View Full Version : Gay men = Straight women
Posting this just to annoy Matty: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080616/lf_nm_life/brain_gay_dc
Why is it that every crazy scientific study always seems to come from Sweden or Denmark?
matty
06-16-2008, 06:24 PM
:grumble:
Well, as much as I hate the comparison, maybe studies along this line can find evidence that homosexuality is natal or prenatal. Not that extreme or religious conservatives would listen to scientific findings, anyway. (Evolution, anyone?)
I'm listening to a radio discussion about gay marriage right now. The Christian-y guy they're interviewing keeps calling it a choice. Which drives me insane. First of all, if they think anybody would choose it, they're nuts. Can you straight guys just up and choose to fuck a guy, if you wanted to? Can you even entertain the notion? No. I didn't think so. Other religious groups believe it's a "choice" in that they might have homosexual tendencies, but they choose to give in to those feelings, instead of spending their lives in the closet. Which is so fucked up I don't know where to begin. So yeah, that's completely off topic, but this guy keeps saying it's a choice, and keeps getting his message out there that he knows a lot of people who have "successfully rehabilitated" from the gay lifestyle, and it's got me all mad.
AHEM. Anyway, yes, Denmark and Sweden can actually get lots of funding for whatever crazy scientific experiments they feel like. In the States, your funding can be considered detrimental to your project. For instance, if you receive a bunch of funding from LGBT groups to do the same type of study, the results would be considered unreliable. But in the States, we wouldn't waste money on a study like that. The next study they come out with will relate gay men to black women, with an emphasis on sassy language.
Why is it that every crazy scientific study always seems to come from Sweden or Denmark?
i'm not sure why this study would be considered crazy. it seems pretty important to me. most homophobic people i've spoken with see homosexuality as a choice. the more evidence we have to the contrary, perhaps the more tolerant people will become.
not that people listen to evidence, as matty noted, but still.
i'm not sure why this study would be considered crazy. it seems pretty important to me.
I don't know, I guess I just don't particularly care about the comparison between a gay man's brain and a heterosexual woman's. At least not as much as I do about preventing aneurisms, or curing autism, or fixing blindness or protecting against concussions, or discovering the roots of addiction, or a thousand other things that I can think of that seem more beneficial for brain specialists to study. I bet that eventually scientists like this are going to come up with a way to tell if your kid is going to be gay even before he/she is born, or discovering some hormone that you can inject into the fetus to ensure a straight baby. I guess studies like this always make me ask, what do you propose we do about your findings? What is the next step? To me the next step in this process seems unsavory. I don't know it just seems kinda creepy to me. Obviously scientists can study whatever they want to, but I am one of those close-minded anti-science guys who think that governments of the world (I have no idea if this was sponsored by the government or not) waste tons of money on "silly" research. We still haven't found a cure for cancer or HIV/AIDS or dozens of other diseases that are destroying people's lives and yet we are spending money to tell us something that 15 minutes at SoCo could have proven. Some gay boys are girl like? Some Lesbians are male like? No, you got to be kidding me! I can't believe it! Thank god we have a group of scientists cracking the code on that one!
matty
06-16-2008, 07:44 PM
Well, it may seem silly initially, and the only reason you don't care is because you're straight, but if we can prove scientifically that homosexuality is determined at birth, it will push gay civil rights in a whole new direction. It will launch homosexuality up there with race, where right now there is a distinction, and it will shut up a large chunk of conservatives who morally disagree. (You can't morally disagree if you're born that way. You can't morally disagree with the fact that someone is black, can you?)
Of course, the next step will be finding ways to alter genes or prenatal conditions so that gays are not born, but whatever. All the gays are doing now is fucking up elections.
btw, I don't really care about any of that, I am just trying to spark some conversation...I am sure there is some worth while information they could find from studies like this.
