RIP Boy Scouts

[Stosh]

4 minutes ago, Stosh said:

Its fine and interesting, I just resented the implication that Luke and others are all malfunctioning. . Hes keeping his cool in the face of considerable opposition. 

Whats he supposed to say ? Im sorry about the magnetic field ?

Theres plenty of evidence even in the animal kingdom that not all members are geared to serve the species community by being the breeders , and considering that siblings share genetic code , there is no requirement to do that job in promoting ones kin.

[TheWhiteRabbit]

5 minutes ago, Stosh said:

Its fine and interesting, I just resented the implication that Luke and others are all malfunctioning. . Hes keeping his cool in the face of considerable opposition. 

Whats he supposed to say ? Im sorry about the magnetic field ?

 

I was thinking about this stream I often would spend time by as a kid.  Even as thought streams go.  Some people throw rocks and pebbles in and still the beautiful stream keeps beautifully moving onwards.

 

Kind of like a discussion of the scouts.  I went back a bit through the posts, but I do not really see "opposition" it is just a rolling stream.

 

@rene I like the merit badge.  It is spacey.

[Stosh]

8 hours ago, TheWhiteRabbit said:

 

I was thinking about this stream I often would spend time by as a kid.  Even as thought streams go.  Some people throw rocks and pebbles in and still the beautiful stream keeps beautifully moving onwards.

 

Kind of like a discussion of the scouts.  I went back a bit through the posts, but I do not really see "opposition" it is just a rolling stream.

 

@rene I like the merit badge.  It is spacey.

I thought it was there... ? now I dont see it either. ???  

Well, there are some things which seem invalidating .

I had an odd dream about an oval coin with an elk head on it which this person palmed and wouldnt return. Inexplicable it was. 

[gendao]

13 hours ago, Stosh said:

Theres plenty of evidence even in the animal kingdom that not all members are geared to serve the species community by being the breeders , and considering that siblings share genetic code , there is no requirement to do that job in promoting ones kin.

Fake news.  Yes, there has been bisexuality (not homosexuality) observed in wild animals, but generally only as a Plan B to heterosexual mating (always Plan A).

 

Whereas, cases of "true homosexuality" have only been found in domesticated sheep and humans (domesticated sheeple, lol).  But note that domesticated sheep are artificially-selected for HIGHEST FEMALE FERTILITY - which is what male homosexuality might then be a byproduct of.

Quote

Domestic sheep have been carefully bred by farmers to produce females that reproduce as often as possible, which might have given rise to the homosexual males.

So essentially, homosexuality could be a symptom of excessive feminine/matriarchal energy...

Edited October 19, 2017 by gendao

[Stosh]

17 minutes ago, gendao said:

Fake news.  Yes, there has been bisexuality observed in wild animals, but generally only as a Plan B to heterosexual mating (always Plan A).

 

Cases of "true homosexuality" have only been found in domesticated sheep and humans (domesticated sheeple, lol).  But note that domesticated sheep are artificially-selected for HIGHEST FEMALE FERTILITY - which is what male homosexuality might then be a byproduct of.

So essentially, homosexuality could be a symptom of excessive feminine/matriarchal energy.

I wasn't presenting the sexual orientation of Gays as being ordinary , but rather that , functionally speaking , one doesn't have to produce young to advance the welfare of their genetic code.  Human attitudes vary bigly from the motivations of animals , my comment is anti  darwinesque- invalidation that personal procreation is needed for a being to be fit. 

 

A simple example might be wolves ,where not all breed, yet the common genetic pool is still promoted, or bonobos, where there's a social bonding aspect to sex, which advantages the group. Even for a breeding human , only half of ones code gets handed down to a child , and so ones brother is just as good a genetic substitute parent to the next gen ,as ones-self, so not all males need to compete for the ladies.

Those males are still valuable though, as they can still help kick the ass of the unrelated neighbors out of the tree, 

as are, the intimate relations that may come about amongst women, as an extension of heightened social integration. 

