The Power of a Voice

One day, I will upload a clip of me reading the first paragraph of The Odyssey so you can judge.

I had a bunch of clips of me singing on here, but I don't know where they've all gone. I almost wanted to sing the songs in my thread about theme songs...but again...too much work.
 
I had a bunch of clips of me singing on here, but I don't know where they've all gone. I almost wanted to sing the songs in my thread about theme songs...but again...too much work.

Sing the doggerel! The tune is the "Major-General's Song" from Penzance.
 
Sing the doggerel! The tune is the "Major-General's Song" from Penzance.

I have no clue where my microphone is...but I can sing the song.

I can also do the patter song from "Barnum"

"Quite a lotta...Roman terra cotta...
Livin' lava from the flanks of Aetna...
Statuary, ride a dromedary!
See the temple tumble and the red sea part!"
 
Yeah, I don't get paid, it's entirely voluntary. I knew long ago I couldn't actually help someone unless they ask for help and they want help, in which case I'm more of a facilitator. Someone needing involuntary help is pretty screwed. People trying to help people who don't want help are pretty screwed.

No, you're confused. Homosexuality is a biological thing.

I'm almost embarrassed by saying "No, YOU!" but in this case it fits. My brother was gay. Dearly wanted to be straight. He wasn't. His answer as to why? "Guys make my dick hard." I'm afraid no amount of research gets to counteract that sort of reality. If you didn't have the experience of growing up with someone who was gay who desperately did not want to be, that's not your fault. It wasn't confusion, it was his dick. That explains a lot of human behavior, by the way.

He didn't cross dress, but Ru Paul is awesome.

I'm 50 pages into the Pinker book. So far I've learned why women experience morning sickness, and Pinker promises to speak about homosexuality but hasnt. That is, his thesis is: Human conduct is the servant of the gene's efforts to get itself into future generations.
 
I'm 50 pages into the Pinker book. So far I've learned why women experience morning sickness, and Pinker promises to speak about homosexuality but hasnt. That is, his thesis is: Human conduct is the servant of the gene's efforts to get itself into future generations.

I bought it yesterday but haven't gotten into it yet. With all the active titles it'll take me a while.

Sounds very much like Dawkins' meme theory. I accept that life is a series of accidents involving environment and opportunity to persist.

I don't think there has to be sense to it in a moral or "it should be this way" sense. I think that's going at the idea backward. We have a sex drive, in some people it's inverted. The mechanics are there and given environment and opportunity, they will persist in different permutations.

The fact that something that exists wishes to persist is all that's really the valid lesson. Humans don't necessarily only persist now in genes. They can also persist in memes. Nature also creates straight people that can't or don't procreate. I don't think genes get to be the authority on their value or purpose. They're alive and that's what matters.

Procreation is an impulse, but it's an essentially mindless and silly impulse and shouldn't be granted some level of authority it doesn't have. Once something does exist, its wish to persist and find a niche takes precedence over making identical copies. A gay person can fulfil all other social tasks to forward the human race as a straight person can. There's no real disadvantage to being gay vs straight except social mores.
 
Last edited:
In an ant colony there's really only one female capable of reproducing and most other members of the colony are sexually irrelevant, but they perform tasks.

Genes "only existing to further themselves" become subject to social constructs and roles that allow for variants of sexuality to thrive and persist.
 
In an ant colony there's really only one female capable of reproducing and most other members of the colony are sexually irrelevant, but they perform tasks.

Genes "only existing to further themselves" become subject to social constructs and roles that allow for variants of sexuality to thrive and persist.

That's kind of like the GB. There about ten women capable of reproducing, and the other 400 are sexually irrelevant males.
 
That's kind of like the GB. There about ten women capable of reproducing, and the other 400 are sexually irrelevant males.

To properly raise a child or two or three, it takes a great deal of care and attention on the part of the entire extended family, not just the parents. It's a huge investment not to be undertaken lightly if there's any wisdom involved.

Of course, the brain and genes just push down on the gas pedal and make it seem as if making a baby were more important and better than raising one.

Genes are stupid. Don't fall for their crap.
 
In an ant colony there's really only one female capable of reproducing and most other members of the colony are sexually irrelevant, but they perform tasks.

Genes "only existing to further themselves" become subject to social constructs and roles that allow for variants of sexuality to thrive and persist.

All the worker ants are clones with identical genes.
 
All the worker ants are clones with identical genes.

Right, more diversity, more strategies. Clearly straight isn't the only way to go. A community of ants supports clones and drones and queens. A human community supports straight and gay and now surgical transgender.

Genes aren't the only game in town and they're mindless. Social constructs have the opportunity to make more sense, so I hope we take that opportunity and stop being dumbasses on the subject.
 
Back
Top