IndexPrevalence of homosexualityLife history theoryLHT and homosexualityLHT Family life indicators for homosexualityIs homosexuality an alternative to reproduction? Female sexual fluidityDiscussion and conclusionsPrevalence of homosexualityLesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer The (LGBTQ) movement is growing. A Gallup poll concluded that 4.5% of American adults were LGBTQ. Gallup also provides a gender breakdown for both females (5.1%) and males (3.9%). While it may seem easy to divide homosexuality into these five categories, as in analyzing something more closely, there is an almost infinite complexity that is quickly discovered and that's before you start asking questions like "why?" Homosexuality, in general, appears to be counterintuitive to adaptability and would provide substantial barriers to the passing of genes; however, research is showing that this is not the case. Further investigation is needed as Gallup also reports that these numbers are growing. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Included in the LGBTQ category are gay males, lesbian women, bisexuals from the male and female polar ends of the gender spectrum, gender queer (e.g. non-binary, gender fluid, and gender non-conforming people, etc.) and transgender people. Within gender queer and transgender people there are subsets of gay transgender men and lesbian transgender women, and other gender queer individuals will not be on the subtypes within of the spectrum, but will focus on the adaptive strategies of homosexuality regarding adaptation. Homosexuality, according to Nila, Barthes, Crochet, Suryobroto, and Raymond (2015), should disappear ) and the cited material indicating the heredity of MHP. Nila, et al. (2015) note that testimonies of homosexuality have existed throughout history in various texts. Among their reports are also the different trends of Eastern societies have higher rates of homosexuality than Western societies. Life history theory The literature surrounding homosexuality is often based on life history theory (LHT). Luoto, Krams, and Rantala (2017) describe LHT as a powerful tool for describing lifetime effort expenditure and an analysis of the tendency to cultivate personal growth versus the tendency toward reproductive acts. By looking at an organism's life cycle, the conditions it is born into, and the strategies it uses to reproduce, LHT can be used to develop some causal relationships with mating behaviors. Luoto et al. (2017) note that “life history strategies are a set of developmental, somatic, and psychological variables commonly represented on a continuum from fast to slow.” Based on biological facts, the LHT assigns gender strategies. Evolutionary psychology will often consider LHT as it provides some attention to the development of an organism in a historical sense, through evolution, and analyzes existing behavior partly based on previous evolutionary adaptive changes. LHT and homosexualityLuoto et al. (2017) propose the hypothesis that homosexuality and bisexuality in women are the result of life history, this is due to irregular environments. That is, women in dangerous conditions resort to faster reproduction strategies, including promiscuity so intense that they do not care whether it can produce offspring. While plausible, Figueredo (2018) argues that it is necessarydivide it as a sex-specific phenomenon, otherwise male fast-living strategies would include homosexuality innately, but not necessarily. Figueredo further argues that intrauterine determinations of homosexuality exist, including but not limited to homosexuality itself and different subtypes of each type. Figueredo (2018) makes a slight insinuation of environmental causes through discussions of what is superior to the presence of factors that might make the early years of life more unstable (e.g. unstable parental relationships, absence of father figures, and adverse childhood conditions to name a few) they are more present in the lives of homosexual males than in that of heterosexual males; also arguing that these conditions that cause women to use more masculinized LHT strategies could feminize homosexual men by causing them to adopt feminine LHT strategies. This is counterintuitive to LHT, as the language used to describe these roles is gendered. Adverse conditions should push men towards hypermasculinity according to Figueredo (2018), which would include fathering many children by many mothers rather than homosexual strategies. LHT Family Life Markers for Homosexuality Among the previously mentioned markers for predicting homosexuality, other events and traits serve as predictors of homosexuality. . Petterson, Dixson, Little, and Vasey (2018) state that cis-gender and transgender males have more male relatives, older siblings, larger families, reduced offspring production, greater gender nonconformity in adulthood and childhood, as well as higher levels of childhood separation anxiety. All of these traits describe a highly competitive market in terms of sexual partners or instability/insecurity in their family structure, and these indicators transcend cultural boundaries to result in similar rates of homosexuality. Diamond & Alley (2018) note that high levels of developmental adversity can cause rapid sexual maturation, sexual debut, and increased risk-taking in sexual behaviors. Instability in one's ability to secure a mate may require alternative strategies to ensure genetic reproduction. To what extent are these strategies incorporated into psychology and development? When measuring response times and attractiveness ratings on a seven-point Likert scale by cis-gender and trans-gender men, Petterson et al. (2018) noted that there was little difference between both groups' response rates towards males, who they also found more attractive than females. Both took extended periods to view composite photographs of men compared to composite photographs of women, and both groups rated their attractiveness higher. Petterson rationalized this as a biological and psychological similarity between the groups. These conclusions translate into a split decision between nature and the determination of nurture. Is homosexuality an alternative to reproduction? Nila, et al. (2015) provide an alternative explanation for the adaptiveness of homosexuality. Nila, et al. explain that kin selection and “helping” behaviors may be key to ensuring the continued spread of a homosexual strategy using a pattern of behavior similar to matrilineal strategies. A homosexual male can contribute to the guarantee of survival in others by favoring his own grandchildren, generated by his brothers. Male reproduction was a mysterious affair before paternity testing according to Gaulin (2004, pp. 359) in his description of the low probability of paternity. In matrilineal societies, resources are distributed to the sister's children rather than to the sonof the direct descendant. However, there is an evolutionary explanation for this since brothers share at least 25% of genes, and this is known since women's motherhood is assured in primitive societies. This means that nephew and uncle share at least 12.5% ​​of their genetic makeup. In this way, homosexuality can form a protective barrier of one's genes without risking direct loss of relatives, thanks to a greater support network and more providers. The only condition for this strategy to work is that one sibling produces multiple children to create a 50% share of genes, as opposed to heterosexual strategies which require only one to create an equal share of genes. Nila et al. hypothesis (2015). predicted that nieces and nephews would be provided resources, based on previous research showing higher altruism scores among homosexual and bisexual males, to create what they describe as the indirect mating and avuncular trend. By sacrificing their own mating potential, homosexuals create a more likely candidate to continue their family line, even if they share fewer genes. Although the discussion by Nila et al. concerns mostly men's topics, it is also a possibility among lesbian and bisexual women. The work of Nila et al. showed a low rate of direct reproduction in homosexual males early in life, but as homosexual men aged they saw more indirect mating success as the subject's brothers had more children. This is consistent with the slower mating strategies of the LHT. Although this work focused on a less industrialized area (Samoa) than the United States, it serves to reason that this may also be the case in industrialized nations, thanks to industrial technology granting the ability to share resources further afield. LHT strategies for female sexual fluidity may be more diverse than strict heterosexual and homosexual preference. Diamond & Alley (2018) focused more on the exclusivity of women's sexual attraction and behaviors while analyzing the findings and methods of Luoto et al. (2018). Diamond & Alley acknowledge that previous research distinguishing the behaviors of exclusive lesbian and bisexual women and find that a variety of troubling interactions with their environment may have some root in the distinction between exclusive lesbian and bisexual women, including early sexual behaviors, promiscuity, delinquency, substance use, etc. and high-risk sexual behaviors. Diamond & Alley also present what may be a distinction between homosexuality and heterosexuality, i.e. that women's sexual pleasure and the act of reproduction are separate from each other, and suggest that women may have a higher priority for sexual pleasure over reproduction. The distinction presented by Diamond & Alley (2018) is enriched by previous research cited showing that women who have sex with women report greater satisfaction and better orgasms than women who have sex only with men. Diamond and Alley point out that women's sexuality may be more flexible or fluid for these reasons and conclude that all women may be capable of having sexual contact with other women. This is in contrast to those who self-report as heterosexual males and homosexual males who are more likely to only have sex with other women. being aroused by female partners and male partners respectively. It is not an unreasonable hypothesis therefore that women may choose between these strategies in an attempt to spread their genes directly, while also conducting some diffusion indirectly while.