Did homosexuality evolve to help humans bond?

[wvwvw]

Did homosexuality evolve to help humans bond? People who are more open to the idea of sleeping with the same sex have higher levels of 'social' hormones
Scientists looked at the link between progesterone and sexual attitudes
Progesterone is a hormone that contributes to formation of social bonds
Heterosexuals with more of the hormone are more open to homosexuality
In men, thinking about social bonds and friendships had the same effect
UK study claims there is a continuum between affection and sexuality
By ELLIE ZOLFAGHARIFARD FOR MAILONLINE and PRESS ASSOCIATION

PUBLISHED: 00:02 GMT, 25 November 2014 | UPDATED: 08:56 GMT, 25 November 2014

Homosexual behaviour may have evolved to improve how well humans bond and get along with each other, according to new research.

Researchers found that heterosexual women with high levels of the hormone progesterone are more open to the idea of engaging in sexual behaviour with other women.

Similarly, when heterosexual men are subtly reminded of the importance of having male friends and allies, they report more positive attitudes toward engaging in sexual behaviour with other men.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/11/24/2377AFF600000578-2847542-image-11_1416846715319.jpg

The study provides the first evidence that our need to bond with others increases our openness to engage in homosexual behaviour.

The hormone progesterone is known to contribute to the formation of social bonds, which have many benefits for humans.

The hormone is produced mainly in the ovaries in women, and in the adrenal glands in men.

It is one of the main hormones responsible for caring or friendly behaviour, and levels rise when people have close and friendly interactions.

Dr Diana Fleischman from the University of Portsmouth said that the pattern was particularly obvious in men who had high levels of progesterone.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/11/24/2377AFE600000578-2847542-image-12_1416846723970.jpg
Similarly, when heterosexual men are subtly reminded of the importance of having male friends and allies, they report more positive attitudes toward engaging in sexual behaviour with other men. The hormone progesterone (a crystal of the hormone is pictured) is known to contribute to the formation of social bonds

Women's levels of progesterone peak after ovulation when the chance of becoming pregnant is dramatically reduced.

'From an evolutionary perspective we tend to think of sexual behaviour as a means to an end for reproduction,' said Dr Fleischman.

WHAT IS PROGESTERONE?
The hormone progesterone is known to contribute to the formation of social bonds, which have many adaptive benefits for humans.

The hormone is produced mainly in the ovaries in women and in the adrenal glands in men.

It is one of the main hormones responsible for caring or friendly behaviour and levels rise when people have close and friendly interactions.

Women's levels of progesterone peak after ovulation when the chance of becoming pregnant is dramatically reduced.

This research looks at how progesterone, a hormone that has been shown to increase motivation to form close bonds, might also underlie the motivation to affiliate with those of the same sex, sexually.

'However, because sexual behaviour is intimate and pleasurable, it is also used in many species, including non-human primates, to help form and maintain social bonds.

'We can all see this in romantic couples who bond by engaging in sexual behaviour even when reproduction is not possible.

'The results of our study are compelling because, using two very different methods, they arrived at the same conclusion.

'Women were more likely to be motivated to think about homosexual sex when their levels of progesterone were higher.'

Dr Fleischman said that, compared to a control group, men's homoerotic motivation was not increased by priming them with sex.

But thinking about friendship and bonding caused a measurable change in their attitude to the idea of having sex with other men.

She said that having homoerotic thoughts did not necessarily mean they would be acted upon.

The researchers first developed a measure of homoerotic motivation through an online survey of 244 participants, with questions including: 'The idea of kissing a person of the same sex is sexually arousing to me', and 'If someone of the same sex made a pass at me I would be disgusted'.

The researchers then measured progesterone in 92 women's saliva and found that as progesterone increased, so too did openness to the idea of engaging in homosexual activity.

In a second study, the researchers measured levels of progesterone in the saliva of 59 men before all were randomly assigned to one of three groups.

They were then asked to complete word puzzles, one using friendship words, one using sexual words, and a third using neutral words.

