Arkansas high court backs gay foster parents

[Huckleman2000]

I never said all, said typically and many. Stating about my experience as just reference, I did not mean to encompass all. I can't find the site that had the information about the intelligence levels this evening. What I read if I remember correctly was that homosexuals are generally (not all) 1 deviant (think that is the right word) standard above normal intelligence. I've met some pretty stupid smart people before, just as I've met some really smart dumb folks. I personally base intelligence level on the task that is before the individual.

Tom, you and Box have raised some very interesting points to each side. My two cents is that a person who denies their natural attraction for what ever reason and decides to pursue the same or opposite sex doesn't make that person suddenly straight or gay (a gay person going for a heterosexual relationship and a straight person going for a homosexual relationship), to me, that person is still either straight or gay but is living against their nature.

Keeper

The statistical term would be "one standard deviation". Generally, about two-thirds of a random sample will fall within one standard deviation either side of the mean. If what you're saying is the case, that would mean that homosexuals average about at the 85th percentile, which I would find remarkable.

 

[Tom Collins]

The statistical term would be "one standard deviation". Generally, about two-thirds of a random sample will fall within one standard deviation either side of the mean. If what you're saying is the case, that would mean that homosexuals average about at the 85th percentile, which I would find remarkable.

Hmmmm...indeed, Huck. As would I. I mean, I know that I'm really smart, but I never would have linked my intelligence with my sexual orientation.

 

[Liar]

Not all homosexuals do this, but many do and have too in order to survive. For the record I'm not a homosexual, I'm actually a transsexual and for me if I make one mistake in my every day life, some hate mongers or homophobic would not hesitate one second to end my life. Therefore each day when I walk out my front door, I go against my nature. I am smarter, more creative, and more adaptable, no myth, no cliché because evolution teaches us, that it is survival of the fittest, and for me to survive, I must be all that and more or I'll no long exist.

Maybe more homosexuals than heterosexuals are forged to act this way, today, in this place in history, but that doesn't mean that it is linked to their sexuality. It's linked to their social situation, nothing else. A west-friendly Iranian, a French revolution blue-blood, a McCarthy-era communist, a black man in the US' south during (and after) slavery, any member of a persecuted religion in history... it's the same thing. Adapt, decieve, act in manners that goes against everything you are and believe in, or get killed, arrsted, deprted, whatever. The real cause is a social and political climate, and the secondary cause is deviation from the norm - whatever that norm is. In your case it happens to be sexuality. It could just as easily have been something else.

If gays are more intelligent and sensitive due to hiding their true nature, the cause is homophobia, not homosexuality.

 

[wazhazhe]

To do so, one must be smarter, more in touch with the little things that are generally overlooked, and must adapt to an array of changes from person to person and situation to situation without fail.

Are you saying the ability to deceive is an indicater of higher inteligence?

 

[Boxlicker101]

Stating a fact. Tell me, can you live your life pretending to be something you're not every day, so effectively as to fool those closest to you? I don't mean lying, I mean going against your very nature. To do so, one must be smarter, more in touch with the little things that are generally overlooked, and must adapt to an array of changes from person to person and situation to situation without fail. For to fail just once, could mean your very life. Not all homosexuals do this, but many do and have too in order to survive. For the record I'm not a homosexual, I'm actually a transsexual and for me if I make one mistake in my every day life, some hate mongers or homophobic would not hesitate one second to end my life. Therefore each day when I walk out my front door, I go against my nature. I am smarter, more creative, and more adaptable, no myth, no cliché because evolution teaches us, that it is survival of the fittest, and for me to survive, I must be all that and more or I'll no long exist.

"Studies of brains have taught us that people with higher IQs do not have larger brains. Thanks to brain imaging technology, we can now see that the difference may be in the way the brain develops," said A. Zerhouni, M.D.

By Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard Science is rapidly converging on the conclusion that sexual orientation is innate. It has found that homosexuals often act differently from heterosexuals in early childhood, before they have even heard of sex. A recent study by Simon LeVay, a neurobiologist at the Salk Institute, reported a difference in the hypothalamus, a part of the brain that develops at a young age, between homosexual and heterosexual men.

As for difference between gay and straight being just sexual attraction, it is more than that. I can find the beauty in both sexes, though I am attracted to one sex, however, because that sex is the same as my physical sex does not define me it doesn‘t make me who I am so to speak. Who and what I am on the inside is what drives my desires, my attractions, it is my make up.

Keeper

I realize you know vastly more about your life situation than I do. Even so, I can't help but think your are overstating the peril you face, especially living in California. I also realize that there are homophobes and other bigots even in the most tolerant of places. However, I can't believe that even the worst of these, upon learning you are a TS and for no other reason, would not hesitate even one second before ending your life.

