With all due respect to your college teacher, s/he is wrong. PSYCHOLOGY IS A SCIENCE. It is in the category of sciences known as SOCIAL SCIENCES, which also include anthropology and sociology. Other sciences include NATURAL SCIENCES: biology, and PHYSICAL SCIENCES: physics and chemistry, as well as political science and economics. THESE ARE ALL SCIENCES BASED ON THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD. They involve experimental research and statistical analysis. When something is proven, that does not mean that it never changes if new information is found. ALL SCIENCES INVOLVE CHANGE. Please take my psychology courses!
You’re right, Elizabeth. That’s why we also have outcome research with regard to what works best in the treatment of ego-dystonic homosexuality and other problems. (The current thinking is that homosexuality is a disorder only if the gay person cannot accept his sexual orientation and feels ashamed. I know you don’t agree with that: moral relativism and all that jazz!) No bona fide clinical psychologist can pretend to predict outcomes in human behavior. It’s a matter of probabilities; but that’s also true to some extent in other sciences. However, certain treatments have significantly better track records than others. What non-clinical psychologists sometimes complain about is that certain therapies are only partially based on theoretical findings. Same in medicine. That’s where more research comes in. At the same time, there is the “whatever works” school of thought, not grounded in science, but based more on clinical intuition and experience.
**N.O.W. (the National Organization for Women - now.org), the largest feminist group in America and possibly the world is adamantly clear about their homosexual agenda (www.now.org/issues/lgbi/marr-rep.html) and Abortion rights. They were in the forefront of of the fight for sam sex marriage in every state. **
Praxising - there are some hormonal correlates in subsequent pregnancies, if you want the references, I can find them easily. The evidence is not compelling yet, but the mountain is growing, and the bits of stone to build it are coming in from multiple directions. The knock out punch would be to do a projective genetics study on the offspring of gay biological parents. Previously, it was so difficult to identify who was gay, that the genetic studies tended to be objective on twins and nephews, etc… I would not expect the results of such a study to be available for perhaps 20 years.Let me be clear: no, it’s not. It may be about what you, personally, or some other person considers radical, but it’s actually pretty standard, every day, ABC feminism. As I previously stated, radical feminism proposes radical and violent answers to gender issues.
Now, who shall we decide knows best about the types of feminism: The 60 year old woman who grew up during the movement and was part of that movement? Or some guy?
The only connection between feminism of any sort and homosexuality in XY offspring, is that evidence shows the trait is not triggered until there are multiple pregnancies of male offspring. That is: your third son and subsequent sons will be gay at a much higher rate than your first or second. (Or, if there have been miscarriages, it could be a first son, but a third pregnancy of a male child. Feminists, of all stripes, tend to have fewer children. Possibly, this could change the incidence of gay males in a population where women are free to choose the number of offspring they bear.
Actual science, as I have stated, has shown decades ago that there is no link between the personality of the mother and whether sons are gay. However, same-sex attraction does increase beyond a population norm in areas where the population exceeds the resources, or perceived resources. This is a post-natal adaptation to environmental crowding, common to both genders.
Someone said gay men did not usually reproduce. On the contrary, the “norm” was for gay men to marry, have children, and develop relationships with other men extra-maritally. So, there are actually quite a few offsping of identified gay males since the 70s, when these men started divorcing and coming out. Twin studies are valuable in all kinds of behavioral research because you could, supposedly, eliminate genetics as a factor. But epigenetics has made that an outdated idea.
IF anyone wanted to research this issue, the information is easily found through your favorite search engine.
That’s all I have. I’m sure y’all can proceed itt without any further (name removed by moderator)ut from me.
cya
According to this logic, I no longer have to shove away into the dark recesses of my brain my primeval urge to rob banks. I’ve been plotting and scheming for years, just waiting for the opportunity to walk in, announce “hands up” and walk out with hundreds of thousands of dollars. If I had to shoot someone, well, I realised after a lot of soul searching, that if it happened, it would have been an unintended consequence of my sense of self preservation about who and what I am. Of course, I’ve refrained from actually carrying out what most people would call a dastardly deed, because I don’t want the social stigma that goes with being an outed and convicted bank robber. I’ve kept my proclivities to myself, because I don’t want to hurt my family, nor lose my friends. However, it has been a real sacrifice to have to hide away that part of me which just wants so very much to rob a bank. Every time I walk past one, the urge is almost overwhelming and it has been like that since I was a teenager. I actually have met a few who feel the same way, and at one stage we formed a gang, but they have decided to go straight and have not told anyone how they really feel. I am now glad I can ‘own’ my affliction and just be myself, without feeling ashamed of how I feel. Can I also give up counselling?
John - Are you being dramatic for “effect”, or do you actually compare being gay with committing a crime like robbing a bank? Just trying to understand how your mind works.
Go back and read Meltzerboys post, take note of what I underlined and then think about the ‘logic’ which is inherent in his post. particularly in light of the next sentence after that which I underlined. The “subject” of my post is the “logic”, as I indicated in my opening sentence. If you still need my reponse explained to you, just let me know.
I think I understand your logic. I think an analogy like bank robbery is a bit over the top to make your point, though.
There is a world of difference between living a homosexual lifestyle (e.g. having sex with members of your own gender) and girls just acting gay by kissing and fondling one another. Especially if the girls in question are just doing it to get the attention of males.
…as those who quote things without checking their sources perhaps?Actually, if you’d read the links properly, plus followed a few more leads that were pretty obvious, you’d know it was more than one. Like they say, there are none so blind…
No, not really.
Oh yes it does.
Good.
Not in historical terms.
What does this sentence mean?
If the behavioral sciences are so unreliable (that even the groups for regulating it are terribly inconsistent), why should we take Nicolosi and Dallas (or for that matter any psychologist or psychiatrist) seriously?
You cannot see a difference (morally speaking) between violent robbery and homosexual attraction?
