"I'm not saying that a background of LGBT+ aren't real. We know that Classical Greece was essentially gay, that Thailand has a huge proportion of trans -- which is why hormonal treatments and surgeries are cheapest there -- and that parts of New Guinea are entirely BL. I do believe some of it is genetic."
Agreed. And as I noted, in regards to those above societies you mentioned, I am not certain how much of that was based on genetically innate sexual preferences and how much of it was simply a specific sort of sexual behavior that was practiced in larger numbers than our pre-2000s society based upon strong societal expectations and peer influence.
I do not believe the vast majority of people in any society are predominantly gay or bi (though, I think, much more of the latter than the former), because such would not be conducive to long-term reproductive survival of our species, plain and simple. However, there will still be sizable numbers of natural gay and bi people in any give society. The minority LGBT+ populace will hide their homosexual behavior and even pretend to engage in heterosexual behavior in times and places where they are heavily stigmatized. Conversely, many naturally straight people will pretend to be at least bisexual and even engage in that behavior to varying degrees (some of it superficially, and just for show) and trans, non-binary, etc. if living in a time and place where such behavior and social identities are highly acceptable--> whether due to popularity in one's social circle, as a legit way of promoting themselves as "different" or as a legit form of rebellion against status quo expectations of strict gender roles, or even as a way of increasing their chances for employment (which is the case in the USA in terms of Hollywood and the creative writing field these days).
We must, I think, make note of the differences between genuine sexual preference and expectation-based sexual behavior and identity manifestation. In other words, especially in the contemporary West, there are natural LGBT+ people and political LGBT+, with the latter being opportunistic and peer-pressured identitarians.
However the apparent increase in their numbers isn't easily explained. Many just explain it away as greater acceptance. I am sure this is part of it. However if we go to social factors it's obvious that part of it isn't as much organic acceptance as mainstream media and culture validation.
And it is obvious to me that pollution is a factor even though it is under researched. That definitely explains much better than social factors the differences between countries, regions and even parts of countries.
This is new to me. Is there legit scientific study for this? If so, I can only imagine it's not very popular, regardless of where the data actually points. Is it possible this phenomenon may also be partly due to the increased use of hormones in cattle and poultry that gets mass processed into fast food? Or even certain type of pesticide use on crops?
How that relates to us is not necessarily linear. As long as the woke side relates us to patriarchy they cannot be relied upon. Even as the based side relates us to loss of purity.
Plain and simply, since it's currently still very, very unpopular to be a MAP, most of us will stay hidden in the toybox and pretend to be teleiophiles in real life. The "woke" are not worth seeking acceptance from, since they are very much against us as a go-between scapegoat that they and their right-wing opponents love accusing the other of "harboring" and "accepting". Remember during the Cuties fiasco how the Right were accusing the "woke" crowd of being behind that pseudo-atrocity? And, as you noted, how the extreme Left often claims "pedophilia" is an aspect of the patriarchy due to the widespread belief that it's mostly a manifestation of predatory male heterosexual behavior. Also, the "woke" too have a conception of purity that they apply to female sexuality, or at least all non-heterosexual behavior.