Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
L
climber
Eating sand on the shores of Malibu...
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 11:23pm PT
|
Resent it Jody. Let me know that you've gotten it.
Hey Dingus...thought you were up in the mountains. I've been sitting here working on a story and playing on ST and eating my heart out for not being away from this city either by land, sea or mind. Smokey where you are?
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2008 - 11:23pm PT
|
"To be honest, I don't read blogs. As far as I am concerned, they are usually [anonymous] people full of crap who can spout off about anything and be called an expert."
If you'll excuse the expression, amen to that!
SuperTopo may sometimes meet that description, but at least many of us have met, and we have the self-moderating influence of a multitude of posters and views.
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
Nowhere
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 12:13am PT
|
Those who are taking the position that sexual orientation is a learned behavior may indirectly be victims of one of the great scientific frauds of the late 20th Century--this misreporting of the case of David Reimer.
David Reimer was born as a boy. However, David's circumcision was botched and his penis was accidentally cut off. The decision was made to surgically alter him to be a girl and raise him as a girl. He was given a girl's name and raised as girl. At puberty he was given estrogen to develop breasts, etc. His birth as a boy was kept secret from him.
He had an identical twin who remained a boy, and was considered a good "control" for comparison purposes. The doctor who recommended and oversaw the sex change published a widely reported paper about how David "successfully" developed into a girl.
This was cited by many as definitive proof that sexual orientation was not genetic but the product of our development.
However, the paper was not correct. Although every effort was made to turn him into a girl, both physically and mentally, the truth was that the effort was total failure.
In a turnaround, the case of David Reimer is now seen as strong evidence that sexual orientation is mostly genetic.
For more information on David Reimer, read these links:
http://infocirc.org/rollston.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 01:47am PT
|
I'm jealous ding, I think I've only done that one six times, Got ' first tracks' in '05. But I ain't stoppin' now! and I think I have a hot date for it August...
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
Nowhere
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:23am PT
|
Jody, the initial (false) report was seen as proof that sexual orientation was very malleable and a product of the environment. However, after the full facts were revealed, it is now seen as strong evidence that sexual orientation is genetic. Read the links.
I did not see the let you mention but will look at it.
|
|
nita
climber
chica from chico, I don't claim to be a daisy
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:49am PT
|
equal rights and justice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAFoCH3-anM
VIVE Y DEJA VIVIR!
Hey Peter, thank you.. for sharing your story with us..;-)
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:26am PT
|
Jody (sorry Roxjox), that's a pretty mixed grab bag of references you've cited - controversial researchers, UFO / new age physics proponents, Mormon psychologists, militant gay/feminist biologists, etc. really don't do more than muddy the water.
No one is saying homosexual behavior is only rooted in genetics, or even that the exhibition of homosexual behavior is always biologically based. What is being said is homosexual behavior is in fact a 'normally' expressed behavior in most all mammalian species - with reasonable thinking people chalking it up to genetics (unless of course, you are positing a form a beastial pedaphilia and abuse to blame for such expression in animals). By the same token, no one is saying there is a 'gay gene' or 'gay' brain structure - there isn't a 'black gene' or a 'left-handed gene' either. Our genetics, our hormonal systems, and our behavior are entwined in highly complex ways we are only just beginning to understand. That's why data from other species is important. Hell, tweak one gene in a fruit fly and you can switch sexual orientation back and forth - mammals, primates, and humans are a bit more complex.
And just so you know relative to one of your references, a whole branch of militant gays and lesbians are completely with you and dead set against any notion there is a genetic/biological basis for homosexuality - they definitely/desperately want to believe it is strictly a matter of choice. The whole topic of a genetic or biological basis for homosexuality strikes fear into many gay and lesbians as an attempt to 'medicalize' it - turn it into what you would call a 'condition' or 'disorder'. They also, like many in the deaf community, fear if a genetic basis for homosexuality [or deafness] could be identified then embryos / fetuses would be [url="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4232383.ece" target="new"]unused or aborted on that basis[/url]. That would certainly set up a real quandry for christian parents whom are against both homosexuality and abortion if they were to confront such a choice. What do you suppose the Cheney's would have done had the capability been available to them when their daughter was being carried to term?
