|
In my work we don't just pile artifaces on the
child but work to find the core of the child both genetically and in the
culture. There are people who are so psychologically insecure
in their sexuality that conversion is a possibility but in America we have
elected not to censor such things. We could start with the
unsophisticated and provencial and choose to protect them but who would the the
rule? Usually I appreciate your arguments but I find this one
strangely specious.
REH
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2003 7:53
AM
Subject: RE: [Futurework] Gay at
birth?
Keith,
. My complaint about male homosexualtiy is not so much that it exists but
that because it has reached such a large and substantial proportion of the
population it becomes rationalised as "natural" when, in fact, because an
adolescent ambivalent boy is sucked into such a largish sub-culture he becomes
increasingly trapped (as Harry mentioned yesterday). The result of all this is
that, today, (compared with the previous examples) the boy never grows up to
have hetrosexual experience nor the jopys of long-term hetero relationships.
Arthur
I
agree with this. This would apply to all sorts of things that kids feel
or see about them but don't see as "normal." Once they are seen as
"natural" then they say "why not try it out..." This could apply
to car theft, heroin or whatever.
Brad,
At 08:46 25/10/2003
-0400, you wrote:
Keith Hudson wrote:
Before anybody attempts to
shoot me down by quoting the article in today's /New York Times/, all I
would say is that I agree with the writer, Nicholas Kristof. There are
two few studies involving too small a number of experimental subjects to
make any sort of judgement yet. [snip]
For my part, I'm prepared to
say that the degree of homosexuality we > see around us
today is probably far greater than at any time in history
> and this
bespeaks something very unusual, such as high stress.
> (Or it could
be the large amount of artificial contraceptive
> hormones that are
being dispensed into our sewage systems
> and some from thence into
our drinking water.
[snip]
Some people say we should
settle gay rights disputes on the basis of the Old Testament. I say we
should rely on blinking patterns.
[snip]
Earlier this year, the
journal /Personality and Individual Differences /published an exhaustive
review of the literature entitled "Born Gay?" After reviewing the twin
studies, it concluded that 50 to 60 percent of sexual orientation might
be genetic. [snip]
I like the idea about stress being a
factor, since it seems
prima facie plausible that stress should lead
to
a cornucopia of dysfunctional psychological and
social
phenomena. On the other hand, isn't (wasn't)
homosexuality
rather prevelant among England's
aristocracy?
Yes, a bit more prevalent than the norm
-- probably due to private boarding schools where a lot of teenager
homosexuality went on. I don't think that most of it continued after
school, though I think it tended to delay marriage for many while they
re-adjusted via mistresses, brothels, etc.
I think Freud's
idea of repressed sexual energy as the "fuel"
for civilization is still
important (as for several years,
I have what I think is the key quote
and some commentary at
http:/www.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/civil.html
).
I think Freud was right, though my
evolutionary-economics view is a great deal more prosaic (but accurate, I
believe). Sex drives the need to establish some sort of status in order to
attract the best females. Very physical in the case of the primates and very
early man. But our frontal brain enabled us to symbolise status in the form
of, initially, face and body painting (pigments seem to have been the first
traded goods) and then other ornamentations and then a whole cascade of
different things -- in other words, consumer goods.
What other reason
than to fill up our tanks - not with oil --
but with "aim-inhibited
homoerotic energy", for "contact
sports" and LOCKER ROOMS in high
school? [Gimme some
privacy, please! Remember Robert Bork?
He asserted there
was no constitutional right to privacy....]
As
for the contemporary west being unique, I remember once
reading that
one of the Taliban's continuing morals
problem was keeping the warlords
from having sex with
young boys. How widespread are such
relations in
tribal cultures?
It's only unique
because of its widespread incidence and its predatory/exploitative nature
(the line between paedophilia and male homosexuality is a hazy one in my
view). The warlord matter you refer to above (news to me, but not at all
surpirsed) is fairly common in Arab countries -- that is, in rich people
being able to have access to good-looking boys. But not exploitative. And I
don't think the boys were 'labelled' or deeply affected in that culture.
Rather like the gymnasium-boy fashion among the Greek aristocrats. Such boys
were also introduced to (women) prostitutes by their adult sponsors as they
grew up.
Today, because it's heavily repressed by our society, both
paedophilia and homosexuality in our culture can stretch from fairly
innocent relationships to the most extreme nastiness and exploitation. My
complaint about male homosexualtiy is not so much that it exists but that
because it has reached such a large and substantial proportion of the
population it becomes rationalised as "natural" when, in fact, because an
adolescent ambivalent boy is sucked into such a largish sub-culture he
becomes increasingly trapped (as Harry mentioned yesterday). The result of
all this is that, today, (compared with the previous examples) the boy never
grows up to have hetrosexual experience nor the jopys of long-term hetero
relationships.
Keith Hudson
Keith Hudson,
Bath, England, <www.evolutionary-economics.org>, <www.handlo.com>,
<www.property-portraits.co.uk>
|
