Monday, May 21, 2018 around midnight EDT, the site will go offline for some scheduled routine maintenance. Sorry for the inconvenience. [ X Dismiss ]
Home « Forum « Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

Tropes

EzzyB

A while back I had a great time simply perusing a website on tropes. Honestly I wasn't very familiar to the term then and it fascinated me.

We all use them, apparently even if we didn't know the definition of the word at the time.

So I wanted to start a thread of the most overused tropes on SOL. Not mean-spirited, have some fun with it.

I'll start with my favorite SOL face-palms when I see them.

Ninja Boy
Seriously is there a male protagonist outside my own stories that is not an expert at martial arts? Every one seems to wake up in the morning with nothing on his mind but beginning Tai Chi. Ninja Boy is mild mannered, a lover, not a fighter, until he meets 17 nasty, heavily armed thugs in a dark alley.

As a corallary I'll add one more before you beat me to it.

Ex Navy SEAL If Ninja Boy isn't, well, a boy, then he has undergone the most rigorous training the military has to offer. Not ex special forces, not ex Delta Force, nope. Ex Navy SEAL

Capt. Zapp

@EzzyB

Not ex special forces, not ex Delta Force, nope. Ex Navy SEAL


There are those who will argue that there is no such thing as an "EX" of any of those you mentioned.

Replies:   EzzyB  ezrick
red61544

Instant Wealth. Whether it comes from an inheritance, a lawsuit or a lottery win, we seem to have a lot of protagonists on SOL who acquire Instant Wealth.

Have you ever noticed that Ninja Boy never has to spar or practice kata but somehow retains his proficiency when facing those thugs?

Replies:   ezrick
Dominions Son

@EzzyB

Ex Navy SEAL If Ninja Boy isn't, well, a boy, then he has undergone the most rigorous training the military has to offer. Not ex special forces, not ex Delta Force, nope. Ex Navy SEAL


Don't forget USMC (United States Marine Corps) Recon.

Not_a_ID

@Dominions Son

Don't forget they're single. Either because they never settled down for some reason, or because of some "tragic event" in their past.

Failing that, they have a family, but either "a dark secret from their past" comes calling, or some kind of disaster wrecks mass havoc on their life.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Not_a_ID

Not all tropes are inherently bad, many are unavoidable. Reality is that "average every day life" is boring, and isn't much of an "escape" for anyone.

Which means you want your character to be "mobile" in some way, while also keeping them relatable. So you thus either end up with an "unattached" character who is "free" to go and do as they please. Or you have the character encounter a "life changing experience" that they couldn't have (reasonably) expected, as that opens the door for change, adventure, and discovery about themselves and or others along the way.

richardshagrin

@Dominions Son

Don't forget USMC (United States Marine Corps)

I read somewhere it stands for Uncle Sam's Misguided Children.

Switch Blayde

@EzzyB

Someone who died was killed by a drunk driver.

Replies:   EzzyB
awnlee jawking

Protagonist mentors a failing pupil for half an hour a week and within a fortnight he/she has caught up and getting straight As.

Protagonist is working from home as a writer or IT specialist but rarely has to do any work, and deadlines never get in the way of amorous pursuits.

AJ

Replies:   ezrick
awnlee jawking

@Not_a_ID

Either because they never settled down for some reason, or because of some "tragic event" in their past.


Or 'the bitch' traded up to a sleazy politician/lawyer, not realising the protagonist was a secret millionaire and had a sex repertoire that would leave a porn star envious.

AJ

graybyrd

One that has run its course: communists & communist regimes. The word has literally fallen off the screen. The new trope? Oligarch/oligarchy. And kleptocrat/kleptocracy. All modernized variants of the dictator/strongman theme. The new universe of antagonists.

Also falling out of style: drug lords and cartels. Perhaps co-opted by oligarchs and kleptocrats above.

Crumbly Writer

@EzzyB

I'll admit, I did a variant of the Ninja Boy myself, in my second book (#2 in a six book series). However, I took it in a different direction. Instead of being a super, well-trained fighter, he simply snapped into a phase where everything slowed down around him (which happens to a small number of people in dangerous situations) where he could think everything through (for the benefit of the reader) but still not respond any faster.

He'd often win the fight, but end up with no clue what it was about, and often injured as much (or more) than the loser.

Few people 'win' in a fight, as winning by either party is simply being able to walk away.

As for the Ex Navy Seal, again an insulting name to anyone in the military, don't forget that there's a whole market of both writers and readers who were once in the military, and thus are interested in stories which capture those types of moments.

But then, what about the biggest SOL tropes:

Irresistible Awkward Teen, who could never talk to women before, and suddenly finds every girl in the entire known universe (including their mothers and sisters, who should know them better) throwing themselves at them.

Or Family Incest trope, where people who've lived together their entire lives see someone and no one can resist attacking each other, and never has a single second thought of what they've done. After ward, they realize that every other family member in their entire city are also engaging in incest in one happy child-trade fest.

Finally there's the Trope Trope trope, where someone decides to lambast the exact same tropes that everyone else attacks, bringing nothing new to the conversation. 'D

Replies:   EzzyB
Switch Blayde

@EzzyB

Ex Navy SEAL


In my current work-in-progress novel, the protagonist is ex-Army Ranger/Special Ops. It worked for Jack Reacher and the protagonist in "Taken" and so many more. So why not my guy?

Just because it's been done a lot doesn't mean it can't be done well.

Crumbly Writer

@Switch Blayde

Just because it's been done a lot doesn't mean it can't be done well.

The key isn't that tropes are dead, but that they need to always be looked at with fresh eyes, occasionally turning them on their heads, inside out, or having them fail miserably when they're most needed (i.e. the Special Ops agent falling flat on his face, leaving the 'terrified girls' to save his sorry ass).

However, if it's already been done a thousand times, chances are, people are already sick of it, so you need to try something new!

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Switch Blayde

@Crumbly Writer


However, if it's already been done a thousand times, chances are, people are already sick of it, so you need to try something new!


I will never get sick of those stories/movies. If they're done well, that is.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
REP

Ex-military types who were Navy Seals, Rangers, Special Forces, Delta Force, Force Recon, or other are basically men who received a higher degree of marital training resulting in them being more lethal than the average person. They were also trained to use their training as a member of a team, which can be an advantage if your allies in a fight had similar training.

In fiction, these men's abilities are romanticized to the point it seems that they are omnipotent, and cannot be overwhelmed or stopped. Bullets fired at them always miss or they leave a minor wound that never puts them down for long. The wound gets sewn up, they flex the arm or leg, and are back to full functionality. Their bodies aging never seems to slow them done or impede them in any way, and war wounds just give them a bit of pain in the morning.

I'm no good at writing that type of scene; otherwise, I probably would even if it didn't reflect reality. :)

EzzyB

@Capt. Zapp

I'm a 12 year Army vet who spent some time with the Special Forces guys (a couple of years assigned to sixth group as an intel specialist).

I get it.

ezrick

@red61544

I'm certainly guilty of the instant wealth thing. :p

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
ezrick

@Dominions Son

Yeah, Force Recon in old-school parlance, but Google up, the Marines are actually organizing their own Special Forces units. They don't have much of a history yet, but we may hear about them in the future.

Force Recon was a platoon or so per unit that did long-range recon. Each Army division has the same. They are the Long Range Recon Patrols (LRRPS). Even, say, a mech infantry until will have a small airborne detachment for those missions. Normally dropped by that unit's own helicopters. Believe me a jump from a transport isn't near the rush as a jump for a CH-47 (rotor-wash collapses your chute for a second, definitely a code-brown the first time you do it.)

EzzyB

@Switch Blayde

Someone who died was killed by a drunk driver.


Absolutely!

I came up with a bridge that was hit by a barge in one of my stories just to avoid the drunk-driver thing. :p

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
ezrick

@awnlee jawking

Protagonist is working from home as a writer or IT specialist but rarely has to do any work, and deadlines never get in the way of amorous pursuits.


I think I'll combine this with Red's Instant Wealth and call the trope Penny's From Heaven

Replies:   awnlee jawking
EzzyB

@Crumbly Writer

Finally there's the Trope Trope trope, where someone decides to lambast the exact same tropes that everyone else attacks, bringing nothing new to the conversation. 'D


Like I said, don't attack them, just have fun with them. When visiting that TV-Tropes site I found a dozen of them in my own writing.

I don't judge because they exist in your writing or anyone elses.

Like I said, I thought I made some of this shit up on my own, only to find a whole site dedicated to it.

Dead baby-sister is actually on the site. So, guilty again.

Replies:   REP  Crumbly Writer
REP

@EzzyB

I don't judge because they exist in your writing or anyone elses.


Agreed. They are certainly in my stories.

Ernest Bywater

Like stereotypes, many tropes exist because they mimic real life.

Take the combat expert who handles one fight after another - in real life if they weren't already an expert they'd die in the first or second fight, so there's no story there. Same true for a number of other tropes.

And, yes, I've written stories with those tropes, and also written stories without them. Take a guess which ones get the better downloads and scores! Most people read to escape their daily life, so they want something that's different to what they see each day, they want the larger than life character - so we authors deliver them such characters.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Crumbly Writer
Not_a_ID

@Ernest Bywater

Take the combat expert who handles one fight after another - in real life if they weren't already an expert they'd die in the first or second fight, so there's no story there. Same true for a number of other tropes.


I just reflect on the comment from a Navy SEAL in a video I once watched on my ship's CCTV feed. "It isn't that we're THAT good. It's that everyone else is THAT bad."

You don't need to a grand master of combat in order to survive. You just need to be better prepared than the other guy when said fighting starts. Particularly once Murphey decides to get involved.

Sometimes its better to be lucky then good, but the better you are at something, the more likely you have a "lucky" break occur. As you'll recognize it for what it is.

awnlee jawking

The cuter the teenage schoolgirl, the more likely she is to wear a thong to school or no underwear at all.

AJ

Not_a_ID

@awnlee jawking

The cuter the teenage schoolgirl, the more likely she is to wear a thong to school or no underwear at all.


Have the prevent VPLs. ;)

It actually stands as a reasonable extrapolation, as the "hottest"/"cutest" tend to be the more fashion aware, and manage to dress to impress given what they've got. Even if it isn't the latest and greatest in current fashions.

Of course, I've also heard that women who go commando also have reduced risk of certain other "feminine issues" down there, as it promotes better airflow, and thus a dryer environment in general. ;)

red61544

@awnlee jawking

The cuter the teenage schoolgirl, the more likely she is to wear a thong to school or no underwear at all.

Sadly, I'm so old that it was different when I went to school. The cutest girls hid their charms. Only those with bovine qualities displayed theirs! I want a do-over.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@red61544

I've just read yet another female columnist moan about how uncomfortable thongs are to wear. Since schools routinely make PDAs nigh on impossible (unlike SOL schools, where there's always an empty classroom or closet for a quickie), I'm pretty sure most real life schoolgirls dress for comfort. I'd be willing to conduct an official survey - in the interests of science, of course! :)

AJ

Replies:   red61544  REP
awnlee jawking

The self-taught genius who can hack into any computer.

AJ

ustourist

The virgin nerd who learnt all about sex from the internet, but who makes women pass out with pleasure and is the best lover they have ever had.

red61544

@awnlee jawking

how uncomfortable thongs are to wear.

Having never worn one, I have wondered if there is a difference between a thong and a wedgie. Maybe the definition of a thong is "an intentional wedgie".

madnige

... what about Jennylynn Swift? I think I read that Wes introduced her in one story (Growing Together) just to be a minor character to add color, but she refused to be used for just that and demanded a story of her own (Magic Carpet) and many more cameo roles. She does seem to be settling down now though. Anyway, the Clarks and Evachevskis are living relatively normal lives for people in their positions, as far as I can tell.

REP

@awnlee jawking

another female columnist moan about how uncomfortable thongs are


It has never made much sense to me for a person, male or female, to select and wear the current fashion trend and then complain about discomfort, and that is especially true, when common sense would tell them that similar prior garments were uncomfortable, so this garment will probably be uncomfortable also.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
REP

Then there are the MCs who almost every night go to bed around midnight, completely satisfy 30-40 women, sleep, and get up before sunrise.

Bondi Beach

@Switch Blayde

In my current work-in-progress novel, the protagonist is ex-Army Ranger/Special Ops. It worked for Jack Reacher


Jack Reacher would be the first to tell you he is a former Army MP, and that his metabolism is such that he's tall and fit and doesn't have to work out---aside from throwing bad guys around, I guess---to stay that way.

It's the main reason Tom Cruise didn't seem like a good fit, although I think he's done a fairly credible job. Books are better than the movies, however.

bb

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Crumbly Writer

@Switch Blayde

I will never get sick of those stories/movies. If they're done well, that is.

Ah, that's the key. Part of doing a story well is understanding what's been done previously, and presenting an original interpretation of it, as opposed to merely regurgitating another of the same story, already endlessly repeated.

We enjoy these tropes, not because they're so predictable, but because they continue to surprise and intrigue us.

Crumbly Writer

@ezrick

I'm certainly guilty of the instant wealth thing. :p

In that case, could you share the results of your ill-gotten gains with the rest of us. After all, you still have another couple lives to recoup even more. ;D

Crumbly Writer

@EzzyB

I came up with a bridge that was hit by a barge in one of my stories just to avoid the drunk-driver thing. :p

Let me guess, the barge driver was drunk. 'D

Crumbly Writer

@EzzyB

Like I said, don't attack them, just have fun with them. When visiting that TV-Tropes site I found a dozen of them in my own writing.

I don't judge because they exist in your writing or anyone elses.

Like I said, I thought I made some of this shit up on my own, only to find a whole site dedicated to it.

The key to that realization isn't to avoid a whole category of popular stories, instead it's to recognize the weaknesses in the existing stories, and to present an additional challenge in recognizing them, and trying to work around them without weakening the underlying strength of the sub-genre.

Sometimes, recognizing a problem within a story is enough to win over doubtful readers, while taking a different tact will delight those already familiar with the tropes.

