Okay….

I dunno why I always forget to mention the important stuff.

The dead giveaway we are talking about environment is the age at which people experience SSA. If men started out straight but around the age of 50 or 60 they began to experience SSA a gene/environment combo would be very likely. However SSA begins in people’s earliest memories, long before they’ve had a chance to sprinkle their genes across the landscape.

A secondary fertility benefit or something equivalent is the only way this gene could survive. Until they find something like that I’m going with the safe bet.

If I only knew 3 things.

1)Phenomenon reduces fertility

2)Exists worldwide for thousands of years

3)2% to 3% of people experience it

Right there I’d bet the house on environment.

Science could make an unprecedented finding and I could be completely wrong. But when you are talking about something very common and very old like SSA the smart money is always on the environment.

Gee… it is? Hmmm…. Wasn’t necessarily that way when I studied paleontology/biogeology. Maybe we geologists are just a little too simplistic in our outlook, “KISS” and all all. Yep, agree to disagree.

And also: Do you have any human example where genes have been responsible for something similar to the gay/fertility theory? I mean a gene that offers the same kind of +/- in the fitness column and is widespread around the globe.

Nope. We are speaking about chance gene expression of genes from an X-chromosome which overrides the Y-chromosome. Maybe transgenderism in men as a result of the expression of a diferent gene from the X-chromosome? But it is a situation which appears to be unique… why can it not be a unique situation?

However, we must be cautious not to assume that because something can occur post-natal and because in some rare instances it can be correlated with early trauma that therefore this is an indication of the usual or expected means of origin.

Agreed, in fact I don’t believe homosexuality is post natal. I think orientation has already been chosen by birth.

Gay sheep certainly could be the result of breeding for traits and getting an extra side effect. I don’t personally believe that is the case but it is possible.

Anyway if I wasn’t half sleepy I would have written a better hypothesis.

Ok, this one might be more relevant

1)Pathogen (for whatever reason) has the ability to switch a male sheeps orientation to gay.

2)5% (as an example) of wild, male sheep become gay.

3)Humans put sheep on farms

4)Pathogen gets a tightly packed, target rich environment

5)5% turns into 25%

Once again that goes into the completely unsubstantiated theory department. I’m just saying that there are a lot of reasonable theories that make sense and fit in with other things we already know about. I believe a gene for exclusive SSA would be an unprecedented find.

If it turns out I’m wrong I’ll happily come on here and say what a dummy I was thinking it was the environment all these years. 😎

Absolutely, my statement was pretty forward looking. I could be totally INcorrect. I put it in the category of unsubstantiated but not unreasonable speculation.

BTW, I posted that an hour after I read the article about lefties and meningitis. I had no idea that was even possible 24 hours ago. Kind of blew me away.

I don’t know how many environmental agents can effect handedness. I’m only saying that handedness appears to be routinely altered by the environment…. which to me is pretty amazing.

I think that this statement is too aggressive to be supported by the article that you referenced.

As I read it, the altering discussed was the result of “early life brain insult”. In a similar manner I would not be surprised to find that early life brain injuries could result in a change in orientation. This would seem to be consistent with my assumption that ones orientation lies in the physical structure (the “wiring”) of the brain.

However, we must be cautious not to assume that because something can occur post-natal and because in some rare instances it can be correlated with early trauma that therefore this is an indication of the usual or expected means of origin.

BTW I’m not sure how accurate those figures are for wild sheep (although I’ve read they can also have SSA). When you breed for traits and cut out all the natural fitness killers you can get some unexpected results. Just about all dog breeds have genetically engineered fitness problems that wolves don’t have. If you put dogs back into the wild and came back in a couple thousand years those fitness killers would be gone.

Are you suggesting that homosexuality is a biproduct of domestication of humans (ie. civilization)?

Whoops… I wrote that wrong. Not prenatal development, early childhood development.

I don’t know how many environmental agents can effect handedness. I’m only saying that handedness appears to be routinely altered by the environment…. which to me is pretty amazing.

/righty