I'm eating popcorn :)
Printable View
I'm eating popcorn :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by schoolbusdriver
Some might say that this would be the acid test. I would be interested to see if children brought up in gay households were disposed to pursue gay relationships, or whether their "instincts" would come to the fore. I think this one is actually too close to call - I can see it going either way.
Regardless of what you think of such behaviour, ultimately what two consenting adults choose to do between themselves is up to them, as long as they don't involve me in it. That applies to all styles of sexuality. When it comes to kids, that isn't in the same league and you all know it. Abusing minors, often those for whom you have some responsibility, sometimes those too young to talk, is not even remotely the same.
I can understand people not wanting to think that something as important to them as their choice of partner might be down to "a state of mind", particularly one brought on by chemicals, but at the end of the day much of what we do is a state of mind in one form or another. Besides, we spent our first 9 months in an environment specifically designed to influence us with the right concentrations of chemicals and hormones at the right time to produce a particular output.
Accept that ultimately, what matters is that you have one life and you have the responsibility to live it in the way that you choose, and accept that along the way there are always going to be people who try to bring you down, and you'll be well on the road to making as much sense as we can of this ship of fools.
She's a dudette, dude.Quote:
Originally Posted by System_Error
MD: What you are saying is neither junk, nor necessarily wrong (though nobody yet knows whether it is right). My point was that we know there are chemicals being found in increasing numbers in our environment (mostly water we drink, but I wouldn't rule out other sources, like the food supply), which are functionally similar to hormones. What effect this is having, or will have is unknown. You could be right about the increase in homosexuality, but I'm not ready to say that it couldn't also come from a co-dependent variable.
As for fish, however, they may not be the finest indicator of anything, as there are a few species (look up wrasses....but don't yell "Nice Wrass" at them, you might get slapped) which can change gender as necessary to maximize reproductive potential....hmmm....NoteMe once posted that he did that, too.
SchoolBusDriver: I don't really know the stats on whether the per capita rate of adopted kids being odd when the parents are homo- or hetero- sexual. The only stats I have heard have to do with how emotionally close the different couples are, and homo averages well above hetero in the studies I have seen. Since having a pair of loving parents seems important to creating a well adjusted kid, that seems pretty good, but having parents well outside the norm seems a bit bad. Therefore, I'd want to see some hard data on the subject, as the weight of evidence appears balanced.
By the way, what's the ageist thing? Am I shielding something?
If you mean my asking System Error whether or not he was a teenager, the reason was simply that he sounds like I used to when I was a teenager. There was a right and wrong and damn all people who didn't know that. I wrote down a bunch of that crap, but fortunately, I didn't show anybody, and was able to quietly burn it once I got into my twenties (which was a long time ago, by the way). The only thing I feel so strongly about anymore is that we should try to improve. I won't say that we should try to be good, because there are very few absolutes in that regard, but we can always be better than we currently are, and should strive to be so. Which leads me to:
System Error: Why do you think your opinion, and the opinions of others here have such little value? We are real people, who affect the lives of many other real people around us. Any time we get the opportunity to realize that our own perceptions are not the only ones, we have an opportunity to expand our understanding.
One study of terrorists and fundamentalists showed that they tend to see themselves in a very narrow way. Most of us wear many hats in the course of our days. We see ourselves as parts of many groups. For example, I'm a biologist, law enforcement, programmer, robot builder, extreme hiker, caver, party prankster, etc. As part of the last one, it is my nature to find ways to get nasty pictures secretly onto peoples cameras. However, that would hardly be appropriate when I am working on a robot (biologists deal with nasty photos routinely, so that one is neither here nor there). Fundamentalists identify themselves with only one group....others with the same fundamentalist beliefs. This gives rise to some forms of terrorism, religious extremeism, some communists, nazis, etc.
Therefore, your views here are neither entirely right, nor entirely wrong, but the key is that you recognize that there are other people with other beliefs. Dismissing all other views out of hand will work for a time, but ultimately you either become a bit more open minded, or you end up strapping on a bomb (literally or metaphorically).
As for the bizarre reading of exploration, I can only assume you are joking. I read over that a couple of times, and while both the concept of homosexuality, and the name Columbus did exist in the same post, there's no rational way that I can see how you could connect the two. After all, I mentioned Columbus and the spherical nature of the world as an example of information which was lost when the sum knowledge in the Eurpoean world decreased during the dark ages. It had nothing to do with homosexuality, but only with the imperative that nobody supress the quest for knowledge simply because one group or another wants to keep people from asking questions.
