X3 My very first dragon was a red hathian from Mystic, and my first candidate got a Fire from JKat.... >.>" I wonder if that says something about me/my candidates.... XD
But yeah, it'd be so cool to run! XD There'd need to be some special reason to single them out, though--usually it's by colour or type or whatever, so it's easier to have a reason, in character, for someone to show up.
XD Where would it be held? Who'd be responsible for ordering people around and getting all of the images in, etc etc?
*stoked* I haven't been interested in Pernese-type dragons in a long time, but for something like this... it'd be really cool! XDDD
My oldest dragon
Moderators: Mystic Dragon, Xalia, Shard, JKatkina
-
DNS
- Ancient Dragon
- Posts: 3852
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 3:47 pm
- Location: On top of the rainbow
- Contact:
Ha, me too~ like, a lot. So i kind of just started ignoring the rules. -shrugs- my women ride bronzes because some of them impressed bronzeson the neoboards and some of them impressed queens and bronzes go with queens, and some of them are just suited to bronzes. Firelizards don't care, and you can't really change around THAT much of a creature's infant mentality by putting an absolutely fascinating chemical in it's brain. there's only so much pseudoscience i'm willing to believe.t always galled me that a character like, say, XENA from the hercules tv universe, would have been considered 'not gold material' because she was essentially bisexual. o.0 i mean... hello? Strongest woman character - smart, clever, witty, physically strong and adept, capable of leadership, literate... and gay. So. No gold for YOU oh leader of many
OMGILOVEYOU. >.> The last time i mentioned this subject, I got flamed by a friend. I have gay dragons. >.>I mean seriously if there were so many gay people on Pern why were there not ANY gay dragons? You'd think that there'd at least be one or two.
Aaaaaaand my first dragon? it would either be myrror's runnerdragons or the dragons i got in shard's alabastor giveaway. My first non-giveaway dragon was Aust's Adenro. And pierre's namesten. Etc. >.> But the very first one i saw was Adenro. I got them this saaaaaturday. I feel special.
a first dragon frenzy would be hellaneat though.
Okay then... 
Dray? Got your pm. New threadage on the way.
Dray? Got your pm. New threadage on the way.Author of Repurposed
kshau-protectorate.com
kshau-protectorate.com
-
caesiusdraco
- Fledgling
- Posts: 468
- Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 7:36 am
- Location: Michigan
- Contact:
Gay dragons? Did anyone see the last Coeptus Hatching? Blue Felanith and Blue Lucith are definitely more interested in males than females, but they'd never admit it openly. 
My first dragon was a Ryslen light-blue. I wasn't around to get all the older, spiffy images like those from DawnSisters. Which makes me really sad, because they were gorgeous.
My first dragon was a Ryslen light-blue. I wasn't around to get all the older, spiffy images like those from DawnSisters. Which makes me really sad, because they were gorgeous.
S.R. / Coeptus Weir
~*~
Before she turns, rose-thorned tail streaking my hood,
I glimpse from her a thought like jagged glass,
Yet delicate with the texture of sentience:
We remain "turtle-apes", only the shells of our armors grow.
-My Bones Waxed Old by Robert Frazier
~*~
Before she turns, rose-thorned tail streaking my hood,
I glimpse from her a thought like jagged glass,
Yet delicate with the texture of sentience:
We remain "turtle-apes", only the shells of our armors grow.
-My Bones Waxed Old by Robert Frazier
-
Mystic Dragon
- Great Wyrm
- Posts: 2290
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:37 am
- Location: Tris'Hath
- Contact:
>.> Everyone knows my gay dragons. They've already been in a flight.
https://renaissancebookpress.com/2017/0 ... tlin-caul/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
As a rule, I've always ignored Anne McCaffrey's sexuality rules. I've got several reasons for that, but the one that's probably not going to get me yelled at is this one:
It's not statistically feasible for all greenriders and blueriders to be homosexual, at least not in the books where very few girls get to Impress.
Pern has a population, according to the DLG, of roughly one million people. Roughly, 500,000 of these are male.
Of that 500,000, approximately 2500 are dragonriders. Factor in people who could Impress, but never do for whatever reason (never Searched, didn't want a dragon, just never managed to attach a dragon no matter how many hatchings they were at), and you can probably say you've got 10,000 people suitable to bond a dragon. That's 2% of the population.
Now, of the 2500 dragonriders that you have, 50% are greens with male riders, 33% are blues with male riders, bringing you up to 83% of riders being homosexual. Add in another few percent for the occasional homosexual brownrider, and call it 85%.
