Oops, 7 Days. Hey look I don't update on weekends.

CATCH your child's homosexuality...BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.

Every time, I think American society can not sink further down, I get another stunning evidence of its sinking nature. The assholes in this organization are teaching parents to detect homosexuality. Here's the story:

http://www.focusonyourchild.com/develop/art1/A0000684.html

I am really sorry for folks raising their little ones in this fucked-up country
Permalink Dan Denman 
August 21st, 2005
Check this out:

National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality
16633 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1340
Encino, CA 91436
Phone: 818-789-4440


You have research centres in your country to treat homosexuality?

Will the real Adolf Hitler please stand up.
Permalink Dan Denman 
August 21st, 2005
How about phoning and harrasing the shit out of them?
Permalink Dan Denman 
August 21st, 2005
How about ringing them up and propositioning them?
Permalink Stephen Jones 
August 21st, 2005
Yeah love that. I am planning to phone them all Monday.
Permalink Dan Denman 
August 21st, 2005
"5. A susceptibility to be bullied by other boys, who may tease them unmercifully and call them “queer,” “fag” and “gay.”"

love this one. some poor kid gets roundly abused by his fellow school kids, which can happen regardless of whether its true or not *hell, even regardless of whether his fellow school kids think its true or not) and comes home to face the same shit from his parents.

is that site really on the level? it looks like it could actually be a *really* good gag...
Permalink Jesus H Christ 
August 21st, 2005
Meanwhile, science has discovered biological differences between homo- and heterosexual animals.

So, the result of their endevours will probably not be that the child becomes hetero, but a repressed homo who will be angry at everything and everyone and end up taking out his home town a ak47.
Permalink Eric Debois 
August 21st, 2005
"Meanwhile, science has discovered biological differences between homo- and heterosexual animals."

Do you have sources on this?
Permalink KC 
August 21st, 2005
"CATCH your child's homosexuality...BEFORE A PRIEST DOES."
Permalink Tayssir John Gabbour 
August 21st, 2005
KC >> I heared it on the latest Skepticality podcast. I dont remember the details beyond that it had something to do with the hypothalamus.
Permalink Eric Debois 
August 21st, 2005
Oh, that's clever. I like it.
Permalink Aaron F Stanton 
August 21st, 2005
----" Meanwhile, science has discovered biological differences between homo- and heterosexual animals."-----

Has it really? Perhaps you could give us a few links.
Permalink Stephen Jones 
August 21st, 2005
Stephen, I already gave my source.
Permalink Eric Debois 
August 21st, 2005
Sexual differentiation of the brain
- Swaab, D.F. and E. Fliers - A sexually dimorphic nucleus in the human brain. Science 228, 1112-
1115, 1985.
- Swaab, D.F. and M.A. Hofman - An enlarged suprachiasmatic nucleus in homosexual men. Brain
Res. 537, 141-148, 1990.
- Zhou, J.N., Hofman, M.A., Gooren, L.J.G. and Swaab, D.F. - A sex difference in the human brain
and its relation to transsexuality. Nature 378: 68-70, 1995.
- Kruijver, F.P.M., Zhou, J.N., Pool, C.W., Hofman, M.A., Gooren, L.J.G., Swaab, D.F. - Male-tofemale
transsexuals have female neuron numbers in a limbic nucleus. J. Clin. Endocrinol.
Metabol. 85: 2034-2041, 2000. This paper was awarded the GIRES (Gender Identity Research
and Education Society) prize 2002.

http://www.nih.knaw.nl/Informa/Staff/Swaab-CV.pdf
Permalink Erik Springelkamp 
August 21st, 2005
"So, the result of their endevours will probably not be that the child becomes hetero, but a repressed homo who will be angry at everything and everyone and end up taking out his home town a ak47."

My mother "caught" my tendencies toward homosexuality when I was about 8 years old. Let's just say she turned me into a very closeted (feminine), very angry person by constantly chiding me for my boyishness, choosing my friends, and making me feel like a loser for not being like the other girls.

I do have fantasies about being serial killer, and no, I'm not hetero, I'm bi. I would not act on those feelings, however.
Permalink sharkfish 
August 21st, 2005
homosexuality is treatable, just as intelligence
Permalink Adalbert Blumenkohl 
August 21st, 2005
"I'm not hetero, I'm bi."

All is forgiven. [g,d,r]

In all seriousness, it must've been awful for you to grow up thinking something was wrong with you. My daughter is left-handed, but my wife isn't - because it was beaten out of her by nuns in catholic school.

We do our best to encourage our daughters to be who they are and not to place their self-worth in anyone else's hands.

Philo
Permalink Philo 
August 21st, 2005
<weak-latin-joke>
Left handed people are just plain sinister...
</weak-latin-joke>
Permalink Mat Hall 
August 21st, 2005
"I heared it on the latest Skepticality podcast. I dont remember the details beyond that it had something to do with the hypothalamus."

Wow. You have me convinced Eric.

Erik (notice the "k", not the "c"), any sources that I can read or should I go talk to my local research librarian?


When someone asserts something as fact, it is up to them to support their point.
Permalink KC 
August 21st, 2005
Unfortunately, NARTH is a real organization. I find it only slightly less sickening than NAMBLA. Both organizations promote fucking with children in order to make adults feel better about themselves, and ignore the effects the fucking has on the children.
Permalink A JOS regular 
August 21st, 2005
KC, confrontational much? I am not trying to convince you or anyone else. I am not sure I am convinced myself. I was not arguing, merely supplying a perspective.
Permalink Eric Debois 
August 21st, 2005
I should elaborate on that. I do believe the studies that say that there are differences in gay animals. I am just not sure it applies to humans. Still, I was just making conversation.
Permalink Eric Debois 
August 21st, 2005
oh, just stubled upon an article that talks about the same study they talked about on skepticality:

http://uk.gay.com/headlines/8903
Permalink Eric Debois 
August 21st, 2005
"KC, confrontational much? I am not trying to convince you or anyone else. I am not sure I am convinced myself. I was not arguing, merely supplying a perspective."

I'm just tired of the whole "Well, I read this article once... PROOF PROOF!" I think it's corrupting the way we think about science.


Assuming that a genetic predisposition to homosexuality exists, Darwin would probably point out that there must be a reason for this... such as to remove particular traits from the genetic pool.
Permalink KC 
August 21st, 2005
"such as to remove particular traits from the genetic pool."

PROOF PROOF!
Permalink sharkfish 
August 21st, 2005
KC - WTF are you smoking? Eric *never* said that he had "proof."
Permalink MarkTAW 
August 21st, 2005
Oh, your post was admitting a knee-jerk reaction to Eric's statement. My bad.

FWIW, I'm sure scientists could discover differences between drivers & non drivers. Heck, they're constantly discovering differences between identical twins. They could discover differences between people who ate meat all their life and people who only eat vegetables. But I don't think it would prove a predisposition.
Permalink MarkTAW 
August 21st, 2005
"homosexuality is treatable, just as intelligence" Adalbert Blumenkohl

I can also confirm that heterosexuality is equally "treatable" and patients respond exteremely well to my therapy.

My conversion rate has been extremely high. Sometimes I've found that extra sessions are required to complete the process :-)
Permalink AndyUK 
August 21st, 2005
WILL: You've gotta be kidding me. The photographer's late. Four people who RSVP'd "no" just arrived with dates. And the cake shows up with two grooms on it. Is the whole city gay?

JACK: Not yet. [WITH ENGLISH ACCENT] But if all goes as planned, come Monday morning... [WRINGS HIS HANDS WITH AN EVIL LAUGH] Mwah-ha-ha-ha!

- http://www.twiztv.com/scripts/willandgrace/season5/willandgrace-508.htm
Permalink MarkTAW 
August 21st, 2005
Whip those queer faggots into the Godly heterosexuals they are supposed to be! Show them no mercy!!
Permalink Anon 
August 22nd, 2005
Just a sharpener.

Homosexuality is evidently a trait that is neither necessary nor inimical to survival it is evolutionarily neutral. Gays can have children entirely successfully and always have had.

If anything gays are having fewer offspring now than in the past when being gay had to be a secret and a public heterosexual life (with children) was required.
Permalink Simon Lucy 
August 22nd, 2005
"Homosexuality is evidently a trait that is neither necessary nor inimical to survival it is evolutionarily neutral. Gays can have children entirely successfully and always have had."

Yes, just like bald people wear toupee's (sp?).

Homosexuality would make a creature - human or otherwise - less likely to breed and therefore pass on its genes.

Here's my logic countering your first point:
* AIDS is a survival-limiting disease.
* From most studies, anywhere from 1-10% of the general population is homosexual.
* Approximately 66+% of new AIDS cases happen in the homosexual - mostly male - community.

Therefore, 66+% occurances of AIDS transmission happens in a community making up less than 10% of the population.

While homosexuality in itself is probably not a threat to survival, there seem to be conditions, behaviors, etc within this community making it more likely die early.

Source: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/2003SurveillanceReport/table8.htm
Permalink KC 
August 22nd, 2005
"* Approximately 66+% of new AIDS cases happen in the homosexual - mostly male - community."

Within the US. You may find that not to be the case outside the US.
Permalink Aaron F Stanton 
August 22nd, 2005
++But I don't think it would prove a predisposition.

I think I know why you'd say that. There's one study I've heard of that convinces me of physiological differences. In it, they monitored the size of brain parts from birth. With inexplicable consistency, there was one part in the brain that was smaller for homosexuals.

Now whether it is just genetics, or something in the womb, or what, who knows. But it does seem to be something different.
Permalink I am Jack's psychopathic psalm 
August 22nd, 2005
Scientists have isolated the gay gene. It has a slightly pinkish hue, a meticulously frilly perimeter and a faint, but distinctive perfume like odor.
Permalink Colm O'Connor 
August 22nd, 2005
Oh here we go again. Firstly there's an implicit assumption that heterosexuality has an implicit single "cause". In reality the vast majority of people are bisexual with only the outliers being purely hetero and homo. Whilst nature may have some role cultural norms have a very strong role. You wouldn't believe the guilt some people have going against these.

There's also an implicit assumption that sexuality is fixed for an individual. Many, many people change their preferences. Which is one of the reasons many people are "gay" parents.

It's always amusing to see the confusion between male homosexuality and effeminacy. Whilst this may apply in some cases it again seems to apply to a minority in my experience; perhaps these are the outliers at the homo end of the spectrum.

Also there's an implicit assumption that homosexuals don't want to breed. There are many who do. To top it all KCs confusion of genetics and hiv to refute Simon' s point is a corker of poor critical thinking.
Permalink andyuk 
August 22nd, 2005
Old Navy joke:
A Master Chief Petty Officer was retiring after 35 years of service. The fleet's admiral was presiding over his retirement ceremony, with hundreds of Navy and civilians in attendance. After much pomp and circumstance, long speeches, etc, it came time for the Master Chief's retirement speech.

He walked up to the podium, waited for the crowd to quiet down, and said "Thank you for the kind words, Admiral. All I know is that when this is over, I'm going to smoke a joint and suck a cock, and if I like either of them I'm going to be REALLY pissed off."

Philo
Permalink Philo 
August 22nd, 2005
++In reality the vast majority of people are bisexual

I find that very hard to believe, much less substantiate.

The vast majority of people may be able to appreciate appearance within their own sex, but I really doubt the vast majority wants some kind of sexual pleasure out of their own sex.
Permalink I am Jack's apparent appearance appreciation 
August 22nd, 2005
I suspect he means that absent the overwhelming social taboos that HOMOSEXUALITY IS EEEEVIL, most people wouldn't care.

Look at the current prevalence of girls kissing girls, now that it's socially acceptable. (totally anecdotal, but pretty large sample size)

And also recognize the range of "bisexual" - from "doesn't mind kissing members of the same sex" through "would fool around with member of the same sex if there wasn't anyone else around" to "dates personalities, not bodies" etc.

Philo
Permalink Philo 
August 22nd, 2005
Maybe I'm more homophobic than I like to admit or just one of the fringe heteros.

I maintain that the 'explosion' of girls kissing girls has almost nothing to do with sexuality. It's link to sexuality is not to that of the participants but to the observers. The participants are just 'showing off' because it is socially acceptable to do so. If it were something I thought would be entertaining for my companions to witness I'd probably smooch one of my buds....

I see the range... but I still think that is only stretching the definitions of sexuality, not evidence of sexuality being a stretch. Solely kissing someone is not a sexual act. Several cultures kiss same sex and opposites and it is not sexual at all.
Permalink I am Jack's apparent appearance appreciation 
August 22nd, 2005
"Several cultures kiss same sex and opposites and it is not sexual at all."

I often see this comment made, so I gotta ask - in what culture do men (or women, for that matter) openly and publicly french kiss?

