I'm making the assumption that for heterosexuals sexuality is more significantly related to the X and Y chromsomes. XX = have sex with men, XY = have sex with women. Whereas with homosexuality there seems to be a larger set of possible causes. (I've just debated this, rather hotly, with my partner so maybe i'm overlooking something).
Okay, I'd disagree with that, but I think we can do that civilly. I see sexuality as one thing, one trait. Like height, even though you still have 'short' and 'tall' (and of course 'middling'). The trouble I find with the idea that hetero and homo are completely different things is that it CAN lead to some pretty distasteful arguments. Like, being straight is something you are, but being gay is something you do, ergo you can just stop.
[REPLY: Emma, I've forwarded your question to Prof Fletcher. If/when I get a response I'll post it on this thread -- DH]
Cheer, David, I appreciate the effort.
Heterosexuality has, presumably, one main genetic cause, whereas homosexuality is most likely the result of a greater number of causes
I'm genuinely not sure what you mean by that, Neil. Sexuality is a continuum, not a binary state. No matter what end of the continuum you're on, the genetic cause is the same. It's like saying genes or womb environment have more influence over having red hair than brown.
But. I'd happily argue that social influences are much more complicated and influential when choosing a same-sex partner. I can argue this from personal experience (we bis have such a fabulous perspective on these things don't you know), but I'm aware how dangerous it is to base broad conclusions on a single example.
At the risk of getting the thread back on topic (or being an anthro-bore, which has been known to happen) I found this really interesting. I just have one, quite big, question.
The biological basis for couple attraction in heterosexual couples all looks very sound from an evolutionary viewpoint. But what happens in same-sex couples? Has Prof. Fletcher had homosexual couples in the study, and what happens? If you have two females in a couple, do they both look for what women look for in a partner, both look for what people look for in a female partner, or do you have one from each perspective?
[**REPLY**: Emma, I've forwarded your question to Prof Fletcher. If/when I get a response I'll post it on this thread -- DH]
well just once I'd like to post an image but: http://www.ravensbrew.com/images/kopiluwakmovie.gif
There, see, the civet looks happy. Or whacked out of its gourd on caffeine, or something. And the process is organic!
I think its important to remember what your mum told you: "If you can't say anything nice, then don't say anything".
My friend Oliver used to say "If you can't say anything nice, come and sit next to me". One of the traps, I think, is that panning something can make for awfully entertaining reading.
Russell: Can Karajoz get some for the next Great Blend?
Prince Charles has got some. Stephen Fry gave it to him as a wedding present. That's what you get the man who has everything.
Or his principle is that the Government shouldn't interfere in NZer's family lives.
Copeland? Really? Guess it depends on your definition of 'family'.
I think Emma's nailed it for best question.
I also once nailed an Investigate reporter...
But it's what I was thinking when I was watching the media scrum. I wasn't thinking about what they were asking at all, I was thinking that if I'd been in the middle of all that I'd have been screaming for air. Focused on the process, because processes interest me, and I'd rather deconstruct the media response than the actual story they're responding to. But Che is right, most good, thoughtful questions aren't suited for standing in a pack screaming, and neither are most good, thoughtful answers.
I didn't mind the 'how do you feel' questions in this case. It's when it's more like; "You've just found your daughter's bloodied corpse hacked to pieces in your living room HOW DO YOU FEEL?" That makes me sick.
one question before being shouted down by the others, what would you most want to know?
How much would you like everyone to take one big step backwards?
Has it struck anyone that many of the "we went to random parties and drank far too much and we're OK" comments are very similar to the "I was whacked with [fill in implement of your choice] as a kid and I'm OK" anecdotes?
I had thought that the point of the anecdotes was that
a)binge drinking among teens is not new, and
b)when we were kids the drinking age was twenty, yet I celebrated my 16th birthday in the Old Bank.
Oddly enough there aren't many mothers out there willing to share "I was f#cking like a bunny as a kid and I'm OK" anecdotes with their friends/daughters.
I have been asked how I'm going to bring down the moral authoritay on my kids considering my own teenage years. And okay, I don't have a plan, but I'm not going to tell them that having teenage sex is going to ruin their lives forever, because it's demonstrably not true.