SEXUAL ISSUES IN CLINICAL PRACTICE FORUM ARCHIVE
Return to the active forum
Re: First Things First
Musing Anonymous · 6/24/99 at 7:13 pm ET
Above you wrote on 6/24/99:
"I am not debating the state of mankind or this planet; or am I arguing that all human (heterosexual) behavior is "good" for our species or our planet."
Earlier on 6/7/99, you wrote (sans capitalizations):
"And the question [of what causes non-heterosexual psychology in a small proportion of the population] is not just limited to homosexuality, but includes bisexuality, transexuality, transgender identification, pedophilia, beastiality, and others. Clearly, such sexual "preferences", however expressed, have little to do with biology beyond some low level personality characteristics, and the QUESTIONS TO BE DISCUSSED SHOULD BE about what mix of personality (or personality traits) and environment lead to choices of sexual behavior and orientation that are in
BIOLOGICAL OPPOSITION TO NATURAL SELECTION."
In reply to you above message of 6/24/99, I concede that of course I cannot prove that one kind of sexual behavior or another is in opposition to or in favor of natural selection. My point was that an argument can be made that relatively higher frequencies of non-heterosexual as compared to heterosexual behavior, conducive to lowered rates of reproduction, MAY favor natural selection; accordingly heterosexual behavior rather than homosexual behavior COULD BE viewed as opposed to natural selection at least in times of overpoplulation, pollution, and impeding likely dire resource depletions.
So, I ask you, on what grounds do you imply above that we CAN KNOW what behaviors do and what behaviors do not oppose natural selection? We would have to know that first, in order to then have the kind of conversation you assert we should be having--about the mix of personality and environment leading to the most desired behavior that does NOT oppose natural selection.
First things first: I think once we can establish what sexual behaviors do or do not oppose natural selection we can have discussions about the kinds of questions you believe SHOULD be occurring, conversations about what mix of personality and environment would lead to favorable behaviors (those not opposing natural selection). I agree with the suggestion behind your dare that I prove that homosexulity (or any other form of sexual behavior) favors (or, for that matter, opposes) natural selection. That is, I agree that I cannot prove what behaviors oppose or favor natural selection. Time will prove that.
So now I ask you: Can you prove that, given the times we live in (with overpolulation, resource depletion, and pollution) that relatively higher rates of preference for heterosexuality FAVORS natural selection and thereby CANNOT act "in biological opposition to natural selection"?
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.