Switch Blayde

@Bondi Beach

Jack Reacher would be the first to tell you he is a former Army MP


I know he was an MP, but he must have been something else too because they couldn't find any record of him other than collecting his pension (only saw the movie). It was the skills he had that I was referring to, like the Liam Neeson character in "Taken."

Replies:   Bondi Beach
Crumbly Writer

@Ernest Bywater

Most people read to escape their daily life, so they want something that's different to what they see each day, they want the larger than life character - so we authors deliver them such characters.

Ah, the 'wish-fulfillment' theory of fiction writing. Though it completely ignores the 'allowing the reader to see parts of themselves they never considered' or the 'imparting broader messages about readers' lives' schools. 'D

Sometimes, reminding readers that they can still achieve great things, even though they're no longer in their prime, is important too. (Consider that an alternate wish-fulfillment.)

Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

The cuter the teenage schoolgirl, the more likely she is to wear a thong to school or no underwear at all.

Again, that fits into the 'fiction reflecting reality' argument, as few fat girls would ever be caught dead in a thong.

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Crumbly Writer

@REP

It has never made much sense to me for a person, male or female, to select and wear the current fashion trend and then complain about discomfort, and that is especially true, when common sense would tell them that similar prior garments were uncomfortable, so this garment will probably be uncomfortable also.

This goes to the previous argument about art reflecting life. The more unattractive girls (i.e. those heavier than normal) tend to find thongs more uncomfortable, simply because they don't fit as well and don't 'hold everything in the right place', while those who are already model thin don't mind the minor discomfort because of the positive reinforcement they provide their ego (something the less attractive wouldn't appreciate).

Just imagine a two-hundred pound teenage girl showing off her new thong and the male protagonist having to bit his lip, lest they curl in disgust. 'D

Switch Blayde

@Crumbly Writer

as few fat girls would ever be caught dead in a thong.


Really? I thought the purpose of a thong was not to show a panty line and it would be more apparent with a large butt.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Bondi Beach

@Switch Blayde

It was the skills he had that I was referring to, like the Liam Neeson character in "Taken."


He certainly has the skills, you're right in that, but if we are to believe Mr. Childs and the Jack Reacher Internet Military-Industrial Complex, he was in the Army, MPs, for thirteen years. That's it. No secret SEAL training, Marine Force Recon, LURP* teams, etc., etc. There is some indication he learned to fight when he was a kid, apparently.

Virtue of the creator: endow your character with whatever you want. The movies may have taken their own liberties. I've only read three or four of the novels.

*That's a phonetic spelling.

bb

Crumbly Writer

@Switch Blayde

Really? I thought the purpose of a thong was not to show a panty line and it would be more apparent with a large butt.

I suspect that's largely a common myth, as I can't imagine a thin string digging into your flesh not standing out worse than an indention spread out across a larger area.

Replies:   IliaVolyova  Not_a_ID
Ernest Bywater

I know lots of people from both genders and all ages who wear thongs.

Mind you, here in Australia what we call thongs you in America call flip-flops or shower shoes.

graybyrd

@Ernest Bywater

Mind you, here in Australia what we call thongs you in America call flip-flops or shower shoes.


But you don't normally wear them in the crack of yer ass ... unless I'm wildly misinformed about the Aussies!

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@graybyrd

But you don't normally wear them in the crack of yer ass ... unless I'm wildly misinformed about the Aussies!


Oh, sometimes a person wears a thong in their arse, but only after the angered someone enough the person kicked them in the arse so hard the thong got stuck there.

IliaVolyova

@Crumbly Writer

I'm assuming SB meant a pantyline over their pants/short/whatever while you mean a pantyline digging into their skin.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Crumbly Writer
Not_a_ID

@Ernest Bywater

I know lots of people from both genders and all ages who wear thongs.


There still are plenty of Americans who call flip-flops "thongs" instead even now. Heck, I remember "thong" being the common usage for flip-flops in my neck of the woods during childhood, and I'm in my 30's. That said, anyone under 50 talking about "thongs" in the US is more likely than not to be talking about the garment, not the shoe. If they're over 50, it's anybody's guess but the older they are, the more likely it is they're talking about the shoe.

Not_a_ID

@Crumbly Writer

I suspect that's largely a common myth, as I can't imagine a thin string digging into your flesh not standing out worse than an indention spread out across a larger area.


I think a fair bit of this is a lot like the whole thing about most women wearing improperly sized Bras. From my understanding (never tried it, but then, I'm male) If it's "digging into you" (particularly if you're female) you're doing it wrong.

Allegedly, they're quite comfortable if worn correctly. They do take some getting used to all the same, however, as most people have to become accustomed to the sensation of having a garment present in an area they've probably never had anything before, or if they did, they sought to remove it(wedgies). Which makes it more of a psychological issue than a physical one.

Of course, the thong isn't the ultimate in VPL avoidance, short of going commando, there is always the c-string, which even I have a hard time being convinced could ever be comfortable unless custom made, and even then...

Not_a_ID

@IliaVolyova

I'm assuming SB meant a pantyline over their pants/short/whatever while you mean a pantyline digging into their skin.


A VPL(Visible Panty Line) is where the outline of the "panties" can be seen through whatever else the person happens to be wearing. So a thong, which is little more than a string anywhere besides in the front of the groin. A "string" which also happens to pass through the crack of the ass thus avoids much chance of leaving any kind of noticeable "line" in any garment that conforms tightly with the posterior of the wearer, as there's literally nothing there.

Now if we're talking about after they get naked, that's another matter, but as already covered recently, if your underwear is leaving welts or otherwise leaving any kind of significant impression upon your skin, you're either doing something wrong, or wearing a compression garment. And I don't think thongs have a "compression garment" variation, so if that happens to someone in a thong, they're wearing the wrong size.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@IliaVolyova

I'm assuming SB meant a pantyline over their pants/short/whatever while you mean a pantyline digging into their skin.

I understood what he intended, as many people espouse how thongs look better by not showing the the panty line through the clothes worn over them. However, my point is, for slightly heavier people, the logic seems to fail, as they're more likely to dig into the skin, producing bigger bulges through the clothes. However, I don't have much personal experience with them (my wife and kids always refused to wear them, though I always wore Speedos (aka: "banana-hammocks") anytime I visited a beach requiring clothing.

Crumbly Writer

@Not_a_ID

if your underwear is leaving welts or otherwise leaving any kind of significant impression upon your skin, you're either doing something wrong, or wearing a compression garment.

Or simply aren't a size "0" fashion model with zero body fat. Most people require a certain amount of 'support', even in the best of circumstances, thus they'll end up with specific bulges when their underwear tries to constrain certain body parts.

Again, for those of us who can wear those garments (like Speedos) without an issue, they're fine, but I dislike when discussions like this disregard 80% of the population just because they're not our ideal fantasy partner.

Switch Blayde

@Ernest Bywater

here in Australia what we call thongs you in America call flip-flops


I actually got corrected on that mistake in a story. Although "panties" and "briefs" are plural, "thong" is not. When it is, it's the flip-flop.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater
Updated:

@Switch Blayde


I actually got corrected on that mistake in a story. Although "panties" and "briefs" are plural, "thong" is not.


So they'd say a person has a drawer with a dozen thong in it? I doubt it. I can understand when a person puts on a single unit where you'd say a person puts on panties you'd now say she put on a thong. But when you're referring to multiple units I'm sure the word is thongs.

Replies:   graybyrd  Not_a_ID
graybyrd

@Ernest Bywater

Fer bein' such skimpy little thangs, them thongs is pretty sexy things.

Replies:   REP
Not_a_ID

@Ernest Bywater

But when you're referring to multiple units I'm sure the word is thongs.

...unless someone is described as wearing "a pair of thongs."

Odds are, there was a bit of method to the madness where it concerns a thong being singular while panties isn't. The thong offers no individual leg coverage, so there is no "pairing" happening. (One "pant" per leg with two legs involved always resulting in "pair of pants")

Replies:   ustourist
ustourist

@Not_a_ID

Not disputing your reasoning, just looking for any informed additional explanation.
Why not a pair of bras though? (Admittedly that does sound weird to my mind). A person wears a pair of briefs, which only provide minimal hip coverage, but I seem to recall that pantaloons were originally two piece and tied together at the waist, which may also be part of the reasoning.
Unless the original brassiere was a plural format? Unfortunately my French is now non-existent.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@ustourist

Why not a pair of bras though?


The very early coverings that were the ancient predecessors of the bra were a single band of cloth tied around the upper female torso to help hold the breasts in place and protect them while working . it was a single item.

Early pants and pantaloons were tubes of cloth which a person put one of each on each leg and tied the top to the bottom of the shirt, then a version with string threaded through them keeping them together in a pair and they tied the string around their wist. In both these early versions they only covered the thighs and posterior and weren't joined in the centre. Thus the plural terminology.

Replies:   graybyrd  Not_a_ID
graybyrd

@Ernest Bywater

they only covered the thighs and posterior


And the rest dangled...

Till one day somebody invented the codpiece. However did a 'cod' get involved, Ernest? Something fishy about that.

Prior to that, a fellow in pants was working the field, and the wind was kickin' up something fierce. A fellow came walking by, glanced over, and commented: "It's a bit airy, arn't it!" The fellow with his bits floppin' in the gusts, growled back, "What'cha expect, Mate... feathers?"

Not_a_ID

@Ernest Bywater


Early pants and pantaloons were tubes of cloth which a person put one of each on each leg


My understanding is the pantaloons came first, and the "pant" or "pants" was an outgrowth from there. "Trousers" predates both of them however. Also, if you're talking to a Brit, "pants" is typically a reference to undergarments rather than overgarments.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trousers

REP

@graybyrd

them thongs is pretty sexy things


The thongs or what is in them? :)

richardshagrin

Isn't there a song, "Thongs for the mammaries"?

Dominions Son

@richardshagrin

If someone is wearing a thong on their mammaries, they are doing it wrong. :)

Replies:   Zom
REP

@richardshagrin

I thought it was "Slings for the Mammaries".

Replies:   EzzyB
awnlee jawking

The McGuffin shop which, despite being in a busy part of town, the protagonist has never noticed before. And after being sold the McGuffin by an old crone, is never able to find again.

AJ

EzzyB

@REP

I thought it was "Slings for the Mammaries".

My sisters, both rather well endowed, called them "boulder-holders".

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@EzzyB

My sisters, both rather well endowed, called them "boulder-holders".


Over the shoulder bolder holder. :)

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

Over the shoulder bolder holder.

Otherwise known as a "sling", at least slightly better than tripping over them. :(

Ernest Bywater

@richardshagrin

Isn't there a song, "Thongs for the mammaries"?


nah, you're confusing it with the military song of 'Tanks for the memories.'

Zom

@Dominions Son

If someone is wearing a thong on their mammaries, they are doing it wrong. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7PTycUI9Fg

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son
Updated:

@Zom

Very very wrong, and in any case, the way the little girl was wearing it (over regular clothes) it was more a mono-kini than a bra.

Replies:   Zom
Zom

@Dominions Son

it was more a mono-kini than a bra

But she was very sure it was a bra :-)

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Zom

But she was very sure it was a bra :-)


How many legs does a dog have if you call it's tail a leg?

REP

@Dominions Son

if you call it's tail a leg?

Is that what is meant by a leg up? :)

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

How many legs does a dog have if you call it's tail a leg?


That's easy. The number of legs a dog has if you don't call its tail a leg, then add one. Unless, like a dodgy coin, the dog has two tails, for which you'd need to conduct a two-tailed statistical test.

AJ

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

The number of legs a dog has if you don't call its tail a leg, then add one.


Nope. Just because you call the tail a leg, that doesn't make it a leg.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Not_a_ID

@Dominions Son

How many legs does a dog have if you call it's tail a leg?


Which "tail" are we talking about considering "penis" is the latin word for "tail" last time I checked a dictionary that gave such details. ;)

Ross at Play

@Dominions Son

How many legs does a dog have if you call it's tail a leg?

Q. What does a dog do on three legs, a man on two legs, and a woman sitting down?

A. I'll post that later.

Replies:   Zom
Zom

@Ross at Play

What does a dog do on three legs, a man on two legs, and a woman sitting down?

Micturate is one answer.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Zom

@Dominions Son

How many legs does a dog have if you call it's tail a leg?

As many as it had before the erroneous nomenclature.

Ross at Play

@Zom

My Q: What does a dog do on three legs, a man on two legs, and a woman sitting down?
Your A: Micturate is one answer.

That is the obvious answer that would occur to most.

The other answer, courtesy of the late, great Kenny Everett, is shake hands.

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

New reality check - if a man starts wearing women's clothes and calls himself a women, that makes him a woman. To say otherwise discriminates against transgender people and constitutes a hate crime.

So by precedent, a thing is whatever you call it :(

AJ

Replies:   Wheezer  REP
Wheezer

@awnlee jawking

New reality check - if a man starts wearing women's clothes and calls himself a women, that makes him a woman. To say otherwise discriminates against transgender people and constitutes a hate crime.


^--- Demonstrates an appalling lack of understanding and compassion about what being Transgender is. Transgender people (of both sexes) recognize that something is wrong from early childhood - long before they know what Transgender is.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer  REP  EzzyB
Crumbly Writer

@Wheezer

^--- Demonstrates an appalling lack of understanding and compassion about what being Transgender is. Transgender people (of both sexes) recognize that something is wrong from early childhood - long before they know what Transgender is.

And bitching about 'thought police' dictating speech is out-of-line. In case you haven't noticed, there are no hate crime regulations or protections concerning the transgendered. Instead, there's a movement (mostly among the younger generations who've grown up with many of them) trying to change the preconceptions of the older generations (much as they did concerning blacks in the 60, woman for centuries and gays in the 90s.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Crumbly Writer

there are no hate crime regulations or protections concerning the transgendered


Although it is largely up to individual police forces, most in the UK now treat attacks on transgenders, verbal or physical, as a hate crime.

BTW, the professionally offended will probably take issue with your use of the word 'transgendered'. I suggest you duck.

AJ

Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

BTW, the professionally offended will probably take issue with your use of the word 'transgendered'. I suggest you duck.