I thought that was JR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
It couldn't have been JR, because I shot him.Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
By "junk" science I mean I have no conclusive scientific data to support my theory. One of the largest sources for these hormones in the water comes from farm runoff. Cows-chickens..... are given these hormones, they urinate and it ends up in the local water supply. People eat the cows chickens, they urinate and it ends up in us and in the local water supply. Vegitable farmers use manure from the tainted cows and it ends up in the vegetables ect ect... Bottom line, ultimatly it all ends up in our bodies. and is being recycled through us over and over again in increasing quantities. Don't even get me started on the antibiotics that are piggybacking along as well making bacteria and the like stronger and stronger faster. Next thing you know humans are all going to be running around in black leather assless chaps with a cold. What a bright future. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Yes but that is a normal occurance in that species and it may well be normal for the wrass species as well :lol: It is not even close to normal in Small Mouth Bass or rainbow trout.Quote:
As for fish, however, they may not be the finest indicator of anything, as there are a few species (look up wrasses....but don't yell "Nice Wrass" at them, you might get slapped) which can change gender as necessary to maximize reproductive potential....hmmm....NoteMe once posted that he did that, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
Actually, I had written JR in there first, but then I remember a thread from NoteMe from a couple years back when he mentioned a party strategy along the lines of:
"If I don't get some female action within x amount of time, I turn gay."
I thought it was a pretty funny comment. He was basically saying that he tried all the women at a party, and if none of them were interested, he started in on the men. Noteme is a party type of animal.
MB: Amen brother! Preach it! (can't believe I'm saying that to you, but the antibiotics bit will be the death of us all).
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
Some people think that the increases in precocious puberty (some girls are starting to menstruate as early as 6-7 years old) and breast cancer are coming from the vast amounts of hormones given to livestock in the western world. We're certainly not doing ourselves any favors by giving them prophylactic antibiotics; all we're doing is creating resistant bugs.
Breast cancer maybe, but I think the precocial development has other causes. I would expect that early development is a result of a rich diet during early growth....oddly, that is also true in salmonids, however, leaving lights on at night seems to increase precocity in steelhead, while I don't think that's the case in humans.
I'm not a biologist, but I would assume that not exposing children to artificial hormones is healthier than exposing them to artificial hormones, right? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
That's the problem, the Biologists don't even know. The majority of the water treatment facilities do not test for these substances so no one knows how much we're ingesting in the first place, let alone what it is doing to us and espically our kids. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by disruptivehair
Yes, but part of that rich diet is artificial hormones. I have read studies regarding steriods in the food supply adding to the overall size of children. 40 years ago 6'6' 350 pound guys built like a brick sheithouse were a rarity. No true any more. I don't see why the reason for accelared growth of pre to adolecent males would skip females.Quote:
but I think the precocial development has other causes. I would expect that early development is a result of a rich diet during early growth....oddly, that is also true in salmonids, however, leaving lights on at night seems to increase precocity in steelhead, while I don't think that's the case in humans.
Right on all counts. We really don't know what those hormones will do, or even whether or not they CAN do anything (proteins ingested orally tend to be digested). This issue has only really been identified recently (in scientific terms), and hasn't been well studied.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
Rich food alone can account for early development and large size. It is not necessary to add hormones, steriods, etc.....but it might help.
True, but we've switched to organic meats and dairy products to try to avoid exposure to the hormones and antibiotics used to raise them. Better safe than sorry I say. :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterBlaster
It wouldn't, I just think it would affect them differently. I've read that high-fat diets can alter your hormone balance anyway...if someone has a lot of adipose tissue doesn't that stimulate estrogen production? Hence manboobs...Quote:
Yes, but part of that rich diet is artificial hormones. I have read studies regarding steriods in the food supply adding to the overall size of children. 40 years ago 6'6' 350 pound guys built like a brick sheithouse were a rarity. No true any more. I don't see why the reason for accelared growth of pre to adolecent males would skip females.
I always thought manboobs were just one example of the variations between how fat is laid down on different people.
Mebbe, but men who have a lot of fat on their bodies make more estrogen which promotes breast growth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Well they aren't really the same shape, or men with them would never leave the house because they'd be too preoccupied.