Follow by Email

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

My Theory Of Gay

         Perhaps nature intended for a certain percentage of the population to be non-heterosexual. Yes, of course nature and life itself hinges on reproduction, but what about survival? Even reproduction has its limits. Eventually, having so many kids can take its toll on mom and the health of the family as a whole. Also, when populations are strained to their limits, pandemics become far more likely and damaging. And last but not least, non-heterosexual males may intrinsically deter war and violent proclivities by virtue of their same-sex attractions. Although most of these theories are being researched, the following discussion is purely based off my own experiences, understandings, and logical conclusions. As a young gay man who has struggled with my sexuality in the past, I find great comfort in the idea that gays are, and always have been, an instrumental to the survival of our species.
            Have you ever heard of the “Gay Uncle” theory? It’s been studied alongside kin theory, which attempts to explain altruistic tendencies by asserting that though that individual is not benefited, those close to him/her have a greater chance of surviving and passing on the genes which are found in, or favored by, the self-sacrificing individual. So you have brothers and sisters with whom you share your genetic information. Though some may fight with their siblings on a continuous basis, they never want to see them hurt or worse, pass away. We are biologically inclined to love our family and strive for the survival of it’s offsprings. We especially care for our own children, but then our nieces and nephews before any others. Nature has apparently hard-wired us to favor those who are closest to us genetically, and we want to see the maximum number of these people, not only survive, but prosper and live fulfilling and productive lives.
            Now, we look at the efficiency of a family in terms of how many children it consists of. Obviously there is a tipping point. Though some women in history have been able to churn out a baby every year for their entire life, this is not feasible for the entire population, especially in this day and age. Financial issues present themselves, parents split, or mom dies during childbirth. Either way, more kids equals more stress for the mother and the family. The most recent research suggests that great psychological stress for the mother during pregnancy leads to prenatal and hormonal stress for the baby. These hormonal washes are directly responsible the development of sexual behavior and mannerisms in the growing baby’s brain. The result, gay babies; babies that will grow up and not reproduce, putting more stress on the original family, but instead play with his siblings children and help foster in them healthy emotional, social, and intellectual growth. Also, if dad turns out to be a dead beat or happens to pass away, well now you have an extra man in the family to help with the kids! When you dig a little deeper into the idea of diminishing returns and the tipping point of family sizes, it seems to make sense to add some male individuals who care more about culture and communicating emotions rather than impregnating every woman in sight.
            I don’t mean to be stereotypical, because it’s not always true, but the average gay guy is often cleaner, better groomed, and more anal (no pun intended) than their average heterosexual counterparts. Like typical heterosexual women, homosexual males are more likely to be manic and OCD about personal hygiene and living quarters. It is no surprise to me that nature would increase these traits, i.e. cleanliness via homosexuality, at a time when the mother is stressed or overwhelmed by the number of children she already has. Nature seems to also be slowing down the population growth so that the people can adjust to the germs or viruses now being spread more rapidly. These assertions are of course speculatory, but still, they don’t seem completely baseless.
            My final argument for homosexuality being a part of natures design is my all-time favorite. It ties into human history, biology, and psychology. In 1983 a study (link) was conducted by G. Dorner investigating the effect of psychological stress during pregnancy on the sexuality of the developing baby. Dorner surveyed women from Germany who had been pregnant during the WWII and asked about the sexuality of the child that was born from that pregnancy. His study revealed higher rates of homosexuality from pregnancies during those years, the highest of which were during the last two years of the war. Though this study was retroactive and based on the surveyed mother’s memory, Dorner’s following studies on rat pregnancies influenced by higher or lower than normal levels of hormones (primarily testosterone) supported his conclusion that psychological stress in the mother leads to prenatal and hormonal stress for the fetus which results in atypical sexual behavior and tendencies. The stress in this situation was the war, the destruction, the loss of life and especially loved ones. I’d say that could be pretty stressful for a pregnant woman. So here, nature has provided a way to reduce the probability of future aggressive outbreaks, by insuring that the men will be too busy fucking instead of fighting :)

            Maybe, life has built into its reproduction process a sort of circuit-breaker, a way to prevent the system from going out of control too quickly and destroying itself. Maybe that component is the rate of homosexuality. Seems likely to me, but only more research and time will prove me right. Until then, I’ll hold tight to the believe that gays are here for a reason, to slow population explosions, take care of those close to us (both genetically and socially), and continue to make love and not war with our fellow man. Here’s to gays, and the healthy productive lives that we bring to family, friends, and society!