Then, if you assume that the ability to Impress a dragon is linked to sexuality in no way whatsoever, in order to have 85% of dragonriders being homosexual, you'd need 85% of the entire male population of Pern to be homosexual. Obviously, this isn't going to work if you expect Pern to have human inhabitants for more than a few generations.
Also, from the sociological point of view, the average Pernese citizen is strongly against homosexuality, and if they could categorically say that every green or bluerider they met is homosexual, they're going to view said green and blueriders with disgust rather than the awe protrayed in the books.
Finally, I've always considered mating flights to be special situations. What a guy does in response to his dragon's flight isn't necessarily what he'd normally choose to do. This counts for bronzeriders who's dragon catches a green as much as any other rider! There's not enough golds around for each bronzerider to have a weyrmate, so without greens they'd get frustrated pretty quickly.
Another flaw is that if you allow for girls Impressing greens, and say in a perfect world, all the greens end up Impressing to girls, doesn't that kinda leave all those homosexual male blueriders a bit stuffed?
Now, this is not to say that I'm anti-homosexuality. Anyone who knows me well enough will know I don't see anything wrong with it. I just don't like Anne McCaffrey's ruling on it, because it's scientifically, statistically and sociologically unsound.
I prefer a more logical approach. In Weyr's I run, Xena would get a gold, because of the personality that makes her so suited to it. If we continue under the assumption that a mating flight counts as outside the rider's personal preference, then when a bronze catches Xena's gold, that's not Xena miraculously turning straight. That's Xena making a sacrifice for her gold's happiness with the aforementioned bronze.
And this is why I stay traditional with my Old World dragons; they bond based on personality, but most dragons would prefer a rider of their own gender if it's possible. A strong female will get a gold (not a bronze or brown), for example.
If anyone's interested in my other reasons against AM's rules, PM or AIM me or something. I'm not gonna post it on the forums because someone who doesn't understand it will start yelling at me.
It's not statistically feasible for all greenriders and blueriders to be homosexual, at least not in the books where very few girls get to Impress.
Pern has a population, according to the DLG, of roughly one million people. Roughly, 500,000 of these are male.
Of that 500,000, approximately 2500 are dragonriders. Factor in people who could Impress, but never do for whatever reason (never Searched, didn't want a dragon, just never managed to attach a dragon no matter how many hatchings they were at), and you can probably say you've got 10,000 people suitable to bond a dragon. That's 2% of the population.
Now, of the 2500 dragonriders that you have, 50% are greens with male riders, 33% are blues with male riders, bringing you up to 83% of riders being homosexual. Add in another few percent for the occasional homosexual brownrider, and call it 85%.
Then, if you assume that the ability to Impress a dragon is linked to sexuality in no way whatsoever, in order to have 85% of dragonriders being homosexual, you'd need 85% of the entire male population of Pern to be homosexual. Obviously, this isn't going to work if you expect Pern to have human inhabitants for more than a few generations.
Also, from the sociological point of view, the average Pernese citizen is strongly against homosexuality, and if they could categorically say that every green or bluerider they met is homosexual, they're going to view said green and blueriders with disgust rather than the awe protrayed in the books.
Finally, I've always considered mating flights to be special situations. What a guy does in response to his dragon's flight isn't necessarily what he'd normally choose to do. This counts for bronzeriders who's dragon catches a green as much as any other rider! There's not enough golds around for each bronzerider to have a weyrmate, so without greens they'd get frustrated pretty quickly.
Another flaw is that if you allow for girls Impressing greens, and say in a perfect world, all the greens end up Impressing to girls, doesn't that kinda leave all those homosexual male blueriders a bit stuffed?
Now, this is not to say that I'm anti-homosexuality. Anyone who knows me well enough will know I don't see anything wrong with it. I just don't like Anne McCaffrey's ruling on it, because it's scientifically, statistically and sociologically unsound.
I prefer a more logical approach. In Weyr's I run, Xena would get a gold, because of the personality that makes her so suited to it. If we continue under the assumption that a mating flight counts as outside the rider's personal preference, then when a bronze catches Xena's gold, that's not Xena miraculously turning straight. That's Xena making a sacrifice for her gold's happiness with the aforementioned bronze.
And this is why I stay traditional with my Old World dragons; they bond based on personality, but most dragons would prefer a rider of their own gender if it's possible. A strong female will get a gold (not a bronze or brown), for example.