Sorry, "transexual". "Gender" is a fairly nebulous term when dealing with transfolk, as it refers to societal expectations more than anything else. Still, I suspect you're coming 'professionally paranoid' about the supposed 'professionally offended'. People take offense when someone says something either completely ignorant (not simply typos) or make outright bigoted and hateful comments. There's a BIG difference between having an opinion and trying to marginalize and harm people.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Crumbly Writer

Still, I suspect you're coming 'professionally paranoid' about the supposed 'professionally offended'.


With the current trend for 'safe spaces' and 'no platforming', I can see why the current generation are being labelled 'the snowflake generation'. Perhaps political correctness isn't such a rampant juggernaut in the US.

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer  Not_a_ID
Ross at Play
Updated:

@awnlee jawking

I suggest you duck.

I suggest CW, especially, has no reason to duck.
There is no one here who has more consistently advocated the principles that all people are entitled to tolerance for whoever they may be, and to be judged on the "content of their character".

Replies:   Zom
Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

Perhaps political correctness isn't such a rampant juggernaut in the US.

Again, I'd argue it's not so much "political correctness" as it is "generational blindness". In a country where one side can't agree with anything the opposition stands for, you can't expect people to 'politely disagree'. Hell, they shoot people for not putting their blinkers on, and gay and transfolk are more likely to be murdered than to raise their voice in a public forum, so I think—all things considered—that we're doing fairly well as it is.

@Ross at Play

I suggest CW, especially, has no reason to duck.

Thanks for that. It's nice to know that taking a stand counts for more than merely making yourself available as a punching bag by the offended/offensive.

Replies:   Not_a_ID
REP

@awnlee jawking

So by precedent, a thing is whatever you call it :(


Trump would probably define that as an "Alternative Definition".

Sort of like his term "Alternative Fact", which means "I can believe anything I want to believe and call you a liar if you disagree with me".

REP

@Wheezer

long before they know what Transgender is.


I agree Wheezer.

Transgender is nothing more than a label for what some people feel about their gender. That feeling sometimes conflicts with the gender assignment society forces on them, but it doesn't mean they are wrong or that their feeling are incorrect or improper.

richardshagrin

Is a person who hates tropes a misantrope?

Crumbly Writer

@richardshagrin

Is a person who hates tropes a misantrope?

No, they're "illiterate". You can't have literature (or drama, comedy, non-fiction, etc.) without encountering tropes. People might dislike certain ones, but you can't hate them all, otherwise you might as well live in a cave (without a cellphone) for the rest of your life.

Ross at Play

@richardshagrin

Is a person who hates tropes a misantrope?

That is what most thropes believe. :-)

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@Ross at Play

That is what most thropes believe.

Nope. "Thropes" are what story tropes tie themselves up with when they play B&D, not to make assumptions about anyone's story, that is. :-)

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

Nope. "Thropes" are what story tropes tie themselves up with when they play B&D, not to make assumptions about anyone's story, that is. :-)


And here I though a thrope was a trope that turned into a wolf during the full moon.

Replies:   graybyrd
graybyrd

@Dominions Son

And here I though a thrope was a trope that turned into a wolf during the full moon.


Nope. That's a clawful grope.

Zom
Updated:

@Ross at Play

and to be judged on the "content of their character"

There is a reasonable argument that says there can be instances when there is not time for that.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@Zom

There is a reasonable argument that says there can be instances when there is not time for that.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's a common protest, but the argument isn't against making quick first impressions about someone, it's the ability to set those first impressions aside after encountering someone and allowing their behavior and personality to change your opinion that defines you as a human being. Otherwise, your value as a human is no more valuable than a simple Google search algorithm.

Replies:   Zom
awnlee jawking

@richardshagrin

The patron saint of tropes is Saint Tropez.

AJ

awnlee jawking

@ezrick

Penny's From Heaven


Greengrocer's Apostrope ;)

AJ

Not_a_ID

@awnlee jawking

With the current trend for 'safe spaces' and 'no platforming', I can see why the current generation are being labelled 'the snowflake generation'. Perhaps political correctness isn't such a rampant juggernaut in the US.


Oh, it's common enough, online at least. In person is a bit more rare, particularly in more conservative areas.

Rampant bigotry remains far more common in my experience.

The simply ignorant just compound things.

In some respects, Trump's electoral success was likely due in large part to that ignorant/lazy(can't be bothered to change their habits) crowd back-lashing against the professionally offended.

Because they've been getting lumped in with the actual racists and bigots, and treated as such.

It ceased being about education and understanding. It's now all about who can scream the loudest, and who can get the government to support their side. With everyone seemingly under the mistaken belief that getting the government on your side is the magic "I win" button.

Replies:   REP
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


In a country where one side can't agree with anything the opposition stands for, you can't expect people to 'politely disagree'.


The killer in all of this, is that they DO agree on a number of things. But they're too busy going off on their "trigger" issues to notice. Too busy screaming at them to bother listening.

Zom

@Crumbly Writer

set those first impressions aside

Or strengthen them.

allowing their behavior and personality to change your opinion

Toward good or ill.

I know these are cynical views, but scars will build those. The important thing is to moderate any innate tendency to preferentially look for the best in people.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@Zom

The important thing is to moderate any innate tendency to preferentially look for the best in people.

Thanks, Zom.
That sounds like a simple statement of a truism all authors should be conscious of if they want to become the best they can be. :-)

REP

@Not_a_ID

ignorant/lazy(can't be bothered to change their habits) crowd


I don't recall the exact words, but one Trump supporter was quoted as saying -Yes I know Trump is a liar, but I believe he is telling me the truth.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Dominions Son
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@REP


I don't recall the exact words, but one Trump supporter was quoted as saying -Yes I know Trump is a liar, but I believe he is telling me the truth.


I think some of that disconnect is "big" vs "small" picture, and people being unable to properly elucidate it.

So alternately: "I know Trump is probably lying to me in regards to the details. But I think he's being truthful about his 'big picture' intentions."

There is more than "one kind of lie" out there, some are more forgivable than others. By whatever fuzzy metric they were using, the determined that while he may be lying about certain things, they didn't matter. As it was the other things they were concerned about.

Or to frame it yet another way that Democrats should love: They were "single issue voters." Much like the "Gay rights" crowd had tended to vote as a block historically on the single issue of "gay rights." Or how a number of women will historically vote over the single item of "women's issues" and so one and so forth.

Much like many of those voters didn't particularly care about the other issues(at least not enough to change their vote). Trump tapped into a "new" pool of "single issue voters" who had an array of issues that were "their thing" that rarely solidified into anything coherent as a group. Which goes back "Sure Trump is lying, but I think he's being genuine about 'my issue' so I don't care about the rest."

Edit: So now it is "the Democrats turn" to be exasperated by the seemingly strange behavior of voters who fixate on a specific (range) of issues and "disregard the big picture."

Dominions Son

@REP

I don't recall the exact words, but one Trump supporter was quoted as saying -Yes I know Trump is a liar, but I believe he is telling me the truth.


On top of what Not a ID said, you also get people who want to believe.

Tell people what they want to hear, and they will be motivated to believe you.

If someone wants something badly enough, if you tell them you can give them what they want, they will believe you.

Even if they know intellectually that what they want is impossible, if their desire is strong enough, they will find it impossible to doubt.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer  REP
EzzyB
Updated:

@Wheezer

Demonstrates an appalling lack of understanding and compassion about what being Transgender is. Transgender people (of both sexes) recognize that something is wrong from early childhood - long before they know what Transgender is.


Sorry if it's not politcally correct, but I call bullshit.

There was a lawsuit in Colorado. Interesting article about a a couple suing the local school system because their son wasn't allowed in the the girl's bathroom. Seems the couple decided their son "identified" female because he played with dolls. Even had a picture of the lovely child.

That five-year-old boy did NOT buy the dress he was wearing, nor did he dye his hair pink, nor was he old enough to make intelligent decisions on such things.

Nurture is much more important to children than Nature. I have ZERO doubt in my mind that the parents chose this child's sexual identification.

Replies:   Ava G
Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

If someone wants something badly enough, if you tell them you can give them what they want, they will believe you.

A certain someone famously said, "If you tell a big enough lie, everyone will believe you." What's most telling, is that even as he was saying that, they believed everything he said. By the way, that behavior led to his government's downfall, and sealed his fate (though I can't remember whether he was executed or died in prison).

REP

@Dominions Son

I agree with you DS. Wishful thinking is very powerful and it has led many of us into disastrous situations.

Ava G

@EzzyB

Seems the couple decided their son "identified" female because he played with dolls.


And a lot of other things, according to this article on Coy Mathis:

Then one night in January 2010, Kathryn was tucking him in for bed under his pink quilt, and Coy, then three, seemed upset. "What's wrong?" she asked. Coy, his head resting against his kitty-cat-print pillow, hugged his pink stuffed pony with the glittery mane that he'd gotten for Christmas and said nothing, his mouth bent in a tight frown. "Tell me," Kathryn urged. Coy's chin began to quiver.

"When am I going to get my girl parts?" he asked softly.

"What do you mean?"

"When are we going to go to the doctor to have me fixed?" Coy asked, tears now spilling down his cheeks. "To get my girl parts?"


--
Still, there is a cultural component to such things. I was wondering which restroom the fa'afafine of Samoa use. Apparently nobody in Samoa really cares.

awnlee jawking

@Ava G

Clearly not testimony from Coy himself. 3 year olds know nothing about sexual feelings or the purposes of 'girl parts'. Munchausen syndrome by proxy.

AJ

Crumbly Writer

@Ava G

Still, there is a cultural component to such things.

I'm sorry, I understand everyone's concern about children being 'forced', but who the hell would 'choose' to be gay if they actually had a choice. Transfolk have the highest suicide rate of any other group (except possibly dentists), and no one wants to be rejected by their families, fired from their jobs, or beat up in the street to the cheers of nearby cops.

As we've mentioned before, for those concerned about 'forcing kids', the standard now is to wait children are 18, but it's essential to act soon, otherwise they'll NEVER transition properly. Once the natural hormones kick in, they'll always look like their original sex. The solution is to take a drug to prevent their 'normal' hormones from taking effect until they're able to 'decide' they want to reverse their decision (which very few do).

@awnlee Jacking

3 year olds know nothing about sexual feelings or the purposes of 'girl parts'. Munchausen syndrome by proxy.

That's simply ignorant nonsense. Among the gays/lesbians I know, most (at least half) knew as children, same as young as 5 - 8. Much of those who didn't, only figured out they were 'gay' after multiple failed marriages.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Ava G  EzzyB
Not_a_ID

@Crumbly Writer

As we've mentioned before, for those concerned about 'forcing kids', the standard now is to wait children are 18, but it's essential to act soon, otherwise they'll NEVER transition properly. Once the natural hormones kick in, they'll always look like their original sex. The solution is to take a drug to prevent their 'normal' hormones from taking effect until they're able to 'decide' they want to reverse their decision (which very few do).


The thing here is, we're talking about a "tween" in most cases, although admittedly, there are reports of puberty hitting at even younger ages(I think the most extreme cases involved 8 year olds).

So even going for the "early intervention" route, you're still not looking at 6 year olds needing anything from the medical side. (At least, that's likely to be helpful at this level of medical expertise)

Dominions Son

@Not_a_ID

The thing here is, we're talking about a "tween" in most cases, although admittedly, there are reports of puberty hitting at even younger ages(I think the most extreme cases involved 8 year olds).


8 year olds showing signs puberty is not only not extreme it's normal.

Onset of puberty happens between 8 and 13 for girls and 9 and 14 for boys. Yes, there are recorded cases of early onset of puberty, but to be considered early it would have to be earlier than 8 for a girl or 9 for a boy.

http://www.webmd.com/children/guide/causes-symptoms#1

Oh, talk about early puberty, there is a recorded case from Peru of a girl giving birth at the age of 5 years 7 months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina

The boy she gave birth to was healthy and died in 1979 at the age of 40.

From the link above:

Her case was reported in detail by Dr. Edmundo Escomel in the medical journal La Presse Médicale, including the additional details that her menarche had occurred at eight months of age, in contrast to a past report stating that she had been having regular periods since she was three years old[1][5][6] (or 2½ according to a different article).[2] The report also detailed that she had prominent breast development by the age of four. By age five, her figure displayed pelvic widening and advanced bone maturation.

Ava G

@Crumbly Writer

@Crumbly Writer-
I think I need to make myself clear on the "cultural component" part, and apologize for my goof.

I was thinking of more AMAB (assigned male at birth) identifying as female in modern United States culture vs. AMAB identifying as fa'afafine in Samoan culture - that's why I included the link.

Someone identifying as "girl" in Atlanta might have identified as "fa'afafine" had she been raised in Apia. That's a distinction based partly on societal differences, which is where the "cultural component" I mentioned comes in.

The dynamics will be different among the Dineh (Navajo), who traditionally had five gender categories. Due to Western influence, there are even more ways a member of the Dineh nation may experience gender identity. Wesley Thomas' book on the topic sounds interesting; I'll have to get it through interlibrary loan.

transition properly

If Western society had nadleeh categories, would the concept of transitioning even come up? I don't know.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  awnlee jawking
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@Ava G


If Western society had nadleeh categories, would the concept of transitioning even come up? I don't know.


Probably, if only because the technical capability of making it happen is within reasonable expectation of existing in the lifetime of many people now entering middle age("We'll just grow you the sex organs you're currently missing.") People are already attempting it as it is, without the parts.

And that isn't even getting into gene therapy side, particularly when it comes to the younger ones, which would probably be the ultimately preferred path. Assuming the medical ethics side gets resolved(is it the child, or is it the parents?).

As for a related matter, I imagine it is becoming reasonable to say there probably will be a reproductively viable (artificial, human) hermaphrodite within the next 100 years, maybe 50 for that matter(and accomplished after they were born). Whether it's a genetically inheritable trait or not is another matter.

Edit: On the bioethics side, we're probably within 20 years of the first person being born as a genetically engineered, and quite possibly reproductively viable, hermaphrodite. Hopefully they check their work in animal trials first. If you think things are weird now...

