From Mike Miller:

Re: A function for “gay genes” after all? (Feb. 8): What I don’t like about research that uses “primitive” societies as typical examples is the FALSE assumption that older societies constitute more authentic human values. In this case, sexual values.

First of all, “primitive” societies are not really primitive at all... Human society goes way back much farther in time than the development of these so called “primitive” societies. So they are in fact highly evolved human societies, that have adapted in very isolated circumstances to stimuli that we can only imagine.

These “primitive” societies are therefor atypical societies.

Second, the so called “scientific” process of transferring observations from so called “primitive” cultures and deriving conclusions applied to modern society is exactly akin to the error of taking strictly physical laws, such as Einstein’s law (or theory) of Relativity and applying that to social structures - which is the basis of the big mess we are in now of “your Ok, I’m ok”.

At least Einstein had a constant (‘c’ the speed of light) by which the various frames of reference in the physical sphere could be measured... transferring relativity to society minus a standard of reference just yields our present social chaos. “God” is the universal social constant.

“Primitive socities”, i.e.pre-Judeo-Christian, did not have any standard by which to regulate the norm: hence aberrational behavior is more acceptable - human sacrifice, infanticide, and the example this article gives: socially acceptable homosexual roles.