If anyone's interested in my other reasons against AM's rules, PM or AIM me or something. I'm not gonna post it on the forums because someone who doesn't understand it will start yelling at me.
-
Mystic Dragon
- Great Wyrm
- Posts: 2290
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:37 am
- Location: Tris'Hath
- Contact:
o.O You've done a lot of research on this. Quite impressive.
https://renaissancebookpress.com/2017/0 ... tlin-caul/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Heh I don't know that you'd get yelled at. Nitpicked maybe, but I think a lot of us have issues with her... issues.
And whatever happened to 'standby partners' anyway? I mean, our weyrs are filled to the brim with drudges, cooks, crafstpeople and visitors. It'd be like pairing up with someone on E... from what I've heard lol. (recently my coworkers had a bit of a party and got ... a little ... yeah. Why i don't party with people I don't wanna have sex with...)
Nitpicked maybe, but I think a lot of us have issues with her... issues. And whatever happened to 'standby partners' anyway? I mean, our weyrs are filled to the brim with drudges, cooks, crafstpeople and visitors. It'd be like pairing up with someone on E... from what I've heard lol. (recently my coworkers had a bit of a party and got ... a little ... yeah. Why i don't party with people I don't wanna have sex with...)
Author of Repurposed
kshau-protectorate.com
kshau-protectorate.com
<:3 Agreeing with Shard -- you ehn't get yelled at, just nitpicked.
But why oh why does everyone overlook us bisexuals? XD We're here, we're queer, though most days we're invisible because people label us depending on the gender of our partner at the time. *headscratch* Couldn't some of those riders be bisexual?
Maybe they like teh mansecks during dragon flights, but generally prefer the wimminfolk elsewhere. Or maybe they just like having sex with both sexes. Orr... and the list goes on. :3
But why oh why does everyone overlook us bisexuals? XD We're here, we're queer, though most days we're invisible because people label us depending on the gender of our partner at the time. *headscratch* Couldn't some of those riders be bisexual?
Maybe they like teh mansecks during dragon flights, but generally prefer the wimminfolk elsewhere. Or maybe they just like having sex with both sexes. Orr... and the list goes on. :3
I would get yelled at, because my thoughts are the ones that are scientifically proveable, rather than the politically correct ones. Baaasically, and this is seriously simplified, without any of the deep psychology stuff to explain it:
A person's gender identity is determined by their relationship with their parents between the ages of two and ten. A boy who never forms a strong relationship with his father (or any father-figure - a male friend of the family, a big brother, etc) can end up gay. A girl who never has a strong relationship with her mother (or any mother figure - a female friend of the family, a big sister, etc) can end up lesbian.
This doesn't mean that every boy who doesn't have a father-figure will turn out gay. And it doesn't mean that every child brought up with two parents will be straight. It's all determined by what relationship they have with which parent at which point in their childhood, so it's quite complicated.
What it means, in an overall view, is that a child could be brought up by a gay couple and not turn out gay themselves - one 'parent' would be a mother, and the other a father. A child's actually more likely to be gay if they grow up with only one parent, which is why there's a lot more homosexuals around these days. Both because it's more acceptable to be open about it, and because so many families these days have only one parent.
The thing I'll note is that homosexuality is not genetic. But that still doesn't mean it's a choice, as such. How can anybody really make a choice about something that was determined when they were less than ten years old, in accordance to the relationships they had with their parents?
And, to sound horribly cliche, everybody's a little gay, but it's a sliding scale, rather than black and white. Bisexuals are people who're halfway along that scale, and can go either way.
Now, what this all means in relation to Anne's rules is the following:
Firstly, a guy can grow up to be very feminine in behaviour, but not be gay. He'd still have a lot of female attributes to his personality and his mannerisms, but he wouldn't be attracted to other men. What colour dragon would he bond? If a blue or green is only supposed to bond to males who're gay, he couldn't have a blue or green. But he's not exactly the right personality type for a brown or bronze.
On the other hand, a guy can grow up very masculine, but still be gay. I don't mean masculine but still obviously gay. Think of your typical bronzerider material, but gay. He can't bond a brown or bronze because of his preferences, but he's not the right personality type for a blue or green.
To be realistic, you've either got to dump the stereotypical personalities for the colours, or you've got to dump the sexuality rules, because otherwise you'd never be able to get enough Candidates for all the dragons, and within a few years you'd have no dragons left and Pern gets eaten by Thread. The sexuality rules make the most sense to ditch, because that really effiminate-but-not-gay guy would go really well on a green. He'd probably go really well with a masculine-but-not-lesbian girl on a blue, don'tcha think?
