The Gay Rights Movement - News and Views

[Starfire]

Desmond Morrison ( Anthropologist ) in the ' Naked Ape ' says "Any form of sexual activity which does not inhibit the ability to procreate, is biologically acceptable"

[fluffybiscuits]

Desmond Morrison ( Anthropologist ) in the ' Naked Ape ' says "Any form of sexual activity which does not inhibit the ability to procreate, is biologically acceptable"

So essentially sex for reasons other than enjoyment is not acceptable ?

[Griska]

So essentially sex for reasons other than enjoyment is not acceptable ?

The Naked Ape was written by Desmond Morris.
And the line used by Starfire suggests that same sex activity is biologically unacceptable.
This, of course, is nonsense.
One word: ORGASM.

[fluffybiscuits]

The Naked Ape was written by Desmond Morris.
And the line used by Starfire suggests that same sex activity is biologically unacceptable.
This, of course, is nonsense.
One word: ORGASM.

I have just ordered a copy off Amazon out of pure interest. Will report back from my findings!

[morticia]

I have just ordered a copy off Amazon out of pure interest. Will report back from my findings!

There's a difference between "biologically acceptable" and acceptable in other ways

What he probably means is that any form of sexual activity that inhibits your ability to procreate might be subject to natural selection against this form of activity.

I.E., if you are strongly gay or lesbian, your chances of having children may be lower than those of others, so your genes may not be passed on.

This assumes that orientation is genetically determined (far from proven).

It also assumes that there isn't counter-selection....i.e. any hypothetical gene that may predispose to female homosexuality might, if inherited by men, make them hyper-masculine and therefore more attractive..... so a lesbian sister may not have kids, but the brother has been married 3 times and has 5....etc, and vice versa.

The Naked Ape was also written in the 1970s or 80s, and, while avant garde by the standards of the day, may not be entirely up to date with modern theory (most of which, on this topic, is somewhat unproven still)

Conclusion; don't worry about it..... and anyway, we live on an overpopulated planet, so not having kids may be a good thing?

[fluffybiscuits]

There's a difference between "biologically acceptable" and acceptable in other ways

What he probably means is that any form of sexual activity that inhibits your ability to procreate might be subject to natural selection against this form of activity.

I.E., if you are strongly gay or lesbian, your chances of having children may be lower than those of others, so your genes may not be passed on.

This assumes that orientation is genetically determined (far from proven).

It also assumes that there isn't counter-selection....i.e. any hypothetical gene that may predispose to female homosexuality might, if inherited by men, make them hyper-masculine and therefore more attractive..... so a lesbian sister may not have kids, but the brother has been married 3 times and has 5....etc, and vice versa.

The Naked Ape was also written in the 1970s or 80s, and, while avant garde by the standards of the day, may not be entirely up to date with modern theory (most of which, on this topic, is somewhat unproven still)

Conclusion; don't worry about it..... and anyway, we live on an overpopulated planet, so not having kids may be a good thing?

A lot of what it discusses may not be up to date but it does propose some interesting ideas! It would make sense if there was a gay gene so they dont have children however as a nuclear family unit can still take care of children whom may need to be adopted. From the evidence that is out there it looks like there is a lot of evidence that does show that homosexuality is genetic

On another topic look at the news on the gay blood donor ban

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/09/08...l-unjustified/

As per usual Peter Tatchell though being a big queen about things...

[Starfire]

The thrust of Morison's argument is that sexual practice which does not cause biological damage
is acceptable. Morticia's point is valid if viewed as a species factor but not a behavioural one.

[morticia]

On another topic look at the news on the gay blood donor ban

Yes, it was a groundbreaking book in its day.

What do you think about the UK "you have to be celibate for 12 months to qualify as a gay blood donor" thingy?

Not sure about it meself, how can you prove people are telling the truth? Bit like the whole confessional reporting of child abuse debate....

Anyway, would be interested to know what people think? It is supposed to take 3 months for the AIDS virus to show up in blood tests after infection, not 12...

[Griska]

Yes, it was a groundbreaking book in its day.

What do you think about the UK "you have to be celibate for 12 months to qualify as a gay blood donor" thingy?

Not sure about it meself, how can you prove people are telling the truth? Bit like the whole confessional reporting of child abuse debate....

Anyway, would be interested to know what people think? It is supposed to take 3 months for the AIDS virus to show up in blood tests after infection, not 12...

Why on earth would somebody who has tested negative for HIV/Aids be refused?
Doesn't make any sense to me.

[morticia]

Why on earth would somebody who has tested negative for HIV/Aids be refused?
Doesn't make any sense to me.

The problem is with the vagaries of the Aids test. Looking for the virus itself can be difficult; it is a retrovirus, which means it inserts its genetic material into that of the cell before either remaining latent for a while, or churning out copies of itself. The cells into which it inserts are CD4+ T cells, if I remember correctly; many of these circulate in the blood stream (obvious problem re donations is that if even one of these HIV+ cells is donated, that person is infected).

The initial period after HIV infection is often asymptomatic, but sometimes is accompanied with unexplained fevers/flu like symptoms that can last a month; signs of the immune system trying to fight the invader. After 3 months, antibodies to HIV appear in the blood, these are what are normally detected by standard AIDS tests. However, the latency period (that between infection and the appearance of antibodies) can vary from individual to individual. One must never forget, also, that T cells help the antibody manufacturing B cells to produce antibody, by "showing them" foreign matter that they can then target. These helper T cells are the very cells that are subverted and infected by HIV, making antibody production a less sure thing than under normal circumstances.

Theoretically, someone who has been partner/IV drug abuse free for a year and has a negative AIDS test should be fine. But you are relying entirely on their word that they didn't have a moment of condom free madness 2 months ago and might be harbouring an as yet sero-negative HIV infection.......

That's the bit I'm not sure I'm happy with.....I have trust issues.

[fluffybiscuits]

Yes, it was a groundbreaking book in its day.

What do you think about the UK "you have to be celibate for 12 months to qualify as a gay blood donor" thingy?

Not sure about it meself, how can you prove people are telling the truth? Bit like the whole confessional reporting of child abuse debate....

Anyway, would be interested to know what people think? It is supposed to take 3 months for the AIDS virus to show up in blood tests after infection, not 12...

The two reasons I heard against the removal of the blood donor ban was that gay men are more promiscous than hetrosexual men and that the HIV test can return false negatives in a lot of cases and where this has a three month window to show up on the test it could mean that someone could potentially be infected if they are sexually active in between getting a test and giving blood. It's discrimination based on studies from the 80's which showed that gay men were promiscous but looking at behaviroual patterns now of people they would have to bring in a straight blood donor ban. They way I view it is , HIV is a diseases across humanity and afflicts everyone and anyone regardless but this doesnt seem to be the view taken by other agencies. Besides they ask people to volunteer the information when donating blood here. Its pure and utter insanity....

[fluffybiscuits]

The Republicans in the US know how to make friends

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/09/10...an-terrorists/

Ahead of the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Republican member of the Oklahoma House of Representatives Sally Kern has renewed her claim that homosexuality has killed more people in the United States than terrorism.

[fluffybiscuits]

lol at this

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011...gay-characters

[fluffybiscuits]

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2011/09/14...tes-reactions/

This has caused a bit of stir. The child in question is getting bullied by adults in the school after being diagnosed with GID

[Griska]

Ahead of the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Republican member of the Oklahoma House of Representatives Sally Kern has renewed her claim that homosexuality has killed more people in the United States than terrorism.

Oh dear.
Is she advocating the bombing of San Francisco?