At least not as much as I do about preventing aneurisms, or curing autism, or fixing blindness or protecting against concussions, or discovering the roots of addiction, or a thousand other things that I can think of that seem more beneficial for brain specialists to study.
one important aspect of research is that it is frequently impossible to know how, exactly, the information gained may ever create any sort of concrete technological advancement. any gain in the corpus of knowledge we have, though, can trigger new insights in the future. especially when dealing with anything as complicated as the human brain (i think we have a better comprehension of the first millisecond of the universe than we do of how something like 'creativity' works.)
if/when a cure for HIV or cancer is ever found, it will be built on information gained from completely unrelated research.
Well, it may seem silly initially, and the only reason you don't care is because you're straight, but if we can prove scientifically that homosexuality is determined at birth, it will push gay civil rights in a whole new direction. It will launch homosexuality up there with race, where right now there is a distinction, and it will shut up a large chunk of conservatives who morally disagree. (You can't morally disagree if you're born that way. You can't morally disagree with the fact that someone is black, can you?)
Of course, the next step will be finding ways to alter genes or prenatal conditions so that gays are not born, but whatever. All the gays are doing now is fucking up elections.
Hasn't it already been proven that homosexuality is mostly determined at birth? I mean I was under the impression that we figured that out 20 years ago. Plus like Slam said, the people who are homophobic are going to be homophobic no matter what. They are going to say, just because you are born gay doesn't mean you have to act out on those impulses, just like if you are born with an addictive personality is doesn't mean that you are justified in becoming a cocaine addict.
What concerns me with studies like this is, like you said, there are going to be scientists dilligently working on ways to ensure that kids are not born gay, and that I have a real problem with. I don't consider being gay a birth defect or something that needs to be cured, and it seems like that could easily be the direction that some scientists take this.
I do totally understand what you are saying about making gayness = race. For me the two are not the same. I can tell if somebody is black just by looking at them. I can only tell (for a fact) that somebody is gay by walking in on them having sex, and even then they may be bisexual or curious or something aside from being truly gay. I am not even sure what the defintion of gay is. I suppose we are all gay and straight to a certain extent it is all just a matter of degrees. Is a man who is married to a woman and has children gay if they are attracted to men, but never act out on that attraction. I don't know. Does the physical act of sex mean one iota when it comes to defining sexuality? I don't know. Seems like I could argue just about any side of that and make a compelling arguement. Defining race is simple, defining sexuality seems next to impossible. Of course I don't give a damn if you are born gay (which I think you mostly are), or not, you should still be entitled all of the rights of everybody else in the world. I guess that is the bottom line for me regardless of the studies show.
one important aspect of research is that it is frequently impossible to know how, exactly, the information gained may ever create any sort of concrete technological advancement. any gain in the corpus of knowledge we have, though, can trigger new insights in the future. especially when dealing with anything as complicated as the human brain (i think we have a better comprehension of the first millisecond of the universe than we do of how something like 'creativity' works.)
if/when a cure for HIV or cancer is ever found, it will be built on information gained from completely unrelated research.
I understand and I don't disagree. I just think it is funny that a group of brain specialists decided to do a study telling me that some gay boys are girl like and some lesbians are boy like. I hope their parents didn't pay for their college tuition or they are probably pissed.
I think a study that works to actually define what gay is would be much more compelling to me. At least that is something that is not obvious to any 8 year old child.
I wonder if anybody has ever done studies of homosexuality in primates. Does it exist (seems like it surely exists)? Are the homosexual primates exclusively homosexual, or are they bi? Are they monogamous or are they players? Does it seem to be exhibited more with females or males or about the same? Are there groups of homosexual monkeys that prowl the jungles, or are they incorporated in to the normal groups? or are they completely ostracized from all groups? or are they accepted and welcomed just like all of the others? Is there something in the upbringing of homosexual monkeys that is different than with heterosexual monkeys? Could you take two twin monkeys and try to raise one to become heterosexual by raising it normally and one homosexual by exposing it only to primates of the same sex during puberty? Would that even matter? Seems like this would explore not only sexuality but also the capacity to define what homosexuality is. Are child primates that exhibit homosexual behaviors treated any differently by their families or groups? Is the seeming apparent apprehension with homosexuality a moral or instinctive reaction? Is it driven by fear or disrespect or what? What is the capacity of primates to make moral judgments based on sexuality? That is a study that I think would definitely be worth the time, effort and education needed and as a plus the results wouldn’t be immediately obvious before you ever started the study.