There's also the fact that homosexuality is considered a bad thing on most of Pern, and most of the families are more traditional than what you get here on Earth. Very few children grow up outside of the nuclear family, so the numbers of homosexuals would actually be somewhat less on Pern than it is on Earth. Which comes back to the statistics I mentioned before.
I probably gave this a lot more thought than I really should have.
But one final note I might as well make. It'll come out eventually anyway. I'm gay, and if you wanted, I could give a full psychological breakdown of exactly why. Not that you really want to know that much about the inside of my head, but still.
But people always get really shocked. They say "How can you say it's not genetic when you ARE gay?"
Heh.
A person's gender identity is determined by their relationship with their parents between the ages of two and ten. A boy who never forms a strong relationship with his father (or any father-figure - a male friend of the family, a big brother, etc) can end up gay. A girl who never has a strong relationship with her mother (or any mother figure - a female friend of the family, a big sister, etc) can end up lesbian.
This doesn't mean that every boy who doesn't have a father-figure will turn out gay. And it doesn't mean that every child brought up with two parents will be straight. It's all determined by what relationship they have with which parent at which point in their childhood, so it's quite complicated.
What it means, in an overall view, is that a child could be brought up by a gay couple and not turn out gay themselves - one 'parent' would be a mother, and the other a father. A child's actually more likely to be gay if they grow up with only one parent, which is why there's a lot more homosexuals around these days. Both because it's more acceptable to be open about it, and because so many families these days have only one parent.
The thing I'll note is that homosexuality is not genetic. But that still doesn't mean it's a choice, as such. How can anybody really make a choice about something that was determined when they were less than ten years old, in accordance to the relationships they had with their parents?
And, to sound horribly cliche, everybody's a little gay, but it's a sliding scale, rather than black and white. Bisexuals are people who're halfway along that scale, and can go either way.
Now, what this all means in relation to Anne's rules is the following:
Firstly, a guy can grow up to be very feminine in behaviour, but not be gay. He'd still have a lot of female attributes to his personality and his mannerisms, but he wouldn't be attracted to other men. What colour dragon would he bond? If a blue or green is only supposed to bond to males who're gay, he couldn't have a blue or green. But he's not exactly the right personality type for a brown or bronze.
On the other hand, a guy can grow up very masculine, but still be gay. I don't mean masculine but still obviously gay. Think of your typical bronzerider material, but gay. He can't bond a brown or bronze because of his preferences, but he's not the right personality type for a blue or green.
To be realistic, you've either got to dump the stereotypical personalities for the colours, or you've got to dump the sexuality rules, because otherwise you'd never be able to get enough Candidates for all the dragons, and within a few years you'd have no dragons left and Pern gets eaten by Thread. The sexuality rules make the most sense to ditch, because that really effiminate-but-not-gay guy would go really well on a green. He'd probably go really well with a masculine-but-not-lesbian girl on a blue, don'tcha think?
There's also the fact that homosexuality is considered a bad thing on most of Pern, and most of the families are more traditional than what you get here on Earth. Very few children grow up outside of the nuclear family, so the numbers of homosexuals would actually be somewhat less on Pern than it is on Earth. Which comes back to the statistics I mentioned before.
I probably gave this a lot more thought than I really should have.
But one final note I might as well make. It'll come out eventually anyway. I'm gay, and if you wanted, I could give a full psychological breakdown of exactly why. Not that you really want to know that much about the inside of my head, but still.
But people always get really shocked. They say "How can you say it's not genetic when you ARE gay?"
Heh.
-
DNS
- Ancient Dragon
- Posts: 3852
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 3:47 pm
- Location: On top of the rainbow
- Contact:
The science of homosexuality is so impresise anyways, that it's all to moot. X.x I dislike mccafferys rules for everything becuase htey just DON'T WORK. she turns firelizards with the aid of some genetic manipulation and a magical chemical into gender-presise huge firebreathing empathetic creatures? They choose bonds when they're infants, for gods' sake. How does one change the mind of a creature that forms weak empathetic bonds to something that forms bonds so strong that one dies without the other and that can choose out the correct gender through pheramones, with the aid of a single chemical?
Pseudoscience.
It's all pseudoscience, and that's my problem with it. ._. so i tend to ignore it. I commend mccaffery from the HUGE ammount of research that went into her books, seriously, what she did was take an idea from a short story and turn it into a huge series. the ideas came first, the reasons came later, but she had to reasearch all of that and she did a wonderful job of taking an outlandish concept and making it somewhat plausable. But there's only so far it'll go.