 

Homosexuality happens in patriarchal societies just as much , ( I'm told) , so I don't believe the empowerment of women makes the men gay. 

Nuf said on my part , you can have the last word. 

Edited October 19, 2017 by Stosh

[liminal_luke]

My boyfriend and I have a code word for love.  Inspired by the language of the Na`vi in the movie Avatar, it`s just a few nonsense syllables that for us mean "I love you."  This way we can bid each other goodbye in public settings in a sweet, secret way without the hassle of being in an obvious gay relationship.  Not that I think we`re fooling anybody.

 

In general, I don`t think straight people have much of an idea what it`s like to be gay.  They don`t know what it`s like to come to a spiritual forum like Taobums and read debates about the validity of their existence.  I remember looking for information about homosexuality in the local library as a teenager.  There wasn`t much.  A copy of Don Clark`s very useful book, Loving Someone Gay, and a not so useful psychoanalytic treatise detailing the supposedly aberrant family dynamics that Freudians of that time thought led to people like me.  These days people put little stock in psychoanalysis, going in instead for more materialistic, biological explanations.  So we`ve got lots of talk of genetics and debate about chimpanzees.  Lots of people seem to think that if there are gay chimps in the wild then being a gay human is OK.  If there aren`t gay chimps then I suppose homosexulity is more suspect.  Well, I`m here to tell you that I don`t care about the gay chimpanzees. I`m just trying to love myself and my partner as best I can, regardless of whether or not we have sexual counterparts in the wild kingdom. What else can I do?

 

It occured to me today that gay people have something in common with straights who, for whatever reason, chose not to have children.  There`s just something shameful, or so we`re told, about not procreating.  I believe the root of the taboo is the fear of death.  Having kids can be a way of girding oneself against the horror of non-existence: parents will die, but they can take comfort in the idea that their genes will live on through their progeny. Gay people and non-procreating straights live closer to death; they are the unprotected. Their very existence is a challenge to those who haven`t come to terms with mortality.     

Edited October 19, 2017 by liminal_luke

[cold]

24 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

My boyfriend and I have a code word for love.  Inspired by the language of the Na`vi in the movie Avatar, it`s just a few nonsense syllables that for us mean "I love you."  This way we can bid each other goodbye in public settings in a sweet, secret way without the hassle of being in an obvious gay relationship.  Not that I think we`re fooling anybody.

 

In general, I don`t think straight people have much of an idea what it`s like to be gay.  They don`t know what it`s like to come to a spiritual forum like Taobums and read debates about the validity of their existence.  I remember looking for information about homosexuality in the local library as a teenager.  There wasn`t much.  A copy of Don Clark`s very useful book, Loving Someone Gay, and a not so useful psychoanalytic treatise detailing the supposedly aberrant family dynamics that Freudians of that time thought led to people like me.  These days people put little stock in psychoanalysis, going in instead for more materialistic, biological explanations.  So we`ve got lots of talk of genetics and debate about chimpanzees.  Lots of people seem to think that if there are gay chimps in the wild then being a gay human is OK.  If there aren`t gay chimps then I suppose homosexulity is more suspect.  Well, I`m here to tell you that I don`t care about the gay chimpanzees. I`m just trying to love myself and my partner as best I can, regardless of whether or not we have sexual counterparts in the wild kingdom. What else can I do?

 

It occured to me today that gay people have something in common with straights who, for whatever reason, chose not to have children.  There`s just something shameful, or so we`re told, about not procreating.  I believe the root of the taboo is the fear of death.  Having kids can be a way of girding oneself against the horror of non-existence: parents will die, but they can take comfort in the idea that their genes will live on through their progeny. Gay people and non-procreating straights live closer to death; they are the unprotected. Their very existence is a challenge to those who haven`t come to terms with mortality.     

 

Liminal-Luke the language of love ( like the language of dogs ), is universal to recognize, see, or if blind feel.

It is hard wired.

 

And would you please at least consider respecting the gay chimpanzees. You don't have to love them but please don't single them out, lol, thanks!

