Being Gay, Choice, Disease or Other? (attractive, jobs, famous, conservative)

[AxisMundi]

Originally Posted by CrownVic95

Axis, the more I read of your posts the more I almost feel sorry for you. And I don't mean that in a flippant or sarcastic way.

The fact that you keep bringing it up makes you seem to be driven by your perceived degree of "manlyness". It appears that the purveyors of lies driving the homosexual agenda have convinced you of..well..many things - including that only a man insecure about his own sexuality would attempt to stand in the way of “progress” in the homosexual march toward marriage and legally enforced silence of those that would stand in their way. That is garbage, Axis, and whether or not a man bows to their wishes shows one thing and one thing only. It demonstrates whether he can think for himself and stand for what he believes or rather is a puppet on a string to be led in whatever direction others demand.

It is embarrassing for you that you continue to say the same things over and over as though you had an audience of kindergartners. As though other mature adults need you to define “normal” or “natural” for them or are going to accept your view of a world turned on its head.

As I have told you before, I am about as religious as Bill Maher is. So it is coincidental that I stand with religious folks on this issue. Well..coincidental in one way and not so in another.

I object to religious zealots with the same fervor that I object to progressive zealots pushing the homosexual agenda along with their global warming hysteria. And I object to them for exactly the same reason. Though they are at each other throats figuratively, both groups are the same. Their objective is to control the masses - anyone young enough, vulnerable enough, gullible enough, or insecure enough to accept their lies and propaganda and trump their own thoughts and instincts with them. This is all about thought control, Axis, and that is why I feel so strongly about it and why it is so dangerous to the future of freedom.

You have stated that you once held a different point of view and that somewhere along the way you “evolved” - or some such terminology that progressives would give their stamps of approval to. So, foolish as it may be, I’m still willing to give you some benefit of the doubt as I’m not fully convinced that what you are saying is in your heart. Trust me, you don’t need to sing their twisted tune to be a man.

1. Whether you consider yourself "religious" or not matters not. The discrimination against gays is largely driven by religion in this Nation. Ick and Insecurity also play a part, of course.

2. Your continued attempts at insult, ie some sexual insecurity on my part, is not only laughable, but infantile as well.

3. The other attempt at insult above, ie progressives (yes, I do consider that an insult), is just as lame and infantile. Yes, I was indeed a homophobe in my youth, driven into me by the religious culture that society is immersed in. Yes, my opinions and bigotry did change and that bigotry dissolved.

I find it quite telling indeed that you consider the erasure of any form of bigotry a reason for insult.

4. Sometimes it seems like I AM talking to a group of kindergartners. At times the anti-gay crowd acts exactly like YECers in the face of simple peer reviewed sciences, pure purposeful ignorance clutched desperatly to uphold their biased views.

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by AxisMundi

1. Whether you consider yourself "religious" or not matters not. The discrimination against gays is largely driven by religion in this Nation. Ick and Insecurity also play a part, of course.

2. Your continued attempts at insult, ie some sexual insecurity on my part, is not only laughable, but infantile as well.

3. The other attempt at insult above, ie progressives (yes, I do consider that an insult), is just as lame and infantile. Yes, I was indeed a homophobe in my youth, driven into me by the religious culture that society is immersed in. Yes, my opinions and bigotry did change and that bigotry dissolved.

I find it quite telling indeed that you consider the erasure of any form of bigotry a reason for insult.

4. Sometimes it seems like I AM talking to a group of kindergartners. At times the anti-gay crowd acts exactly like YECers in the face of simple peer reviewed sciences, pure purposeful ignorance clutched desperatly to uphold their biased views.

I thought I made it very clear that no insult was intended.

I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, while acknowledging at the same time that it might be foolish to do so. Appears it was.

We will have to agree to disagree, while acknowledging further discussion of this issue is pointless.

Peace.

[beachmel]

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

It makes no difference to me, tho, it contradicts your position of having a "tenaciously inquisitive mind" and unfortunately this attitude is pretty common. It lends itself in the sciences as well, ime, and scientists have to be mindful. Not so much about not liking a person, so their referances, data, etc will be neglected, but more like "I have a hammer, so everything looks like a nail".

Okay, okay, okay!! I looked him up....did some reading on him and read some of his material. Fabulous stuff...really fabulous stuff. In so many ways, it's like he's talking from my own heart. I was blessed with that analytical mind that much of society has tried to stereotype. It's not as if all intelligent women out there are competing with men, it's that they shouldn't HAVE to! We do know our place and it should be anywhere we want to be. That same privilege should be accorded to males as well. Stereotyping is so hurtful and limiting. It saddens me to think that a human being should have to go to such great lengths to be taken seriously though. The beauty of being a wife and mom though....is that I have 4 opportunities to change the "stereotypical woman" image. LOL

[AxisMundi]

Originally Posted by CrownVic95

I thought I made it very clear that no insult was intended.

I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, while acknowledging at the same time that it might be foolish to do so. Appears it was.

We will have to agree to disagree, while acknowledging further discussion of this issue is pointless.

Peace.

You made nothing "very clear".

"Intending no insult" doesn't mean one continues to be insulting.

