Homosexuality: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Homosexuality (edit)

Revision as of 18:13, 30 December 2019

147 bytes added ,  30 December 2019
→‎Dominant vs submissive
Line 22: Line 22:


In many species, including humans, the greater [[Bateman's principle|parental investment]] on part of females causes males to engage in contest competitions over reproductive opportunities.<ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Men.27s_social_status_accounts_for_62.25_of_the_variance_of_copulation_opportunities</ref><ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Among_male_university_students.2C_only_cues_of_physical_dominance_over_other_men_predicted_their_mating_success</ref>
In many species, including humans, the greater [[Bateman's principle|parental investment]] on part of females causes males to engage in contest competitions over reproductive opportunities.<ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Men.27s_social_status_accounts_for_62.25_of_the_variance_of_copulation_opportunities</ref><ref>https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Among_male_university_students.2C_only_cues_of_physical_dominance_over_other_men_predicted_their_mating_success</ref>
A result is that the act of penetration itself acts as dominance signal as it is the consequence of winning prior contests, but also directly demonstrates overpowering the penetree.
A result is that the act of penetration itself acts as dominance signal as it is the consequence of winning prior contests, but also demonstrates physically overpowering the penetree.
Females, in turn submit to the most dominant male available, in order to secure the best social and material resources being dominated and managed by that male.
Females, in turn submit to the most dominant male available, in order to secure the best social and material resources being dominated and managed by that male.
Eibl-Eibesfeld (1990) suggested such male dominance/female surrender patterns may be rooted in ancient brain regions that humans share with lizards.
Anthropologist Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeld suggested such male dominance/female surrender patterns may be rooted in ancient brain regions that humans share with lizards.
He suggested the type of excessive, promiscuous and anonymous adult-male/adult-male homosexual behavior that is common among many homosexuals (see [[#Statistics|statistics]]) may have originated from the archaic vertebrate dominance-and-submission sexuality.<ref name="eibl1990">Eibl-Eibesfeldt I. 1990. ''Dominance, Submission, and Love: Sexual Pathologies from the Perspective of Ethology.'' In: Feierman, J. R. (ed.): Pedophilia. Biosocial Dimensions. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990 151-175.</ref>
He suggested the type of excessive, promiscuous and anonymous adult-male/adult-male homosexual behavior that is common among many homosexuals (see [[#Statistics|statistics]]) may have originated from the archaic vertebrate dominance-and-submission sexuality.<ref name="eibl1990">Eibl-Eibesfeldt I. 1990. ''Dominance, Submission, and Love: Sexual Pathologies from the Perspective of Ethology.'' In: Feierman, J. R. (ed.): Pedophilia. Biosocial Dimensions. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990 151-175.</ref>
Indeed, historically, penetration of another man (sodomy) was, arguably, the ultimate act of male-male domination, especially in honor-shame cultures. Exhibitionism and phallus symbolism may also be born from such display of dominance.<ref name="eibl1990" /> Women's [[libido|lower sex drive]], as a result of their greater parental investment, also dooms men to be horny, which facilitates men getting sexual pleasure from one another as an outlet of sexual frustration. However, dominance behavior is unlikely to explain all male homosexual behavior it also comes in other forms and shapes, besides anonymous promiscuity.
Indeed, historically, penetration of another man (sodomy) was, arguably, the ultimate act of male-male domination, especially in honor-shame cultures. Exhibitionism and phallus symbolism may also be born from such display of dominance.<ref name="eibl1990" /> Women's [[libido|lower sex drive]], as a result of their greater parental investment, also dooms men to be horny, which facilitates men getting sexual pleasure from one another as an outlet of sexual frustration. However, dominance behavior is unlikely to explain all male homosexual behavior it also comes in other forms and shapes, besides excessive anonymous promiscuity.


One other shape is the receptive and submissive homosexuality. In what Muscarella calls ''alliance formation hypothesis'', he suggested peripheralized men (incels) can establish social ties with horny men of higher social standing by homosociality and re-gain access to resources, and thus increase chances of [[reproductive success]] (see [[homocel hypothesis]]).<ref>https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J082v40n01_03</ref>
One other shape is receptive and submissive homosexuality. In what Muscarella calls ''alliance formation hypothesis'', he suggested peripheralized men (incels) can establish social ties with horny men of higher social standing by homosociality and re-gain access to resources, and thus increase chances of [[reproductive success]] (see [[homocel hypothesis]]).<ref>https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J082v40n01_03</ref>


In both of these homosexual reproductive strategies, however, the penetree is associated with low status, and men can hence use accusations of gayness as means of intrasexual competition, which is crucial for reproductive success as access to women is negotiated by dominance competitions among men.
In both of these homosexual reproductive strategies, however, the penetree is associated with low status, and men can hence use accusations of gayness as means of intrasexual competition, which is crucial for reproductive success as access to women is negotiated by dominance competitions among men.
Omega males are of no use for betas, so betas exclude and bully them to foil any competitive threat that may arise<ref>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260515593546</ref> (see also [[Reproductive success#Violent_reproductive_strategies|violent reproductive strategies]]).
Omega males are of no use for betas, so betas exclude and bully them to foil any competitive threat that may arise<ref>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0886260515593546</ref> (see also [[Reproductive success#Violent_reproductive_strategies|violent reproductive strategies]]).
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. Evidence of homoerotic behavior as costly signals of high status and confident sexual status may be found, for example, in a study by Robison and Anderson from University of Winchester in which highly confident and masculine men (sport athletes) did engage in homosocial tactility.<ref>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1097184X17730386?journalCode=jmma</ref><ref>https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/straight-men-cuddle-guys-study_n_5241953?ri18n=true&guccounter=2</ref>
As a result, men of higher status can use homosexual or homosocial acts, not only as act of intimidation, but also as [[signaling theory|costly signaling]] as they risk being accused of gayness, but are confident in their ability to thwart such insults to their reputations, hence robust evidence of high social status. Evidence of such signaling may be found, for example, in a study by Robison and Anderson from University of Winchester in which highly confident and masculine men (sport athletes) did engage in homosocial tactility,<ref>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1097184X17730386?journalCode=jmma</ref><ref>https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/straight-men-cuddle-guys-study_n_5241953?ri18n=true&guccounter=2</ref>
Only a dominant man can afford to hold hands with other men in public without being accused of gayness (see [[#Gay_acceptance_and_homosocial_intimacy|gay acceptance and homosocial intimacy]]). A low status man vulnerable to gossip needs to claim the status of a protected class and rely on shaming to survive socially.
even though today public male intimacy is uncommon (see [[#Gay_acceptance_and_homosocial_intimacy|gay acceptance and homosocial intimacy]]). Only a dominant man can afford to hold hands with other men in public. A low status man vulnerable to gossip would need to claim the status of a protected class and rely on shaming to survive socially.


