Re: Homosexuality: male & female
Bryant (mycol1@unm.edu)
15 Sep 1996 15:00:08 -0600
In posts like the following, it's easy to be misunderstood. So even
though it might look a tad silly, I want to state here that I hold no
bias against folks on the basis of their sexual orientation. Except for
child and farm animal molestors.
In article <51heo7$dso@viper.txdirect.net>,
Mike/Damon or Peni R. Griffin <griffin@txdirect.net> wrote:
>Homosexuality,bisexuality, and heterosexuality are not real states.
I question racial (and personality) typologies, because
these rather arbitrarily assign "types" along a continuum of variation.
Sexuality, on the other hand, seems to come in only three relatively common
forms: heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality. Some bisexuals may
view these labels as unreasonable because exclusivity in preference seems
unfamiliar to them, but I doubt many homosexuals or heterosexuals
would agree.
There are important developmental clues suggesting the distinctness of
the sexual orientation "types" you object to. Homosexual males, for
instance, are significantly often of late birth order with skewed sibling
sex ratios favoring brothers. Female homosexuals, on the other hand, have
high waist to hip ratios, an indicator of low estrogen to testosterone
hormonal profiles. These suggest early developmental pathways for the
determination of the homosexual phenotype.
Hence, it's very likely that homosexual orientations are *not* merely
"lifestyle choices," as many believe.
Bryant
|