Lots. Lots get married to opposite sex people at soem point.

In humans, there may be a range of gentic distribution as far as homosexuality goes. It may present in groups that have lived in harsh environments for long enough to condition selction, as a way to increase the ratio of adults to children. i don’t know if anyon has studied t form that angel, but given the cultural status of homosexauls in many North American cultures, there may be something to it.

All true, Pelle, and it gets more complicated than that. If a bastard turns out to be a strong contributor to the family, that enhances the father’s biological children’s chances, so in the end he is an evolutionary winner. This explains adoption/kidnapping/slave-taking behavior in a lot of societies. Eastern Woodlands societies (North America) conducted what they called “Mourning Wars” - wars to kidnap children from other tribes, including the English at the time, to replenish losses from epidemics or hard winters.

“I’m sorry, but I’m just not much of a fan of group selection. I know there are biologists who do believe in it, but I just don’t get it.”

It’s about the best explanation going for the evolution of species where only one female per colony breeds and all the others work to support her. And there are hundreds of species in two separate orders who use this strategy, so it’s obviously very successful, and I don’t see any other explanantion for how it arose other than some form of group selection.

Not in all times, but otherwise yes, something like that.

Gilesy:
First is to remember helping kin is indeed helping their genes get passed onto the next generation, after all the building blocks of that individual are largely strewn across their kin

Yes, this is roughly my thinking too. Evo psych is about the interaction between genes, individuals and the environment - so from that perspective group level phenomena likely exist and have the potential to influence genetic replication and expression.

Secondly in times and places of low-resources, there would be a higher evolutionary pressure to reduce the quantity of offspring lest there not be enough food, shelter etc for everyone.

Purely as far as evo-psyche goes, I think homosexuality needs to be viewed the same way as how asexual desires, infertility or any factors that don’t contribute to offspring have survived this far (ignoring the huge social pressure / expectation to be heterosexual throughout history for now - I’ll come back to that later).

Another thing to consider is that genes, biology, womb etc are constantly trying to select ‘right your female, so you gotta fancy men, time to create a desire for males’ and vice versa, doesn’t sound like the easiest thing to get ‘right’ if mothers are having male and female children constantly switching between the two - its like the physical aspect of intersexed individuals, as clitoris to penis is a continuum thats pushed to one of two extremes. Of course intersexed individuals exist and I suspect largely difficult for them to concieve, but it may be a case of the random variation process hitting out the ‘middle ground’ (intersex / bisexuality) or ‘other extreme’ (homo/asexuality).

If genetics / biology etc didn’t have the flexibility to make alternative answers, it never would of made the ones that were evolutionarily beneficial, and we never would of evolved.

On social pressures, humans are largely unique and dynamic in their inhibitions and planning behaviour, its possible to hide your desires and maintain the expected social convention - babies and all. Or you could decide that you actually want a child and have sex with the opposite sex despite that not being your desire.

Final point is that how many gay people have you heard had sex with the opposite sex before they realised it wasn’t for them? Before contraception, once could easily be enough for offspring. I happen to know of several people who are 80-90% gay but fell in love with a individual from the opposite sex - if the majority of individuals are hetero then its likely the best suited partner is someone from the opposite sex - personality etc may win through and the biology of love might override their regular behaviour.