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Not_a_ID

I imagine it is becoming reasonable to say there probably will be a reproductively viable (artificial, human) hermaphrodite within the next 100 years,


I suspect not. For the male side to function, the body needs large doses of testosterone. For the female side to function, the body needs large doses of oestrogen. Oestrogen neuters the male organs (it has been used for chemical castration and to control prostate problems) and testosterone has been used to assuage female problems, although with consequential infertility.

I don't think it's feasible to have a human body simultaneously capable of male and female reproductive functionality. Except on SOL, obviously :)

AJ

Replies:   Not_a_ID
awnlee jawking

@Ava G

If Western society had nadleeh categories, would the concept of transitioning even come up?


I'm pretty sure it would. Nadleeh categorises current appearance/functionality. Transgender people don't identify with their current appearance and functionality.

The article says that younger Navajo have adopted Western classifications - I see that as acceptance of a system with a better scientific basis rather than through coercion or cultural appropriation.

AJ

Replies:   Ava G
Not_a_ID

@awnlee jawking

I don't think it's feasible to have a human body simultaneously capable of male and female reproductive functionality. Except on SOL, obviously :)


And Japanese Futa Stories. ;)

I still wouldn't rule out the ability to make it work. Probably end up defaulting to naturally sterile and requiring a special drug regime in one direction or the other to become "fertile" in that specific direction? Or go the futa route, they're able to get pregnant by default, but shoot blanks until/unless other steps are taken.

The bigger challenge would be transitioning a male in that direction. A Y chromosomal ova could present issues unless they restricted their partners to XX Hermaphrodites.

Crumbly Writer

@Not_a_ID

So even going for the "early intervention" route, you're still not looking at 6 year olds needing anything from the medical side. (At least, that's likely to be helpful at this level of medical expertise)

Please, NO ONE ever suggested a medical intervention at six years old. I was addressing the point that 'no one knows anything about sex as a child', and I countered that many of the gays and lesbians I've known KNEW they were gay near those ages, so your (collective you) assumptions are clearly wrong. It's NOT about a desire for sex, it's knowing that you're not 'wired' the way the rest of the world is.

They're not about to go off an join an orgy at that age, but it also doesn't mean that they don't realize they don't fit into the mold that society tries to force them into.

That's why the current trend is to put off medical a legal decision until they're old enough, but that decision necessitates a medical intervention before they reach early puberty (i.e. 14, 16 or 18 is much too late). They don't require surgery at that point, but they need something which delays the onset of puberty. It can always be reversed later (though there are surprisingly few cases of anyone 'changing their minds', aside from cases of family applying extreme pressure for them to 'recant' their sexuality), but it eliminates the risk of their not being able to make the decision for themselves until it's already irreversable (i.e. they'll always like a man in or dress or a woman in hiking boots).

Seriously, you people call yourselves authors? How about doing some research on these topics you're so quick to spout off on?

EzzyB

@Crumbly Writer

I don't know if you are a parent or not Crumbly. That bundle you bring home from the hospital is an open book.

You write in that book, and hope to hell you write the correct things.

These parents wrote "girl" into a boy's book. I actually, to this day, advocate corporal punishment (just a smack on the hand that reaches for a stove or electrical outlet or a leg that begins to step into traffic) for children under the age of 5. The reason is that their brains aren't yet mature enough to reason (they also can't reason enough to understand where that punishment came from). They need a Pavlovian response at that age to keep them safe.

No five-year-old has any idea, nor has come to any conclusion, that he is a girl in a boy's body. It's his parents that have decided that for him.

awnlee jawking

@EzzyB

That bundle you bring home from the hospital is an open book.


I'm not convinced that has been settled. Some research seems to suggest genetic factors might influence orientation of sexuality.

Having said that, for a child to know that they're different, they have to know what they're different from. A five year old can probably spot that they're stuck in a wheelchair while their peers are running around kicking a football. But they're not going to know they have a different sexual orientation from most of their peers when the sexual feelings of all those concerned won't develop for several years.

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Ross at Play

@EzzyB

I actually, to this day, advocate corporal punishment (just a smack on the hand that reaches for a stove or electrical outlet or a leg that begins to step into traffic) for children under the age of 5.

You sound to me as an advocate of not taking a good idea (corporal punishment is counterproductive) to the point that it becomes stupid. :-)
I agree that a smack on the hand for young children is appropriate in some circumstances - such as situations you describe where your purpose is not to punish, but to distinguish an action they have attempted is potentially dangerous. I assume you apologise to the child for having to do it afterwards too.

Replies:   ezrick
Ava G

@awnlee jawking

The article says that younger Navajo have adopted Western classifications - I see that as acceptance of a system with a better scientific basis rather than through coercion or cultural appropriation.


The article also says that closeness to traditional Dine/Navajo culture plays a role in what classifications are adopted.

Power relations between societies would also be important; the United States had committed genocide against the Navajo nation. If Western society had the nadleeh, and the Dine a strict male/female binary, would young Dine identify as nadleeh rather than gay/lesbian?

There's also some coercion. Everything from driver's licenses to college admissions tests have just the M/F choice for gender; that's a powerful incentive to adapt to the system.

Going elsewhere - same-gender relations weren't viewed as a problem in Japan until the Meiji Era, when Japan started to adopt Western norms. Why were the norms adopted? Even though they hadn't conquered Japan, the Europeans held much more military power. It had nothing to do with having a better scientific basis.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Crumbly Writer

@EzzyB

I don't know if you are a parent or not Crumbly. That bundle you bring home from the hospital is an open book.

I agree completely. I've always said, "children's personalities seem to fall from the sky", because they'll all be similar, and the other will be completely different, so you never know what you're getting.

I also agree with you about corporal punishment. Once they get old enough, kids always learn enough from school to threaten to call 'protective services' and report you for abuse. Both my wife and I respond the exact same way: "go ahead, but don't expect to come back home again if you do. By the way, I don't think the foster home has all the nice things we provide." That shuts their power play down cold!

However, my comment about kids knowing their sexuality at an early age is based on actual research, rather than my 'gut response'. As I've said repeatedly here, most gays/lesbians and transfolk (but certainly not all) know by an incredibly young age that they either don't fit the role that's been assigned to them, or that there's something wrong with their bodies. And that realization has little to do with sex at that age. Pretending otherwise is just keeping your head in the sand so you won't have to hear what life is like for those people.

Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

I'm not convinced that has been settled. Some research seems to suggest genetic factors might influence orientation of sexuality.

That's never been documented. It's a favorite assumption, but 'they've never found a 'gay' gene, and while you frequently have more than one gay/lesbian person in the same family, studies that include those results couldn't correlate any basis for it beyond random chance.

However, as far as what kids know or don't know, it's clear your and EzzyB are going to ignore whatever I say on this subject, so I'll quit telling you what many people have told me over the years. If you want to believe that the mean is made of green cheese, or that Trump won the Presidency because he was the most qualified candidate, they you're free to live in your own fantasy world. Just don't expect the rest of the world to accept the nonsense that you're spewing.

Case in point: look at how many generations it took to convince the world that homosexuality isn't a severe mental disorder, best controlled by eliminating the person from the genetic line! Some things people simply want to believe, regardless of easily refutable facts.

Note: In contradiction to the above statement, I've never seen the 'age of sexuality' come up in a legitimate scientific study, mostly because children are not about to admit that they feel like freaks to their parents. So that argument is difficult to iron down with document fact other than self-reporting long after the fact. Yet, I've heard it so often, often by people who can't agree with whether sexuality is genetic or not, that it's difficult to discount.

In the end, the argument boils down to the old 'homosexuality' isn't natural argument. Anyone who's ever lived on a farm, or had pets, has likely encountered homosexual animals of all stripes, even though many 'farmers' refuse to accept the idea (I always imagine them beating the animals over the head until they quit their 'disgusting behavior'). It ends up being a 'convincing argument' for both sides.

Dominions Son

@Crumbly Writer

That's never been documented. It's a favorite assumption, but 'they've never found a 'gay' gene, and while you frequently have more than one gay/lesbian person in the same family, studies that include those results couldn't correlate any basis for it beyond random chance.


My personal opinion on this is that both nature(genetics) and nurture have an impact on this.

There doesn't have to be a gay gene in the sense of everyone with that gene turns out gay for genetics to play a role.

One of the biggest problems with the idea of homosexuality being genetic is how such a gene could persist, how would it avoid being bred out of the gene pool.

I have seen one interesting proposal for an answer to this.

There are known cases among animals where a single gene has drastically different effects in males than it does in females. While there are no documented cases of such genes in humans, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the human genome would contain such a gene.

I saw a couple of years back a small study done in England that showed that highly fertile women have a higher probability of producing gay sons. The studies authors were proposing just such a gene that results in increased fertility in women and gay men.

The study was far too small a sample size for definitive results, but it suggests an interesting mechanism for how a gay gene could persist in the gene pool.

awnlee jawking

@Crumbly Writer

I've never seen the 'age of sexuality' come up in a legitimate scientific study,


Interesting. One got a mention in my paper today and it reported that the average age a young person became sexually aware was 12. Okay, it was a really crap study but research has and is being done.

AJ

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

While there are no documented cases of such genes in humans,


There has been a claim that a gay gene had been found. Other research tends to support the sceptical view, although as logicians know, proving something doesn't exist is problematical. I reckon the issue has some way to go before being definitively resolved.

AJ

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

There has been a claim that a gay gene had been found.


When I said:

While there are no documented cases of such genes in humans,


I wasn't referring to a gay gene as such, but rather to genes that exist in both genders with distinctly different effects on each gender.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
ezrick

@Ross at Play

You sound to me as an advocate of not taking a good idea (corporal punishment is counterproductive) to the point that it becomes stupid. :-)


Again, I disagree. Children under five or six years of age have very little or no capacity to reason. It doesn't matter how many times you tell them not to stick their fingers in that power socket. They can't make something so abstract into a danger.

Studies show that the only genetic danger a child that age recognizes is heat, though I'm not so sure of even that. Heat grows as one goes near the source. So that may add something to the study.

Those tiny children need a Pavlovian response. The abstract idea of an electrical shock is foreign to them. The slap on the wrist is not.

Properly taught they reach a hand to that socket and say, "NO".

Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

One of the biggest problems with the idea of homosexuality being genetic is how such a gene could persist, how would it avoid being bred out of the gene pool.

Actually, there was a recent study which drew interesting parallels between gays and sibling cohesion, which might go a long way in explaining why a 'gay gene' would lead to success, especially in familial families (i.e. families related by family). Essentially, by having gay members, the female members of the tribe would be more fertile (better fed and better able to bear children), thus leading to the families genes having better chances overall. Add to that, that the genetic link is indirect, it probably requires a sequence of different genes, each of which is activated by different conditions.

If you combine that with your study (which I haven't seen done so far), it might be a reciprocal benefit (gays help women have more kids, which then produces more gay kids).

EzzyB

I have to say, as a general reply to the topic, that I ain't buying it.

I have no problem with a child choosing whatever they want at an adolescent stage. I still think it is highly influenced by their upbringing, but hey, if girl wants to love girl, or boy wants to love boy, or even become the opposite sex, whatever. Live and let live, and God knows I'd still love my own daughters if they made that choice.

But a five-year-old? Not buying it.

Crumbly Writer

@Dominions Son

I wasn't referring to a gay gene as such, but rather to genes that exist in both genders with distinctly different effects on each gender.

You mean like: establishing menstrual periods and improving prostate health? 'D Or maybe: remember details (where your spouse screwed up) and improves males ability to remain emotionally at the age of 12 all their lives. :-)

Crumbly Writer

@ezrick

Again, I disagree. Children under five or six years of age have very little or no capacity to reason. It doesn't matter how many times you tell them not to stick their fingers in that power socket. They can't make something so abstract into a danger.

I had a different response with corporal punishment. We took in my sister-in-laws kids, who wasn't able to raise her kids because of alcohol and drug issues. As a result of developmental issues, they never learned empathy (which is generally learned around age five, and if not learned early, can lead to life-long problems). As a result, the only thing they responded to was corporal punishment, which the youngest one saw as her only evidence of emotional connection to her parents, so it was a complex relationship.

We eventually recovered their empathy, though it took a LOT of sustained effort. We also managed to break the whole 'punishment is love' connection in the youngest (she's in a very healthy relationship now, though her sister (the one without the issue) didn't do as well.

Replies:   EzzyB
Crumbly Writer

@EzzyB

I have no problem with a child choosing whatever they want at an adolescent stage. I still think it is highly influenced by their upbringing, but hey, if girl wants to love girl, or boy wants to love boy, or even become the opposite sex, whatever. Live and let live, and God knows I'd still love my own daughters if they made that choice.

But a five-year-old? Not buying it.

Again, they (the ones who recognize such things early) aren't ready to act on it for years, but it seems to be a common trend not experienced by the cisgendered. What's more, they NEVER admitted it to their parents (although it's sounding like, as attitudes change, they're starting to now).

The point is, it really doesn't matter how you treat them. The point is, action needs to be taken before pubescence, otherwise it's largely too late. (i.e. you don't have to believe 6-year-olds think about such thing, though you do have to act around 10 to 12 years of age (to delay puberty).

Even worse, denying sexuality is a leading cause of suicide, as gays, trans and others feel unsupported and don't see options.

Replies:   ezrick
REP

There has been a great deal of research done on development of the brain. The following links address some of the information known. The first link indicates that our brains are not fully developed until we reach the age of about 25. One portion of the brain that is behind the developmental curve is the prefrontal cortex. That area is only half way developed at about 18 years old. The second link defines the functions controlled by the prefrontal cortex.

Put the two links together and it explain why most young children do not have a great deal of ability in many areas of their lives.

The following is extracted from: http://mentalhealthdaily.com/2015/02/18/at-what-age-is-the-brain-fully-developed/

Although brain development is subject to significant individual variation, most experts suggest that the brain is fully developed by age 25. For some people, brain development may be complete prior to age 25, while for others it may end after age 25. The mid-20s or "25" is just an average age given as checkpoint for when the brain has likely become mature.

