Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rilder]

What Rilder's trying to prove is just that people shouldn't get offended by a word, it's the meaning behind the word they should pay attention to.  Having someone else get offended because you routinely greet your friend with the line "Whassup nigger?" is indeed a bit silly, because you mean it as a friendly greeting, not an insult.  If someone were to use other, "neutral" words to illustrate a far more venomous meaning, then it's perfectly alright to get offended, because the guy is actually conveying animosity. 

Kind of a form of "don't judge a book by its cover".  I won't get offended if someone cheerfully walks up and says "how ya doin' ya honkey motherfucker?".  But then again, that might not be a good example, because I am ridiculously difficult to offend.  And I always try to listen to the meaning rather than the words, so words in and of themselves have an even lesser effect.

Exactly this, I apologize if I apparently tried to provoke something or destroy the civility of this thread (according to the warning I got) I'm not trying to do anything of the sort, I was just throwing my opinion out and my way of doing that is doing it in an overly blunt manner that more then often hurts my side of the argument then the other's.

[Fishersalwaysdie]

Does this hypothesis come with any, y'know... evidence?  Cause the gays have been around for a good long time, including plenty of places that didn't face overpopulation.  And homosexuality hasn't exactly skyrocketed in the places facing overpopulation pressures.

Well according to this thread there are certain studies on the subject, but unfortunately I haven't seen the actual works so I cannot really cite them or link to them.
Everything in nature happens with a reason, homosexuality is often seen amongst animals and probably isn't an anomaly, but a way to remove a number from the population without violence or danger to others..

[Faces of Mu]

Ick. The homosexuality=naturalselection argument. I don't think natural selection is very applicable with human beings these days given so many factors these days influence successful progeneration of the species, and genetics, genotypes and phenotypes are so more complex than this. This is another argument for another thread.

[mainiac]

If the term heteronormality won't due, couldn't a more appropriate term like it be found?

Heterocentricism?  Heteronormalism?

Does this hypothesis come with any, y'know... evidence?  Cause the gays have been around for a good long time, including plenty of places that didn't face overpopulation.  And homosexuality hasn't exactly skyrocketed in the places facing overpopulation pressures.

Well according to this thread there are certain studies on the subject, but unfortunately I haven't seen the actual works so I cannot really cite them or link to them.
Everything in nature happens with a reason, homosexuality is often seen amongst animals and probably isn't an anomaly, but a way to remove a number from the population without violence or danger to others..

From what little information there is available, I can tell you that study is unrelated to genetic overpopulation pressures.  That is a study in genetic bottlenecking.  Overpopulation is where the population is too large for the environment to survive.  This study intentionally removed overpopulation pressures.  Genetic bottlenecking is where a small population gives rise to a large population.  Over this process, the population magnifies pre-existing traits and is very susceptible to genetic drift (increase in the prevalence of traits due to random mating.)  Genetic drift can result in any genetic trait at all.

One could make a case that the information we have suggests that crowded populations will have a rise in bisexuals expressing their homosexual tendencies.  It wouldn't be proof, but it would be a sign that this avenue of research might be worthwhile.  But the theory that bisexuals respond to social pressures isn't exactly cutting edge.  You ever heard of a lesbian until graduation?  Not to mention that the social role of bisexuality has been extensively documented in many animal species, including primates.  The benefits for the larger population (which will also carry any genes leading to homosexuality and bisexuality) have also been documented.

Science doesn't work well if you haphazardly evaluate your results.  It also doesn't work if you set out with a result in mind... as far too many people do when they chose to "study" the matter with a political agenda.