As a former Bay Area resident I am quite familiar with the sad story of Gwen Araujo. She put herself at great risk by deceiving some macho young Latino men into having sex with her. Once they discovered she was anatomically a man, they became incensed and tortured and killed her. This was an extreme overreaction and they are in prison where they belong but, if not for her deception, they would never have been involved with her.

There are many TS in Calif. who make no secret of their physical natures, and they live normal lives. This would not be the case all over, and not even all over the US, but it is the case in California.

 

[Sex and Death]

Lindsay’s research suggests that in humans the attraction for one person to another of the same sex can be seen as a continuum.

He was able to divide the population into six parts based upon the strength on an individual’s attraction to another human. The strongest (6) was finds others of the same sex exclusively attractive and feels no attraction to a member of the opposite sex.

His findings showed that at the other end of the scale (1) an individual was exclusively attracted to members of the opposite sex and felt no attraction to the same sex.

If his research is valid, then one possibility it suggest genetically is that the sexual attraction that one has for another is a factor of varying degrees because at least six different combinations of genes are involved.

Of course, environmental pressures may influence the difference in attraction strengths so we might look at that as well as other possible influences.

My thoughts have been considering this subject have been focused on those cultures that I am most familiar with, but broadening (NPI) the scope only slightly, Greeks of Sparta had families. They also had homosexual lovers. The society was military and many of the warriors were lovers. One result of this devotion to one’s fighting companion was the tendency to protect each other, train together, and support each other more closely than heterosexual fighting partners.

When 300 Spartans held 10,000 Persians and were defeated only after a traitor led the invading Persians through a secret route that allowed the Spartans to be flanked and even then only after they were defeated to the last man did the Persians prevail.

Upon seeing the dead Spartans on the battlefield lying in pairs with each pair surrounded by slain Persians did Darius the Persian King weep at their bravery. When one of his aides pointed out that these Greeks were homosexual lovers, Darius executed the man on the spot for slandering men who had exhibited such bravery.

Of course this historical footnote shatters the modern slander about “not wanting to share a foxhole with a faggot,” but it also suggests one species survival trait that homosexuality might bestow that would tend to preserve the trait within a population.

You're mixing up love and sexulaity. Homosexuality in the military context you mention is irrelevant. Perhaps you're couching a heavily draped political, social or ideological agenda in academic garb.

Mixing up love and sexulaity is common in our culture. We see very little difference between Eros and Sexulaity. At best, we have 3 kinds of love in our culture, platonic, sexual and divine. That's painting with only primary colors. We need more KINDS of love...eskimos and words for snow, and all that jazz. In truth, sexuality is simply a subset of Eros, one of many.

There is a KIND of love that can be awakened to between warriors, even warriors who are enemies of each other, whether they're homosexual lovers or not. When it's reduced to sex, it is misunderstood. Sex can be present or not...doesn't matter. Your statement, "One result of this devotion to one’s fighting companion was the tendency to protect each other, train together, and support each other more closely than heterosexual fighting partners," is quite false, and you also fail to research any deficits of homosexuality and any attributes of heterosexuality within military organization and warriorship.

Every KIND of love has a purpose, simply because it exists. Homosexual love also has a purpose, as does heterosexual love, and bisexual love, although I wager that a very small percentage of individuals, whether homo-, bi- or heterosexual ever even ask the question about what their KIND of love is "for." There are many gays who are not really gay. There are many bi's who are not really bi. There are many heteros who are not relaly hetero. We use bi and gay lifestyle identification for many things in this culture. Right now its fashionable. It's way to express poltical and social values, ideologies and beliefs, as well as a KIND of sexuality and a KIND of love. Homo and bisexuality have become minority social and political movements Just as heterosexuality has become a social and political movement.

What it says to me is that in our cutlure, at this time, we are being asked to pay attention to sex and sexuality and to allow it to move from the seedy shadows of our cutlural consciousness, where it causes great strife perosnally and culturally, and into our awareness so that we aren't slaves to it, so that it can be serve as an eneriched and enriching part of life. Right now we're still slaves to our collective sexuality...that's why it's at the center of so much social, political and pathological turmoil.

Also, you trap your thoughts on Lindsay's research on attraction in nature v. nurture paradigm, as if life can be reduced to that. Your mind and creativity seem far greater than that. Also, your hermetic tango makes it hard to pin down your stance. The material is out there for everyone, if they want it, but what about your unique position on the subject(s) at hand?

S&D

 

[Shadownight_Keeper]

The statistical term would be "one standard deviation".

Thank you for the correction Huck.

