Quote:
Originally posted by italiangm,
As I've posted elsewhere, I believe homosexuals are an evolutionary solution to fill a gap. If the underlying gap is filled by men who exhibit the best of feminine traits (from an evolutionary perspective), and who are sexually attracted to females, the need for homosexual males may very well be rendered vestigial and disappear. |
Have you heard Desmond Morris's theory on the biological role of homosexuals? That they are non-reproductive couples in a world were overpopulation is a very serious problem? This does not ring true in all examples, however, since homosexuality probably has always existed and most likely always will (there are small tribes across the globe that practice homosexuality and have done so for centuries).
The existence of homosexuality is in my opinion a very good thing for the human race. However, I would agree with this Simpson fellow that metrosexuality is a result of a consumer culture or a class based society, and that it is, unlike homosexuality, a negative thing.
This is not to say that a man "in touch" with his feminine side is a bad thing. On the contrary, it is necessary for our survival - an intelligent woman should detest war-mongering, ignorant muscleheads.
But we are forgetting something here - the idea of "femininity", at least by modern standards, is mostly a cultural construct. Wearing makeup and making your hair "fabulous" and donning exquisite, expensive jewelry and clothing and wanting a huge mansion is no more inherently "feminine" than being a drag queen is inherently homosexual! Not all homosexuals are drag queens (not all drag queens are homosexual!) and not all feminine people are wasteful to precious natural resources, destructive to the environment, and buttress an unjust hierarchy based system.