It may seem logical that those aged 18 to 25 are completely mature, the brain still is maturing – specifically the area known as the "prefrontal cortex." Changes occurring between ages 18 and 25 are essentially a continued process of brain development that started during puberty. When you're 18, you're roughly halfway through the entire stage of development. The prefrontal cortex doesn't have nearly the functional capacity at age 18 as it does at 25.

The following is extracted from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefrontal_cortex

This brain region has been implicated in planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making, and moderating social behaviour.[4] The basic activity of this brain region is considered to be orchestration of thoughts and actions in accordance with internal goals.[5]

The most typical psychological term for functions carried out by the prefrontal cortex area is executive function. Executive function relates to abilities to differentiate among conflicting thoughts, determine good and bad, better and best, same and different, future consequences of current activities, working toward a defined goal, prediction of outcomes, expectation based on actions, and social "control" (the ability to suppress urges that, if not suppressed, could lead to socially unacceptable outcomes).

Not_a_ID

@Crumbly Writer

That's never been documented. It's a favorite assumption, but 'they've never found a 'gay' gene, and while you frequently have more than one gay/lesbian person in the same family, studies that include those results couldn't correlate any basis for it beyond random chance.


Without having made my through the rest of today's postings just yet, I'd just like to flag this one. While they may not have found any "gay" genes just yet. They have found "transgendered" ones. Although rare, it is possible for someone with XX chromosomal pairs to end up with the genetic "flag" for growing a penis, but as much of the other relevant genes for making the penis do much seem to in that Y chromosome, it can result in a "XX Male" that is sterile from birth. There are a few other genetic markers and flags that can likewise result in (sterile) "XY Females" as well. Although most cases of the XX/XY and birth sex confusion still seem to be widely held as being "gestational in nature" rather than genetic. (But that may just be a matter of they haven't found the relevant gene sequences yet)

So with respect to the transgendered, it is very possible their "lot in life" is in fact a genetic or otherwise congenital situation. So there is a carve-out I'm more than open to making in regards to the ones that have a clear medical basis for their asserting a gender identity other than what they physically present as naturally.

However, for those who cannot be diagnosed with known "transgender-related medical conditions" I'd be much more wary of how they get handled, as steps need to be taken to ensure the parents weren't influencing things in some way.

And I don't consider boys playing with dolls, or girls wanting to do "boy things" as grounds for parents to start treating their child as though they are TG. I know of a few people in my own extended family who were alleged to have done that as children growing up(some even w/pictures to back it up). They're presenting hetero-normative as can be as adults.

Confusing Gender roles with Gender identity when people cross those lines is a hazardous path to tread down, and I'm amazed certain (feminist) groups haven't called others out on that more openly, and often.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Not_a_ID

@Dominions Son

One of the biggest problems with the idea of homosexuality being genetic is how such a gene could persist, how would it avoid being bred out of the gene pool.

I have seen one interesting proposal for an answer to this.

There are known cases among animals where a single gene has drastically different effects in males than it does in females. While there are no documented cases of such genes in humans, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the human genome would contain such a gene.


I'm more inclined to think that nature found an "evolutionary advantage" in favor of bisexuality, and that certain populations may have "expressed" it via different ways through genetics. As such, the "homosexual" outcome is merely the event of somebody happening to get hit with "enough" of the right combinations of the "bi" genetic markers that they skew strongly in favor of their own gender. Likewise, the "heterosexual" outcome would likely be much the same, except that socialization in modern society has most people conditioned to believe they're either straight, or they must be gay, they cannot be somewhere in between, and as the "Straights" are the "normal" ones and with the most power, most tend to favor that. It would also explain a lot of the sterotypes associated with the more vocal of the homophobes, they're probably at least bi-sexual and "acting out" in order to try to suppress that aspect of their sexuality. It's arousing them, and they don't want to be.

History even holds that one a lot better, in particular in Europe, and I suspect East Asia would generally agree historically as well. Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece had no problem with Men having sex with women(that they had "rights" to, at least), and likewise had no problem with men who had sex with other men, hell they even often encouraged it. But what they did seem to take issue with was men who seemed to only have sex with other men. In this respect, it probably was better to be the heterosexual rather than the homosexual in bi-sexual central, as they seemed to largely ignore those guys, well, so long as they didn't identify as being members of certain religious groups. Of course, that was also partially the down side of being a straight male during the height of Rome's power, if you're not up for banging, or being banged by a Senator or the Emperor himself, you were more likely to be ignored. ;)

But then Christianity came onto the scene and Sodomy became a forbidden thing, which skewed things strongly towards the hetero-sexual side of things.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Crumbly Writer
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@Not_a_ID


I'm more inclined to think that nature found an "evolutionary advantage" in favor of bisexuality, and that certain populations may have "expressed" it via different ways through genetics.


To double-down on this one for moment, I'd also go so far as to postulate that some of those "expressions" may have zero relation to gender preference at all. They may be getting triggered by other physiological mechanisms. Which would get you the person who is straight as an arrow, until they meet/encounter a particular specific person, and they actually do "go gay" for that person, but may later find themselves right back on the heterosexual side of things after that relationship is over and done with. Ditto for the homosexual who find themselves "suddenly straight" when it comes to a specific person. They have a genetic predisposition towards a sexual response to certain things, and those people managed to trigger it for whatever reason without regard to gender.

Edit to add: If you want to really go down the rabbit hole, you could also look at some of the more awkward aspects of things that people have encountered when being reunited with (biological) parents/family after having been separated from them at an early age(adoption/abduction/etc).

It isn't unusual for them to report experiencing a strong sexual attraction towards one another. So this could be some kind of vestigal "tribal recognition"/bonding thing going on.

Meanwhile the Israeli's have the Kibbutz(sp?) which seems to have nearly the opposite problem(people raised in very close proximity to one another tend to strongly dis-associate said person from any kind of sexual interest).

Human sexuality expresses itself in weird ways, and the mechanisms involved are undoubtedly very complex with a lot of pieces and parts. (Like studies indicating women finding the natural BO of men with "more different" immune systems than their own to be "more appealing,"(well, as appealing as BO can get) while "more similar" immune systems will tend to have their BO rated more poorly. So keep that in mind when your mother, sister, or daughter complains about your smell.) ;)

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@Not_a_ID

Without having made my through the rest of today's postings just yet, I'd just like to flag this one. While they may not have found any "gay" genes just yet. They have found "transgendered" ones. Although rare, it is possible for someone with XX chromosomal pairs to end up with the genetic "flag" for growing a penis, but as much of the other relevant genes for making the penis do much seem to in that Y chromosome, it can result in a "XX Male" that is sterile from birth. There are a few other genetic markers and flags that can likewise result in (sterile) "XY Females" as well. Although most cases of the XX/XY and birth sex confusion still seem to be widely held as being "gestational in nature" rather than genetic. (But that may just be a matter of they haven't found the relevant gene sequences yet)

While XYX and XXY chromosome combinations are a factor, they don't fully explain the majority of transgender cases—even when you take in the multiple cases of 'hidden' duplicate chromosomes (where certain chromosomes only exist in certain parts of the body but not in others). However, I'm fairly convinced that there are more direct links overall with the transgendered than there are for gays and lesbians.

I agree that gender roles and gender identity can be incredibly confusing, but that argument ventures into the old canard 'if being gay is a choice, then why would anyone elect to be hated and despised'. Being gay is hardly like buying the latest iPhone, and while certain parents may be more receptive to potential sexuality issues, I seriously doubt there are many who hope their kids are 'one of those neat new transgenered ones!'

Again, even if a few go off the rails, pushing their kids into something they're not inclined to do, that's largely taken into account by restricting treatments until they're of legal age. Few kids will continue listening to their parents once they reach the age of 18, though the cases of parents forcing gay teens into 'medical cures' of homosexuality way outnumbered those who might want someone with an indefinite sexuality.

Crumbly Writer

@Not_a_ID

I'm more inclined to think that nature found an "evolutionary advantage" in favor of bisexuality, and that certain populations may have "expressed" it via different ways through genetics. As such, the "homosexual" outcome is merely the event of somebody happening to get hit with "enough" of the right combinations of the "bi" genetic markers that they skew strongly in favor of their own gender.

If that were the case, they homosexuality would be limited to certain cultural enclaves, say Hebrews or the Greeks, rather than being evenly distributed across all cultures/races/sexes.

Also, the claim that 'bisexuals' account for more people self-reporting as 'gay' in nonsense, as most people will, given a free choice, will select the easiest choice. If you can marry a man and face losing your job, your home, your career and your family, or settling with a woman you're equally attracted to, three guesses what they'll do. They'll go with being straight, rather than being gay.

Other than religious conservatives, few continue arguing that being 'gay' is a personal choice. Bisexuality is more open, but no one is going to chose to be hated by self-identifying with an oppressed minority.

In addition to your case, there were many ancient Greeks who proposed the 'superiority' of gay and heterosexual love, but what they all agreed was that getting married and raising children was part of a social obligation, necessitated by society, so even if you were gay, you still got married and treated your wife well, even if you fooled around on the side.

Replies:   Not_a_ID
Crumbly Writer

@Not_a_ID

So keep that in mind when your mother, sister, or daughter complains about your smell.

"Son, you stink! Go take a bath."
"Ah, Mom, you just love the smell of bikers to clean-cut studious types."
"No, whoever you are, when you don't wash, you smell like shit. Go wash it off!"

Ross at Play

@ezrick

Those tiny children need a Pavlovian response. The abstract idea of an electrical shock is foreign to them. The slap on the wrist is not.
Properly taught they reach a hand to that socket and say, "NO".

I am not prepared to argue your opinion is wrong. :-)

Ross at Play

The "debate" over whether gay and lesbian are caused by nature or nurture has an obvious answer in my opinion.
They exist, and they have continued to exist as substantial minority - across all societies - for a very long time - despite all efforts, often extremely harsh, by some societies to eradicate their "abnormal behaviour".
There MUST be some evolutionary advantage preventing the prevalence of their genetic variation from simply fading away, because they do have less offspring than the general population.
The most plausible explanation I have seen for the evolutionary advantage they have is their siblings have more offspring than the general population. The most plausible explanation I have seen for that is children who grow up to become gay or lesbian are probably better at interacting with both sexes while young, they teach their siblings that by example, and their siblings produce more offspring as adults because of those skills.
Note, there is only one reason I did not include transgender in my argument above. Their numbers are not large enough to state there is overwhelming evidence of their continued existence across all societies for a very long time. I am personally confident that exactly the same argument does apply to them too.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
awnlee jawking

@EzzyB

As a thought exercise, I pondered what sort of study would be needed to put CW's claims on a solid scientific basis.

It would have to be a blind study, with the identities of the subjects hidden from the analysts.

Current best estimates of the scientific community put the proportion of people who are 100% gay rather than bisexual at about 1%. So to have any hope of statistical significance from the results, a study population of 100,000 might be a reasonable starting point.

Each 5 year old would be asked whether they felt different from their peers (and with today's parenting culture,where every child is made to feel special, that would probably be the majority) and, if so, why they felt different.

The test subjects would then be monitored for decades, until their sexual orientations were reasonably secure.

At that point, the proportions of subjects saying that they felt different without knowing why at 5 years old would be compared between the heterosexual and gay populations and tested for being statistically significant from the overall proportions of heterosexuals and gays.

A very large and expensive study. With no guarantee of success, given that researchers have been looking for early indicators of homosexuality for decades.

AJ

Replies:   REP
awnlee jawking

@Ava G

If Western society had the nadleeh, and the Dine a strict male/female binary


Under those conditions, you're probably right.

Here in the UK, the record number of gender options on an official government form stands at 22. I think people have a much better chance of finding a gender option that suits them from 22 rather than binary M/F or even 5.

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


If that were the case, they homosexuality would be limited to certain cultural enclaves, say Hebrews or the Greeks, rather than being evenly distributed across all cultures/races/sexes.

Also, the claim that 'bisexuals' account for more people self-reporting as 'gay' in nonsense, as most people will, given a free choice, will select the easiest choice. If you can marry a man and face losing your job, your home, your career and your family, or settling with a woman you're equally attracted to, three guesses what they'll do. They'll go with being straight, rather than being gay.


Ah. but the thing here is even the "gay historians" who have brought to light all of the "homosexuality" that went on in ancient times seem to like to conviently overlook the whole matter that a lot of that "homosexuality" they found wasn't homosexuality at all, it was bisexuality being openly demonstrated. Slightly different critter.

It also stands that if you go with "sexuality being a spectrum" and the possibility that there are a multitude of genetic triggers that are "indifferent" as to gender that influence sexuality, as well as a number of others that are "keyed" to specific gender traits, you then end up with a very broad "sexual spectrum" indeed.

Which would also make it hard to pin down the "sexuality gene" because there are many different genetic routes that can result in someone with a certain specific sequence reporting as Hetero/bi/homo-sexual in their preferences. As there isn't actually "one gene to rule them all" when it comes to sexuality, but rather several, and not all be created equal. Which is also something we know about from genetics, as we have the "simple" dominant, and recessive traits. Then we have the even more complex "recessive traits" that rather than being reliant on one sequence alone, they could be relying on 2, 3 or even 4 other genetic sequences lining up in just such a way. (Human Eye color is one such an example of 3+ different genetic pairings deciding eye color between Brown, Blue, Green, Hazel, etc. And unlike eye color, in particular if you're dealing in bisexuals in particular, you don't have a solid independent reference point to start from in any genetic study. You can take a picture of the person's eye in order to validate their reported eye color. As to "independently validating" their self-reporting as to their "innate sexuality" rather than their current sexual preferences?(Which probably have been "socially influenced") Good luck.)

Nothing about a "natural predisposition towards bisexuality/heterosexuality" rules out the "homosexual" outcome if the bisexual population is substantial(or even the majority in reality). If you're male, and you find you're physiologically attracted to some/many/most men in a sexual way, then you're sexually attracted to them. It isn't much of a choice. Now if they also are attracted to women as well, ok, well, then they have something of a choice. But as I'm arguing the position of "sexuality as a spectrum" (How 1950's of me) even that may not be much of a "choice" for them, if say on a scale of 1(low) to 10(high) their attraction to men is an 8, while their attraction to women is a 3, how do you think they're going to report their sexuality?

