Homosexuality is in my view a consequence of humanity's use of tools. Tools are a disengage. They produce bother upon bother. It is within this miasma, brought about originally because tools were seen as a boon without downside, that the confusion of homosexuality, and other confusions like it, came about.
Tools evolve a society of inequalities, injustices, and secrets, because of the elaborate involvement with keeping tools maintained in contrast to keeping the species up to date in the moment with all its powers applied to the biosphere directly. It is a society of eddies, where individuals fare vastly different fates for relatively insignificant reasons, and the elements that comprise the real species identity are never known. Scholars toy with all these most important of issues in familiar terms, content with fashion, tradition, and consensus, in the face of these inequalities that produce suffering, continuously at every moment.
We are living out the inertia of an earlier protean act by our species originator, accepting inequality as normal. An intelligent species origin will set its course in terms of elements of interaction, or logistics of sheer science and rigorous quantitative relationships between individuals descending from that origin and the natural universe they encounter.
First the tools must be circumscribed with a deeper logistical base, so that they lose their advantage to sheer science. A toolless science will better command tools than the science that breeds them. This will not have to be a matter of victories in every contest. Strategy will determine which victories to seek.
A population recipient to these ideas will produce a mating pool more ready to move in this direction. In mating itself, and in the creation of domestic structure, the rigorous quantitative relationships will take form. Management is a concept steeped in tools. A better logistic will triumph over it, in finance, commerce, and health, and lead to clearer military success, whether or not that means winning wars and subjugating peoples, which are of dubious value anyway. A more rigorous logistic will let people not ready to apply it reach their own inherent potential, strife being more a risk of delay and distraction than a field of competition and survival. The rigorous logistic will begin from a standpoint of balance, and move into areas of reduced uncertainty in larger contexts while allowing uncertainty to emerge in smaller ones.
This is a concept essentially sensible, having to do with the senses as the initial and final site of intelligence.