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by beachmel

Okay, okay, okay!! I looked him up....did some reading on him and read some of his material. Fabulous stuff...really fabulous stuff. In so many ways, it's like he's talking from my own heart. I was blessed with that analytical mind that much of society has tried to stereotype. It's not as if all intelligent women out there are competing with men, it's that they shouldn't HAVE to! We do know our place and it should be anywhere we want to be. That same privilege should be accorded to males as well. Stereotyping is so hurtful and limiting. It saddens me to think that a human being should have to go to such great lengths to be taken seriously though. The beauty of being a wife and mom though....is that I have 4 opportunities to change the "stereotypical woman" image. LOL

Ben is certainly breaking down barriers and stereotypes for women and transgendered folk. He's thoughtful and obviously incredibly bright. Here is his lecture if you have the time.
Some Reflections on the Dearth of Women in Science; A Talk by Ben Barres#

All of this is going pretty far OT, but this thread is all over the place any way, so I doubt it matters. Although, he and people like him highlight where you are correct, that it's about the individual; what the individual is bringing to the table, what s/he gives to the community.

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by AxisMundi

You made nothing "very clear".

"Intending no insult" doesn't mean one continues to be insulting.

I certainly did, Axis - and I even overlooked your insults in the interest of peace.

I've cut you more slack than you deserved, so to the ignore list you go.

[TANaples]

Why in the world do you CARE????? That is the bottom line. You do care about green eyed, red headed, left handed, artists, athiests, etc., etc.?


We are not CLONES of one another. Thank whoever for that.

[beachmel]

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Ben is certainly breaking down barriers and stereotypes for women and transgendered folk. He's thoughtful and obviously incredibly bright. Here is his lecture if you have the time.
Some Reflections on the Dearth of Women in Science; A Talk by Ben Barres#

All of this is going pretty far OT, but this thread is all over the place any way, so I doubt it matters. Although, he and people like him highlight where you are correct, that it's about the individual; what the individual is bringing to the table, what s/he gives to the community.

Thank you so much for that link. It was quite long, but I couldn't pull myself away from it. I actually read the Powerpoint presentation before I responded to your post, but the lecture was much better. Thanks for posting the link. Although OT, as you said, this thread has ended up all over the place anyway and I actually think that this was a very productive avenue, in view of the fact that we ARE involved in a "great debate". I truly hope that I am not the only person on this thread who clicked on that link.

I tried to watch the UTube video from the link on his notes earlier, but couldn't find the video. Thanks for providing this link to the Google video. Be blessed and have a great evening. I'm glad that someone is saying something.....someone in a position of authority, who has the power to reach a large audience....although, it starts with one.

[beachmel]

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

I linked Ben because A. he's a great scientist. B. as a transgenered individual he has quite a bit of insight on the issue of transgenderism (sp?), since it has been brought up in this thread (wrongfully, tho). He's socially active in a range of areas. If any scientist belongs in this conversation, it's Ben. If you're interested, I have an excellent lecture he gave at Harvard on women's issues. It's pretty long, but enjoyable.

eta: be clear, this magic (and, agreed, it certainly is magic) is being wielded by a transgendered person. He does take issue with being called disordered, tho.

etaa: since you love science, and I sense a passion, perhaps you should reconsider your career path and join the fun.

Ah, did I just imagine it, or did Ben state that he suffered from gender identity in his/her younger days? I believe s/he did...right there on the lecture! LOL

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by beachmel

I truly hope that I am not the only person on this thread who clicked on that link.

It's great that you took the time. It is 2 hours so that's probably too much of an investment for some. But, yes, it's difficult to pull away once it gets going. Ben is the one, and recently Redisca here on CD, who introduced me to the follies and blunders of evolutionary psychology. The issues that prompted Ben's article in Nature also hit close to home due to my locale in Cambridge. While that's on the table, you might be interested in the debate he referred to between Pinker and Spelke, which I will link, but I will quote one of the examples used to highlight potential consequences of bias, which lends to systemic discrimination even tho it's not overt.

"I will give you one last version of a gender-labeling study. This one hits particularly close to home. The subjects in the study were people like Steve and me: professors of psychology, who were sent some vitas to evaluate as applicants for a tenure track position. Two different vitas were used in the study. One was a vita of a walk-on-water candidate, best candidate you've ever seen, you would die to have this person on your faculty. The other vita was a middling, average vita among successful candidates. For half the professors, the name on the vita was male, for the other half the name was female. People were asked a series of questions: What do you think about this candidate's research productivity? What do you think about his or her teaching experience? And finally, Would you hire this candidate at your university?

For the walk-on-water candidate, there was no effect of gender labeling on these judgments. I think this finding supports Steve's view that we're dealing with little overt discrimination at universities. It's not as if professors see a female name on a vita and think, I don't want her. When the vita's great, everybody says great, let's hire.

What about the average successful vita, though: that is to say, the kind of vita that professors most often must evaluate? In that case, there were differences. The male was rated as having higher research productivity. These psychologists, Steve's and my colleagues, looked at the same number of publications and thought, "good productivity" when the name was male, and "less good productivity" when the name was female. Same thing for teaching experience. The very same list of courses was seen as good teaching experience when the name was male, and less good teaching experience when the name was female. In answer to the question would they hire the candidate, 70% said yes for the male, 45% for the female. If the decision were made by majority rule, the male would get hired and the female would not.

A couple other interesting things came out of this study. The effects were every bit as strong among the female respondents as among the male respondents. Men are not the culprits here. There were effects at the tenure level as well. At the tenure level, professors evaluated a very strong candidate, and almost everyone said this looked like a good case for tenure. But people were invited to express their reservations, and they came up with some very reasonable doubts. For example, "This person looks very strong, but before I agree to give her tenure I would need to know, was this her own work or the work of her adviser?" Now that's a perfectly reasonable question to ask. But what ought to give us pause is that those kinds of reservations were expressed four times more often when the name was female than when the name was male"
Edge: THE SCIENCE OF GENDER AND SCIENCE

I'm glad that someone is saying something.....someone in a position of authority, who has the power to reach a large audience....although, it starts with one.

Yea, he's a real gem.