Dr Fleischman said that, compared to a control group, men's homoerotic motivation was not increased by priming them with sex. But, thinking about friendship and bonding caused a measurable change in their attitude to the idea of having sex with other men

Men asked to complete the affiliative and friendship word puzzle showed 26 per cent greater homoerotic motivation, compared to the men in the sexual or neutral conditions.

In addition, those men with the highest progesterone in the affiliative condition showed 41 per cent greater homoerotic motivation compared to high progesterone men in the other two groups.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/11/24/2377AFFB00000578-2847542-image-13_1416846744991.jpg
Dr Fleischman said that studies of other animals in the great ape family also pointed to homosexual behaviour being used to maintain and forge new friendships.

Dr Fleischman said: 'Humans are among a group of animals who have sex for many reasons, not just to reproduce.

'Reasons can include pleasure, a reward, a way of saying "please be nice to me" or exerting dominance.

'It's very complex, but it's clear there's a continuum between affection and sexuality and sexuality is fluidity, that is, the ability to engage sexually with those of the same sex or the opposite sex is common.

'In humans, much, if not most of same-sex sexual behaviour occurs in those who don't identify as homosexual.'

The researchers will now explore other contexts and hormonal influences that could increase homoerotic motivation in men and women.

They are also interested in seeing how bisexual people might react differently to social cues.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2847542/People-open-homosexuality-higher-levels-social-hormones.html

[Pjeter Pan]

No

[Porpolita]

Hmm, its been a while since we last had a thread about Homosexuality. I knew it could not be too long before TA's second topic of obsession (after Southern European exoticness) would appear.

[Scholarios]

LOL reductionism

[SardiniaAtlantis]

Nature's answer to population control I think.

[King Claus]

Nature's answer to population control I think.
dumb fuck. that shit happens only in the west;)

[Mortimer]

i heard that animals can be homosexual too, does it apply to animals too that they bond. im not sure. it is really interesting, i dont know much about homosexuality, im not even sure if it is really something biological or just something people like to do, all adult greek males had sex with young boys, it was common cultural practice, were they all homosexual? no it was just common to have sex with males

[Unome]

No, homosexuals and incels are males who have opted-out of male competition for sex, since they cannot or will not compete. They have given-up or surrendered.

Heterosexuality is natural, every other sexuality is not.

[Methmatician]

No, homosexuals and incels are males who have opted-out of male competition for sex, since they cannot or will not compete.
It's not like homosexuals have sex with every other homosexual simply because they're homosexual :rolleyes2: They have to attract other people just as much as heterosexual people need to.

[LightHouse89]

The bible forbids to lay with the children of ham and also forbids sodomy.

[Fortis in Arduis]

It's not like homosexuals have sex with every other homosexual simply because they're homosexual :rolleyes2: They have to attract other people just as much as heterosexual people need to.

Indeed, and there is a lot of competition. Lesbians can be very predatory and competitive. I do not expect the 99% to understand the 1%, but Unome is the chap who, apparently, chose to be heterosexual. I have an opinion about that.

BrownBear, you are not homo, so you will not relate to it easily, but in animal species that bond heterosexually, some form similar homosexual bonds, if they are inclined to.

It's the Jewish and Christian reproductive ethos and morality that has created schisms where they need not have been any.


I would imagine that Ancient Greek society was hypermasculine, with men firmly in power and so their male homosexuality was expressed in that way. Now, we have feminists and feminised heterosexual and homosexual expressions, so culture must play a role in determining the form, but the homo is always there. People are not making conscious lifestyle choices either way, unless they are bisexual, these days, I would suggest.

There is a lot of chemistry involved, as the study suggests. My experience of bisexuals is that they tend to be very friendly sociable types, with loving natures, as the study suggests. I find it very sad that so many of them feel the need to hide the homosexual side of themselves.

[Mars06]

This has long been the theory that I've advocated.

To add to that, while I think that homosexual desires are somewhat inherent in all or most people, exclusive homosexual desires are likely a result of a hormonal imbalance ("imbalance" in the sense of abnormality - this does not imply that it is a bad thing) which sets homosexual desires on "overdrive".

