Why Do Homosexuals Exist?
An explanation examining groups of humans cooperating and competing to raise children
Arnold Kling writes,
In my opinion, society's label (as expressed in popular culture, not by government) for sexual behavior other than monogamous heterosexual relationships ought to be ‘Caution: may be harmful to the individual and the community.’ The costs of divorce and of sexually transmitted disease are high. Are the benefits of sexual experimentation so great that it should be above criticism?
This excerpt is from his 2001 review of Bobos in Paradise, which he linked to a few days ago in this blog post. One of my many comments on this blog post was the following:
“Well said Arnold Kling.” And by that I pointed directly at the above excerpt.
That drew a comment from Cinna the Poet, and more from others. These comments partly motivated the main question of this post: why do homosexuals exist?
The scope of this question concerns evolution. In order for you to exist right now an enormous chain of events, or rather web of events, had to occur.1 All of your ancestors had to be born, and all of them had to grow up to have children. This required surviving harsh and changing conditions — countless droughts, famines and ice ages.
All life on earth has descended from elements on the Periodic Table. Our ancestors are atoms. We exist today because we passed through the evolutionary filter of billions of years of events. We can imagine some of these events.
Of particular importance in these events is the recurring event of raising children. This is an exceptionally difficult task; so difficult that countless species have gone extinct. The fact that human animals exist today means that our ancestors had the right combination of traits to survive harsh situations. To put it most simply, we cooperated and competed to carry on our genes over all these years.
Cooperation requires trust. In order for a mother and father to raise a child to adulthood in such a way that their child can successfully raise his or her children to adulthood requires cooperation and trust. Behaviors and traits that diminish the likelihood of successful child-rearing tend to be ones that die out. For example, marriage is with us today because the tradition of marriage survived evolution. The tradition of marriage helps to raise “successful” children. “Success” simply meaning that they can raise their children to do the same.
Humans evolved from groups of hunter-gatherers. The fact that homosexual behavior exists today means that it too helped in the process of raising children. This isn’t to condone all sexual acts, nor all types of homosexual behavior. I agree with Arnold Kling’s caution statement. Caution. Beware. But I also agree with Cinna the Poet. Have tolerance for certain homosexual behaviors and acts. The question is, “Which ones?”
I argue that we should be tolerant of the ones that help the group survive.2
It must be the case that certain homosexual behaviors aided the process of raising children within bands of hunter-gatherers. Such behavior promoted trust, cooperation and even competition. Homosexual behaviors and acts cover a very wide spectrum. In the way that I’m using the phrase here, “homosexual behaviors and acts,” can be as simple as two men shaking hands. This tends to build trust. So does embracing.
We don’t normally think of these acts and behaviors as homosexual because they are universal. They are practiced heterosexually, homosexually, in private and in public. Almost all human groups practice same-sex handshaking and same sex embracing.
Sodomy on the other hand is murkier. Why does sodomy exist today? Is sodomy somehow beneficial to the process of raising children? Keep in mind that men tend to be warriors and women tend to be worriers. Warriors and worriers cooperate and compete in ways that increase the likelihood that children within the group survive — whether a band of hunter-gatherers, community of farmers, etc.
This is not to condone sodomy in all situations, times, places, or at all, but this is a statement of tolerance. The First Amendment reads that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” This is a statement of tolerance. It is also a statement of respect. To simplify, it can be and is translated into the classroom comportment code: “I am here to learn. I respect myself and my rights. I respect others and their rights.” And the Christian compartment code known as the Golden Rule and Silver Rule.
The Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
And the Silver Rule: Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you.
Alongside these statements of tolerance and respect, we also place Arnold Kling’s caution statement: “Caution: may be harmful to the individual and the community.”
A web rather than a chain because reality consists of at least three spatial dimensions and time. As far as I can tell.
This requires defining “the group,” which is a very big topic. See the U.S. Constitution and how it was created, for example.