Step by step, researcher looks for sexuality clues

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Hardly. The Germans had a specific purpose in the 30's. This is not a government backed research project.

I was referring to the fact of trying to find a correlation between to variables based on stereotype, rather than actual science in order to promote their theory.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by amber

If people "are going to think what they always thought anyway", and no one ever changes their mind, then society would have the same viewpoints as it did 100 years ago, or 1000 years ago. Our society's opinions have actually grown and changed very fast in this century, alone, regarding various types of human rights issues.
So, to say that studying something is useless and that everyone will think what they were going to think anyway is simply not true. Society's attitude towards gay people has changed remarkably just in the past 30 years. That didn't happen in a vacuum, it happened because of learning and the spread of information. Some studies and information are more compelling than others, but I would hardly call studies "useless". If no one ever looked for things, studied things, and shared the information, where would gay people be today? Or anyone?

Societies views do not change, only cycle. Our technoligical toys change, but the human core does not. The acceptance of gays was much more accepted in ancient times during that cycle than now. The culture and ideas on the island of Lesbos, the Spartens, all had strong gay attributes. The Temples of pleasures in Rome are very close to places like Las Vegas. Temple of Aphrodite or Mandalay Bay. Different from one stand point, similar in the core.

Society never changes. It thinks it does by reiventing itself We will always have poor, homeless, greed, corruption aspects on one side, and music, art, literature, kindness on the other. Every aspect of history from wars to religion to thoughts on any given subject fall back to basic principles. The basic instinct to reproduce (Give your off spring greater chance to survive thereby continuing your genes) and the "look I was here" need. Or in more modern terms Money (control of resources) and Power (Survival).

It all cycles and repeats. over and over and over.

[amber]

^^^ So, societies do change, they go through different cycles. So for x number of years in x place at x time, people believe such and such. Then their views change, or cycle into different views. And there is always something new that people are finding out that has never been known before. so, basically, I think yours is a poor argument as far as speaking to this subject. And while cycles in general do repeat, they absolutely are not comprised of exactly the same components every time.
And when new cycles come about, as far as thought and morality, it is still because new information to that particular society at that time causes it to change.

[Rickypt]

I am not interested in proving whether or not one is born gay. By doing that, I find an inherent belief that being gay is bad or not normal, but we can "blame" it on the fact we're born that way. Besides, most gay people know we were born that way so why can't people just believe us instead of wasting time on experiments.

Homophobic people are going to be homophobic regardless of the science. Many of these folks are the same people who don't believe in evolution. They will find a religious reason to discriminate against and hate gays regardless.

It really shouldn't matter if we are born gay or choose it.

Edit: i wrote this before reading the whole thread. I see I'm just agreeing with what many others have written: carrie, mike, hejira, etc.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by amber

^^^ So, societies do change, they go through different cycles. So for x number of years in x place at x time, people believe such and such. Then their views change, or cycle into different views. And there is always something new that people are finding out that has never been known before. so, basically, I think yours is a poor argument as far as speaking to this subject. And while cycles in general do repeat, they absolutely are not comprised of exactly the same components every time.
And when new cycles come about, as far as thought and morality, it is still because new information to that particular society at that time causes it to change.

Only what they percieve as new. The core is always the same. And Yes, I agree, the cycles are not comprised of the same components everytime. But society can't seem to go beyond a certain point of a selfish, short-sighted stance that it always seems to take. Not all of siciety, mind you. There are glimmers of light every once in awhile. But they don't always last, and sometimes are few and far between. Now....How about a choccochip cookie? I'm buyin.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

It really shouldn't matter if we are born gay or choose it.

I agree. People aways feel the need to catagorize things. I am straight and think gay or not is a nonissue. Any Variance in society, relgion, belief, ...whatever should be tolerated as long as they are not harming innocents or forcing/harming others for not believing the same thing. With the idea that you understand and take responsibility for your actions. You break it, you buy it.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by seeker007nmss

I was referring to the fact of trying to find a correlation between to variables based on stereotype, rather than actual science in order to promote their theory.

Then your point is well taken. I bet you were a great math student?