But this doesn't necessarily mean that homosexuality evolved "for" anything - there are benefits (social bonding) and disadvantages (ease of STD transmission) to homosexual behavior and I suspect that natural selection would be working against it, if there is indeed a more-than-negligible selective force here. So another possibility would be that homosexuality is a result of hormonal imbalances (in the sense of being "abnormal", not necessarily bad for the individual in question or society) in the womb or in early childhood.

[Unome]

Homosexuals do choose to be what they are, as do everybody else.

The problem with Fortis and other pro-homosexuals is that they want to attribute their life choices to "nature", but only when convenient and for the sake of argument. However, unfortunately, people cannot "pick & choose" moral consequences in life. You are stuck with your choices; pro-homosexuals dislike this idea. Because liberals want the "freedom" to be one thing, one minute, and something completely different, the next minute. Liberals live in a fantasy world where, words > actions. If you say that you are an orange, then you are an orange. This is false. Actions determine what you are, actions > words.

Most homosexuals are liars; they're pretending to be something they're not. They're pretending to be something other than "normal". Liberalism is a war against normalcy.

[Fortis in Arduis]

Homosexuals do choose to be what they are, as do everybody else.

The problem with Fortis and other pro-homosexuals is that they want to attribute their life choices to "nature", but only when convenient and for the sake of argument. However, unfortunately, people cannot "pick & choose" moral consequences in life. You are stuck with your choices; pro-homosexuals dislike this idea. Because liberals want the "freedom" to be one thing, one minute, and something completely different, the next minute. Liberals live in a fantasy world where, words > actions. If you say that you are an orange, then you are an orange. This is false. Actions determine what you are, actions > words.

Most homosexuals are liars; they're pretending to be something they're not. They're pretending to be something other than "normal". Liberalism is a war against normalcy.

Did you really chose to be heterosexual? If so, when did this happen?

[LightHouse89]

I think Gays wish to be the opposite sex sometimes. At least some of them. They dress and act like women and then you have some who do not behave this way. Its rather odd. There is a scientific discovery to be made so that this affliction can be lifted for homosexuals and society. God bless :thumb001:

[Unome]

Did you really chose to be heterosexual? If so, when did this happen?
Everybody chooses to be and become exactly what they are. I choose to be who I am, yes, as do you.

You can never escape moral responsibility and consequence, no matter how much you want to deny choice.

Homosexuality is just an excuse, as I mentioned, to quit (hetero)sexual competition in life.


From my experience in life, most homosexuals are bullied as children and teenagers, called 'fags' relentlessly by more brutal and violent males, who then convince them they are that way. This is natural. Nature includes bullying of dominate males to subservient males. Homosexuality is a result of this bullying. I liken it to teachers and parents who call their children and students 'stupid'. For example a child doesn't know the answer to a question or test, so the teacher calls him or her 'stupid' often. Then the other children call him/her stupid. After enough repetitions, the child begins to believe and accept it. The child conforms to his/her peers and their expectations.

Same with homosexuals who are bullied as children.

[Fortis in Arduis]

I think Gays wish to be the opposite sex sometimes. At least some of them. They dress and act like women and then you have some who do not behave this way. Its rather odd. There is a scientific discovery to be made so that this affliction can be lifted for homosexuals and society. God bless :thumb001:

Some homosexuals are a bit transgendered, which makes them stand out a lot, and the gay culture can be quite feminised, just as the hetero-culture is now quite feminised, but it does not have to be so. We have a long tradition of feminised homo-culture in the UK, going right back. You can love it or hate it.

What I find sad is that when homosexuality was almost unthinkable, men could be more affectionate and appreciative of one another without concern that this could be misconstrued as homosexual behaviour. I think that heterosexual men are sometimes afraid to be mistaken for something else.

I have absolutely NO sexual interest in heterosexual men, because there is no real chemistry, but understandably any affection that I might have for them can be misunderstood, and I really dislike that.

The study suggests that there is a continuum from affection to sexual interest, which goes against my kama/prem (lust/compassion) dichotomy or understanding of love's differing natures, but I have noticed that many bisexuals are often very sociable and kind people, and often the centre of their social circles.