And again, you voted for and stand by a guy who couldn't even raise a straight daughter - now that is liberal for a guy with your beliefs and perspective.
|
|
howlostami
Trad climber
Southern Tier, NY
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 10:00am PT
|
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article4232383.ece
Gattaca is just a couple minor tech advances away. It'll be nice when we can finally get a handle on this genetic variation thing, people are too different, and that obviously causes problems.
Nobody here would pass the screening, we're all fetuses that got too far, too much mental instability :)
|
|
_MUDD_
climber
Schwagstaff
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 10:37am PT
|
Cool!
Soon I can make my own RuPaul!
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 11:22am PT
|
"WHAT do your group call the social conservative relatinship seeking homosexual, as opposed to what do you call the leather stud agressive sexual hobbist that is the party going, agressively self-satifaction seeking sexually active multiple anonymous partners in a night, type that I am calling socially deviant for lack of a better term? "
Maybe there is a "Mullet" class? You know, Business in the front, party in the rear?
Oppps.. Sorry. Should have resisted.
What's the point of arguing the deepest origins of what makes people gay? After all, if they themselves don't know and, as a general rule, can't change, it's a red herring.
so those who don't want Gays to have legal rights to marry the person of their choice because you don't approve of their behavior, I'd like to know what other rights you'd care to deny other groups whose behavior you don't like?
Many of the disabled got there through their own choices, and some via genetics, (or signing up for Bush's war) They are costing society piles of money, way more than Gay social security benefits. Should all or a certain portion of the disabled get limited rights?
How about procreation in general? Now that we have DNA testing, perhaps there should be a license to have sex (or, if we had better birth control, just a permit to have a baby) You'd have to pass a dna screening to show the medical condition of you kid wouldn't be a burden to society. (of course, like justice department hiring, during some administrations the permit process could screen out potential liberals as well) Sickle Cell anemia? We could wipe it off the planet if the highest danger carriers weren't allow to procreate
How far the rabbit hole do you want to go? (opps, getting in dangerous territory again)
A modest proposal
Karl
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 01:11pm PT
|
Roxjox, at this point, as Lois points out, a little education might go a long way towards understanding what has been consistently said prior to and after Jody's posting of a set of references which taken as a whole constitute just that - so much 'malarkey'. Even attempting to give some legitimate shape to those references requires at least a cursory understanding of genetics (and gay and lesbian politics).
I've not 'backtracked' a wit - there is no gay, black, or left-handed gene or brain structure - but that doesn't mean they aren't normal expressions of our genome. Homosexuality is a normal expression of the mammalian/primate/human genome - i.e. being homosexual is as normal as being black or being left-handed. The idea that behaviors and traits/characteristics necessarily have a one-to-one mapping to genes is a profound misunderstanding of the genetics and biology involved unless you are talking about very, very simple organisms (which is why fruit flies, planaria, [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caenorhabditis_elegans" target="new"]nematodes[/url], and zebrafish are so useful in research).
Where behaviors and biological traits/characteristics (handedness, eye color, etc.) differ is traits are only expressed genetically - even if we can't figure out why genetically (even something as simple as eye color is a result of a complicated polygenic system); behaviors on the otherhand, can and do have multiple if not endless roots - genetic, biological (hormonal), psychological (cultural, stress, etc.), and yes, even choice. No one is, or has been, saying that there aren't people who partake of homosexual behavior by choice - clearly many do. What has been consistently said is homosexual behavior is a 'normal', even pervasive, behavior expressed throughout mammalian/primate/human genome.
Ever travel in Asia or the Middle East? Some Americans might easily assume entire countries are homosexual based on the clear segregation of sexes and open displays of affection between men (and between women). But they aren't and such perceptions are a matter of cultural bias. It's a complicated business, but the bottom-line is there is nothing 'abnormal' about homosexual behavior whereas there is sexual behavior practiced by both heterosexuals and homosexuals which is often deemed 'deviant' or 'abnormal', but by and large that's just another cultural bais. And again, if virile heterosexuals like the Cheneys would stop having homosexual children then the problem wouldn't exist. Don't you think as loyal republican and daughter of an arch-conservative that Mary Cheney would restrain her 'choices' to heterosexual partners if it was as simple a matter as you suggest?
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:15pm PT
|
Jody is saying he has compassion for gays but doesn't think they should act on being gay. Abstinence-only Gay rights?
and if you aren't acting on your gay feelings, you also shouldn't be feeling Love or the need to marry right? Feel gay but marry straight, right Jody?