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by amber

^^^ So, societies do change, they go through different cycles. So for x number of years in x place at x time, people believe such and such. Then their views change, or cycle into different views. And there is always something new that people are finding out that has never been known before. so, basically, I think yours is a poor argument as far as speaking to this subject. And while cycles in general do repeat, they absolutely are not comprised of exactly the same components every time.
And when new cycles come about, as far as thought and morality, it is still because new information to that particular society at that time causes it to change.

It's such a coincidence that we are talking about cycles now becuase when I was riding my bike today I was thinking that life itself is just a series of cycles.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

It's such a coincidence that we are talking about cycles now becuase when I was riding my bike today I was thinking that life itself is just a series of cycles.

well, the wheel in the sky keeps on turning after all.........

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

when I was riding my bike today I was thinking that life itself is just a series of cycles.

Yes, Lindsey, isn't that WEIRD?

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by mikeschmike

That's sig worthy.

Thanks. After it came out I thought that too.

[seeker007nmss]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Then your point is well taken. I bet you were a great math student?

I got disgusted with upper mathematics when a friend's father , who is a nuclear physicist at Sandia Labs in NM, asked why we were being taught some upper level calculus stuff. "I don't even use that". I was already on the edge and that pushed me over the "I don't want any more math" ledge.

[amber]

Originally Posted by Rickypt

I am not interested in proving whether or not one is born gay. By doing that, I find an inherent belief that being gay is bad or not normal, but we can "blame" it on the fact we're born that way. Besides, most gay people know we were born that way so why can't people just believe us instead of wasting time on experiments.

I'm not understanding the logic. How does studying something scientifically imply that it is bad? Most things we are are genetic, when we study those things, it doesn't necessarily mean or imply they are bad, just because we are studying them. And of course gay people know they were born gay, but maybe non gay people want to understand further. After all, they don't know what it is like being you. And, JMO, if someone is born something, that seems more "normal" to me. Like being left handed is normal, or blond. Cause you were born that way.

Originally Posted by Rickypt

Homophobic people are going to be homophobic regardless of the science. Many of these folks are the same people who don't believe in evolution. They will find a religious reason to discriminate against and hate gays regardless.

Then how has homophobia in our society dropped so dramatically in recent years? By accident? Also, even if a homophobic doesn't change their mind, maybe their kids will believe differently because of evidence, scientific or otherwise. I think it is a fallacy to believe people can't change their minds. Not everyone, but some people surely can, and over a generation populations especially change their minds.

Originally Posted by Rickypt

It really shouldn't matter if we are born gay or choose it.

It shouldn't matter if we are born left handed, or will get cancer, or experience hair loss, or choose to eat meat, or anything. Doesn't mean we shouldn't study those things. If it doesn't matter to you if gay people were born or chose it, then what is the harm in gaining scientific knowlege about it?
And does it really matter to you what type of reason leads people to the conclusion to accept gay people? I would think acceptance is desireable no matter what.

Not being rude, just not really understanding your logic.

[irishgrl]

Originally Posted by amber

I'm not understanding the logic. How does studying something scientifically imply that it is bad? Most things we are are genetic, when we study those things, it doesn't necessarily mean or imply they are bad, just because we are studying them. And of course gay people know they were born gay, but maybe non gay people want to understand further. After all, they don't know what it is like being you. And, JMO, if someone is born something, that seems more "normal" to me. Like being left handed is normal, or blond. Cause you were born that way.

arent you confusing a physical characteristic with something that is inherently emotional/spiritual? (not quite sure what term to use, I just know it aint physical or mental!) I mean, there is no physical connection to sexuality, no "gay gene" floating out there, and science is barking up the wrong tree IMO. That said, however, at least the scientists are willing to acknowledge that it isnt something a person has control over...

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

arent you confusing a physical characteristic with something that is inherently emotional/spiritual? (not quite sure what term to use, I just know it aint physical or mental!) I mean, there is no physical connection to sexuality, no "gay gene" floating out there, and science is barking up the wrong tree IMO. That said, however, at least the scientists are willing to acknowledge that it isnt something a person has control over...

i disagree that there isn't a gay gene ... i think it probably is genetic. but i've got no interest in finding one. waste of time and money.