[LightHouse89]

Some homosexuals are a bit transgendered, which makes them stand out a lot, and the gay culture can be quite feminised, just as the hetero-culture is now quite feminised, but it does not have to be so. We have a long tradition of feminised homo-culture in the UK, going right back. You can love it or hate it.

What I find sad is that when homosexuality was almost unthinkable, men could be more affectionate and appreciative of one another without concern that this could be misconstrued as homosexual behaviour. I think that heterosexual man are sometimes afraid to be mistaken for something else.

I have absolutely NO sexual interest in heterosexual men, because there is no real chemistry, but understandably any affection that I might have for them can be misunderstood, and I really dislike that.

The study suggests that there is a continuum from affection to sexual interest, which goes against my kama/prem (lust/compassion) dichotomy or understanding of love's differing natures, but I have noticed that many bisexuals are often very sociable and kind people, and often the centre of their social circles.

Here it seems odd. You have men who are gay and act like men and men who are gay and act rather odd and behave so. By odd I mean transgender and beyond. This is probably what gives people who choose to be homosexual a bad reputation. I do not know. But I find all of it rather odd. I did not learn of this foolishness until I was a bit older [6th grade or 8th grade].

[Fortis in Arduis]

Here it seems odd. You have men who are gay and act like men and men who are gay and act rather odd and behave so. By odd I mean transgender and beyond. This is probably what gives people who choose to be homosexual a bad reputation. I do not know. But I find all of it rather odd. I did not learn of this foolishness until I was a bit older [6th grade or 8th grade].

It is odd. :)

I have to reassure you that no-one chose to be homosexual, unless they were bisexual and decided to favour the same sex.

The norm arises from the range, and that range is very broad and diverse. So, there are all sorts out there.

In some parts of the Mediterranean many men adore transsexual prostitutes. These men are not actually homosexual. What the hell is that?

There is a whole world of weird out there. I think what matters is that people do not try to make sexuals relations something that should not have some element of responsibility with it. One is always responsible for the other, as a sexual partner. Gentlemen pay prostitutes as recompense for not having to bear that responsibility.

Ultimately, none of this should worry you, because it is not your problem unless homosexuality is being used as a means to break down society by the left, and that is a problem, but one that is fast dying as fewer and fewer homosexuals feel that they have an axe to grind.

[Unome]

That's false, Fortis.

You choose to be what you are. It is not a matter of "bisexuality" or any other liberal propaganda nonsense. That is just your attempt to absolve yourself of responsibility. It's obvious to see that homosexuals choose to be as you and they are.

You could choose to kiss a woman. Instead you choose to kiss somebody or something else. It's that easy and simple. You choose something, a status, other than heterosexuality. Heterosexuality is the norm since like begets like. And human evolution has occurred upon the predicate of heterosexuality. In fact, there is no other means of human reproduction. Thus homosexuality, and other perverse sexual behaviors, have a 0% reproductive rate.

Homosexuals cannot beget homosexuality. So you are flat-out wrong. There has never been, nor can there be, a homosexual beget genetically.



EDIT, including more:

In the US, the current country leading the liberal homosexual campaign social movement, young people are deluded and out-of-touch with reality. US children are taught to value 'Choice' and freedom. Kids are made to feel and believe that they can "choose" to become anything they want. So there is an existential problem between "choice" (nurture) and genetics (nature). Is nature > nurture, or, nature < nurture? Many people get confused by these questions and dialogues.

But as I just explained, homosexuality has a 0% reproductive rate in nature. Therefore in the most simplistic terms and argument, it cannot be natural. Thus it must be a choice, and it is. And it is a deceptive choice. Because liberalism and homosexuality are both "Social Progressive Movements". And there are even explicit means, propaganda, aimed to break-down and destroy traditional families, based upon these premises.

Homosexuality is also, by definition, anti-tradition, liberal, and anti-family. It destroys family, since a homosexual male is taking himself out of heterosexual competition (for females), and instead just "giving up" on expanding his family.

[Fortis in Arduis]

That's false, Fortis.

