Intoscience

It seems to me that people maybe implying its ok for a person to enjoy gay sex and that person to find hetero sex distasteful. But its not ok the other way round and if you sate such you are prejudice in a negative way even labelled homophobic. Or am I missing something? Should I be forced or educated to change my personal tastes because my tastes are found offensive to someone else? Even if my personal tastes are not prejudice towards a person or group but towards an act? Yes, but iNow is implying that a distaste for a particular sexual act automatically prejudices that person against another person or group and even worse implies that that person dislikes or even hates that person or group because of their sexual preferences. This is just not true. I dislike the act of gay sex (learned or innate is irrelevant), I do however like and respect many gay people. If I feel strongly enough the want to understand or even attempt to change my dislike, and how this came to be (which I'm genuinely interested in) then I would want to investigate whether its a learned or innate trait. it has nothing to do with prejudice against people who feel different from me.

I'm not sure what you mean but, ok The use of the term distasteful was raised by another member. I agree that "repulsive" is a stronger word so not fitting, but prejudice? Not sure how this would be the same unless you are using it as a blanket term The relevance being that I find the act of gay sex distasteful, in that I don't enjoy watching, imagining or engaging in such. Though admittedly this may be learned rather than innate or from experience in engagement. I also find the act of tasting & or smelling coconut distasteful and even repulsive to some extent which seems to be innate rather than learned, though i'm open to suggestions. Either way I have no prejudice towards people who engage in the act of gay sex or the act of eating coconuts. Provided of course that I'm not expected to change my tastes to agree with someone else's just because its different. Also why should a personal taste for or against have any particular status? I don't like coconuts or gay sex, you may like either, both or non. That's your prerogative, and who am I to judge what you like or dislike and who are you to judge me on the same?

Nope, you are conflating my distaste of an action with prejudice towards a person or particular group who may engage in that action. I never said it was right or wrong, I just said that I personally find the act of same sex gender sex distasteful, repulsive (or whatever term you want to use) whether it be to imagine, watch or participate in. I also said with sincerity and honesty that I was trying to understand why I find it distasteful, what is the reason/root cause behind my distaste. If other people want to enjoy such pleasures for themselves that's fine by me and I would show no more or less respect regardless. You seem to be implying that my personal distaste for a certain sexual act automatically makes me prejudice against the people that may engage in such. This is just not true, I have both Gay and Bi friends who I care for and respect very dearly. I just don't wish to imagine, watch or engage in their personal sexual activities. I'm willing to try and understand why and if my dislikes are outdated. But is this really so important provided that those dislikes are not prejudice towards another. For as long as I can remember I have never liked the taste of coconut. I don't recall ever been influenced or traumatised which may cause this dislike. I have even tried eating it on a number of occasions over the years and still found it very distasteful. My partner recently purchased some coconut milk for me to try. I kept an open mind and fingers crossed that with age my pallet had since changed and that the taste would be ok. I tried to not have any preconceptions or expectations and took a sip. Instantly I found it repulsive. I tried again the next day and again the following. Thinking that overtime I might come to at least tolerate it, I challenged myself to keep trying until it became an acquired taste (learned). No joy, I just find it repulsive, no reason to do so, but with every reason to try not to. Is my distaste for coconut innate? I'm certainly not prejudice towards people who find it tasty.

So really we are back to square 1, is a distaste for something nature or nurture, innate or learned. Reading through all the replies and the data on this thread. I have come to the conclusion (so far) that well it depends on what it is, and sometimes likely a bit of both. I have tried to be honest with myself and ask why do I find the thought of same sex gender sex distasteful? Honest answer, I don't know, I can't remember back far enough to an early age where I may not had a specific preference of intimacy. I remember (which was most likely learned) thinking that kissing a boy was distasteful, though as a youngster kissing anyone seemed distasteful (in public) but I do remember playing kiss chase with the girls. The truth is I find same gender sex distasteful and something I would not personally engage in. However I have no opinion on what others may want/do engage in. This is their prerogative and provided I'm not expected to engage in or favour something I find distasteful I have no problem with it, and would treat everyone equally with the same respect accordingly. So does my distaste for same sex gender sex make me an homophobic?

very informative, thanks What about sending Maverick (Tom Cruise) to shoot it down? I'm sure he would have sorted it no problem 😝

I'm more than happy to abandon an old model for new, if it is an improvement based on evidence and logic. First we have to define and agree on all parameters.

I agree that sex & gender are often conflated, certainly so in these types of discussions. But some of the confusion arises when we are discerning the difference between biological sex, how we label such and the relationship that may have with biological/physical differences. In biology is it not so that in general there is the basic accepted model - male & female, which is binary?

Interesting!

Ok, so you agree that there are genetic differences that may influence tendencies and then there are social (learned/taught) differences that may influence tendencies? Phi seems to be implying that the vast majority of, if not all tendencies are learnt, even from a really young age. From your posts I have read and if interpreted correctly you appear to take a similar stance? On another thread - girls v boys there is agreement amongst most that in general girls learn speech earlier than boys due to genetics. This implies the tendency is innate not learned. Interestingly, we, myself and my siblings, wore hand-me-downs, the colour and style was irrelevant whether girl boy or other. There are old photos of me as a toddler in a frock, and some with my younger sister wearing my trousers.

Is that learned/taught or innate?