Maybe more homosexuals than heterosexuals are forced to act this way, today, in this place in history, but that doesn't mean that it is linked to their sexuality. It's linked to their social situation, nothing else. A west-friendly Iranian, a French revolution blue-blood, a McCarthy-era communist, a black man in the US' south during (and after) slavery, any member of a persecuted religion in history... it's the same thing. Adapt, deceive, act in manners that goes against everything you are and believe in, or get killed, arrested, deported, whatever. The real cause is a social and political climate, and the secondary cause is deviation from the norm - whatever that norm is. In your case it happens to be sexuality. It could just as easily have been something else.
If gays are more intelligent and sensitive due to hiding their true nature, the cause is homophobia, not homosexuality.

Liar, it isn’t about the ability to hide ones nature, but the skill it takes to do so effectively that I was using as reference only. Intelligence isn’t all about sexuality, nor is it all about societies and situations. Intelligence is based on many things, for example the ability to blend into a given situation. One going against their nature, adds more to potential complications, which follows the path that it is a form of complex thinking and is a product borne of intelligence yes?

“For example, in response to concerns about cultural and ethnic biases in traditional IQ tests, the developmental psychologist Howard Gardner, PhD, popularized the phrase "multiple intelligences" to reflect that fact that intelligence is multi-faceted.” “Gardner's IQ tests measure not only verbal and mathematical skills but also musical, mechanical, physical, and even social skills. Similarly, cognitive psychologist Robert Sternberg, PhD, has developed a triarchic ("three component") theory of intelligence that includes analytical, creative and practical intelligence.”

Are you saying the ability to deceive is an indicator of higher intelligence?

Wazhazhe, I'm not in any way shape or form stating that deception is a form of higher intelligence, I am stating that the ability to change or to fit in, to learn from situation to situation and person to person is a form of higher intelligence. Some can do this with great ease while others can not.

“According to Sternberg, practical intelligence is not assessed in traditional IQ tests, but it is easy to measure, and it allows people to adapt effectively to the demands of work and daily life.”

“Given modern controversies regarding IQ testing, one might ask how Binet viewed intelligence. Binet equated intelligence with common sense.” “He called intelligence "judgment…good sense…the faculty of adapting one's self to circumstances." “Binet also believed that intelligence is a combination of many skills - skills that are shaped heavily by the environment.”

However, given I’m unable to find the article about higher iq’s with regards to homosexuals, it is a mute point that I’m not able to support.

Box, I do not underestimate others. Perhaps I'm guilty of overestimating them, but I've always tended to err on the side of caution. What a person is capable of due to hate, fear, influence and the list goes on has been taught throughout history. Yes California, parts are very liberal, and there are parts that unfortunately are not so liberal. The area I live, is a mix, liberal and not. I've worked with folks who talked of going out and beating "faqs" to death, are they joking, maybe, but am I'm going to throw on the blinders? All it takes is wrong place, wrong time and that is a natural part of life. I keep my guard up, but I don't let fear rule my life. I'm practical about what I do, if I know a place isn't safe, I don't go. What happened with Gwen, I'm actually torn by the cause and effect. To lie to a sexual partner is wrong, but to be killed for it is also wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right and everyone lost in this situation.

 

[wazhazhe]

Are you saying the ability to deceive is an indicator of higher intelligence?

Wazhazhe, I'm not in any way shape or form stating that deception is a form of higher intelligence, I am stating that the ability to change or to fit in, to learn from situation to situation and person to person is a form of higher intelligence. Some can do this with great ease while others can not.

“According to Sternberg, practical intelligence is not assessed in traditional IQ tests, but it is easy to measure, and it allows people to adapt effectively to the demands of work and daily life.”

“Given modern controversies regarding IQ testing, one might ask how Binet viewed intelligence. Binet equated intelligence with common sense.” “He called intelligence "judgment…good sense…the faculty of adapting one's self to circumstances." “Binet also believed that intelligence is a combination of many skills - skills that are shaped heavily by the environment.”

However, given I’m unable to find the article about higher iq’s with regards to homosexuals, it is a mute point that I’m not able to support.

Box, I do not underestimate others. Perhaps I'm guilty of overestimating them, but I've always tended to err on the side of caution. What a person is capable of due to hate, fear, influence and the list goes on has been taught throughout history. Yes California, parts are very liberal, and there are parts that unfortunately are not so liberal. The area I live, is a mix, liberal and not. I've worked with folks who talked of going out and beating "faqs" to death, are they joking, maybe, but am I'm going to throw on the blinders? All it takes is wrong place, wrong time and that is a natural part of life. I keep my guard up, but I don't let fear rule my life. I'm practical about what I do, if I know a place isn't safe, I don't go. What happened with Gwen, I'm actually torn by the cause and effect. To lie to a sexual partner is wrong, but to be killed for it is also wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right and everyone lost in this situation.

