Agreed. Just to frame this out more: evolution is often misrepresented as a carrot on a stick approach to explaining the variety and parallels between morphological similarities of different organisms. As a matter of comparison, to use the cliche phrase "phylogeny recapitulates ontology," where stages of an organisms evolutionary history are represented in its development to adulthood, homosexuality present in ape ancestors or presumably in recent hominins does not assume this will be expressed in modern H. sapiens - though there is a greater likelihood. (It doesn't help that Skene's glands and prostate gland stimulus are very much a carrot on a stick for sex-driven evolution) The social sexual culture of bonobo is an often cited example of unrestricted, exploratory, and playful sexuality present in a near-human ape ancestor, particularly for the prevalence of female to female, male to male, and dominant to subordinate members exchanging sexual favors for social harmony. Similarly, comparing examples of same-sex pair bonding among animals is extremely local and represents convergent evolution, not proof that human custom traces its roots to the 'naturalness' of given sexual preference. Same-sex mating is present in other big-brained relatives besides apes, especially Bottle-nosed dolphins. What's more, it's important to make distinct the differences of what is natural here: 1) there is limbic pair bonding, and then there's 2) reproduction, and again there's 3) sex for the sake of sex. Humans have to navigate all three at once given our physiological predilection for the latter and an exaggerated, culture-bound conception of the former - while reproduction itself is torn, labeled, and valorized or demonized in the same sentence. My point being that examples of same-sex pair bonding (in penguins) does not accurately mirror the concept of homosexuality in humans - just as avian intelligence seems analogous to human cognition though distantly related.
I'm not here to argue homosexuality is unnatural in any sense. It only vaguely resembles same-sex bonding and mating of unrelated animals and it does injustice and great inaccuracy to a uniquely human expression (like language to religion or math to music) by comparing it to same-sex flirting and loneliness of penguins.
Well said. That's really the bottom line of this publicity stunt.