@MrMazda:
the more interesting part remains that in previous articles similar to this that I've read, it was also noted that during the pregnancy, the amount of hormones that the fetus is exposed to proportionately tended to influence the sexual orientation of the resulting child.
Hormones certainly have their place in the process of cell signaling, but they have also been offered as reasons for actions they were not involved in. A power outtage in a town may be the reason why, when traffic lights failed, an accident occurred at an intersection between two vehicles. But an accident at that same intersection last week with no power outtage, as well as the hundreds of non-accidents which occured all over town the night of the outtage, seems to suggest that offering a random event as an explanation will, by definition, only explain one random event.
It's much more likely that genes, and not "hormones" enable homosexuality. Those genes are passed on to us by our mostly heterosexual parents because there is a useful reason for keeping them. And as The Architect told Neo at the end of the 2nd Matrix, things can become useful if they are predictable.
Why has the homosexuality gene maintained itself for so long, when an increase for the risk for homosexuality would theoretically lead to decreased reproductive success? Because keeping it increases mating success in heterosexuals. This mechanism, called antagonistic pleiotropy favors genes that increase the risk for homosexuality because they increase the number of sex partners in the relatives of homosexuals. It's useful.
Given that we are observing only a snapshot of evolution, antagonistic pleiotropy may help in explaining to us what our limited knowledge of genetic variations, as well as our "hormonal imbalance" reasons, have failed to do.
:hug2:
