Here’s some interesting data on sexual orientation of sheep that, if it holds for humans as well, would seem to confirm my thesis (actually, a better exposition of it is found here):
A bare majority of rams turn out to be heterosexual. One in five swings both ways. About 15 percent are asexual, and 7 percent to 10 percent are gay.
That seems, to me, empirically to be about right for humans as well.
Does anyone here really believe that there are Freudian explanations for this among sheep? Well, I think the ones for humans are just as bogus.
And the potential consequences?
The more likely path is gentler. Science will gradually convince us that sexual orientation is innate, more like the color of your skin than like the content of your character. Condemnation of homosexuality as a sin will subside. Freed from the culture wars, we’ll turn to the biological differences between race and sexual orientation: Homosexuality defies the aspiration to procreate with your mate, and it’s easier to isolate and alter in embryonic development. Resentment will give way to pity. We’ll come to view homosexuality as a kind of infertility
Here’s some interesting data on sexual orientation of sheep that, if it holds for humans as well, would seem to confirm my thesis (actually, a better exposition of it is found here):
A bare majority of rams turn out to be heterosexual. One in five swings both ways. About 15 percent are asexual, and 7 percent to 10 percent are gay.
That seems, to me, empirically to be about right for humans as well.
Does anyone here really believe that there are Freudian explanations for this among sheep? Well, I think the ones for humans are just as bogus.
And the potential consequences?
The more likely path is gentler. Science will gradually convince us that sexual orientation is innate, more like the color of your skin than like the content of your character. Condemnation of homosexuality as a sin will subside. Freed from the culture wars, we’ll turn to the biological differences between race and sexual orientation: Homosexuality defies the aspiration to procreate with your mate, and it’s easier to isolate and alter in embryonic development. Resentment will give way to pity. We’ll come to view homosexuality as a kind of infertility
Here’s some interesting data on sexual orientation of sheep that, if it holds for humans as well, would seem to confirm my thesis (actually, a better exposition of it is found here):
A bare majority of rams turn out to be heterosexual. One in five swings both ways. About 15 percent are asexual, and 7 percent to 10 percent are gay.
That seems, to me, empirically to be about right for humans as well.
Does anyone here really believe that there are Freudian explanations for this among sheep? Well, I think the ones for humans are just as bogus.
And the potential consequences?
The more likely path is gentler. Science will gradually convince us that sexual orientation is innate, more like the color of your skin than like the content of your character. Condemnation of homosexuality as a sin will subside. Freed from the culture wars, we’ll turn to the biological differences between race and sexual orientation: Homosexuality defies the aspiration to procreate with your mate, and it’s easier to isolate and alter in embryonic development. Resentment will give way to pity. We’ll come to view homosexuality as a kind of infertility
2007 has barely started, and we already seem to have the first blog scandal of the 2008 election season. John Edwards hired a blogger for his campaign, named Amanda Marcotte. She seems to have some interesting opinions:
Christopher Hitchens isn’t very impressed with the New York Times theater critic’s latest blast at George Bush:
Now, “truthiness” is a laugh-word invented by Steven Colbert who (along with his friend Jon Stewart and the other heroes of Comedy Central) is the beau ideal of what Rich considers to be the ironic. In this book and in his regular column, he gives “truthiness” a workout whenever he can. He clearly wishes he had coined it himself, and he has kept it going for perhaps a touch longer
Christopher Hitchens isn’t very impressed with the New York Times theater critic’s latest blast at George Bush:
Now, “truthiness” is a laugh-word invented by Steven Colbert who (along with his friend Jon Stewart and the other heroes of Comedy Central) is the beau ideal of what Rich considers to be the ironic. In this book and in his regular column, he gives “truthiness” a workout whenever he can. He clearly wishes he had coined it himself, and he has kept it going for perhaps a touch longer