Joshu (rh22384 at swt.edu) wrote:
>I submit that as long as our questions are so dichotomous, we will
>suffer under the delusion that we can be in complete control of the
>universe.
My questions are usually dichotomous, but I suffer under so no such
delusion.
>I doubt that the "either/or" categorization of homosexuals into
>"either" nurture "or" nature will serve any better function than to
>continue our delusion that we as humans are "either" heterosexual "or"
>homosexual.
Do you have any evidence to this hypothesis? Are you denying the
existance of a certain subset of humans that are "either" heterosexual
"or" homosexual? It is this subset we're interested in (for now).
>culture there is such a strong reaction formation to our universal
>homoerotic inclinations that, when we THINK about our condition, confined
>as it is within a Cartisian dualistic paradigm, our fear drives us to
>pigeon-hole sexual phenomena to some distant taboo island, where "either"
>"those" people are homosexual "or" not, "either" genetically determined
>"or" not, "either" free to choose "or" not, "either" oriented "or" not,
>"or" "either" preferenced "or" not.
Is this some sort of a Freudian analysis? I don't see where you get
the "fear" from. What would you say if such a dualistic question was
posted by a bisexual?
But really, I don't think any clear cut answer will come out of asking
"either" "or" in all cases. But I do think clear-cut answers, that
for a subset of a population describe such categorisation, are
possible.
--Ram
me at ram.org || http://www.ram.org || http://www.twisted-helices.com/th
Waiting for the revolution. Nuclear vision, genocide.
Computerise god, it's the new religion.
Program the brain, not the heart beat. ---Black Sabbath