When i hatch a clutch, generally, i use a variaty of colours and markings. No gender-colour-fertility links. Because that doesn't happen in nature as far as i know. ._. Where is a species wherein all the fertile females are so big (THAT does make sense) and a certain colour. When i hatch, rank and fertility is based on size and fertility-- that is, a queen is a large female capable of bearing so many eggs, and what those eggs hatch into and how many of those eggs are fertilised depends on the male who flies her. and it goes down; uncommon to common. commons being small females capable of having few eggs if any. The colours and markings? Varies. More freedom, that way. Besides, the only thing i can think of that's like canon at all is calico cats, which TEND to be female because that particular marking gene seems to be sex-linked. But I have MET a male calico before, so it happens.
It gets so confusing~
Point in a nutshell: MCcaffery's pseudoscience annoys the crap out of me for it's flaws, so i ignore it. >.>
but yes. XP everything shiolar is true, certainly. The only thing is, bronze riders do not actually bang the male greenriders. I think mccaffery decided that fairly recently, cuz the only mention of it is in Skies and in the dragonlover's guide. But standby partners are what's used, and when I HAVE to play canon, that's what i use.
>.>
It's so much easier to just screw canon over though. and there's more leeway for creativity.
Pseudoscience.
It's all pseudoscience, and that's my problem with it. ._. so i tend to ignore it. I commend mccaffery from the HUGE ammount of research that went into her books, seriously, what she did was take an idea from a short story and turn it into a huge series. the ideas came first, the reasons came later, but she had to reasearch all of that and she did a wonderful job of taking an outlandish concept and making it somewhat plausable. But there's only so far it'll go.
When i hatch a clutch, generally, i use a variaty of colours and markings. No gender-colour-fertility links. Because that doesn't happen in nature as far as i know. ._. Where is a species wherein all the fertile females are so big (THAT does make sense) and a certain colour. When i hatch, rank and fertility is based on size and fertility-- that is, a queen is a large female capable of bearing so many eggs, and what those eggs hatch into and how many of those eggs are fertilised depends on the male who flies her. and it goes down; uncommon to common. commons being small females capable of having few eggs if any. The colours and markings? Varies. More freedom, that way. Besides, the only thing i can think of that's like canon at all is calico cats, which TEND to be female because that particular marking gene seems to be sex-linked. But I have MET a male calico before, so it happens.
It gets so confusing~
Point in a nutshell: MCcaffery's pseudoscience annoys the crap out of me for it's flaws, so i ignore it. >.>
but yes. XP everything shiolar is true, certainly. The only thing is, bronze riders do not actually bang the male greenriders. I think mccaffery decided that fairly recently, cuz the only mention of it is in Skies and in the dragonlover's guide. But standby partners are what's used, and when I HAVE to play canon, that's what i use.
>.>
It's so much easier to just screw canon over though. and there's more leeway for creativity.
-
Mystic Dragon
- Great Wyrm
- Posts: 2290
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:37 am
- Location: Tris'Hath
- Contact:
Uh... you might not want to be posting that as fact, hun. That's one theory. A popular one, but only a theory. There are several.
Personally I subscribe to the theory that a person's gender identity is flexible, but swayed towards one particular direction at birth. It can change according to a person's will, even if subconsciously they know that their choice isn't the one that will deliver the most pleasure. Hence why there are cases of homosexual people living in hetrosexual relationships their entire lives until near the very end.
:D And good for you for coming out! Honestly, if I met those people who propose that it's entirely genetic, I'd likely thwack 'em. I really, /really/ am not a fan of that theory.
Personally I subscribe to the theory that a person's gender identity is flexible, but swayed towards one particular direction at birth. It can change according to a person's will, even if subconsciously they know that their choice isn't the one that will deliver the most pleasure. Hence why there are cases of homosexual people living in hetrosexual relationships their entire lives until near the very end.
:D And good for you for coming out! Honestly, if I met those people who propose that it's entirely genetic, I'd likely thwack 'em. I really, /really/ am not a fan of that theory.
https://renaissancebookpress.com/2017/0 ... tlin-caul/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
:/ Well, I'm not gonna get into the 'rationalizing sexualities' debate because... I don't /care/. I ams what I ams and frankly, if it's genetic or if it's some side-effect of how I got along with my parents, it doesn't matter to me.
