Posted on 09/11/2017 5:35:31 PM PDT by Kaslin
In the 1980s, I had a boss who had gotten a masters degree in psychology from New York University. He was a brilliant man; could have been a doctor. He told me a story that explains much of what we see in society today.
It seems that while doing his graduate work in the early 1960s, he had to do research on lab rats, which were given the synthetic hormones used in the then new birth control pills. The results, he told me, showed that the grandchildren of these lab rats would have high rates of homosexual behaviors. From what he told me, the findings were suppressed. Apparently, the powers that be wanted “the pill” to pass muster. What happened to the second generation of rats that followed was of no consequence to them.
Then my boss told me: The first generation of kids born to mothers using the pill have already arrived. But we should expect in another generation a noticeable increase in homosexual behavior, as they would be the second generation. As that was then still in the future, I was shocked.
This was told me in the mid '80s. By his reckoning, we should have seen a societal explosion of homosexuality starting around 2000, and subsequently. And, of course, we have seen such an explosion. His prediction came true.
Now, to many classic conservatives – whether religious or merely social – homosexuality is a choice, something which can be learned and/or unlearned. The problem is: There is a degree of evidence that it may be contrariwise in some individuals.
I invite one to look at this short CBS 60 Minutes documentary about what happens to lab rats treated with sex hormones early on their development.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
First of all, it is obvious that your knowledge ( actually lack thereof ), of genetics is abysmal to nonexistent.
Do read up on Gregor Mendel, the father of modern genetics, and read his work. Why you didn't have to study this, in high school biology, I'll never know, but even a rudimentary, rather low level of knowledge, would have served you well.
"NOT EVERYONE IS BORN WITH BLUE EYES, EITHER." ?
Of course they aren't! However, if both parents have blue eyes, the chance of their offspring having blue eyes is close to 100%!
If only one parent has blue eyes, the number of children they have, how many of both parents' ancestors, come into play and many of their children will probably have blue eyes.
No matter how much the crazy lefties and/or some homosexuals year to believe that homosexuality is genetic.....IT ISN'T!
If BC pills, which became legally available in the early 1960s, had anything substantial to do with producing homosexual children,there would be far, far, FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR more of them! And BC pills are very late comers on the scene, vis-a-vis homosexuality.
Also, besides the examples posted earlier, to this thread, it is well known that male prisoners, for centuries, have engaged in homosexual acts; so have many men in the military! As a matter of fact, the Ancient Spartans, had entire platoons, that were only comprised of homosexual lovers!
And then there was Caligula...who would engage in homosexual acts with men, women, and had one heck of a thing with his sister! Yet neither of his parents were queer,though his Great Uncle, Tiberius, did have a pederastic craving for young boys, in his old age.
And just for giggles...how about the Colonial Governor of N.Y. and N.J., Edward Hyde, the 3rd Earl of Clarendon? He was not only married, but had 4 children with his wife, but was a raving cross dresser, who wore THE most expensive, made for just him, ladies' clothing...not only in private, but also when opening the Assembly ( like today's state Senates )and other public, official governmental occasions.Not a one of his ancestors were so inclined!
The Isle of Lesbos, in Ancient times, was supposedly a place where Greek women gathered and where the modern word "lesbian" comes from.
When there were still laws against open homosexual, in modern times, as well as in earlier times, when religions ( Jewish and Christian ) condemned such behaviors, most homosexual kept it to themselves, as did lesbians.
All male private schools, in England, were well known for boys engaging in homosexual dalliances/some boys having a "crush" on same age/older boys.
The same was true for all girl private schools; even day schools.
Have you never read nor seen the movie THE PRIME OF MISS JEAN BRODY, nor any other books about private schools?
Re male homosexuality....most have been molested, or "tried it out, at some point. And today, when it is thought to be "cool" ( though transgenderism is MUCH "cooler", now, especially re 3 and 4 and 6 year olds ), some easily lead people will "become" queer to be "IN"/"COOL"!
as a nation, we're generally overweight...men included...
that's got to play a part...
people that would never consider homosexual acts might feel free to "explore" especially if they strike out with the opposite sex....
The thread has been civil, until your post.
Thanks, but no thanks. I’m outta here.