You're also ignoring the matter that while the LGBTQI+ crowd likes to talk big about "being inclusive" the reality is that by most reports, if you're Bi, be prepared to be treated like dog shit by the homosexuals.

"A Bisexual is a homosexual who cannot make up their mind."

"A Bisexual is a homosexual who refuses to get off the fence"

"A Bisexual is a homosexual who is trying to get the best of both worlds."

"A Bisexual is a homosexual who is afraid to come to terms with their sexuality."

"A Bisexual cannot be trusted with anybody."

And the list goes on and on and on in today's society.

Oddly enough, it seems to be the Gay community in particular that likes to push the "binary" sexuality idea, you're either straight, or you're gay, there is no in between. Which gets back to "social pressure" inducing people to claim sub-optimal positions as to their own sexual preference, either knowingly or unknowingly as the case may be.

Edit: It also is probable that a number of the "cured homosexuals" weren't actually homosexual in the first place, they probably were bisexual. So in some respects they did have a "choice" in the matter, although the underlying physiological bias towards a same-sex preference undoubtedly still remains.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
REP

@awnlee jawking

Each 5 year old would be asked whether they felt different from their peers (and with today's parenting culture,where every child is made to feel special, that would probably be the majority) and, if so, why they felt different.


Several problems with your described approach.

First of all, focusing a study's participant on the intent of the study contaminates the study participants, which invalidates the study's results.

A 5-year old may sense a difference, but I doubt they have the life experience and reasoning power required to determine what the difference is and explain why they feel different.

Crumbly Writer

@Ross at Play

Their numbers are not large enough to state there is overwhelming evidence of their continued existence across all societies for a very long time.

The anecdotal evidence doesn't go back terribly far (primarily limited to the publication of national newspapers in the 19th century) but there are numerous historical examples. The Civil War and the U.S.'s westward expansion allowed many to abandon their hometowns (the their familial baggage), and there were several infamous examples of women taking on the role of men, only to be exposed once they finally died, often after living successfully as men, often including marriage to women.

Sadly, the examples of men dressing as women are mostly negative, as we only know of them via derisive attacks at exposed 'cross-dressers', although WWII made such actions widely acceptable for some time, including numerous examples on TV at the time.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

Here in the UK, the record number of gender options on an official government form stands at 22. I think people have a much better chance of finding a gender option that suits them from 22 rather than binary M/F or even 5.

Once again, no one is claiming we perform sex-reassignment surgery on any five years olds. My assertion was that many gays and lesbians, and a few public cases of recent transgendered, have expressed their 'knowing' at very young ages (as young as 3, in many cases). The decision to undergo is almost always held off until they are able to legally make the decision for themselves. That was never my point (that children should decide at age six to change their sex).

Instead, it's been demonstrated repeatedly that waiting until someone is of legal age to take any action at all guarantees those results will be abysmal failures, since the onset of puberty includes physical changes in the body which are incredibly difficult to 'undo'. (Those efforts include the shortening of leg bones, 'shaving' the the jaw bone, surgery to reduce the Adams Apple, and other extreme and largely unsuccessful attempts.)

In fact, the largest limit on such things isn't legal, it's financial, as the costs of undergoing sexual reassignment (even at it's most basic) can easily rival the cost of a new house, something that few can afford, and no medical insurance policy will even consider honoring. In fact, there are few American or European medical experts even qualified to offer surgeries (they do, but the best results are often found in the far east, increasing the costs substantially).

Replies:   awnlee_jawking
awnlee jawking
Updated:

@REP

First of all, focusing a study's participant on the intent of the study contaminates the study participants, which invalidates the study's results.


Although I was trying to explain how a study could provide scientific backing to the claim, the study itself would naturally be broader in scope and examine many potential indicators for future sexual orientation. It would be stupid to carry out an expensive study only to ask two questions.

A 5-year old may sense a difference, but I doubt they have the life experience and reasoning power required to determine what the difference is and explain why they feel different.


That's why it's important to compare heterosexuals against gays, so it's like versus like. If there's no statistically significant difference between the proportions of those who feel different then who turn out gay and heterosexual from the overall proportions who turn out gay and heterosexual, then the null hypothesis should be accepted.

AJ

Replies:   REP
Crumbly Writer

@Not_a_ID

It also stands that if you go with "sexuality being a spectrum" and the possibility that there are a multitude of genetic triggers that are "indifferent" as to gender that influence sexuality, as well as a number of others that are "keyed" to specific gender traits, you then end up with a very broad "sexual spectrum" indeed.

Given the numbers we're discussing, compounded by those involved rarely volunteering such information, we can only use overly broad amalgamations of disparate groups.

As for the 'cured homosexuals' actually being bi has been pretty roundly rejected by science, as the 'cure rate' is horrendously low, and is mostly limited to involuntary or 'heavily influenced by outside forced'. There's also no evidence that it's limit to 'bi' men (in fact, the 'targets' are often selected because they're effeminate, not because they like women.

Finally concerning 'bi-bashing within the gay community', it's not 'being bi' that they object to, it's the tendency of many 'in the closet' to cast aspersions (i.e. "I'm not like them because I'm ... something else?").

The bi have long had a home within the gay and lesbian communities, but the anti-gay forces claiming to be 'bi' rank up there with anti-gay politicians caught soliciting same-sex partners in public restrooms. In the hypocrisy and damage they inflict that's being damage, not their identification.

awnlee_jawking
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer

Once again, no one is claiming we perform sex-reassignment surgery on any five years olds.


???

Where did you get that from? Did you misinterpret my reference to the 5 categories of the nadleeh?

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
awnlee jawking

@EzzyB

For those with a head for heights there's the Thai trope ;)

AJ

Crumbly Writer

@REP

A 5-year old may sense a difference, but I doubt they have the life experience and reasoning power required to determine what the difference is and explain why they feel different.

In most cases (at least that I'm aware of), they know precisely why they feel as they do, as they feel pressured to fit into specific binary roles they don't feel they fit, and thus, like most children, they elect to lie, in order to avoid condemnation for something they have little control over (i.e. there's no incentive for them to 'come clean' to their parents, doctors or medical researchers).

They know, even at that age, that they're being judged for who they are, but aren't able to defend their decisions so they seek to escape the spotlight.

Crumbly Writer

@awnlee_jawking

Once again, no one is claiming we perform sex-reassignment surgery on any five years olds.

Where did you get that from? Did you misinterpret my reference to the 5 categories of the nadleeh?

Oops! I saw the following:

I think people have a much better chance of finding a gender option that suits them from 22 rather than binary M/F or even 5.

and assumed you were discussing legal age restrictions, rather than the number of choices (since they so closely resembled the aforementioned 6-year-olds and 21-year legal limits.

For those with a head for heights there's the Thai trope

Ah, one of my favorite dishes. Almost as good as their "Trope Surprise" by General Mungle!

Ross at Play

@Crumbly Writer

The anecdotal evidence doesn't go back terribly far

Yes, that is the point I was making. I see only one significant difference between the influences that result in adults being gay or lesbian (which I discussed above) and transgender or the entire range of bisexual (which I did not discuss above).
The difference I see is a lack of anecdotal evidence they have existed in substantial numbers, across all societies, for a very long time.
The only conclusion I can make from a belief all have existed with such resilience is there must be some evolutionary advantage to those variations. I am quite prepared to believe that advantage is their siblings tend to grow up into better people! :-)

Replies:   Not_a_ID
Not_a_ID

@Ross at Play

The only conclusion I can make from a belief all have existed with such resilience is there must be some evolutionary advantage to those variations.


The ones with a medical case/basis for claiming their transgendered are so exceptionally rare, and of such a nature that it is very likely they actually are an anomaly from either a stray genetic mutation(that wasn't particularly beneficial at that, given the rarity), some kind of "random error" that happened during/before conception(possibly when the sperm was created), or some other highly unique environmental factor.

Statistically speaking the "medical cases" are very rare, often in the 1 in 100,000 range, although some are in the mid to high 1 in x0,000 range. So in that respect, even a 1 in 50,000 prevalence in a given population suggests it's either a "new trait" (that hasn't had a chance to spread) or it is a trait that hasn't been particularly successful at perpetuating itself.

Meanwhile the bi/homosexual groupings could be as high a several out of any given random sampling of 100 people tends to suggest there probably was some kind of evolutionary impetus behind it. I'm still more inclined to think it was the bisexuality that was found to be the "desirable/beneficial trait"(and it would be likely to perpetuate, so long as they didn't pair off in a monogamous same-sex pairing) but it just so happened that if "enough" of the right combination of traits that would predispose a person towards bisexuality are present, it turns into homosexuality instead.

Although there may very well be other factors in play as well, the fertility angle is one I hadn't considered, and wasn't aware that any such correlation had been made. Which could also help to further explain the sexual proclivities of homosexual men in particular. Namely in regards to how sexually active an "uncommitted" gay male has been reported to be when on the prowl.

Which isn't to mention another joke I recall from one guy I knew in the Navy. "Want to be able to hook up with a bunch of women? Seriously, become good friends with a gay guy, women seem to flock towards them like nobody's business, and since they're not going to be 'interested' in those women..." So it isn't to say that there weren't benefits to be had in the case of at least some/many homosexuals throughout history, which have made it indirectly beneficial to have them around. I'm still inclined to think that more of an accidental outgrowth of the bi-sexuality thing more than anything else.

And as previously mentioned, nature has plenty of examples of that to point towards in terms of animals "being gay" in certain circumstances. "The Alpha" fucks whomever he/she pleases, so everyone else better be receptive to the idea of getting fucked, regardless of what their gender may be.

REP

@awnlee jawking

It would be stupid to carry out an expensive study only to ask two questions.


The point I was trying to make is if you ask a person any questions (2 or 2000), the person tries to give an answer. That answer may not be an accurate reflection of their thoughts (i.e., if they don't have a specific feeling about the topic, they respond how they think you want them to respond). Those types of answers skews the data the study is collecting, and can invalidate the study's conclusions. A person providing this type of an answer would be especially true of a 5-year old answering an adult's questions because most young children want to please an adult.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Ross at Play

@Not_a_ID

Please note my original comments included this:

The most plausible explanation I have seen ...

I do not want to debate the "evidence", so I will not comment on your most recent post. :-)

awnlee jawking

@REP

True. It would take a very skilled interviewer to ask the questions in a neutral way, and parents shouldn't be present when the children are questioned, which in itself is problematical.

One question that ought to be on the list is to solicit each child's favourite colour. Current research on the link between girls and the colour pink has resulted in mixed results. Personally I suspect it's down to nurture rather than nature - little more than a century ago, pink was still considered a strong, masculine colour.

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
awnlee jawking

@Not_a_ID

And as previously mentioned, nature has plenty of examples of that to point towards in terms of animals "being gay" in certain circumstances.


My local pet superstore has a notice on its pen for male hamsters saying that males mounting other males does not indicate homosexuality, it's an assertion of status.

My inclination is to side with scientists who claim there are no truly gay animals; what gay activists claim to be examples of gay behaviour in animals is just status assertion.

AJ

Replies:   Not_a_ID
Crumbly Writer

@Not_a_ID

Statistically speaking the "medical cases" are very rare, often in the 1 in 100,000 range, although some are in the mid to high 1 in x0,000 range. So in that respect, even a 1 in 50,000 prevalence in a given population suggests it's either a "new trait" (that hasn't had a chance to spread) or it is a trait that hasn't been particularly successful at perpetuating itself.

I suspect your numbers are off. I haven't checked them lately, but some time ago, they determined that the number of mixed genome (ex: XYX, YXX, XXY, etc.) has been vastly underreported because researched never knew what to look for. Often, those chromosomes aren't spread evenly across the body, instead they express themselves in certain stray parts of the body, so your liver might have an extra X chromosome, while your kidney doesn't.

Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

One question that ought to be on the list is to solicit each child's favourite colour. Current research on the link between girls and the colour pink has resulted in mixed results. Personally I suspect it's down to nurture rather than nature - little more than a century ago, pink was still considered a strong, masculine colour.

Actually, the latest research argues that there's no innate sexual bias in the colors pink and blue. Instead, they've both the most calming colors, so parents typically expose their kids to them simply because it makes them easier to manage. That applies even if you surround little girls with blue and little boys with pink. That also explains why parents inundate kids with the two colors, the fact that girls get pink and boys blue seems to be a random cultural choice which also strengthens sexual stereotyping (of kids, so they know what's 'expected' of them).

Not_a_ID

@awnlee jawking

My local pet superstore has a notice on its pen for male hamsters saying that males mounting other males does not indicate homosexuality, it's an assertion of status.

My inclination is to side with scientists who claim there are no truly gay animals; what gay activists claim to be examples of gay behaviour in animals is just status assertion.

Agreed to some extent, however... It also not entirely unreasonable to conclude that if that behavior has existed in our "common (mammalian) ancestors" for many generations previous to "branching off" that (inheritance) genetic traits would have developed which allowed them to "better cope"(read: enjoy) with a same sex encounter, in particular with regards to males.

A juvenile male that is gay or even bi-sexual is going to be better equipped for handling being sexually used by "the alpha male" than the (strictly) heterosexual male would. They'll also be likely to be slightly less inclined to resist, as they enjoyed aspects of it, compared to their straight counterpart who didn't. So while the heterosexual may continue to resist and potentially get killed, be it directly or otherwise, for doing so. The the juvenile gay/bi males survive to adulthood and eventually the Alpha is replaced. But as the homosexual doesn't pursue women, "their line" ends with them, which in turn leaves the bisexuals to create the next generation. (And also, incidentally gives them motivation to perpetuate the cycle initiated by the previous guy)

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Not_a_ID

I'm not convinced. In a societal group there's only one alpha male, and even future alpha males are subservient to him. That would mean all male hamsters are bisexual.

I think it's purely a dominance issue, with no sexual enjoyment involved.

Ever watched a dog humping a table leg? Does that make it a tablelegosexual? How do you determine the gender of a table leg to decide whether the dog is gay or heterosexual? I think extreme caution is needed before branding animals with sexual orientation labels.