To summarize, there are (at least) four conceivable pathways to increased reproductive success (RS) through homosexual behavior, explaining homosexuality as an evolved behavior: Promiscuity/sodomy (RS for penetrator), alliance (RS for penetrator and penetree), intrasexual competition by gossip (RS for accuser), homosocialty as costly signal by thwarting said gossip (RS for penetrator, and RS for both in case of holding hands and kissing in public).
To summarize, there are (at least) four conceivable pathways to increased reproductive success (RS) through homosexual behavior, explaining homosexuality as an evolved behavior: Promiscuity/sodomy (RS for penetrator), alliance (RS for penetrator and penetree), intrasexual competition by gossip (RS for accuser), homosexuality and homosocialty as costly signal by thwarting said gossip (RS for both, mostly for the 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:
Line 45: Line 45:
* '''More cross-cultural findings''': The active-passive contrast in homosexuality was also prevalent in medieval Scandinavia and contemporary Latin America.<ref>http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/images/Active.pdf</ref> Pederasty, which is also an instance of homosexual power differentials, has flourished in many lower cultures, e.g. Indians of North America,<ref>https://www.britannica.com/topic/berdache</ref> but also in a number of high cultures, including ancient Greece, medieval Islam (especially among Sufis), Japan (among the Samurai nobility), and Korea.<ref>http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/images/Pederasty.pdf</ref>
* '''More cross-cultural findings''': The active-passive contrast in homosexuality was also prevalent in medieval Scandinavia and contemporary Latin America.<ref>http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/images/Active.pdf</ref> Pederasty, which is also an instance of homosexual power differentials, has flourished in many lower cultures, e.g. Indians of North America,<ref>https://www.britannica.com/topic/berdache</ref> but also in a number of high cultures, including ancient Greece, medieval Islam (especially among Sufis), Japan (among the Samurai nobility), and Korea.<ref>http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/images/Pederasty.pdf</ref>


Today, most homosexuals identify as versatile, preferring both the dominant and submissive role at times,<ref>http://www.straightacting.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?p=222697#p222697</ref> which may be regarded as counter evidence for the relevance of dominant/submissive dichotomy for the evolution of male homosexual behavior. However, the entire notion of homosexual identity is plausibly evolutionarily novel (i.e. not evolved/adaptive behavior), drawing in people to act out their sexual fantasies rather than adaptations in the context they evolved, seemingly often [[mutants]] (without negative judgement) as evidenced by the [[#Statistics|statistics]] below.
Today, most homosexuals identify as versatile (around 40%), preferring both the dominant and submissive role at times, with a roughly equal split between top and bottom preferences,<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20120125003836/http://www.straightacting.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?p=222697</ref><ref>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-017-0980-y</ref> which may be regarded as counter evidence for the relevance of dominant/submissive dichotomy for the evolution of male homosexual behavior.
However, the entire notion of homosexual identity is plausibly only a [[social constructionism|social construct]], drawing in people to act out their sexual fantasies rather than adaptations in the context they evolved, seemingly often [[mutants]] (no negative judgement intended) as evidenced by the [[#Statistics|statistics]] below.
The entire notion of a fixed sexual identity has been questioned in a recent meta study,<ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235906255_Physiological_Evidence_for_a_Mostly_Heterosexual_Orientation_Among_Men</ref> rather orientation changes over time and exists on a continuum and 98% of men wanting sex with the opposite sex alongside some homosexual curiosity that may have evolved as discussed above.
The entire notion of a fixed sexual identity has been questioned in a recent meta study,<ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235906255_Physiological_Evidence_for_a_Mostly_Heterosexual_Orientation_Among_Men</ref> rather orientation changes over time and exists on a continuum and 98% of men wanting sex with the opposite sex alongside some homosexual curiosity that may have evolved as discussed above.
Gay men identifying as the bottom are more likely later in the birth order which so it may be related to weakness and mutational load.<ref>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-017-0980-y</ref> Exclusive male homosexuality could plausibly simply be an extreme instantiation and [[spandrel]] of the general usefulness of bisexuality for purposes of dominance signaling and alliance formation.
Gay men identifying as the bottom are more likely later in the birth order which so it may be related to weakness and mutational load.<ref>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-017-0980-y</ref>
It is sufficient there to be selective pressure for (bisexual) androphilia in men for exclusive male homosexuality to emerge more often as it is simply an extreme instantiation of that adaptation (in which androphilia is maximal and gynephilia fairly low).


=== Other hypotheses ===
=== Other hypotheses ===
Bibipi
Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538

edits

Retrieved from "https://incels.wiki/w/Special:MobileDiff/43263"

Navigation menu