matty
06-16-2008, 08:08 PM
Ethically, would it really be that bad if they prevented people from being born gay? I don't really know. On the one hand, I think it's part of society, and would totally negate all the work that's been done for gays to be recognized as real people. Also, it's a step closer to some weird homogeneous society where everyone is the same, or a world where you can special order your child. "I'll have a blond haired, blue-eyed, handsome little honky straight kid, please. Hold the family history of cancer."
On the other hand, if you never had chocolate, you wouldn't miss it if it were gone. And I bet a lot of gays wouldn't want their children to grow up under the same bullshit they had to deal with. One little injection, and your kid would never have to know. Normal, happy, childhood, unsullied by relentless attacks from Christian Conservatives, the irresistible appeal of My Little Ponies, grade-A pillow arranging skills.
bubz_bluez
06-16-2008, 08:49 PM
jvo just made my head hurt .....
i dont even know what to say
the only thing i was going to ask was how do you define homosexuality
but that was already covered so....
great minds think alike i guess
bubs
Soul Queen
06-16-2008, 09:02 PM
I understand and I don't disagree. I just think it is funny that a group of brain specialists decided to do a study telling me that some gay boys are girl like and some lesbians are boy like. I hope their parents didn't pay for their college tuition or they are probably pissed.
I think a study that works to actually define what gay is would be much more compelling to me. At least that is something that is not obvious to any 8 year old child.
I wonder if anybody has ever done studies of homosexuality in primates. Does it exist (seems like it surely exists)? Are the homosexual primates exclusively homosexual, or are they bi? Are they monogamous or are they players? Does it seem to be exhibited more with females or males or about the same? Are there groups of homosexual monkeys that prowl the jungles, or are they incorporated in to the normal groups? or are they completely ostracized from all groups? or are they accepted and welcomed just like all of the others? Is there something in the upbringing of homosexual monkeys that is different than with heterosexual monkeys? Could you take two twin monkeys and try to raise one to become heterosexual by raising it normally and one homosexual by exposing it only to primates of the same sex during puberty? Would that even matter? Seems like this would explore not only sexuality but also the capacity to define what homosexuality is. Are child primates that exhibit homosexual behaviors treated any differently by their families or groups? Is the seeming apparent apprehension with homosexuality a moral or instinctive reaction? Is it driven by fear or disrespect or what? What is the capacity of primates to make moral judgments based on sexuality? That is a study that I think would definitely be worth the time, effort and education needed and as a plus the results wouldn’t be immediately obvious before you ever started the study.
Yes there have been studies on monkeys and it has been seen in nature that there are certain monkeys who trade sex for goods (or conflict resolution) in their society. It can be either male or females. They are not particular who they get it on with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo
Now you know. Bonobo's like to get it on.
Slightly different than maybe what you have in mind, but homosexuality has been seen in nature.
Soul Queen
06-16-2008, 09:11 PM
A side note about Research funding. Most of the time the government dictates what type research will be funded. For instance last year NSF stated that they were extremely interested in Nano technology. Therefore more awards given to proposals geared toward this research.
So if Bush stated he wanted to see more Research concerning Homosexuality, there would be more Request for Proposals for it.
Aids, Cancer, Neurological disorders have huge funding basis. Most agencies are looking for innovative ideas to fund.
On a side note, because of Bush's extreme cuts to these agencies, all of the expect funding to be flat for the next 2 years. This means less money for innovative ideas. And this means less scientific advancement.
Not related to the topic above but a side note.
Rush talked about this story today and his reaction was exactly the same as mine. "Why are scientists waisting their time telling us something that any moron already knows?"
I am going to shoot myself now.
matty
06-17-2008, 04:37 PM
Ha ha!
JVO and Rush, sittin' in a tree,
A-G-R-E...uh...I-N-G.
that's what you get for listening to rush, jvo. your mind is slowly being twisted.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.