Quote:
| Originally posted by Poetic_Justice+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Poetic_Justice)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Oh and for that other guy, there is no evolutionary payoff for homosexuality because it reduces reproductivity.[/b] |
I disagree. The presence of homosexuality supports reproduction. Not among homosexuals, but among heterosexuals. Quote:
Originally posted by Poetic_Justice@
As evolution rests on the adaptation through survival of the fittest which means that genes must be passed on, homosexality is the least evolutionarily suitable trait. |
Yet, the biological dead-end you speak of has persisted for thousands of years. <!--QuoteBegin-Poetic_Justice As a side effect of some other trait which is evolutionarily selectable I could see it, but as a primary trait being selected, such a thing makes no sense.[/quote]Now you're beginning to get it. Consider this: The likelihood of homosexual expression in an individual female's offspring increases with each birth. This statistic remains true, even if that one female selects different males to mate with. I believe this is one important clue that points to the very survival adaptation you speak of.