The Invention of Heterosexuality

  • Arisaig
  • Arisaig's Avatar Topic Author
  • Guest
02 Jun 2017 18:43 - 02 Jun 2017 18:48 #286092 by Arisaig
The Invention of Heterosexuality was created by Arisaig

Found this article, think it's good for discussion.

For those that dont want to open the link, here is the article, youre welcome :) [ Click to expand ]

What do you think? I find BBC to be a rather good source for facts, but I found this a bit... odd. Is heterosexuality a recently modern "invention"?

As I'm sure there are more straight people here (just basic statistics, that kinda stuff ;)), that should mean plenty of people here are suited to speak on the topic of heterosexuality. :)

I look forward to this discussion.
Last edit: 02 Jun 2017 18:48 by Arisaig.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

02 Jun 2017 20:55 - 02 Jun 2017 21:36 #286120 by OB1Shinobi
Theres some really weird thing going on right now where some post modern marxists and social constructivists have infiltrated into the identity politics crowd (sociologists, gender studies and womens studies most especially) and they have basically assembled a socio-political war machine to spread their ideology and establish themselves into - or i should say assert themselves over the legal system particularly and the ongoing cultural dialogue, generally

As far as i am concerned that article is a propoganda piece dreamed up by an identity politics social contructivist marxist who isnt concerned with scientific or anthropological inquiry nearly so much as with socio politial influence.

Heres another example

Its basically an infiltration and brainwashing campaign, and once you recognize it for what it is you should take responsibility for combating it, because its fundamentally dishonest and ultimately socially destructive.

People are complicated.
Last edit: 02 Jun 2017 21:36 by OB1Shinobi.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Rex, Arisaig

Please Log in to join the conversation.

02 Jun 2017 21:44 #286123 by JamesSand
I *really* don't want to get involved in this particular.....dead end discussion, but It's pre-coffee in the morning, and I can't not quip :)

I am decidedly heterosexual - right down to Ari's 1901 definition of "abnormal or perverted appetite toward the opposite sex." - It's not without it's complications :dry:

Whilst I may or may not have been "born this way" (That song was on as I read the article. something similar to pratchett's psychotropic weather I imagine) - Opportunities throughout my life I suppose encouraged me to...develop and strengthen that obsession.

HAVING SAID ALL THAT - "Other" opportunities have also presented themselves through my life, and you know what they say - You're either in or you're out ;)

It is important when discussing any of this claptrap (I mean the subject in general here, rather than any particular source so far) to distance anything remotely related to science and y'know, Left/Right stance taking political rubbish.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Arisaig

Please Log in to join the conversation.

02 Jun 2017 22:02 #286127 by Carlos.Martinez3
I read the article . ( no changes made)

It's sad somthing like definitions...of sexuality can drive or even plant hate in one person to the next, regardless if they know the name of the individual only their chooses. Not my cup of tea. I say this a lot but to much ... An over emphasisii on some lines , "names definitions" make things blurry. Don't get me wrong we can identify things till the cows come home but then .... What's home ... What are cows ? Pun intended from Hitchikers guide to the Galaxy. I don't argue or even try any more at people's labels they choose. Somthing I'm trying to pass to the next generation. So yea , that lines there that's what they call it . I love my other with all of my possibilities and frailties and hopes. I'll pass that too along but I think as a whole here in the homestead won't be labeling others.
Had a new friend over , twice gf of our buddie, where is there room for uncomfortable when comfort is the focus? Where do we insert , me myself... Hate rather than welcome and ... Why? The bigger picture can always be seen when we take a few steps back.
Not a line drawer or even definer... Not my place in my life.
The questions I ask are simple
Do u hug? Hold? Kiss ? Feel ? Live ? See? Share? I don't think or ask what do you define yourself at? in reality that's always gunna change for me. But the bigger pick for me is , not what you love but , u know how to love ? Have any examples ? Questions and talks like this ... Bring more to the table than simple I'm this or I'm that or I've chosen this in spite of that. And conflict follows...
Hope that helps some one not hurts. Never the case, never my focus. Pm me if you feel a need or wish.
May the Force be with y'all

Contact The Clergy
Pastor of Temple of the Jedi Order
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The Block
Build, not tear down.
Nosce te ipsum / Cerca trova
The following user(s) said Thank You: Alexandre Orion, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