I would be interested in seeing the report if you come across it.

 

[Liar]

Liar, it isn’t about the ability to hide ones nature, but the skill it takes to do so effectively that I was using as reference only.

Huh? What's the difference between "the ability to hide ones nature" and "the skill it takes to do so"? Skill = ability, ability = skill. What am I missing? maybe we're just losing semantics in some proxy server across the cyberspace thingy, I dunno.

Intelligence isn’t all about sexuality, nor is it all about societies and situations. Intelligence is based on many things, for example the ability to blend into a given situation. One going against their nature, adds more to potential complications, which follows the path that it is a form of complex thinking and is a product borne of intelligence yes?

Ok, apart from that first sentence about skill vs ability, this makes perfect sense. I agree with you 100%. The ability to blend inno a given situation is one big part of what makes up intelligence. Maybe not according to MENSA, but they're a bunch of asocial nuts anyway.

But this ability has nothing to do with homosexuality. You said in the post I first replied to, that gay people generally are more intelligent and sensitive than others. That's all I'm arguing against. Because they're not. We're all equipped with the intelligence needed for this deception. Homophobia is only one of many different things that can creates situation that calls for social skills needed for survival.

A homophobic (or really just difference-phobic) society that forces gays to blend in also forces them to put whatever they have of that ability to use. For others that are not gay, other things can force them to put this ability to use. Like being a Danish cartoonist in a mosque. Or being an Italian in Germany tonight. (If you don't follow the World Cup, check your world sports website of choice.)

 

[Matadore]

You're mixing up love and sexulaity.

S&D

I don't don’t understand what you're talking about in a few instances. You surely didn't get the point from my posts. It could be that I haven't expressed myself clearly.

Unless I completely misread this thread it was started by the question of action based upon the research that suggests women who have several male offspring tend to be more likely to produce sons who will be homosexual.

Then the discussion went defining terms and values. From there we touched on the mechanisms of evolution. Somewhere along the way the subjects of technology, ethics, morality, and legality surfaced.

You ask my own emotional reactions to this first question (I think you did anyway).

Taken in small increments, positive changes in personality, mental and physical abilities, emotional and emotive qualities will likely be possible for parents to influence in their offspring. My reaction is that this will be a good thing. If sexual preference would be one of these choices, then that would be OK too. I would not choose such my sons, but I also would not support laws to prevent others from selecting that option.

I also would favor making these choices available to any parent.

You honor me by taking the time to read and respond to the posts that I have made in this thread...thanks.

 

[Shadownight_Keeper]

Liar, I've always taken skill and ability to mean completely different things. For example, I have the ability to climb a mountain, I do not have the skill to climb Everest. As I stated near the end of my previous post, I can't find the article that stated that homosexuals typically are smarter, where they are 1 deviation standard above normal intelligence. It is mute, I am unable to support my statement. You did raise some interesting points, but I can't argue a point I can't back up.

 

[Matadore]

Just as a random fact, many state school systems have set the requirements for Special Education (Gifted and Talented) to be a score of 135 IQ on the WISC-R test. That is two SD above the norm. Normal is 100. One SD is about 120 but I haven't used that for a while and might be off a few points. Three SD is around 160 and was refered to as "Profoundly Gifted." (Profoundly mentaly retarded then meant that the student was three SD below the norm and not generally considered educable in the normal classroom.) The valid limits of the test used to be around 165.

A 200 IQ would indicate that a first grader would easily perform at the same level as a sixth grader.

I hope that this helps.

 

[Sex and Death]

I don't don’t understand what you're talking about in a few instances. You surely didn't get the point from my posts. It could be that I haven't expressed myself clearly.

Unless I completely misread this thread it was started by the question of action based upon the research that suggests women who have several male offspring tend to be more likely to produce sons who will be homosexual.

Then the discussion went defining terms and values. From there we touched on the mechanisms of evolution. Somewhere along the way the subjects of technology, ethics, morality, and legality surfaced.

You ask my own emotional reactions to this first question (I think you did anyway).

Taken in small increments, positive changes in personality, mental and physical abilities, emotional and emotive qualities will likely be possible for parents to influence in their offspring. My reaction is that this will be a good thing. If sexual preference would be one of these choices, then that would be OK too. I would not choose such my sons, but I also would not support laws to prevent others from selecting that option.

I also would favor making these choices available to any parent.

You honor me by taking the time to read and respond to the posts that I have made in this thread...thanks.

Thanks for the clarification on your position(s).

Respectfuly, I don't imagine we'd be able to define our terms into a common language without substantial effort.

You have a potent mind.