AJ

Ross at Play
Updated:

@awnlee jawking

I'm not convinced. In a societal group there's only one alpha male, and even future alpha males are subservient to him.

I'm totally unconvinced by @Not a ID's argument. There is only important difference I see between human bisexual (or related) behaviour and that of other species.
In other species these behaviours appear to usually be triggered by similar types of external stressors. The responses then appear common to the species, with variations in responses only dependent upon individuals' place in the hierarchy of dominance. That suggests there are NO genetic variations between individuals affecting such behaviours in any way.

I can attest your statement in "a societal group there's only one alpha male" definitely applies to domestic cats.
I have ten cats, six males and four females. All were neutered at a young age, but the dominance relationships they've developed seems unaffected by that.
I keep them all enclosed within my house and a small open area outside. They hate that and I hate it too, but in predominantly Muslim cultures I will no longer allow my pets to roam free. I have had far too many disappear, and I strongly suspect that was because when adolescent boys in poor Muslim countries "go bad" they are inclined to lash out at society by being cruel to animals.

In my society of six male cats permanently constrained in close proximity I have one 'alpha male'. I have three other males with temperaments that in almost any other circumstances they would have carved out a territorial area in which they were the undisputed alpha male. All three of the second-tier males get on harmoniously with the dominant male, but the fights among those three just never end. Two of them, quite literally, cannot walk past each without getting in a screaming contest - and one false move resulting in a fight with pieces of fur flying everywhere. The "accommodation" they have arrived at is they walk past each other in extreme slow motion. It can take minutes for them to walk a few metres to get past one another without something spooking the other and triggering a claws-out and feet-kicking fight.

It can be amusing to watch at times, but not so much when they are crossing paths on my bed while I am trying to get to sleep.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Not_a_ID

@awnlee jawking

Ever watched a dog humping a table leg? Does that make it a tablelegosexual?

I've had a dog hump my leg before, so don't even need the table.

It just means the dog is highly sexed, and is going to hump basically anything it can in order to get off. I believe the human version would be called "hypersexual"

Not_a_ID

@awnlee jawking

I'm not convinced. In a societal group there's only one alpha male, and even future alpha males are subservient to him. That would mean all male hamsters are bisexual.


Not necessarily, as not all (hetero) future alphas would get killed off either. And in terms of the hamsters, at least with the males, how can you be sure they're not bi? ;)

I will agree however, it also is very much a dominance thing. But even then, humans often make even hetero sex a "dominance thing" as well.

Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

I'm not convinced. In a societal group there's only one alpha male, and even future alpha males are subservient to him. That would mean all male hamsters are bisexual.

I think it's purely a dominance issue, with no sexual enjoyment involved.

Ever watched a dog humping a table leg? Does that make it a tablelegosexual? How do you determine the gender of a table leg to decide whether the dog is gay or heterosexual? I think extreme caution is needed before branding animals with sexual orientation labels.

Another word for 'dominance' achieved through sexual acts is "rape". What you're talking about, with purely abstract language, is the tendency for animals to rape each other throughout history. And while most rapists aren't overly concerned with sexuality (i.e. it's 'a power trip'), they aren't concerned with strictly social sexuality norms, just as pedophiles aren't.

Let's call a damn spade a spade and stop beating around the proverbial burning bush (talk about jock itch)!

For people who bitch so much about the 'politically correct', you're venturing well into their territory with this entire discussion.

awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

I have ten cats, six males and four females.


If, one day, you suddenly find yourself a cat short, your neighbour Conrad is the likely culprit.

How do I know this?

Because Con cat ten ate.

AJ

Ross at Play
Updated:

@awnlee jawking


Because Con cat ten ate.


And you're a con artist from way back. :-)

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Ross at Play

Would you like to buy a bridge? Or a tower? Both have had only one careful owner.

AJ

Replies:   Ross at Play  Not_a_ID
Ross at Play

@awnlee jawking

Would you like to buy a bridge? Or a tower?

I can't top that one, but I'll get back into the jousting contest soon enough. :-)

Replies:   richardshagrin
Dominions Son
Updated:

@awnlee jawking


If, one day, you suddenly find yourself a cat short, your neighbour Conrad is the likely culprit.

How do I know this?

Because Con cat ten ate.


* Edited to fix typo

Did Conrad mount the rear end of the cat on his wall?

richardshagrin

@Ross at Play

Would you like to buy a bridge? Or a tower?

I can't top that one, but I'll get back into the jousting contest soon enough. :-)


It looks like buying a ticket on United Airlines these days is like one of the same type of ownership.

Speaking of the Brooklyn Bridge, which I assume is the bridge you have in mind, why isn't it also the Manhattan Bridge? It goes between both boroughs.

Replies:   Ava G
awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

Did Conrad mount the rear end of the cat on his wall?


Not unless he was deaf ;)

AJ

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

Not unless he was deaf ;)

AJ


What does being deaf have to do with a cat's ass trophy?

Replies:   awnlee jawking
awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

I thought it was a play on caterwaul :(

AJ

Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

I thought it was a play on caterwaul


For a caterwaul it wouldn't matter which end of the cat was mounted on the wall.

Replies:   awnlee jawking  Not_a_ID
Ernest Bywater

@awnlee jawking

I thought it was a play on caterwaul :(


I'm fairly sure a caterwaul is a wall you build by gluing a lot of cats together in a way similar you glue bricks together with mortar.

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

The end of the word 'rear' is 'ar'.

cat-ar-wall.

AJ

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

The end of the word 'rear' is 'ar'.


As EB said, you would still need a bunch of cats to make a cat arse wall. :)

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@Dominions Son

As EB said, you would still need a bunch of cats to make a cat arse wall. :)


I had been picturing them lying head to arse, but with your comment I had a picture of the cats lying side by side with them alternating between facing this side or the other, so you end up with two alls of alternate cat heads and cat arses to have two walls of cats meowing all the time.

Replies:   awnlee jawking
Not_a_ID

@awnlee jawking

Would you like to buy a bridge? Or a tower?


Depends on if we're talking about a tower, or a tower? ;)

Not_a_ID

@Dominions Son

For a caterwaul it wouldn't matter which end of the cat was mounted on the wall.


Unless you're a redneck, in which case the entire cat might be in the wall.

Replies:   samuelmichaels
samuelmichaels

@Not_a_ID

Unless you're a redneck, in which case the entire cat might be in the wall.


I know this site seems dedicated to stories of pussy, but this is getting ridiculous.

Capt. Zapp

@Dominions Son

Did Conrad mount the rear end of the cat on his wall?


Probably. He sounds like someone who would have a Cat Ass Trophy.

Ava G

@richardshagrin

Speaking of the Brooklyn Bridge, which I assume is the bridge you have in mind, why isn't it also the Manhattan Bridge? It goes between both boroughs.


The Brooklyn Bridge's original names were the East River Bridge and the New York and Brooklyn Bridge, the latter referring to the two cities the bridge connected. Brooklyn wasn't part of New York City then, and Manhattan was just an island, not a borough.

There is a separate Manhattan Bridge nearby. It has given its name to the Brooklyn neighborhood of DUMBO, an acronym for Down Under Manhattan Bridge Overpass.

awnlee jawking

@Ernest Bywater

I had been picturing them lying head to arse


Given the amount of time cats spend on autoanalingus, I wonder if that would present an opportunity to learn 69ing.

AJ

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@awnlee jawking

Given the amount of time cats spend on autoanalingus, I wonder if that would present an opportunity to learn 69ing.

Believe me, once a cat's learned ass, it never goes back! 'D

EzzyB

@Crumbly Writer

As a result of developmental issues, they never learned empathy


Dear God that had to be rough man.

My main goal in raising children was "love them into submission". Not sure what I would have done if that didn't work.

ezrick
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


Again, they (the ones who recognize such things early) aren't ready to act on it for years, but it seems to be a common trend not experienced by the cisgendered. What's more, they NEVER admitted it to their parents (although it's sounding like, as attitudes change, they're starting to now).

The point is, it really doesn't matter how you treat them. The point is, action needs to be taken before pubescence, otherwise it's largely too late. (i.e. you don't have to believe 6-year-olds think about such thing, though you do have to act around 10 to 12 years of age (to delay puberty).

Even worse, denying sexuality is a leading cause of suicide, as gays, trans and others feel unsupported and don't see options.


So confusing. You say the kid knows it, but the parents do not? But this kids parents at least they think they know it. So they put the boy in a dress, dye his hair pink, and tell him he should be a girl?

I have a problem with this based on modern society. If a boy-child shows a nurturing aspect, plays with dolls, or whatever why is that no longer masculine?

Now I'm 54, I'm (according to the due-date) ten days from being a grandfather. Even at my age I played a large roll in raising my daughters. My wife (all 5'2" and 100lbs of her) was an Army Sergeant just like I was at the time. Yes, my kid's mother really did wear combat boots until the oldest was 7 or so.

I cooked, cleaned, (well I still do), changed diapers, read nighttime stories, bathed, washed hair, dressed them for school at times, even made somewhat unsuccessful attempts to tie ribbons. It never affected my masculinity as far as I could tell. I was a god-damned paratrooper.

So why don't we support those qualities in a male child and tell that child these are good qualities for a man to have?

Ezzy

Replies:   REP  ustourist  Crumbly Writer
REP

@ezrick

That's an easy one Ezzy.

Some parents nurture their children and help them grow.

But then there are the ones who pay no attention to their children and let them do anything they want to do, or the ones who think their children are property that they own and can compel to do what they want them to do.

Have you ever seen a 3-5 year old, boy or girl, with body piercings, I bet their parents are pierced also. What about a boy with no hair, was his dad a skin head? A kid trying to have fun in Pop Warner football with a Dad who sits on the sideline screaming at the son for flubbing the play.

This second group of so called parents aren't into being good parents. They want to relive their lives through their kids by controlling what they do.

ustourist

@ezrick

I have a problem with this based on modern society. If a boy-child shows a nurturing aspect, plays with dolls, or whatever why is that no longer masculine?

Nearly all kids will play with dolls at some point. Aren't GI Joe, Star Wars figures and Batman all dolls?
I agree with you 100%.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer

@ezrick

So confusing. You say the kid knows it, but the parents do not? But this kids parents at least they think they know it. So they put the boy in a dress, dye his hair pink, and tell him he should be a girl?

I have a problem with this based on modern society. If a boy-child shows a nurturing aspect, plays with dolls, or whatever why is that no longer masculine?

I suspect you're reading more to this than there is. It's not like the parents see the boy playing with a doll once and immediately shove him into a dress and start putting pink nail polish on his fingers. Instead, the parents typically ignore it, or make snide comments at first, but as the child persists, they may start asking questions. But even if they don't, since the kids know that something is wrong, they'll often insist.

Some little girls are just tomboys, wanting to play rough in the woods (remember the days when children actually played outside?), but some just resent being treated as girls at all. Then you have some who are, for want of a better term, 'masculine lesbians' (if any lesbians out there know a better term for this, please let me know). They like being rough and tumble, but they're not interested in being men. But for an incredibly small minority, they feel they were trapped in the wrong body, and they resent any attempts to pigeon hole them into roles which just feel wrong to them.

By the way, my sister not only wore combat boots most of her career, but whenever her young child with Asperger's has trouble sitting still, she'd tell him to 'give her five' and he'd happily drop to the floor and do five pushups, refocusing his attention and allowing him to behave in a socially appropriate manner for some time afterwards.

It's not that these parents insist on gender identification, forcing 'girlie men' into dresses as punishment (although there are plenty of those out there too), it's that the child insists on more (or if the parents don't approve) they do it in secret—which is often worse, as they're more likely to commit suicide that way.

Replies:   EzzyB
Crumbly Writer

@ustourist

Nearly all kids will play with dolls at some point. Aren't GI Joe, Star Wars figures and Batman all dolls?

Even beyond the 'masculine doll' trend (remember the scars they permanently etched into GI Joe's face?), many boys play with girls' dolls because of the prevalence of Disney films like "Frozen", where they're trying to recapture the magic of the fantasy. That doesn't make them transgendered, and any attempt to force them into that roll will result is their utter rejection of the idea.

EzzyB

@Crumbly Writer

To me it's the age though. That was my objection. Plenty of those Tomboys, hell most of them, hit that hormonal stage and realize they want to be girls after all.

None of them at five-years-old though.

Decisions they make later in life may seem odd to me. After all, I have no frame of reference. I mean Bruce Jenner is a girl, that's so bizarre as to be incomprehensible to me. Sonny and Cher Bono's absolutely adorable little daughter is now a boy, WTF?

I'm perfectly fine, if a bit baffled, no frame of reference again, with these later-in-life decisions. But not letting parents making them for children.

Ezzy

Replies:   Crumbly Writer  REP
Crumbly Writer
Updated:

@EzzyB


I'm perfectly fine, if a bit baffled, no frame of reference again, with these later-in-life decisions. But not letting parents making them for children.


Once again, my earlier misstatements were later qualified by someone more knowledgeable on the topic.

Parents don't make those decisions for the children. Instead, they postpone the 'change by date', so the child has a chance to mature, so that if they decide to go through with it (and I can't imagine a single parent who wouldn't LOVE a 'normal' child rather than one they have to stumble over trying to explain), they won't look like freaks because the parents refused to honor their requests early enough to avoid disaster.

NO ONE IS MAKING PERMANENT DECISIONS for their kids, they're simply postponing any decision until the children become old enough to legally decide for themselves.

As these mothers often declare when questioned about it: "I'd rather have a living daughter than a dead son!"

Replies:   EzzyB
EzzyB

Oh, and another trope based on a story I'm reading.

ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS AT HEART

This comes from a myriad of post-apocolyptic stories. The minute society breaks down, it seems like every male of the species becomes an instant rapist, slaver-of-women, motorcycle-riding asshole.

I know we need conflict, but why isn't this conflict based on something else? Territory? Resources? Why is it always the desire to dominate women?

Drives me nuts.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer  Not_a_ID
REP

@EzzyB

But not letting parents making them for children.


