything to it, then, it would be a highly valuable perspective indeed, so it deserves careful inspection. [...]

]]> By: BuBBa http://popsych.org/what-causes-male-homosexuality/#comment-368 BuBBa Tue, 06 Nov 2012 23:37:55 +0000 http://popsych.org/?p=151#comment-368 You might be interested in this article: Offspring Production among the Extended Relatives of Samoan Men and Fa'afafine (2012) http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0036088?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+plosone%2FPLoSONE+%28PLoS+ONE+Alerts%3A+New+Articles%29 "The sexual antagonism hypothesis posits that the fitness costs associated with genetic factors underlying male androphilia are offset because these same factors lead to elevated reproduction on the part of the female relatives of androphilic males." You might be interested in this article: Offspring Production among the Extended Relatives of Samoan Men and Fa’afafine (2012)

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0036088?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+plosone%2FPLoSONE+%28PLoS+ONE+Alerts%3A+New+Articles%29

“The sexual antagonism hypothesis posits that the fitness costs associated with genetic factors underlying male androphilia are offset because these same factors lead to elevated reproduction on the part of the female relatives of androphilic males.”

]]>