Up Front: Newsflash: Women Have Eyes
195 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
that was controversial because it showed really clearly that gay people actually really were "attracted" to the same sex. That is, it wasn't just a "choice".
And that's controversial for whom? His Holiness?
-
Ah, but the first look doesn't tell the whole story.
Sure. Happy to agree with you about that second look and especially about the look that lingers after the third date. But of course that's all about pheromones :P.
-
And that's controversial for whom? His Holiness?
Hell yeah. The first studies were done in the netherlands and caused all sorts of crap to start flying in the Catholic community.
It undercut one of the major arguments against gay rights and so played a political role as well. If gays really were biologically different then it would be wrong to discriminate, however if it was "merely" a choice well then surely the government had a responsibility to "help" them rectify that er wrong choice. Which of course was bollocks and these studies made such arguments particularly easy to dismiss.
Which just meant even more silly arguments were raised - sigh.
-
If gays really were biologically different then it would be wrong to discriminate
Much as it shouldn't be, 'choice' is still an issue, and a major argument against equal rights in the US. It was obviously still a Big Deal for John Barrowman when he made the BBC documentary The Making of Me a couple of years back, which I cannot recommend highly enough
(part one of six)
-
Oh and just in case I'm coming across as all clinical and biological about this stuff - I think all these things we discover about attractiveness - ratios, symmetry and pheromones - are incredibly romantic. I love the fact that there are parts of me that are hard-wired to fall in love with my sweetheart. Or is that just geeky?
-
No, that's cool, I actually find Pinker's idea of "finding the best person who would settle for me" quite romantic myself.
-
If gays really were biologically different then it would be wrong to discriminate
I have always felt that is a very dangerous proposition to agree to. It is giving in to the fallacy that only what is "natural" is permissible.
Fundamentally it's an issue of civil rights. We cherish and protect freedom of conscience in all sorts of areas of life. Bluntly, why should where I put my penis be any different? Whether biology compels me or the whim takes me is irrelevant.
-
hard-wired
This is on a shortlist of Words I Hate Seeing in Any Internet Forum.
(Sorry Bart. I know you're not being one of those 'it is naaaaatural for me to spray my seeeeeeed far and wide, while you, timid loyal lady, stay at home nurturing my many behbehs!!!' dudes. But they all use 'hard-wired'. A lot.)
-
Okay, now see, that's hardly fair when in one's head Ares looks like this.
Man, bet you're upset that you missed the version of 'A Streetcar Named Desire' that my English class went to in 6th or 7th form. The bit where Kevin Smith, as Stanley, appeared on stage sans shirt recieved an ear-deafening greeting from the mostly teenaged-female audience.
Ouch, my ears.
Good actor, but. Killer abs too.
-
Man, bet you're upset that you missed the version of 'A Streetcar Named Desire' that my English class went to in 6th or 7th form.
Au contraire, dude, I was at that. My English teacher was a) an old friend of Kevin's from our local theatre group, and b) gay, so oddly enough our class made the trip up.
-
My apologies for even the merest suggestion that Megan is anything other than ravishing.
<blush>
I go away for four hours, and look what bloody happens. -
Oh, she's back...
< swoons >
-
Great timing...it probably looked a little more sinister, like I was lurking in teh shaddows, just waiting for you.
But not so. Just serendipitous timing.
-
Sorry Danielle.
I certainly wouldn't want to imply that biological imperatives are an excuse to do what is culturally or morally wrong and uncivilised.
There is pretty good evidence for some kind of biological drive to do some pretty horrible things. The mark of civilised folks is that they can do what is right even if it doesn't fit with what was good for us a million years ago.
-
Au contraire, dude, I was at that. My English teacher was a) an old friend of Kevin's from our local theatre group, and b) gay, so oddly enough our class made the trip up.
Shit, small world. You weren't in the group of girls that passed notes to the tall, long-haired guy suggesting he go goth? That was a bit creepy. I suspect I was too young for your attention, however.
-
I have always felt that is a very dangerous proposition to agree to. It is giving in to the fallacy that only what is "natural" is permissible.
I agree, as I bet does Danielle.
The point was the argument being tossed around was that it should be illegal because it was an "unnatural" choice, which it very clearly was not.
That we can decide to use our intelligence to do what is right even in cases where our biology might push us to do what is wrong is to me a pretty serious marker of civilisation.
-
Does that make peiople who are non-breeders by choice the epitome of civilisation?
(Heard it pronounced as 'epi-tome' by a newsreader this week - cracked up.)
-
Stewart: I have to admit that up until very recently, that's how I said it too. Such are the perils of knowing words from reading only.
(I also, as a child, believed that there was a verb "to misle", meaning "fool or deceive", which I inferred from what I thought was an obvious reading of "misled").
-
"Small world," Simon? You're not kidding!
Finding comments from Jack who I used to flat with while people pranked called the Minister of Police, on a blog post about the magazine published by a woman who I once played in a band with, it all points to the same honest truth - Wellington, indeed New Zealand, really is a very small place.
None of that suprises me about anything involving Suraya, though. Suraya's one of those people who, for one reason or another, are social hubs - one could play 'six degrees' with Suraya Singh as well as with Kevin Bacon.
And I wish her all the best with the magazine. Quiting one's job to launch not just a magazine, but a niche magazine, would scare the bejeebers out of me. But Suraya's done it, which is just... well, it's awesome.
Oh, and back to an older comment - I also don't find the word 'Filament' very erotic - I really did like one of the earlier names 'Spitfire' but I understand that was problematical. But, then, I'm not a heterosexual female.
'Moist' on the other hand, is pretty frisky.
-
You weren't in the group of girls that passed notes to the tall, long-haired guy suggesting he go goth?
Nah, we'd have been the group of girls that reeked of cigarette smoke.
-
Does that make people who are non-breeders by choice the epitome of civilisation?
Given you can trace almost all the environmental problems with the planet to "too many people" it's not far wrong.
It's also the subject of some good and some not-so-good science fiction exploring the social implications of changes in culture around breeders vs non-breeders or restricted-breeders.
-
Xeno,
Which Greek god, though? Aephestus was supposedly very ugly indeed (although, great buns according to the old Italian 50 Lire coin).
Oh dear. He looks like he's about to do something with that hammer that Warren Ellis would link to.
-
Oh dear. He looks like he's about to do something with that hammer that Warren Ellis would link to.
Something like this?
-
(I also, as a child, believed that there was a verb "to misle", meaning "fool or deceive", which I inferred from what I thought was an obvious reading of "misled").
Mine was "unched" tears, instead of the unshed ones I girlfully held back.
-
As I child, I mentally pronounced 'awry' as 'aw-ree'. That's what you get for reading ancient children's tomes about British boarding schools.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.