I'm not sure this is strictly true. Women are encouraged and applauded around my parts for taking roles that tend to be male dominated. Though the reality is that when opportunities are available to all with no stigma or expectation, the men tend towards the heavy lifting, physically intensive roles and the females tend towards the less physical, lighter more attentive roles. I'm not convinced that this is just learned, you see at a very young age boys playing rough and tumble (competition driven tendencies) girls playing with less physical intent. Basically you are saying that males can be taught to be non competitive and instead nurturing and women to be competitive and non nurturing. Maybe so, but to what extent and for the vast majority? I'm not sure. Males in general have evolved to be competitive, for a reason, survival and to enable them to continue their gene pool. Yeah sure, we are civilized enough to identify this and learn to be different. It's going to be a difficult task to overcome millions of years of evolution. Is that the vast majority of species then? Needed and innate are two different things. There are many things that we don't need but are born with, appendixes for one. I don't agree that we should not try and learn to be better and have better control over our instinctual tendencies. But before we "learn out" a tendency should we consider why, for what gains and if its worth the effort? So are you denying that there are general physical & phycological differences between males and females? How boring

Going back to the OP, you do see in general males more interested in things per-say, how they are built, how they work, etc... and females more interested in people, caring, nurture... etc. Not exclusively of course, since it is a spectrum, so we are talking about as we tend towards the extremes. We often see male dominated jobs such as construction, engineering etc.. whilst there are female dominated jobs like nursing, care work... You have to wonder whether this tendency is learn't or innate from birth. You see similar traits in nature where quite often the female tends to the younglings and the males go to hunt, or protect, or just move on etc... This then begs the question? Do we tend to be biased because our "nature" leads us this way? Or is it indeed the society in which we live and what we learn? I think that it is a combination, of both. You see boys playing with dolls and girls with cars (nothing wrong in that) but has it been observed and documented on how they play with them, how they interact with the objects they show interest in?

You, Depends on what you want to gain from it. If you want lots of likes then post lots of things people like to hear. Or if you want to be true to yourself then post what you feel, believe in, agree with, disagree with... honesty.

Yes, nice feeling being validated. I guess it makes you feel accepted, part of something... contributing in some way positively. Keep posting and i'm sure it will go up, careful not to post too much which generated negative feedback though else your number may go down. Remember, its quality not quantity that counts. Just to be clear I only give "lil green ones" for posts I feel I strongly agree with or inform me of something I wasn't aware of that I find useful/interesting. I try very hard to avoid giving lil red ones, because though I may not agree with a post, I may be trashing someone's opinion that matters dearly to them, even though I may not agree with it or see the logic.

There you go, feel better now? 😉

+1 I can't, when faced with a desperate unsolvable situation having to choose between either child is a prospect I would fear the most. The only honesty that has any true value is being honest with yourself.

What makes you think I think they don't? How deep do we need to delve into bias? There are positive and negative bias's depending on the contexts/circumstances. I'm bias towards my child's welfare over my own. This could be viewed as a positive bias and negative. One could argue that my child's welfare may depend on my own. Ideally both welfares should be considered equally, so no bias. But in reality this is never the case. Depending on the circumstances one often has to make a choice, which then becomes a natural bias towards the choice made.

Well yeah, but there is always going to be a natural bias if you set a small set of standards across a wide and diverse range. Then you have to define "tough love" & "tough in order to win" then context for each or either... A parent yanking a child back and causing pain to save that child from running in front of a vehicle and suffering worse consequences. A rugby player, or similar, american football player, tackling another player in order to scores points towards winning. Both examples are considered acceptable in the particular circumstances but by your definition would fall under the "bullying" category

My point is some things are learnt, others are traits (mental) that are inherent within personalities (within the make up / process of our brains) that no amount of learning can change. At this point it may be possible and perhaps the only option to use physical intervention to alter/improve things via; drugs, operations etc... . What is normal behaviour in your own mind might well be abnormal behaviour to others. So if the consensus is that someone is deemed a bully, then the person maybe viewed as acting out abnormal/unacceptable behaviour. But for the person doing the bullying in their mind it might be normal and/or acceptable. Or they may not even be aware or recognise, or have the capacity to understand that they are bullying. So I guess, based on my reasoning, my response to your question is - It depends on the individual

Or born different. For most people some things cannot be learned, no matter how much is taught or how hard they try.

I was definitely a water faring animal in my previous life, probably a loner, not a pack animal. Or maybe from Atlantis. 🤔

No point in talking about it then, close the thread.

Waves, strings, vibrations... what ever one might consider I guess. I was not promoting anything per-say. It was in response to a suggestion about parallel "reality's" within the same universe. But as you stated its all conjecture based on ideas that are not testable. Though I may agree with you I can't help wondering why it's still doing the rounds among modern day scientists? You also by your own admission stated that you belong in the "epistemological camp". By the way just to be clear I share the same view, so I'm not arguing the case for any particular theory, but this doesn't make one idea right or wrong, its just a view point based on our interpretation of data/theories. that's what I like about you dim

Essentially the "big bang" theory is a theory based on what we can measure/observe, anything beyond this is speculation. So in answer to your question, "is the big bang theory a complete model?", well the answer is no. It is a model, of the observable universe both present and in the past.

I guess you could consider this as frequencies, where one reality is slightly out of phase with another. And? Its a plausible theory held by many credible scientists as a real possibility, so its at least worth thinking about, no?