The remains of this potentially gay caveman are thought to be so because he was buried without tools or weapons but instead with household jugs. That’s it; there was no sign of him, say, buried with his mate, but he was pointing eastward, which was traditionally a placement for female skeletons.
Okay, so wouldn’t it be more logical to suggest that this might have been the first transsexual caveman instead? There really isn’t evidence that this skeleton’s bearer was gay or not, but there is evidence of both female roles and burial rites—which were taken pretty seriously, as scientists say.
The article actually ends with the statement that a female cave person had been found before buried like a man. So, in actuality, if they are making this the case for the “first homosexual caveman,” it sort of fails on all fronts, doesn’t it?
If it is an indication of homosexuality or transexuality (as is actually postulated at the end of the article), however, it would be a pretty cool discovery, perhaps serving as further proof that our “liberal media” and whatever else is blamed for “causing” people to be gay isn’t reality, but that nature itself, in fact, is what causes people to love who they love.