That is my non-serious answer to a serious question raised by Prof. David P. Barash in The Chronicle of Higher Education, to wit, "The Evolutionary Mystery of Homosexuality". Regular readers will know that whilst I accept (for the moment) evolutionary theory, that is, the concept that all living things evolved from preceding living things (except the first living thing which evolved from . . . ?) I have and still have doubts concerning the notion of zillions of tiny incremental changes leading to the huge range of living forms we see about us today. Nor do I totally subscribe to the idea that all changes to a life form which aid it in its efforts to reproduce is the sine qua non of biological success. You can reproduce all you like but if our poor old globe suffers a solar minimum leading to an extended freeze, as it has done in the past, then you and yours die - end of! In addition to several other objections to Darwin's theory that all living things win or lose (so to speak) depending on their success in 'the mating game' there is the hardy perennial of how it is that stern 'Mother Nature' continues to allow homosexuality to exist. According to strict Darwinian and even stricter 'Dawkinsian' theory it should have died out eons ago. But no, it flourishes still in every human society adding, dare I say, to the gaiety of nations!
In my numerous internet dog-fights with 'Darwinistas' and their first cousins, the 'Dawkinistas', I have never received a convincing response when I raise this awkward question. Happily, Prof. Barash, whilst offering a wide survey of all the latest theories to explain this devilish tricky problem, comes up with - zilch! - nada! - bugger all! Oddly enough, I was slightly disappointed because it is an irritant in what is otherwise a very smooth (too smooth?) theory but at least it demonstrates his scientific honesty. He remains confident that sooner or later his fellow biological swots will come up with an answer. My advice? Don't hold your breath!