And even my slang hating and abjuring father used that word, long before The Dobie Gillis show appeared on T. V.!
That show and an early movie, taken from the original book ( THE LOVES OF DOBIE GILLIS ), which takes place on a college campus, NEVER used that word.
It does, as does men stopping wearing boxer shorts underwear.
I was extremely “civil” and please read what I posted...it’s filled with factual information.
Do you mean that tyranny fluid isn’t transmission oil?
So, now we have to check the gender levels in our vehicles, right? Modern life is confusing at times.
Murder is a choice
theft is a choice
drugs are a choice
drinking is a choice
lying is a choice
“homer” sexual is a choice
Popular among a younger audience might be the best description of what I'm thinking in the way of media influence growing.
Regards
We can choose not to celebrate militant antiheterosexual activism while at the same time identifying and ceasing to dump plastic additives in our water linked to increased feminized behavior in animals, just saying...
Both of what you say is true. Some things can sway or override the sexual preference. But not your innate preference. I knew a lot of men abused by authority figure men when young, who are 100% straight, never mind what happened to them. Childhood abuse messed them up, but they never turned gay. Drug addicts sometimes engage in same sex to get $ for drugs. They would literally “do anything.” And some men get so horny in prison they would accept a man servicing them and pretend it is a woman. Again, not gay.
I think it is useful to see it as a learned maladaption.
There are social and biological factors which can nudge sinners in that direction.
One problem I see is that social conventions today have little or no room for the passionate masculine man child. Finding no acceptable niche in conventional society, he goes off on his own and if that isn’t squarely to a passionate Jesus which gets short shrift today, it is to the devil.
Making sex acts forbidden doesn’t cut down on them. The urge for sex is stronger than the urge for chocolate cake. Humans will always have problems resisting temptation. I don’t know exactly what making gay sex or sex outside marriage illegal would even do.
You gotta admit your opening statement was a bit hyperbolic.
Anyway, no dispute regarding your factoids, they are pretty well known bits I think.
I just had to point out how much I agree with your reference to the most significant growth metric in youth-oriented social activity: the cool factor!
And by youth, we must now include young parents. Who are today pre-choosing for the kids - entirely based on their desired score of the cool-ometer.
It is one of the most selfish new types of child abuse to come down the pike in a while. Hip hetero couples can make the scene with or without the gene. Just sacrifice your kid(s) and your in like Flynn - without actually getting excrement on your on instrument.
Depravity by proxy is all the rage.
Nobody I knew, at that time ( kids my age ), ever used that word, but I grew up knowing it, because of my father. It's somewhat strange that he did use that word; though rarely, since he was totally against ANY slang and we weren't allowed to use slang at home.
It was only much, much later that I found out that it had been a word much used by Cab Calloway.
And it was many decades later, that I found out about the origins of of the Dobie Gillis show. I have seen the movie ( it's awful (!) and own the book. I got the book, because I loved the T.V. show and it just makes me happy to have it.
Agree... And this is why even in the strict Mosaic Law it took 2 witnesses or more to bring down sanctions. God Himself knew the closet would exist, and the Law’s concern was to put a robust firewall between that and society.
Yes, admittedly, most if not ALL ( except for the bit about the early 18th century Brit governor&mayor of N.Y. and N.J., which is not all that well known )of my factoids, are, or rather, should be, extremely well known by all high schoolers.
The newest Muchausen by proxy syndrome, of parents, especially by mothers, who now reach for fame, acceptance, and "coolness", by claiming that their extremely young child is NOT the sex that their genitalia would easily prove they are, is not only shocking, utterly disgusting, but sick and extreme child abuse.
This is a brand new phenomenon, with absolutely NO basis is reality! I don't know how it began, but it is now repulsively extant in America and the UK. It may be in other nations as well, but if it is, I haven't read about it.
Anyhow... The US may have erred by trying to delve legally into the closet. This engendered a pushback that went too far in the other direction.
This said there is still another possible firewall even if the US can’t yet legally adjust (as with a constitutional amendment or a sea change on the Court). It would be a new robust practice of Christian faith that has a robust place for the manly man. Wimp “Jesuses” are a huge problem today. The older church did not err with its knights errant, pardon the pun.
Oh? This is terrible?
(Of course it is)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.