The so-called evolutionary mystery of homosexuality

[juanoclock]

I'm trying to finish this article from the Chronicle of Higher Education, but already red flags have gone up.

I pause right around here:
So, if homosexuality is in any sense a product of evolution-and it clearly is, for reasons to be explained-then genetic factors associated with same-sex preference must enjoy some sort of reproductive advantage.
Why

Comments

[artkouros]

If it makes you feel any better, you're just a tiny bit of random genetic fluff.

[juanoclock]

Hooray! I'm fluffy!!

[queerbychoice]

Xq28 has been pretty well discredited. That's the one that Dean Hamer came up with in 1993. An assistant who worked with Dean Hamer on that study accused Hamer of falsifying the data, and an initial investigation by the National Institutes of Health found the evidence against Hamer substantial enough that they referred it to the highest federal investigative level. The final results of that investigation were not publicly announced, but in 1999, Canadian researchers George Ebers and George Rice attempted to replicate Dean Hamer's study and came up with no support for Xq28 being in any way significant.

Here are some links in case you're interested:
http://archive.guidemag.com/magcontent/invokemagcontent.cfm?ID=C5352D91-2D9E-11D4-A7AD00A0C9D84F02&Method=guidefulldisplay

andhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/

[juanoclock]

Mum was most certainly the word. I had heard nothing of this. Thanks for sharing!!