Anthropology 316
Dr. Pillsworth
06/24/2017
Homosexuality: Solving the Darwinian Paradox
It has been shown by Graham et al.. that people generally judge the acceptability of
specific behaviors based on how much control one has over them (as cited in Mustanski &
Bailey, 2003). Although, this can carry longstanding, negative effects on minorities that possess
certain traits, which are assumed to be decision-oriented by the general population. Many people
have struggled over time with accepting people that identify as homosexual, feeling that it is
unnatural, sinful, and just plain immoral. While many studies have attempted to find causes
leading to homosexuality, unfortunately, the academic field remains at a stand-still. What
plagues most researchers when attempting to answer the questions of homosexuality, is
something called the Darwinian paradox – the fact that species select for certain traits to further
reproduction within individuals, but homosexuality, at least as we know it today, does not lead to
reproducing one’s own genes (Adriens & Block, 2006). Many hypotheses have been proposed
and tested, but researchers often find conflicting evidence, which has only led to the need for
more findings. In this paper, I will discuss two leading theories that attempt to explain
homosexual orientation in humans. Regarding the current research, the evidence supporting the
hypothesis of a sexually antagonistic gene seems to hold the most merit. Not only does it make
sense of homosexual preference in stratified societies, where homosexuality mainly takes place,
but it also combines other theories to provide an explanation for the puzzle that has plagued
researchers the most – the Darwinian paradox.
, Menelaos Apostolou (2013) argues in a review article, for a specific theory regarding
interfamily conflict among brothers and their potential resources. He describes that in many
societies overtime, mates were chosen for females, by their parents. Because of this, males have
had to compete against each other to present some type of bridewealth to these parents. Thus,
parents look for men with the most prosperity to mate with their daughters. This type of system
can be difficult for families with more than one son, because they would have to compete against
each other over the resources of the family to obtain wives. Additionally, this conflict will
increase with the birth of each new son, and potentially result in violence among brothers and
weakening of the familial relations. This will not only have an effect on the brothers in a family,
but can compromise security and coherence of other members as well. Therefore, it is likely that
humans would select for traits over time that reduce this interfamily conflict.
Apostolou proposes that when a younger brother holds genes for homosexuality, he is no
longer competing for these resources and the older one immediately gains all or more access to
the them, granting him potentially higher chance of mating. Thus, a male’s reproductive success
would be somewhat dependent on his brother’s sexual orientation. Not only does this trait benefit
the reproduction rate of one’s heterosexual brothers, but according to Apostolou, it also can
allow the male to continue with the productive process. Males play a primary role in some
societies of maintaining a family’s well-being by doing such things as, providing protection and
hunting for food. Apostolou states that this is a primary explanation as to why our species has
selected for producing homosexual male offspring instead of simply more female offspring,
when interfamily conflicts over resources began to arise.
It is also stated that brothers displaying this homosexual trait will often end up arranged
in a marriage with a female by his parents, thus ultimately reproducing. This however, seems
Dr. Pillsworth
06/24/2017
Homosexuality: Solving the Darwinian Paradox
It has been shown by Graham et al.. that people generally judge the acceptability of
specific behaviors based on how much control one has over them (as cited in Mustanski &
Bailey, 2003). Although, this can carry longstanding, negative effects on minorities that possess
certain traits, which are assumed to be decision-oriented by the general population. Many people
have struggled over time with accepting people that identify as homosexual, feeling that it is
unnatural, sinful, and just plain immoral. While many studies have attempted to find causes
leading to homosexuality, unfortunately, the academic field remains at a stand-still. What
plagues most researchers when attempting to answer the questions of homosexuality, is
something called the Darwinian paradox – the fact that species select for certain traits to further
reproduction within individuals, but homosexuality, at least as we know it today, does not lead to
reproducing one’s own genes (Adriens & Block, 2006). Many hypotheses have been proposed
and tested, but researchers often find conflicting evidence, which has only led to the need for
more findings. In this paper, I will discuss two leading theories that attempt to explain
homosexual orientation in humans. Regarding the current research, the evidence supporting the
hypothesis of a sexually antagonistic gene seems to hold the most merit. Not only does it make
sense of homosexual preference in stratified societies, where homosexuality mainly takes place,
but it also combines other theories to provide an explanation for the puzzle that has plagued
researchers the most – the Darwinian paradox.
, Menelaos Apostolou (2013) argues in a review article, for a specific theory regarding
interfamily conflict among brothers and their potential resources. He describes that in many
societies overtime, mates were chosen for females, by their parents. Because of this, males have
had to compete against each other to present some type of bridewealth to these parents. Thus,
parents look for men with the most prosperity to mate with their daughters. This type of system
can be difficult for families with more than one son, because they would have to compete against
each other over the resources of the family to obtain wives. Additionally, this conflict will
increase with the birth of each new son, and potentially result in violence among brothers and
weakening of the familial relations. This will not only have an effect on the brothers in a family,
but can compromise security and coherence of other members as well. Therefore, it is likely that
humans would select for traits over time that reduce this interfamily conflict.
Apostolou proposes that when a younger brother holds genes for homosexuality, he is no
longer competing for these resources and the older one immediately gains all or more access to
the them, granting him potentially higher chance of mating. Thus, a male’s reproductive success
would be somewhat dependent on his brother’s sexual orientation. Not only does this trait benefit
the reproduction rate of one’s heterosexual brothers, but according to Apostolou, it also can
allow the male to continue with the productive process. Males play a primary role in some
societies of maintaining a family’s well-being by doing such things as, providing protection and
hunting for food. Apostolou states that this is a primary explanation as to why our species has
selected for producing homosexual male offspring instead of simply more female offspring,
when interfamily conflicts over resources began to arise.
It is also stated that brothers displaying this homosexual trait will often end up arranged
in a marriage with a female by his parents, thus ultimately reproducing. This however, seems
