Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Homosexuality: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Dominant vs submissive
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
As a result, men of higher status, can use homosexual or homosocial acts, not only as act of intimidation, but also as dominance signaling as they risk being accused of gayness, but are confident in their ability to thwart such insults to their reputations. Their homosexual acts hence act as [[Signaling theory|costly signal]] of their social and heterosexual status. | As a result, men of higher status, can use homosexual or homosocial acts, not only as act of intimidation, but also as dominance signaling as they risk being accused of gayness, but are confident in their ability to thwart such insults to their reputations. Their homosexual acts hence act as [[Signaling theory|costly signal]] of their social and heterosexual status. | ||
To summarize, there are (at least) four conceivable pathways to increased reproductive success (RS) through homosexual behavior, explaining homosexuality as an evolved behavior: Direct dominance (RS for penetrator), alliance (RS for penetrator and penetree), intrasexual competition (RS for accuser), homosocialty as costly signal (RS penetrator). | To summarize, there are (at least) four conceivable pathways to increased reproductive success (RS) through homosexual behavior, explaining homosexuality as an evolved behavior: Direct dominance (RS for penetrator), alliance (RS for penetrator and penetree), intrasexual competition (RS for accuser), homosocialty as costly signal (RS for penetrator). | ||
Below are historical examples of the prevalence of the dichotomy of dominant vs submissive homosexuality: | Below are historical examples of the prevalence of the dichotomy of dominant vs submissive homosexuality: | ||