Comments on: Innately Flexible

By: Moe Lane

Moe Lane — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

“Theres a moral there somewhere.”

How about ‘Even ideology has limits?’

Moe

By: robert cox

robert cox — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Consider schizophrenia. It is clearly partly genetic (if 1 identical twin is schizophrenic, the other is about 50% likely to be), but partly environmental (since 50% is not 100%). So it is clear that a major mental condition can be some of both. Further binary arguments are silly. What is interesting is what molecular mechanisms affect behavior, what environmental influences, and how these interact.

And I’m not comparing homosexuality to a disease. I’m simply drawing on research on a subject that few people would now characterize as a “moral defect” (but they used to).

By: Robert Bolton

Robert Bolton — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Conservatives focus on the act, and our actions are of course always a choice. The liberal focuses on the desire which never is.

As a gay man, I hope very much no physiological component can be found. I fear the attempts to cure me.

“Those who restrain desire, do so because theirs is weak enough to be restrained.” – William Blake

By: David Ehrenstein

David Ehrenstein — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The cart before the horse! Why look for the cause of homosexuality when the cause of heterosexuality has yet to be found?

By: Thumb

Thumb — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Never one to shy from a good controversy, I have a case for “Genes” for you all to pick apart (Creationists may want to skip this one).

From the perspective of evolutionary biology/psychology it would make perfect sense that a certain percentage of people are born with their molecular/biological gender triggers in reverse. Assuming that humans, as a species, have been around for anywhere from 100,000 to 500,000 years it’s safe to say that for much of that time we existed in smaller hunter/gatherer communities. Assuming that there is a case to be made that gender identification has a role in whether a person is more inclined to take up the hunt (or become a warrior) or remain at camp and nurture the children, it would leave these smaller communities/groups too vulnerable to extinction if all the men went on the hunt (or off to battle) and all the women stayed at camp. Maybe the hunting party is killed, or the base camp is devastated by predators or disease, but either way it would be in the best interest of the community’s survival if some of the men were more inclined to stay at camp (even better if they had no sexual interest in the women, from the hunters perspective) and helpful if some number of the women were less interested in having children [sex with the men] and more inclined to join in the hunt. I would be of a nature go so far as to make a case that homosexuality played a significant role in the survival of the human race. It just doesn’t seem right that we should persecute them now because we’re [supposedly] a modern civilization. After 100’s of thousands of years of serving a purpose (survival), evolutionary biology simply hasnt had the time to catch up yet.

By: Thumb

Thumb — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

One more point in support of my example above. In our armed forces women make up a much smaller percentage of the total numbers, yet of those people discharged for being Gay the numbers are overwhelmingly female.

By: Thumb

Thumb — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

By: Seth Edenbaum

Seth Edenbaum — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Thumb, you’re being silly. Homosocial environments all have homosexual undertones. The Navy was the place to be for gay men in the 70’s. It was party central. Professional athletics has a higher percentage of homosexuals than the general population. What are you saying: All lesbians are diesel dykes and all gay men are fairies?
The existence of a ‘gay’ gene is questionable at best, though it would make things easier for some to believe it.
Absolute sexual exclusivity is nothing other than a social convention and when it becomes an ideology, the hypocrisy makes it dangerously reactionary: there is an obvious relation between mysogynistic homosocial environments, environments based on fear of outsiders, and fascism.
But all this gets tiring.
If you’re that worried, just take two people to bed and call me in the morning.

By: marcum

marcum — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Whether homosexuality (or heterosexuality) is genetically or socially determined is arbitrary.

The DSM-IV (this enormous tome of legal pyschological conventions and definitions)abandoned ‘homosexuality as disease’ a couple of decades ago.

Robert Bolton has made an attribution error by confounding ‘physiology’ with ‘cure’ – my perfectly healthy eyes are part of my physiology but no one is going to ‘cure’ my sight.

Just because conservatives and liberals “think” that homosexuality is determined socially or genetically, respectively, does not make homosexuality any less real or legitimate. An elderly relative of mine “thinks” that his houseplants are capable of conversation.

By: David Ehrenstein

David Ehrenstein — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Well it’s obviously the uniform that determines the proponderance of homosexuality in the Navy. Genet called the sailor’s outfit “the most erotic article of clothing every devised.” I thoroughly agree. Of all the branches of the service it’s been my pleasure to fuck, I rate the Navy Number Once.