I will agree with the belief that everyone's a little gay/everyone's bisexual. X3 BUT I also respect that some people don't like that belief, and are either one or the other enough that they have the right, if they'd like, to call themselves only-straight or only-gay.
The only person who's allowed to label you is you. :D Heck, I have a whole rationale as to why I label myself bisexual instead of pansexual or any of the other wonderful diverse terms out there.
I will agree with the belief that everyone's a little gay/everyone's bisexual. X3 BUT I also respect that some people don't like that belief, and are either one or the other enough that they have the right, if they'd like, to call themselves only-straight or only-gay.
The only person who's allowed to label you is you. :D Heck, I have a whole rationale as to why I label myself bisexual instead of pansexual or any of the other wonderful diverse terms out there.
I suppose I should have been more clear, Mystic...
My theory's not too different from yours, but I go for swayed during childhood rather than at birth. And your original gender identity is determined by your relationship with your parents, because at that age, you're too young to choose for yourself. Later on, it's a different matter, but I think that the majority of people never actually question their gender identity, as long as they're happy with who they are.
If you rule at genetics because it really doesn't make any sense (technically, it'd breed itself out in a few generations), then all you have left is psychological. I like my theory because it makes the most sense from a scientific point of view, and I can relate it directly to my own psychology, if that makes sense?
The main argument against the genetic thing is there are guys who were in a straight relationship most of their life, and then 'came out' much later, but after having a handful of kids. If it's genetic, then some of those kids should be gay as well, shouldn't they?
I always had a problem with Anne McCaffrey's thing about gay guys giving off pheromones that dragons can detect. Did anybody read about that? Apparently, she was even quoted to have said in an interview that a guy that takes part in gay sex will then become gay, regardless of whether he wanted to or not. That had been scientifically proven, she said.
And yeah, a lot of people could make the choice if they wanted to; I bet a lot of people don't even think about it at all.
My theory's not too different from yours, but I go for swayed during childhood rather than at birth. And your original gender identity is determined by your relationship with your parents, because at that age, you're too young to choose for yourself. Later on, it's a different matter, but I think that the majority of people never actually question their gender identity, as long as they're happy with who they are.
If you rule at genetics because it really doesn't make any sense (technically, it'd breed itself out in a few generations), then all you have left is psychological. I like my theory because it makes the most sense from a scientific point of view, and I can relate it directly to my own psychology, if that makes sense?
The main argument against the genetic thing is there are guys who were in a straight relationship most of their life, and then 'came out' much later, but after having a handful of kids. If it's genetic, then some of those kids should be gay as well, shouldn't they?
I always had a problem with Anne McCaffrey's thing about gay guys giving off pheromones that dragons can detect. Did anybody read about that? Apparently, she was even quoted to have said in an interview that a guy that takes part in gay sex will then become gay, regardless of whether he wanted to or not. That had been scientifically proven, she said.
And yeah, a lot of people could make the choice if they wanted to; I bet a lot of people don't even think about it at all.
What? XD Pheremones? Oh, that makes me giggle. McCaffrey, you are really grasping there. (And the problem with scientific studies is that, especially in the realm of sexuality issues, there is a study that 'proves' every single point of view.)
But then again, maybe it explains why some people have really good gaydars. *cackles* Highly evolved noses, anyone?
But then again, maybe it explains why some people have really good gaydars. *cackles* Highly evolved noses, anyone?
-
Mystic Dragon
- Great Wyrm
- Posts: 2290
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:37 am
- Location: Tris'Hath
- Contact:
XD Well that's a good theory too, but it has flaws insofar as there /are/ rigidly homosexual people and rigidly heterosexual people. I do not refer herein to homophobes. Those people are just stupid. Rather, I refer to myself. I can appreciate the female form, but I could never touch it. I am strictly heterosexual.
And I have absolutely no problem with homosexuality, bisexuality, or asexuality either. :3 If you can find a person to make you happy in this life, all power to you. It's a rare thing these days.
I am absolutely facinated by the study of sexuality and taboos. It's one of my favourite parts of studying psychology. What /really/ gets to me, more than the amount of choices out there, is the varied reactions. People can be so incised by someone else's life choice. Why? How does it affect them? What does it matter if a guy choses another guy over a girl? It's like some people believe society as a whole has to decide what's moral and what's not, but they only come off as being paranoid and biased.
One of the working theories that I like is that we have so overpopulated the world that strict, homosexual relationships are mother nature's way of bringing things back to normal. It happens often enough in other animals. Why not humans?
