Reproductive Strategies and Gender Construction:

Abstract

In this chapter the author addresses the following question: Can the historical occurrence of various forms of homosexuality and bisexuality be explained as part of the management of reproduction in response to environmental conditions? She believes that explanations for the occurrence and forms of homosexuality appealing to genetics are biologically indefensible and historically inadequate. However, Darwinian behavioral theory, and specifically that subset termed life history theory, provides an explanatory framework. An individual's life course consists of behaviors coerced by parents and chosen by the individual in response to environmental conditions, forming a coherent reproductive strategy. In the process, alternate male and female genders, such as cadet sons, spinsters, and religious celibates are explained and the normative male bisexuality of Classical Athens and modern Mediterranean/Latin societies is elucidated. The rise of modern homosexuality in industrial nations results from the demographic transition to low mortality and low fertility, relaxing the reproductive management of children by parents and permitting a greater role for temperament in individual sexual and gender choices.

The relationship between temperament and sexual orientation

“…In the group of heterosexuals who have had homosexual fantasies or experiences, cyclothymic and apathetic individuals were more frequent, suggesting again that mood variability may be associated with sexuality, as suggested by Richard C. Pillard (Akiskal and Akiskal, 2005c). Also, Dickemann (1993) provided the concept of sexual orientation as a behavioral adaptation to the environment, especially until the 1900's, when women's exclusively reproductive role and family's decisions over their children, maintained sexual orientation unchallengeable and socially constructed. Since the environment in which we live in now is less dominated by marriage rules and social constructions that aim successful reproduction, temperament and mood variability may exert a higher influence on the diversity of sexual orientations.…”

A Sociobiological Defense of Aristotle's Sexual Politics

“…Behavioral genetics is the study of the genetic variability among humans and other animals: the temperamental differences between individual animals of the same species are as important as the species-specific similarities (Plomin, 1990;Plomin, DeFries, and McClearn, 1990). Behavioral ecology concerns the flexible behavior of animals responding to particular physical and social circumstances (Dickemann, 1993;Kitcher, 1990;Krebs and Davies, 1987;Lamb, 1987). We commonly assume that the biology of behavior requires reductionistic and deterministic explanations that ignore or depreciate the effects of environment, culture, and reasoning.…”