@ #972930
Ironically if Gay people are 'born that way' then it would have a primarily genetic component.
From an evolutionary standpoint, a genetic trait that severly reduces your odds of successfully reprodicing is a flaw.
This logical construct is disproven, btw, if the hypothetical genetic sequence that creates homosexuality also creates an evolutionary advantage sufficiently useful to improve the chances of sucessfully reproducing.
If that is the case however, a lower number of repititions of the sequence would be the most likely cause of bisexuality. As such it would produce the superior combination, little to no reason to not reproduce, with a lesser version of whatever advantage those with a full set of the sequence get.
These hypotheses are testable.
If my theory prves true, then identical twins, seperated at birth, will show particular data:
In a pureley genetic trigger scenario, if one twin is gay, so is the other.
In a predminantly genetic scenario, where 1 twin is gay, the other will be gay 80+% of the time.
In a partially genetic scenario, with some environmental factors affecting. If one twin is gay, the other will be 25%-75% of the time.
In a scenario with predominantly environmental effects, bit with a minor genetic component, if one twin is gay, the other will be 15%-20% of the time.
If there is no significant genetic component. Then one twin eing gay will have the other twin being gay at the same 5%-10% rate in the general population. Possibly a percentage point or so higher due to the shared environmental aspect of 'seperated at birth and adopted'.
Feel free to critique my theory, feel free to point out test data debunking, or supporting, it.