And I have absolutely no problem with homosexuality, bisexuality, or asexuality either. :3 If you can find a person to make you happy in this life, all power to you. It's a rare thing these days.
I am absolutely facinated by the study of sexuality and taboos. It's one of my favourite parts of studying psychology. What /really/ gets to me, more than the amount of choices out there, is the varied reactions. People can be so incised by someone else's life choice. Why? How does it affect them? What does it matter if a guy choses another guy over a girl? It's like some people believe society as a whole has to decide what's moral and what's not, but they only come off as being paranoid and biased.
One of the working theories that I like is that we have so overpopulated the world that strict, homosexual relationships are mother nature's way of bringing things back to normal. It happens often enough in other animals. Why not humans?
https://renaissancebookpress.com/2017/0 ... tlin-caul/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
DNS
- Ancient Dragon
- Posts: 3852
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 3:47 pm
- Location: On top of the rainbow
- Contact:
yeah, it talks about that in the article i mentioned somewhere arlier, that you can find on sabria's website. She wrote a whole thing about how infant dragons use pheramones to find their lifemates.
:/ There's actually a lot of interesting stuff on the theories of homosexuality~ I did a whole series of reports on it. They think it's not so much genetic as prenatal, with perhaps SOME information on like, testosterone immunity in mothers and whatnot. But that's all based on correlational studies, so any conclusions drawn from it are shakey at best. Correlations give you a trend, but you might miss things when trying to determine cause and effect.
/fun technical things.
But in anycase, homosexuality has turned up in all genetic populations at a fairly even rate, and it's first records are in ancient mesopotamia or however that place is spelled. ._. i failed an exam because i couldn't spell that damn name. Ahem. and animals do it too, so it's not likely to be genetic.
:/ There's actually a lot of interesting stuff on the theories of homosexuality~ I did a whole series of reports on it. They think it's not so much genetic as prenatal, with perhaps SOME information on like, testosterone immunity in mothers and whatnot. But that's all based on correlational studies, so any conclusions drawn from it are shakey at best. Correlations give you a trend, but you might miss things when trying to determine cause and effect.
/fun technical things.
But in anycase, homosexuality has turned up in all genetic populations at a fairly even rate, and it's first records are in ancient mesopotamia or however that place is spelled. ._. i failed an exam because i couldn't spell that damn name. Ahem. and animals do it too, so it's not likely to be genetic.
-
DNS
- Ancient Dragon
- Posts: 3852
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 3:47 pm
- Location: On top of the rainbow
- Contact:
yeah, it talks about that in the article i mentioned somewhere arlier, that you can find on sabria's website. She wrote a whole thing about how infant dragons use pheramones to find their lifemates.
:/ There's actually a lot of interesting stuff on the theories of homosexuality~ I did a whole series of reports on it. They think it's not so much genetic as prenatal, with perhaps SOME information on like, testosterone immunity in mothers and whatnot. But that's all based on correlational studies, so any conclusions drawn from it are shakey at best. Correlations give you a trend, but you might miss things when trying to determine cause and effect.
/fun technical things.
But in anycase, homosexuality has turned up in all genetic populations at a fairly even rate, and it's first records are in ancient mesopotamia or however that place is spelled. ._. i failed an exam because i couldn't spell that damn name. Ahem. and animals do it too, so it's not likely to be genetic.
:/ There's actually a lot of interesting stuff on the theories of homosexuality~ I did a whole series of reports on it. They think it's not so much genetic as prenatal, with perhaps SOME information on like, testosterone immunity in mothers and whatnot. But that's all based on correlational studies, so any conclusions drawn from it are shakey at best. Correlations give you a trend, but you might miss things when trying to determine cause and effect.
/fun technical things.
But in anycase, homosexuality has turned up in all genetic populations at a fairly even rate, and it's first records are in ancient mesopotamia or however that place is spelled. ._. i failed an exam because i couldn't spell that damn name. Ahem. and animals do it too, so it's not likely to be genetic.
I know someone with a really good gaydar. He also happens to be more obsessed with psychology than I am, and he /really/ studies body language. Can't be his nose, coz he can never smell anything... Heh.
And I totally respect people's right to whatever sexuality they choose, and their right to not care about why, too. I'm just naturally obsessive. I like to know the reason behind absolutely everything, be it studying my own mind or dismantling the hole puncher at work to figure out how it works...
And I totally respect people's right to whatever sexuality they choose, and their right to not care about why, too. I'm just naturally obsessive. I like to know the reason behind absolutely everything, be it studying my own mind or dismantling the hole puncher at work to figure out how it works...