This Abstinence thing turns out to be quite hard and folks merely make a show of it. Heros of the Bible like David used their peckers and so have any number of TV evangelists and GOP closet gay congressmen.
Not very solid ground to determine who has basic rights
PEace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 02:36pm PT
|
You got the coveted 666 post LEB.
but I guess the point is, LEB, doe marriage equal sex? Many hetero couples, i think, would report that getting married hasn't increased the amount of sex they have.
If somebody like Jody were to say being Gay is not a choice, but acting sexually on being gay is wrong, then how would he say a gay person should live out their life.
I'm guessing he would say they need therapy to try to straighten out their life (pun intended) but is that realistic and couldn't it be very wrong for gay folk to get mixed up in straight marriages and relationships trying to reform themselves? I've seen that!
Or can gays find love and form partnerships and yet, if they believe in Jody's form of morality, keep it in their pants?
After all, with their birth control stance, the Catholic church has basically said that sex is for procreation and not pleasure and that it's immoral to have sex for fun only. Otherwise, why no birth control? See, we need to scale back sex laws to include their moral judgments as well, perhaps some kind of chastity belt system.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:41pm PT
|
Remember LEB that the underlying question is whether Gay couples should have the right to marry and get equal rights and benefits under the law.
Personally I have no idea whether Gay, or even Straight, sexual relationships are moral under what standard of God, or this or that culture. I judge not.
Would you support taking the marriage and social security rights away from couples where adultery is proven? Should adultery be punished by the law?
These are the questions REALLY at hand here. Prejudice can die slow but the law needs attention now.
PEace
Karl
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:42pm PT
|
"are there NO practices that deserve condemnation"
Racism, sexism, chauvinism, homophobia, and other [widespread]forms of intolerance...
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 03:56pm PT
|
Roxjox, clearly you don't have an good understanding of genetics or the fact that homosexual behavior is common in mammalian species or that the sexual orientation of a fruit fly can be easily manipulated would ring a bell for you. You confuse our inability to describe a specific genetic basis for homosexual behavior with a lack thereof. Again, no one can describe the specific genetic basis for many of our biological traits let alone our behaviors. To say that handedness doesn't exist genetically because we can't describe the specific genetic basis for it is foolish in the face of the data.
Now, if being gay was an abstraction with no concrete manifestation - say, like being god - then I'd agree with you that the inability to describe any specific basis for it's existence probably does mean it doesn't exist [genetically]. But gay behavior, unlike god, plainly exists or it wouldn't irritate you to the degree it does. And really, given there is no goddess, what does that make god's sexual orientation? Who knows, but maybe there is a potential resolution between the ideas of god and the 'big bang' after all...
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 04:14pm PT
|
LEB
"If they seek medical care from me they will receive the exact same care and consideration as anyone else gets. Do I want them over to my house for dinner. No, absolutely not. "
Let the state treat them that way too.
LEB, I think the Civil Union compromise you state might be a fine place to start. Problem is, the federal government is nowhere near affording even "Seperate but equal" right to gays.
Getting marriage into government hands was a mistake that violated the separation of church and state if you consider Marriage a 'Sacred Union" Return Marriage to the churches and let the government ONLY do civil unions
How would that be?
PEace
Karl
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 06:36pm PT
|
Guys humping guys totally affects my life.
No really.
Also, not living in a society that is openly hostile towards gays is telling me how to live.
Guys.
Guys.
Seriously.
Here let me quote Leviticus except for the parts (most of them) that I don't follow.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 07:34pm PT
|
Now that there have been several hundered posts per all this I wonder how many folks have changed their minds or learned something new and valuable that might lead to an expanded understanding of a very nuanced subject.
JL
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2008 - 07:40pm PT
|
The thing is I don't think this is a nuanced subject. There's plenty of superfluous arguing over nature vs nuture and the bible and blah blah blah but in the end it's simply about controlling what other people do. Either you are convinced somehow that same-sex marriage "hurts" you in some way or you aren't. Personally I don't find the argument that gay marriage hurts people a very authentic argument. I think it's just people find homosexuality foreign and frightening for whatever reason and use that as an excuse to try to repress it.
Stem cell research is a nuanced topic. Gay marriage is pretty simple.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!