Philo
Permalink Philo 
August 22nd, 2005
>Maybe I'm more homophobic than I like to admit or just one >of the fringe heteros

Lab experiments have that there is a strong correlation between the expressed degree of homphobia and the degree of arousal "heterosexual" men show when shown gay porn. My point is that culturally ingrained homophobia runs deep in the mind.

In case you think I'm biased I should say I'm 50/50 bi and equally encourage those who identify as gay only to try a bit of both. Memorably I had quite a bit of success at a lesbian orgy.

Oh I've gone all shy now.
Permalink andyuk 
August 22nd, 2005
"Memorably I had quite a bit of success at a lesbian orgy."

Last night on Just Shoot Me was the second best episode of all time - "Two Girls for Every Guy" where Dennis tries to get Maya to sleep with a model. Every nuance of the "guys want to watch women have sex" meme was perfectly in place, including the "and women will always use this to torture men" part.

Philo
Permalink Philo 
August 22nd, 2005
Philo, you did not say french kiss, and the comment was in reference to the 'range'.

Does the range start at french kissing?

Is the girl on girl kissing epidemic truly indicative of girls exploring sexuality because of a subsiding cultural taboo?

Further derailment, I was amazed to just be in a programmer's office and see Joel's book on his desk. I hadn't realized Joel was so popular for such a coincidence.
Permalink I am Jack's French foil 
August 22nd, 2005
Sorry, I did mean to refer to french kissing. Yes, same-gendered persons have kissed as an expression of friendship for a long time.

I was referring to the current trend of girls making out with girls (usually to torment men, but a lot of it seems to also be casually sexual):
http://www.clublez.com/movies/a_world_of_girls_kissing/index.html (uh, NSFW)

AFAICT, the women of GenZ are far more bisexual than previous generations.

Philo
Permalink Philo 
August 22nd, 2005
"Lab experiments have that there is a strong correlation between the expressed degree of homphobia and the degree of arousal "heterosexual" men show when shown gay porn. My point is that culturally ingrained homophobia runs deep in the mind."

Oh you have got to post a link! I would love to freak out some of the open haters I know personally.
Permalink sharkfish 
August 22nd, 2005
"Assuming that a genetic predisposition to homosexuality exists, Darwin would probably point out that there must be a reason for this... such as to remove particular traits from the genetic pool."

I think this turns around the Darwinian theory. Darwin doesn't say there's a purpose for every difference. Merely that some differences are more prone to survive than others. Thinking "Mother Nature" has a reason and a purpose for every difference is a common mis-application of evolutionary theory.

I note they quote that great Psychologist Charles Dobson, while leaving out that he's the host of Focus On The Family, and the most recent advocate of excommunicating anybody who is Pro-Choice.

About the argument: I can accept that some people are hard-wired for attraction to one sex or the other. But being gay doesn't make you infertile, as has been pointed out. It does cut down on those activities and life choices that would lead to kids, though.

As I see it, our culture is currently involved in a great experiment -- to see if same sex committed relationships really can exist for a lifetime. Part of that is determining if different sex committed relationships really can exist for a lifetime -- currently our track record isn't too good.

Now there's a LOT of resistance to allowing same sex marriage -- so if those committed relationships can exist, even in the face of this resistance, I think that says something about those relationships.
Permalink AllanL5 
August 22nd, 2005
"As I see it, our culture is currently involved in a great experiment -- to see if same sex committed relationships really can exist for a lifetime. "


That's been proven already. There are documented cases of lifetime same-sex relationships.
Permalink sharkfish 
August 22nd, 2005
The study was by Henry Adams and documented in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology in 1996.

A summary is

http://www.rtis.com/reg/bcs/pol/touchstone/november96/muehlen.htm

I had an interesting conversation with a man about 30 who had never thought he would enjoy sex with men. He was married but had a threesome with another couple. During this the woman insisted that if they were to go any further he should perform oral sex on her husband - although he said he didn't want to since he found the idea repulsive though he wanted to go further with the woman so he did it. He said that it was such a moment of epiphany he wasn't really bothered about the woman after that!
Permalink andyuk 
August 22nd, 2005
Thanks andyuk.
Permalink sharkfish 
August 23rd, 2005
It's amazing what you learn on JOS
Permalink Jonathan 
August 28th, 2005

This topic was orginally posted to the off-topic forum of the
Joel on Software discussion board.

Other topics: August, 2005 Other topics: August, 2005 Recent topics Recent topics