-
Mystic Dragon
- Great Wyrm
- Posts: 2290
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:37 am
- Location: Tris'Hath
- Contact:
@Shiolar
:D Ah, I see what you mean now. Have you ever studied the Joan/Jon case? It's not exactly what we're talking about, but it goes into some pretty need stuff on gender alignments.
:D Ah, I see what you mean now. Have you ever studied the Joan/Jon case? It's not exactly what we're talking about, but it goes into some pretty need stuff on gender alignments.
https://renaissancebookpress.com/2017/0 ... tlin-caul/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
An interesting point on animals... I have a lesbian rabbit. I got her when she was quite young, and she grew up without any other rabbits around... And she's definitely a girl, the vet has confirmed this. But when I got another female rabbit, she got a bit... funny. Claudia thinks Anja would make a great mate, but Anja's not so enthusiastic...
And no, I haven't studied the Joan/Jon case... not even heard of it, actually. I'll check it out, though. I'll see what Google can find for me.
And no, I haven't studied the Joan/Jon case... not even heard of it, actually. I'll check it out, though. I'll see what Google can find for me.
I really dislike homophobic people. And those who think homosexuality/bisexuality is wrong. I mean, my ex-girlfriend is in ROTC at our school. She asked me to take her to Navy Ball, as her date. Now, I am /not/ the girly type. I'm not butch, per se, but I prefer the dominant spot. And I have never in my life worn a dress since I was able to dress myself. But I was told I could not wear a tux to the Navy Ball not only because of their strict dresscode, but because I was a girl. And I could not go as my ex's date, but as her 'friend'.
Same with prom. I went with my ex to that as well, as did two of our lesbian friends. We were not allowed to wear tuxedos or dress suits. We had to wear dresses and play the part of the pretty girl. And while straight couples were practically having sex in public, we'd get fussed at for so much as dancing too closely.
I guess that's what happens when you live in a redneck town but still. Some of the things that go on are just... rawr.
... I really hate dresses.
XD
Same with prom. I went with my ex to that as well, as did two of our lesbian friends. We were not allowed to wear tuxedos or dress suits. We had to wear dresses and play the part of the pretty girl. And while straight couples were practically having sex in public, we'd get fussed at for so much as dancing too closely.
I guess that's what happens when you live in a redneck town but still. Some of the things that go on are just... rawr.
... I really hate dresses.
XD
*headscritches* It's time like this I realize how lucky I've been, and didn't even know it at the time. No one gave me crap for taking Terry to my grad as my date, and I even went to the super-sporty school in my city. ^_^; Then again, we didn't even have a 'prom', per se, more like a mass dinner and dancing after.
It really varies by location and surroundings. :/ We had only one openly gay guy in my jr high school - and he was one of those guys that I honestly don't believe has made it to today for one reason or another. (It wasn't a good time to be out and a teenager, in 1980.)
I hate dresses, though I have to admit there's a couple I own that I look *goooood* in. Myself I'm not remarkably bi, but two extremely different women in my life I could consider myself having been in love with at one point or another. My issue of course, is that I'm so not a female inside. Sure it's okay being a woman, it's actually gotten better over the years. But what I wouldn't give for some *serious* body-resculpting and rearrangements... N'then I'd be 'gay' because... well, I'm still not into women lol!
I'm so glad that I wasn't born even 10 years earlier. The whole world simply couldn't deal with anything other than the normal everyday 'guy girl' thing. When there are so many shades in between, and so many options and descriptions for one's preferences.... Two genders just aren't enough.
Besides, we're all 'neutral until proven otherwise' online... hah.
I hate dresses, though I have to admit there's a couple I own that I look *goooood* in.
Myself I'm not remarkably bi, but two extremely different women in my life I could consider myself having been in love with at one point or another. My issue of course, is that I'm so not a female inside. Sure it's okay being a woman, it's actually gotten better over the years. But what I wouldn't give for some *serious* body-resculpting and rearrangements... N'then I'd be 'gay' because... well, I'm still not into women lol! I'm so glad that I wasn't born even 10 years earlier. The whole world simply couldn't deal with anything other than the normal everyday 'guy girl' thing. When there are so many shades in between, and so many options and descriptions for one's preferences.... Two genders just aren't enough.
Besides, we're all 'neutral until proven otherwise' online... hah.
Author of Repurposed
kshau-protectorate.com
kshau-protectorate.com