(no subject)
Jun. 27th, 2006 07:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
highlyeccentricThis is whacked.
aside from the generally unpleasant wording, as if it's tracing the occurance of some kind of disease, i find the idea that a mother's body treats a male child as invasive a bit weird... and this theory only traces 'causes' of male homosexuality- do they think lesbianism isn't really homosexuality or something? what kind of study on homosexuality only looks at males?
aside from the generally unpleasant wording, as if it's tracing the occurance of some kind of disease, i find the idea that a mother's body treats a male child as invasive a bit weird... and this theory only traces 'causes' of male homosexuality- do they think lesbianism isn't really homosexuality or something? what kind of study on homosexuality only looks at males?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-06-28 05:24 am (UTC)That line alone should give the hint as to how seriously to take this study. Less than a thousand men? In one country?? And no doubt a population that small would be skewed demographically too. Never mind the not researching the actual mechanism part! Argh! That's not research, it's CONJECTURE!
Ridiculous. And insulting. I mean, what is this anyway: the modern day version of family succession? The oldest son inherits, the second goes to the army, the third into the clergy and the fourth...is gay?? WTF?
Sorry to go off so - I'm afraid this sort of thing presses ALL the wrong buttons for me. I wish people would stop pathologising homosexuality and just bloody well accept it as being a natural phenomenon on the incredibly broad and varied spectrum of human sexuality.
Ok, rant over *slinks away*