CW is right about some children sensing a difference between themselves and other children. If left alone, most of these children will work through their feelings and come to a decision about their appropriate gender. CW may also be correct that some of these children just know their current gender assignment is wrong.

The main problem with parents stepping in and making a gender decision for their child is that the decision skews the child's perception of the issue, their feelings, and the world in general. If such a child had been left alone, they may have struggled with coming to a decision, but it would be their personal decision. A Good Parent could then be supportive of the Child's decision. When a Parent makes a gender assignment for their child, they force their child toward one gender, and that is wrong. That is doubly wrong if the Parent's decision is subsequently determined by the Child to be the wrong gender assignment for them.

Crumbly Writer

@EzzyB

Oh, and another trope based on a story I'm reading.

ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS AT HEART

That was my entire reason for writing my Great Death series, to shift the focus of those stories from raping, pillaging and killing to more human conflicts, like wanting to be left alone vs. trying to ensure everyone's survival.

That seems a more compelling conflict, even if it's more difficult to set up and establish.

Replies:   Not_a_ID
EzzyB
Updated:

@Crumbly Writer


NO ONE IS MAKING PERMANENT DECISIONS for their kids, they're simply postponing any decision until the children become old enough to legally decide for themselves.


Dressing your boy in a girl's dress, dying his hair pink, and suing the state to allow him into the girl's bathroom? Oh, that parent made a permanent decision.

I have a sister, who, when young, was left-handed. It drove my father absolutely nuts. Apparently "ladies" are not left-handed (he didn't have a problem that I was also). Anytime she reached for something with her left hand it got slapped. Today, she is right-handed.

My oldest daughter is left handed; she didn't get her hand slapped by her daddy.

Replies:   awnlee jawking  Ava G
awnlee jawking

@EzzyB

My oldest daughter is left handed, she didn't get her hand slapped by her daddy.


That's one prejudice I've very glad is being eroded. But even today, lefties can find it difficult/expensive to obtain suitable equipment. Left-handed golf clubs, for example.

In an ideal world, parents would teach their children a degree of ambidexterity. Research shows that it activates the other side of the brain from normal, leading to better mental balance. It's also recommended as a brain-health exercise for those getting on in years, although I've yet to see convincing evidence that it can postpone dementia :(

AJ

Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

But even today, lefties can find it difficult/expensive to obtain suitable equipment.


Sorry, but with only around 10% of the population being left handed, that is not likely to change even if anti-left-handed prejudice vanished completely simply because relatively low demand will mean there are grater economies of scale for right handed equipment than for left handed equipment.

awnlee jawking

@Dominions Son

I wonder whether any socialist countries have passed equality legislation forbidding price differences between left- and right-handed equipment. Such a proposal was once made in the UK but it didn't get government support.

AJ

REP

@awnlee jawking

teach their children a degree of ambidexterity.


That is actually a very good idea. When I was 12, I was hospitalized for about 5 weeks with an infection in my lymph system. I am right handed and my right shoulder joint was basically immobilized by a swollen lymph gland in my right armpit.

Being active boy in a military hospital with no kids ward, I wandered around and found a group of servicemen playing Ping-Pong. I had never played the game, so I learned how to play it using my left hand.

Since then, I have made a conscious effort to do other things left handed such as write with a pen and paper.

Replies:   Ross at Play
ezrick

@Capt. Zapp

There are those who will argue that there is no such thing as an "EX" of any of those you mentioned.


AIRBORNE, CAPT ZAPP!

Yeah, that kind of training tends to stick with you.

Replies:   REP
REP

@ezrick

Yeah, that kind of training tends to stick with you.


Military service tends to stick with everyone who has experienced it, regardless of what they did in the service. The only thing Ex-Military means is you are no longer on active duty.

Replies:   EzzyB
EzzyB

@awnlee jawking

It works the other way as well.

I have a nephew (actually my nephew's son) who is decidedly right-handed. His father is a baseball coach. The minute the boy picked up a baseball bat his dad turned him around and taught him from the start to hit left-handed (even though he plays the field as a right-hander.)

Kid seriously hit .497 in his senior year (hell he hit .385 as a freshman on the varsity team) in high school.

We seriously underestimate the effect we have on our children (same old nature vs. nurture argument.)

I tend to think of them as an open, unwritten book. Others see them as a finished product, waiting to grow up.

awnlee jawking

@EzzyB

Kid seriously hit .497 in his senior year (hell he hit .385 as a freshman on the varsity team) in high school.


I have absolutely no idea what those numbers signify but, having read some charming stories in the 'Take me Out to the Ballgame' series, I recognise them as being impressive.

AJ

EzzyB
Updated:

@REP

Some, yes, but that kind of advanced training does something else.

I was changed by Airborne training, in a big way. Before I went to Ft. Benning the Army seemed like a club to me. Yeah there was the physical stuff. Hell I had recently been to the Defense Language Institute for 18 months to learn Arabic. Probably one of the most difficult courses mentally in the service. Think of it as college, six classes a day, five days a week, all on the same subject.

Then by absolute craziness I ended up in Airborne school, I didn't volunteer, (and yes, long story, that's not supposed to happen). What training like that does is push you so far beyond what you thought you were capable of. Two weeks later I was in Air Assault school, because, of course, my Airborne training got me sent to the 101st Air Assault Division, go figure.

Later I would go through something even crazier, open water survival training. Imagine, being blindfolded, oh yeah, actually blindfolded, sat into a metal cylinder and strapped in. That device then dropped you into a pool. Then it rotated you 180 degrees until you were upside down. Then and only then you unstrapped yourself, and had to get out of that cylinder by a pre-selected route. Not the closest, you might be in the right-rear cabin seat and be assigned to go out the left front pilot's door. Obviously divers were standing by :p

Stuff like that redefines what you thought you were capable of. That ability to redefine yourself is what sticks with you, not necessarily the skills you gain.

Replies:   REP
REP

@EzzyB

Our military training was vastly different. What you underwent changed you and you carried those changes with you into civilian life.

My units mission was classified Top Secret; it has since declassified, but I don't discuss it for a variety of reasons. I was not allowed to talk about anything that I did during and after my active duty period. Since I have never been re-briefed, I am still not supposed to talk about it. The experience changed me in many ways by reinforcing my introverted personality. Something I have overcome in the past 30 years.

Replies:   EzzyB  StarFleet Carl
Dominions Son

@EzzyB

I tend to think of them as an open, unwritten book. Others see them as a finished product, waiting to grow up.


I tend to think of them as diamonds in the rough. There is a basic foundation that is there at birth, but it needs finishing and polishing to reach it's true potential.

Nature vs nurture? My answer that it's not an either or, both contribute to the finished product.

Not_a_ID

@EzzyB

This comes from a myriad of post-apocolyptic stories. The minute society breaks down, it seems like every male of the species becomes an instant rapist, slaver-of-women, motorcycle-riding asshole.

I know we need conflict, but why isn't this conflict based on something else? Territory? Resources? Why is it always the desire to dominate women?


Eh, I agree that the ratios are a bit skewed in that regard. But that said, most of the genuine "Assholes" ARE in that category, or would be more than happy to explore that option if they thought they could get away with it. So in that respect, territory and women would go hand in hand for them. The territory they control is whatever they can take from others, and as for any women who happened to have the misfortune to cross their path, well, they're now property too.

The other side is they also trend towards being the ones who keep weapons handy, or know where the get them. So when you get into a "shit hits the fan scenario" they're going to be something to overcome. Which in present day society presents other challenges when the majority of society is unarmed, at least in comparison to "those guys."

So letting it play out, you probably would see things skew in that direction. Decent people may still outnumber them, its just a question as to how effective(or even willing) they are at overpowering them. Which becomes a matter of who is better/faster at getting organized enough to repulse the other one.

EzzyB
Updated:

@REP

My units mission was classified Top Secret


Well yeah, all that, but if I told, say, an infantry soldier what my base job classification was, he'd tell you that I was "an intel weenie".

What I did in actuality was far more difficult than he could imagine.

Replies:   REP
Not_a_ID

@Crumbly Writer

That was my entire reason for writing my Great Death series, to shift the focus of those stories from raping, pillaging and killing to more human conflicts, like wanting to be left alone vs. trying to ensure everyone's survival.


I think it comes down in some way to the joke about a viking's note to self: Pillage, Rape, Kill, then BURN.

Especially early on in a disaster scenario, you're going to have a large contingent of "Fuck you, I'm getting mine!" and that is likely going to translate into "I'm taking what you have, and declaring it to be mine." They may rape their victims if so inclined, and then they're gone. Killing their victims(so they don't have to worry about retribution/pursuit from their victims) is also going to be something they're likely to at least consider, even if they don't do so.

The "I've got mine" crowd is another matter.

Most people aren't initially going to be bothered to think about the long term, the ones that do will be the exception not the rule, particularly while most people are in panic mode. And the thing about people in "panic mode" is rational though is gone, so otherwise decent people may themselves engage in pillaging themselves. With more than a few opportunistic rapists among their number as well. ("I don't know when my next chance to get laid will be, so I'm taking it while it's 'on offer'") Although I suspect those would mostly be in the form of a gang rape scenario, one initiated by someone else.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@Not_a_ID

Most people aren't initially going to be bothered to think about the long term


And there is good reason for that. When immediate survival is at issue, nothing else matters. When you reach a point where you are reasonably certain of surviving through the next week, then and only then can you safely take time to start planning for next month or next year.

richardshagrin

@Dominions Son

Sorry, but with only around 10% of the population being left handed, that is not likely to change

That's why the drug store is named Rite Aid. Although they are happy to sell to left handers and ambidextrous as well.

Many drugstore chains lie. Walgreens doesn't have green walls. A Seattle chain called Bartells doesn't tell their customers anything about Bars.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@richardshagrin

That's why the drug store is named Rite Aid


NO, it's Rite as in a form of ritual, not right as in the opposite of left.

StarFleet Carl

@awnlee jawking

Left-handed golf clubs, for example.


That reminds me of this old joke. Husband and wife are sitting around talking, wife asks husband if she dies tonight and he remarried, would his new wife use their bed? He says yes, it's a perfectly good bed. She's disturbed, but then asks, okay, if I die tonight and he remarried, would his new wife use the same cookware? He says sure, it's perfectly good cookware. She's really perturbed now, and says, if I die tonight, would his new wife use the same golf clubs? He replies, No, she's a leftie.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@StarFleet Carl

and says, if I die tonight, would his new wife use the same golf clubs? He replies, No, she's a leftie.


And then he wakes up in the hospital.

StarFleet Carl

@REP

My units mission was classified Top Secret; it has since declassified, but I don't discuss it for a variety of reasons. I was not allowed to talk about anything that I did during and after my active duty period. Since I have never been re-briefed, I am still not supposed to talk about it. The experience changed me in many ways by reinforcing my introverted personality. Something I have overcome in the past 30 years.


You sound like my late father-in-law. He would never talk about what he was doing when he was in the Air Force - even though we all knew where and when he was deployed, and what we were doing there at that time.

My own service was simple, not classified, although I did have a TS clearance. I'm NBC - nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare. Because of when I was in, I knew way too much about Soviet plans and capabilities in the mid-80's, as well as the effects of ... everything. Sort of like the old saying in our corps - did Saddam have WMD? Of course he did - we kept the receipts. I know guys that were exposed to stuff over there before the war while acting as UN guards - that's one reason he kicked the UN out, their 'guards' were trained NBC troops. Duh.

REP

@EzzyB

base job classification


The only thing someone could have determined from my AF MOS code was I worked as an electronic maintenance man. Nothing else was mentioned. My discharge papers list me as working in a career field other than the one I actually worked in. During basic I was given the choice of 2 career fields. One was a classified unit and no information about what I would be doing. The second option would have had me working in an exposed position at the top of tall towers in Vietnam. I figured that would make me sniper bait, and my life expectancy was longer with the first option.

Ava G

@EzzyB

"Dressing your boy in a girl's dress, dying his hair pink,"

Here is a picture of a three-year-old.

This is a picture of the same person as an adult.

Moral: Clothing and hair are not permanent.

Replies:   REP
REP

@Ava G

Moral: Clothing and hair are not permanent.


True, but molding their self image is.

Replies:   Not_a_ID
Not_a_ID

@REP

True, but molding their self image is.


Oh god, giving me flashbacks to kindergarden and being given a chance to "participate in an activity" that the rest of the class was going to do the next day, but I wouldn't be able to participate in because I would be leaving to see my ailing grandfather before he died.

The activity? Something to do with getting to have my face painted and look like a clown. I don't remember anymore, I just remember being highly upset about both the being in "clown face" and being the only one as such. It also didn't help that grandpa had died before we arrived before the sun was up the next morning.

...And then Stephen King publishes a novel by the title of It not long after...

Ross at Play

@REP

Ping-Pong. I had never played the game, so I learned how to play it using my left hand.

In my younger days, I was an A-grade table tennis player - note that serious players hate their sport being called 'Ping-Pong'.
I used a very specialised bat: the rubber on one side was extremely fast and generated a lot of spin, but the other side was very slow with almost no spin. I used the fast side on my forehand most of the time, only occasionally swapping sides hoping to confuse my opponent.
I am so accustomed to one side being faster than the other I am hopeless if I use a bat that is the same on both sides - shots on my forehand usually end up in the net, and on my backhand they fly over the end of the table.
If I play socially with someone else's bat, I use my left hand and I'm a decent player then too. :-)

Replies:   John Demille
John Demille

@Ross at Play

the rubber on one side was extremely fast and generated a lot of spin, but the other side was very slow with almost no spin


Shouldn't that be in reverse? The fast side has no spin and the slow side is all spin? Red is fast and no spin and black is all spin and no speed?

That's how the ones that I've used were.

Replies:   Ross at Play
Ross at Play

@John Demille

Shouldn't that be in reverse?

NO!
For all rubbers used by those who play competitively more spin = more speed. It's as simple as that.
The colour of the rubber makes no difference. The laws were changed some decades ago requiring all bats to have, I think, one side black and the other very different (most use red). The manufacturers of rubbers have a black version and another colour version for every style of rubber the produce.

Back to Top