You choose to be what you are. It is not a matter of "bisexuality" or any other liberal propaganda nonsense. That is just your attempt to absolve yourself of responsibility. It's obvious to see that homosexuals choose to be as you and they are.

You could choose to kiss a woman. Instead you choose to kiss somebody or something else. It's that easy and simple. You choose something, a status, other than heterosexuality. Heterosexuality is the norm since like begets like. And human evolution has occurred upon the predicate of heterosexuality. In fact, there is no other means of human reproduction. Thus homosexuality, and other perverse sexual behaviors, have a 0% reproductive rate.

Homosexuals cannot beget homosexuality. So you are flat-out wrong. There has never been, nor can there be, a homosexual beget genetically.

Choose to kiss is one thing. I cannot choose to find a woman sexually attractive, and furthermore, I take responsibility for myself.

Parents beget infertile children, and so your argument is invalid and a common boring trope. Just move on please.

You are conflating responsibility with choice, and I suspect more projection from you. I suspect that you are a naturally bisexual man who eschews (at least in public) homosexual relations and, if this is so, I pity any wife that you might have, because if what you are writing is anything to go by, you will not be doing it with style.

You 'chose' to be heterosexual. Eww...

Public parks, lavatories, and coy furtive homosexual affairs for you.

[Unome]

You are projecting your own sexual perversions now, not I.

You have yet to cope with your own defects, indicated by your liberalism and refusal to take responsibility for your general life choices.

You also admitted that you could kiss a woman, but choose not to. Therefore you essentially agree with me that sexuality is a choice.


EDIT:

Also to note, there is no "moving on please" from breaks in the reproductive cycle. There are specific reasons that children fail to reproduce. And that is what it is, a failure, a flaw, a defect.

[Fortis in Arduis]

You are projecting your own sexual perversions now, not I.

You have yet to cope with your own defects, indicated by your liberalism and refusal to take responsibility for your general life choices.

You also admitted that you could kiss a woman, but choose not to. Therefore you essentially agree with me that sexuality is a choice.


EDIT:

Also to note, there is no "moving on please" from breaks in the reproductive cycle. There are specific reasons that children fail to reproduce. And that is what it is, a failure, a flaw, a defect.

If you chose to be heterosexual, you must be bisexual, but now you sound like you want to get yourself pregnant.

[MINARDOWICZ]

If you chose to be heterosexual, you must be bisexual, but now you sound like you want to get yourself pregnant.

My thoughts exactly.

[bezant]

Did homosexuality evolve to help humans bond?


What this research reveals is that bromances and homoerotic activities with close friends comes from an over-production of progesterone, the friendship (bonding) hormone. Any conclusion linking this discovery to homosexuality is just another 'quoting out of context' fallacy since this does not explain why homosexuals are not sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex.

[blogen]

Yes, and no. Every form of the human sexuality is the consequence of the human sexuality, what is very different from the other mammal's sexulaty, because of the pure amusement purpose. This purpose serves the strengthening of the human bonds yes, but this was a consequence, an evolutionary benefit only.

[Unome]

If you chose to be heterosexual, you must be bisexual, but now you sound like you want to get yourself pregnant.
Heterosexuality is a choice insofar that a man chooses to pursue, seduce, kiss, entice, and have sex with beautiful women.

Which is the normal choice. However some men choose to pursue less attractive females, or none at all. These are also choices.




****************


What this research reveals is that bromances and homoerotic activities with close friends comes from an over-production of progesterone, the friendship (bonding) hormone. Any conclusion linking this discovery to homosexuality is just another 'quoting out of context' fallacy since this does not explain why homosexuals are not sexually attracted to persons of the opposite sex.
It's best to presume that homosexuality is a false status, built on lies, and that a majority (or all) homosexuals are lying to different degrees.

Because homosexuality does not beget itself. It has a 0% reproductive rate. Since it's common sense that males cannot reproduce with males, or females with females.

Homosexuality is a sexual perversion/deviance, away from the norm, which is heterosexuality, the default status/choice of life.

[blogen]

Because homosexuality does not beget itself. It has a 0% reproductive rate. Since it's common sense that males cannot reproduce with males, or females with females.

