The latest evolutionary theory for homosexuality (that I have heard) is that homosexuals help the females with the rearing and caring of the progeny. For example, a friend of mine observed two male ducks living with one female duck. When the ducklings had been reared, the two males left the female. I am not sure whether this theory could be applied to human beings or not, although some homosexual couples do seem to have the urge to raise children together.

However, a more interesting question I think is why did Greek and Roman cultures find homosexuality to be normal or acceptable? Famously Greek men even thought that homosexual love was preferable to the love between a man and a woman. I know that one reason is that Greek men used to fight together in a type of buddy-system, whereby they really cared for and looked after one another. Therefore these types of close loving relationships between men were actually encouraged and became legendary. And what about Greek women? I saw a documentary that suggested that there was also certain religious ceremonies attended only by Greek women (who were normally not allowed by their queer men folk outside the house) - where they indulged in their own homosexual tendencies. 

Interesting too is that as soon as Greek democracy was banned by the Romans, homosexuality also declined in Greece. This was because the main place for such events were at symposia meant for the discussion of politics and ideas. That does not mean that ALL Greek men necessarily engaged in homosexual acts (probably most of them didn't) - but they did admire the beauty of the naked male figure - and believed that love between men was the most pure form of love there was.

It seems that only since the domination of Judaeo-Christian morality in our culture have we come to consider male homosexuality especially to be both un-natural and disgusting.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=bagemihl+biological+exuberance

I once wrote that my definition of maturity is the ability to live with uncertainty. We had better be able to live with it, because uncertainty is a fact of life.

Barbara wrote: “…We are not in control of everything. We are not certain of everything -- which is another way of saying the same thing. I once wrote that my definition of maturity is the ability to live with uncertainty. We had better be able to live with it, because uncertainty is a fact of life. The only way we can pretend to ourselves that it is not, is to build a structure of dogma and true beliefs that will not in fact shield us from anything.

I think that this desperate need for certainty is in fact the mark of a desperate uncertainty and of a lack of maturity. Life is what it is. We know many things, and there are many things we would like to know that we do not yet know. Pretending to ourselves and others that we have all the answers changes nothing.”

Hi Barbara,

I understand your meaning and agree completely with the importance of “…there are many things…that we do not yet know.” Given that we cannot know everything I personally think that it is very important to integrate non-contradictory knowledge, and resolve issues that are most important for us. There seems to be a semantic issue with “certainty”, or for that matter “moral perfection”. I was raised as a “beach kid” and have never had a religious bone in my body, I cannot conceive of “certainty” in any other form than from a reason-based context.

I use “certainty” all of the time in my work: is that color true? Did I get the proportions right? Does the emotion register? Is light crucial? Is form?

I have also found that the more ambitious the project it becomes absolutely crucial to be certain of your foundation. I don’t mean that you tell yourself that you are certain but that you take all the avenues of research and check and double check that your basis is correct for the goal you have in mind.

Certainty, for me, is being on target.

Michael