Philosophical Psychology 17 (1):59 – 76 (2004)
AbstractAt first sight, homosexuality has little to do with reproduction. Nevertheless, many neo-Darwinian theoreticians think that human homosexuality may have had a procreative value, since it enabled the close kin of homosexuals to have more viable offspring than individuals lacking the support of homosexual siblings. In this article, however, we will defend an alternative hypothesis - originally put forward by Freud in "A phylogenetic phantasy" - namely that homosexuality evolved as a means to strengthen social bonds. Consequently, from an evolutionary point of view, homosexuality and heterosexuality have entirely distinct origins: there is no continuum from heterosexuality to homosexuality. Indeed, the natural history we propose shows that the intensity of the homosexual inclination has little or no predictive value with regard to the intensity of heterosexual tendencies. In fact, this may be a sound Darwinian way to understand sexual ambivalence. But if sexual ambivalence is a biological datum, one has to conclude that psychodynamic mechanisms are often needed in order to explain exclusive heterosexuality or exclusive homosexuality.
Similar books and articles
What’s My Line? Gender, Performativity, and Bisexual Identity.Melissa Burchard - 2006 - Radical Philosophy Today 3:91-99.
Male Love: A Problem in Greek Ethics and Other Writings.John Addington Symonds - 1983 - Pagan Press.
Sexual Orientation, Gender, and Families: Dichotomizing Differences.Susan Moller Okin - 1996 - Hypatia 11 (1):30 - 48.
The Nature and Causes of Homosexuality: A Philosophic and Scientific Inquiry.Noretta Koertge (ed.) - 1981 - Haworth Press.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads