Respectfully, I do not understand how it can be neither an inborn trait passed on genetically nor a chosen lifestyle.
Does that make it a genetic mutation? It is clearly biologically futile.
Originally Posted by friendly fred
The origin of male homosexuality is complicated. There appears to be in some instances a genetic component, something on the X chromosome that can be passed from mother to son. It's not entirely genetic though. If one identical twin is gay, the probability that his twin will be too is much higher than average, but still I believe below 50%.
The environment in the womb also appears to have an effect. Testosterone in pregnant women may have something to do with it. My cousin, who researched this a good bit, thinks her son is gay because she was under extreme stress when she was pregnant -- her husband was dying. Later born children are more likely to be gay.
So perhaps primary reasons a man is gay are because of genetics and the environment in the womb before he's born, both things he has no control over.
As to it being an evolutionary dead end, maybe or maybe not. I read somewhere that female relatives of gay men are more fertile. Maybe they make up for their brothers' gayness. Or maybe gays are good fighters, that helped the tribes of yore kill their enemies. The Greeks promoted homosexuality in the military because it improved morale and made people fight harder, for the benefit of their comrades who also happened to be their fuck buddies. If you've ever been accosted by transvestites in Costa Rica or Bangkok you know they can be pretty aggressive. At least I wouldn't want to mess with them.
If you're interested in this, this would be worth a look,
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015...ifications-dna
Apologies to Trey for going off topic.