But the human sexuality not connected to the reproductivity. This is a game and not a biologically determined act.

[щрбл]

Homosexuality exists among animals. Do they choose it? Certainly no. The same works for humans.

[Unome]

But the human sexuality not connected to the reproductivity. This is a game and not a biologically determined act.
Yes it is, sex causes birth. No sex = no reproduction.



****************

Homosexuality exists among animals. Do they choose it? Certainly no. The same works for humans.
Animals do not have choice, humans do.

Humans are capable of moral responsibility by understanding consequences to actions.

Animals cannot.

[щрбл]

Yes it is, sex causes birth. No sex = no reproduction.



****************

Animals do not have choice, humans do.

Humans are capable of moral responsibility by understanding consequences to actions.

Animals cannot.
10 years old kids would laugh at your face before the concept of "moral responsibility by understanding consequences to actions" is being processed in their minds. Seriously, have you not been young?:rolleyes:

[Unome]

10 years old kids would laugh at your face before the concept of "moral responsibility by understanding consequences to actions" is being processed in their minds. Seriously, have you not been young?:rolleyes:
I was born old.

But yes you're correct. Children do not have a moral sense of self-responsibility. And I would put this same observation against homosexuality and liberalism. They have a child's mentality and don't understand ideas of freedom or choice as well. In the US, much of these topics have to do with acquiring "victim status" and being the protected, privileged members of society. It is another means to delay personal accountability and responsibility in life.

[wvwvw]

You are projecting your own sexual perversions now, not I.

You have yet to cope with your own defects, indicated by your liberalism and refusal to take responsibility for your general life choices.

You also admitted that you could kiss a woman, but choose not to. Therefore you essentially agree with me that sexuality is a choice.


EDIT:

Also to note, there is no "moving on please" from breaks in the reproductive cycle. There are specific reasons that children fail to reproduce. And that is what it is, a failure, a flaw, a defect.

Yes a straight person can 'chose' to kiss or sleep with a person of the same sex but he would not feel sexually attracted to him if he was straight. It would feel more like rape without the physical attraction.

You can not just turn gay even if you tried.

[Seraph of the End]

I don't think that homosexuality will endanger survival of human species. Members of one specie don't have to reproduce to be useful. Plenty of other ways to be useful to the society. Thus, I see no problem with homosexuality as long as they act decent in public.

Plus, I don't think that homosexuality is a choice, just like heterosexuality is not. I can't just choose to be attracted to other females. I believe it's the same thing with homosexuals. I don't see how making someone miserable by forbidding him to be what he is is good for everyone.

[blogen]

Yes it is, sex causes birth. No sex = no reproduction.

That is only accidental consequence and the main purpose, because of the pleasure function of the human sexuality. This is the main fuction, this is the main difference between the other mammals and the humans sexuality. Our ancestors found a new function for their sexuality and this is the reason why the human sexuality not connected to the reproduction.

[Unome]

Sexuality is defined by action, not attraction.

Prostitutes have sex with people they're not attracted to everyday. So attraction is not a necessary aspect of sex.




That is only accidental consequence and the main purpose, because of the pleasure function of the human sexuality. This is the main fuction, this is the main difference between the other mammals and the humans sexuality. Our ancestors found a new function for their sexuality and this is the reason why the human sexuality not connected to the reproduction.
Reproduction is purposeful, not accidental.

It's only an accident if you are irresponsible and not the cause of your own actions in life. Adults have sex with the full knowledge of its consequences: children.

Maybe you are talking about kids aged 14-24 who don't realize the consequences of sex??? Again, that is irresponsibility.

[blogen]

Sexuality is defined by action, not attraction.

Prostitutes have sex with people they're not attracted to everyday. So attraction is not a necessary aspect of sex.

The existence of the prostitution is one of the main evidence onto the purpose of the human sexuality! :D


Adults have sex with the full knowledge of its consequences: children.

In what lunatic sect? Since out of these religious fanatic sect, this is what the adults know about the consequences if they want sex:

http://helid.digicollection.org/documents/s2981e/p149e.gif