[Stosh]

No you're not any closer to mortality, Ill rephrase,,,, every gene that codes for you ,, is also coded in other people ,, unless you're some kind of mutant. 

If you had a kid, at most , half of your genes would be passed on, in that individual ,and the other half still , by the breeding public. 

Your genes don't have individuality, they're just coding.  Your Y chromosome coding is the same as your dad and brothers coding,,.  

(If you were a mutant, that could be either a good thing or a bad thing , If its good , it should be perpetuated , and if its a bad one , it should be minimized. Which may or may not be rare , but only occasionally is of significance )

 

That which is you, but not coding or body, such as your experiences and concerns, can still be passed on without the genetic vessel of a kid. And even if you did have a kid there's no reason to expect that those things are going to be passed on. ( like how you built a birdhouse ,enjoy macaroni ,or do good deeds) 

[cold]

4 minutes ago, Stosh said:

No you're not any closer to mortality, Ill rephrase,,,, every gene that codes for you ,, is also coded in other people ,, unless you're some kind of mutant. 

If you had a kid, at most , half of your genes would be passed on, in that individual ,and the other half still , by the breeding public. 

Your genes don't have individuality, they're just coding.  Your Y chromosome coding is the same as your dad and brothers coding,,.  

(If you were a mutant, that could be either a good thing or a bad thing , If its good , it should be perpetuated , and if its a bad one , it should be minimized. Which may or may not be rare , but only occasionally is of significance )

 

That which is you, but not coding or body, such as your experiences and concerns, can still be passed on without the genetic vessel of a kid. And even if you did have a kid there's no reason to expect that those things are going to be passed on. ( like how you built a birdhouse ,enjoy macaroni ,or do good deeds) 

 

I will play devils advocate, when you state :

 " Your genes don't have an individuality , they're just coding."

I suggest the gene combination or coding I express is unique to me.  The sum is greater than its parts.

 

My Y coding in common with my father and brother(s) of the same parents is a part a tiny part of my genetic makeup. My fathers genetic makeup may have undergone minor or major mutations in the time period between my and my  brother(s) respective conceptions.

 

And I expect increasingly we are all becoming some kind of mutant.

As our genes are increasingly exposed to chemicals, radiation, etc. they are going to mutate.

Which leads to the old Nature versus Nurture debate.

 

Did my mother eat a wide variety of foods while I was in gestation? Did hers? and her ancestors farther back?

It may or may not have an influence on my eating habits later in life. Science suggests our diet it has a variety of important influences

 

I knew of a squirrel who couldn't build a nest. Oh (s)he tried and tried but time after time (s)he failed.

Was this due to poor eyesight, and if so was that trait inherited ?

Or a result of a vitamin deficiency?

 

Luckily (s)he found a partner whom had some skills in that area and I can report they seemed to live out their life peacefully thereafter... as best I could determine... now the skunk under the porch is well shall we say a horse of another color.

 

Pardon me if that's not PC, but if befits the rabbit whole.

[Stosh]

22 minutes ago, cold said:

 

I will play devils advocate, when you state :

 " Your genes don't have an individuality , they're just coding."

I suggest the gene combination or coding I express is unique to me.  The sum is greater than its parts.

 

My Y coding in common with my father and brother(s) of the same parents is a part a tiny part of my genetic makeup. My fathers genetic makeup may have undergone minor or major mutations in the time period between my and my  brother(s) respective conceptions.

 

And I expect increasingly we are all becoming some kind of mutant.

As our genes are increasingly exposed to chemicals, radiation, etc. they are going to mutate.

Which leads to the old Nature versus Nurture debate.

 

Did my mother eat a wide variety of foods while I was in gestation? Did hers? and her ancestors farther back?

It may or may not have an influence on my eating habits later in life. Science suggests our diet it has a variety of important influences

 

I knew of a squirrel who couldn't build a nest. Oh (s)he tried and tried but time after time (s)he failed.

Was this due to poor eyesight, and if so was that trait inherited ?