03 Jun 2017 00:42 #286136 by Rex
The problem with all the discussions around this are largely a matter of semantics (in my opinion). As pointed out midway through the article, sex is the biological function that's present in all sexually-reproducing organisms. Thus, biologically, heterosex behavior is advantageous.
On the other hand are all the cultural aspects that really are manifestations of how we as a species don't have the competitiveness of natural selection to limit our traits to simply biologically advantageous functions. Sexuality is how we express ways we can use biological sex, gender is how we identify ourselves based on our sexuality. Despite what you think on the subject, in a purely biological sense, heteronormativity is a given. Some of you more zoologically-inclined Jedi might be itching to point out dolphins or certain other mammals with homosexual behavior, but again, those are outliers who don't contribute to the gene pool of their species with their behavior.
Just because something exists doesn't mean we have to care about the fact that it may have an opposite counterpart. As Jedi, we should respect the rights of people to express themselves and make sure they can do so freely. On the other hand, heteronormativity is a biologically-inclined function due to the nature of sex, and this will seep into sexuality. In my experience, heterosexuality doesn't limit me to a certain range of expression. Homosexuality ideally should be the same, and the two ought to have similar traits.
Heterosexuality wasn't invented because it's all there was. If we could only see in black and white, we wouldn't have words for describing other colors or the word "monochromatic." As much as the author talks about how we make a big deal out of something that has no implications, it seems that the article is doing that more than anything. Heterosexuality as a word will exist as long as heterosexuality as a practice exists.

Knights Secretary's Secretary
Apprentices: Vandrar
TM: Carlos Martinez
"A serious and good philosophical work could be written consisting entirely of jokes" - Wittgenstein
The following user(s) said Thank You: OB1Shinobi, MadHatter, Kobos, Arisaig

Please Log in to join the conversation.

03 Jun 2017 02:03 #286141 by MadHatter
It depends on what you mean by invention. Sexuality is not invented. It is created ( by what we have a very limited and conflicting knowledge of, but still.). The words for it might be fairly new. But that does not change their usefulness. Words can limit things, yes but limits are not inherently bad. I mean for example if I get mugged and beat up I am pretty sure I want to as narrowly define the guy that did it as possible so that police can get the right person. The same things without likes and dislikes be they in the bedroom or out of it. The more we define what we like the more accurately we can seek out that which makes us happy. That does not mean we always ignore things outside those bounds just that we have a very clear vision of what we want.

Knight of the Order
Training Master: Jestor
Apprentices: Lama Su, Leah
Just a pop culture Jedi doing what I can
The following user(s) said Thank You: Arisaig

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Kodaav
  • Kodaav's Avatar
  • Guest
21 Jun 2017 00:17 #288157 by Kodaav
Replied by Kodaav on topic The Invention of Heterosexuality
These messages are just dangerous and it makes people dumber. Teaching that there is no thing as biological sex is idiotic and calling your self a medical historian doesn't give you credibility as a biologist or doctor. These ideologies only hurt the people they claim to help, making them more confused and scared. Canada's laws now make it a jailable defense if you dont use peoples pronouns which is totally based on peoples feelings about them selves its a step in a radically left direction and its a slippery slope to communism. This argument that heterosexuality is an invention, makes it sound like every other orientation is invented as well.I agree Gay, straight, transexual are all definately real, so why wouldnt heterosexual be real. Makes no sense...

If you are free, you are not equal and if your equal, you are not free.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

21 Jun 2017 01:36 - 21 Jun 2017 01:38 #288160 by Adder
Any blend of physiology and psychology gets complicated, especially when they can exist alone or in combination, but also just because we have that subconscious which also plays a role in conscious decisions. I'm talking about the concepts of climax versus desire, respectively.

Considering maybe some people have no control over what they find sexually stimulating, and so require certain specific environments, participants or behaviours to achieve physiological climax - as then yes while it is still a psychological desire for physiological climax - the climax itself in that circumstance for some reason is dependent on circumstance. It is there that I can see how it might have originally been seen in that light.... such that if it were outside the control of the person it's perfectly reasonable for early science to have looked at it as a part of 'dis-ease'. For comparison to someone who does not have that limitation, but does or does not elect to define themselves by particular psychological desires as part of their routine or preferred sexuality - we can see the semantic rift starting to develop!!! :D
Unless I'm creating my own.....

Knight ~ introverted extropian, mechatronic neurothealogizing, technogaian buddhist. Likes integration, visualization, elucidation and transformation.
Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med ~ Dis
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu
Last edit: 21 Jun 2017 01:38 by Adder.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: RexZero