Re: Brain Changes seen in Gay Sheep, U.S. Study Finds


Posted by Pasti on Mar 17, 2004 at 00:27
(216.209.72.176)

Re: Brain Changes seen in Gay Sheep, U.S. Study Finds (peep)

"...(particularly minus the "spintronic lingo" you seemed so fond of weaving into threads above :-) )..."

I am afraid I am not up to date with the modern lingo, so I might need a more conservative translation of the above.

"and it is interesting that you mentioned research into the (de)evolution of criminal typology(ies) in association with the increased occurrences, or at least "outings", of homosexuality seen in today's society."

Well,it was the similarity between what you were saying
and this theory of "evolving" criminality in terms of "habit and habitat" that I found interesting.

"Sometimes,it really does seem like gay rights advocates exhibit a rather bullying, gang-like mentality, doesn't it? Some rather loud-mouthed individuals and groups actually seem interested in little more than influencing or acquiring legislative powers to impose social control over the masses, even though they themselves represent what is still a ridiculously small minority in society."

As much as I understand the issue at this time,a good deal of the fight of gay groups has been concerned with overthrowing certain "high morals" regarding homosexuality, with social recognisance or aknowledgement if you want.In some states sodomy for example is still punishable under the law.And once they have obtained that(at least in certain states),they moved on towards the next-I think you can call it logical-step, the gay family.

And up to this moment,speaking in terms of social dynamics,they seem to follow the same pattern as any developing minority group, of course, in regard to their particular goals.If you check the development of, say, mormonism, as a social group,you will see the same general pattern.

But I am sure that as soon as they get some spin, and some numerical weight, they will start fighting for power within the society.

"(Aside: Wasn't the U.S. founded on principles opposing a minority rule, and its Constitution written to thwart such things from happening?)"

You are right,but unfortunately,what couldn't be factored in the constitution was human nature, human mentality,in regard to both accepting minorities, or imposing control by a minority.
According to the constitution,the KKK should have never existed, and yet, if I remember correctly, a few years back some good ol' white boys killed a black man by dragging him behind a car.


"Power and control, though, are issues extending beyond strict Anatomy and Physiology, spilling well over into Neuro-Psychology (e.g., aggression, dominance, etc.).It therefore could well be worth looking into possible associations between behaviors exhibited by homosexuals and certain criminal types. Perhaps it'll turn up that what is good for the criminal goose might also be good for the criminal gander?"

You are right, but as far as the gay minority goes, it is too small, for the time being that is, to pose any threat to the existing power groups/structures.

And in all honesty,I doubt at this moment that the lust for power is different in the gay community than in the non-gay community.I think the same theory of the 5% alpha individuals/group works in both the gay and non-gay groups(although to make a malicious joke, in the gay groups it is rather difficult to separate the alpha-males from the alpha-females).

I can only hope that this was not the idea that resulted from my post.I was ony referring to the parallel generated by the "habit/habitat" concept.

And anyway, for the study you propose to make any sense,the same associations should be investigated for the non-gay groups too.But personally, I wouldn't rely too much on such statistics,for both gay and non-gay, since they involve too many variables too difficult to control.

"Now, if only discussing the issue could remain true to Biological and Behavioral Sciences, and avoid getting frightfully muddied up by political correctification, everyone might better understand what's going on."

I think you are right.But you will have a hard time "selling" the ideea that the gay phenomenon actually implies involution, opposing the survival instinct.
One thing that I have noticed though over the years has been the fact that gay groups strongly advocate the ideea that there are genetic/biologic differences, that is "natural" differences between the gay and non-gay,but in fact,they haven't shown any particular eagerness to actually prove this ideea, to finance investigations/studies into this matter.And I wnder why...

"It's a sensitive issue, no doubt, but isn't Science supposed to be about boldly going where no one has gone before?Or is it now completely enslaved by fear and forever consigned to worship only research funds and Nobel prizes?"

With very much sadness I have to admit that the modern trend in choosing research topics, especially - though not exclusively - in biology and genetics is largely conditioned by research grants, and in this particular case of the gay problem, by the social climate and politics.

I know very good scientists that wouldn't undertake such a project,even if funds were available.And the explanation that several of them gave me was more or less that people are not yet prepared for the results, whatever those should be.

Unfortunately, this creates a vicious circle:more or less dubious scientists do some reaserch on the topic, but the results are not recognized by the main-streamers in the field,who,on the other hand won't undertake such a project to confirm or infirm the results they don't recognize, and so on and so forth.

So,I guess,no matter how impartial science is, it is stll a long time until people will seriously and continuously investigate this issue.Probably won't happen during our lifetime.


"(Aside: Ever notice how hermaphrodites, individuals who perhaps are the only ones actually entitled to be "confused" concerning the nature of human sexuality, receive little to no attention by those on either side of the orgasmic fence?)"

Yep, I noticed this fact.And the explanation of this phenomenon,in my oppinion, is the fact that hermaphrodites are unanimously recognized by the medical comunity as natural errors,naturally occuring genetic errors.

On the other hand, gay consider themselves normal, in the sense that thay may be a distinct genetic group, but their genetic differences are naturally occuring, not abberations.
[You have to savour a little bit the "finesse" of such an argument...:-)]

They do not receive attention from the lobbyists of the two sides, but fortunately for some of them at least,they have received attention from the medical community, in terms of the development of "gender stabilization" surgical procedures, or whatever their dedicated name is.

[And guess who took advantage of these surgical procedures?Nonetheless those with "normal but distinct" genetic makeup,but with the wrong gender...]

It would be nice if Amaranth and Taq would join this thread, since they both (that I know of) have expertise in related fields, biology and genetics respectively.



Follow Ups:


Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:
Comments:

[ Forum ] [ New Message ]