Or a result of a vitamin deficiency?

 

Luckily (s)he found a partner whom had some skills in that area and I can report they seemed to live out their life peacefully thereafter... as best I could determine... now the skunk under the porch is well shall we say a horse of another color.

 

Pardon me if that's not PC, but if befits the rabbit whole.

Ill agree that you are not just the sum of your parts , but the son is also not identical to the father since you weren't produced by fission or budding. 

Epigenetics are a fair consideration ,

but those influences are also not constant in a genetic lineage to the point where you can say ...all members of this line will be fat or skinny based on them. 

These are 'historic ' influences but this would make our kids then be a 'product of their times' more so, than 'inheritors of that which made us , us,"

For instance, long life spans may be linked to nutritional circumstances of our ancestors and alternate with generations, .. but then would the kid be more like his dad , or be more like his grandfather? .. there are such effects , yes , but they are environmental or chance. 

Vitamin deficiencies can be due to the lack of them in the diet , but they can also be due to need for extra , which may not be abnormal requirement somewhere else. 

After several generations , the coding for us is decentralized , all our molecules have been replaced , all our memories gone , the only thing left is the ripple effect we had on the world and on society. 

 

 this is getting complicated to explain. 

Edited October 19, 2017 by Stosh

[sagebrush]

it is amazing how often I do not even need to participate in discussion-it can happen without me..

 

that being said...I find a twinge of controversy and I have to sink my teeth into it........

 

easy bake ovens were around in the 70's. so this would have made our busy baker atleast 20 years of age.....

 

hmmmmmm.

 

 

I HAD an easy bake oven and I was born in the 70's.

 

please explain....

[liminal_luke]

The science of genetics is besides the point -- at least to me.  My point above was not that parents actually live on genetically through children, but rather that there`s a felt sense of immortality (usually on a less-than-conscious level) that some people get through the project of raising kids and -- hopefully -- having them live on after they`ve died. .

Edited October 19, 2017 by liminal_luke

[Stosh]

1 minute ago, liminal_luke said:

The science of genetics is besides the point -- at least to me.  My point above was not that parents actually live on genetically through through children, but rather that theres a felt sense of immortality (usually on a less-than-conscious level) that people get through the project of raising kids and -- hopefully -- having them live on after they`ve died. .

Well , they certainly have every right to have false senses of imaginary persistence through time.  

[Wu Ming Jen]

The native Indian beliefs are that gay people were called twin spirits and we special among the tribes for having both sexes but I read that on the internet.

 

 My wife says the whole issue of the boy scouts is stupid. She was a girl scout and I was in the cub scouts before getting kicked out and not for eating a brownie but for fighting. One day my troupe was playing king of the hill and a neighbor kid started tossing all my friends off the hill so I stepped up and threw him off which resulted in a physical altercation in which the neighbor kid went crying home. I was kicked out for this.  I had a certain fame with this bully. the guys and girls would come to me to put the bully back in his place. He would listen to me or we would fight so he would remember to listen next time.

 

I say we toss the adults into the easy bake oven and let them deal with their more "mature" issues,

 

 

 

 

[Marblehead]

Don't forget to shake before you bake.

 

[rene]

2 hours ago, sagebrush said:

it is amazing how often I do not even need to participate in discussion-it can happen without me..

 

that being said...I find a twinge of controversy and I have to sink my teeth into it........

 

easy bake ovens were around in the 70's. so this would have made our busy baker atleast 20 years of age.....

 

hmmmmmm.

 

 

I HAD an easy bake oven and I was born in the 70's.

 

please explain....

 

Hi sagebrush, not sure what your confusion is or its source...but I was born in 1955 and had an easy bake oven when I was 5...so they've been around at least since 1960. Hope that helps!

[Marblehead]

Back to the homosexuality topic.

 

I will admit that I have at least once said that homosexuality is good for the planet as it slows down the rate of the increase of human population on the planet.

 

So yes, if more people would become homosexuals the rate of increase would slow down even more.