Have those who propose a pathogenic origin of human homosexuality ever asked why a Gay Germ should leave homosexual men so curiously undamaged overall, apart from the one effect of being gay?
We first stop to note a distinction between two kinds of hypothetical Gay Germ.
To the first kind of Gay Germ, damage it does to other organisms in the process of propagating itself is merely accidental. Experience tells us that accidents tend to be messy. So why does this “accident” cause damage that looks like it was inflicted with surgical precision?
Since results that look like precision brain surgery are unlikely to happen by mere accident, let’s turn to the second kind of Gay Germ. To this one, the damage it does is strategic. The effect it has on the host is part of its life cycle.
In the ensuing evolutionary arms race, the host strives to avoid any and all damage, while the pathogen must “insist” on inflicting the kind of damage it requires for propagation. This could conceivably result in the damage to become very localized. The host manages to eliminate all damage except for that which is essential to the pathogen.
Thus, between the two kinds of hypothetical Gay Germs, evidence of “surgical” damage not only favors the strategist, it also predicts that being gay would be essential to the spread of Gay Germ.
But isn’t that strange? Have you ever heard of rabid dogs that only want to bite other rabid dogs? A vampire’s unquenchable thirst for vampire blood?