[spacebanana7]

>This is like claiming gay people will "die off" in 2 generations because they don't reproduce.

It's a serious and interesting question as to why evolution tolerated/encouraged homosexuality in a small but significant proportion of the population. If you have the time, this article gives a good overview of the discussion [1].

Depending on your answer to that question - along with your views about how evolution affects modern humans another - it's natural to think about homosexuality will occur in future humans.

Could we have more, less or about the same of it? Will everybody be bisexual? How might medical fertility treatments affect the outcomes? It's an open field of ideas.

[1] https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/the-evolutionary...

[rustcleaner]

I don't think nature promoted it, but that it is a maladaptive corruption of mating systems which isn't serious enough to result in its cause disappearing from the gene pool.

[spacebanana7]

If evolution is sensitive enough to give us two kidneys via some indirect impact on the number of reproductive offspring we create, why can’t it drive a “software” change to give people the desire to have heterosexual sex?

The best answer I can think of is that sexuality is somehow very fragile for evolution to calibrate, so even natural selection isn’t powerful enough to select heterosexuality reliably.

But it’s hard to argue that persuasively with a biological basis which we don’t yet have.

Compared to the other evolutionary arguments for homosexuality it also doesn’t scale well to other non reproductive sexual behaviours.