Re: [UUPoly-L] Perhaps there is some truth in your statment.



Hi Doug,
Thanks for your insights.  Yes, I agree there's a lot of "nature" that goes
into the equation, along with "nurture"!  Actually when I mentioned the idea
that sexuality is both "chemical and cultural", that's what I was hinting at
- that we are what we are born with, as well as what we are made by
environment.
Blessings - Keith



On 7/3/07, PDX Couple <pdx-couple@comcast.net> wrote:

Hi Keith

I think your statement has some truth.  But it is not complete.  Yes
environment and culture has some components but so do genes.

I have seen very aggressive two year old boys.  I have observed very mild
two year old boys.  I have observed some aggressive girls but more
non-aggressive girls.  Raising children and teach in RE classes show you
the
wide range of behaviors long before environments and cultures have kicked
in.  Mothers tell about very active little boys before they are
born.  Same
with unborn girls.  And in real life that behavior continues.

Thank you for your insights.  Yes truth has many forms and different
manifestations.

Doug
Portland, OR


> I came up with a theory recently that I'm quite fond of, though I don't > have the knowledge to even suggest it's born out by any research - anyway: > I figure we're all born, very simply, as sexual. Not hetero-, not guy or > lesbian, not bi-. What we learn as we grow and are brainwashed by culture > is the expectations and rules of our environment. We learn how boys and > girls are "supposed" to act and feel from our environment, and most of us > accept that, even if it isn't quite what we feel inside. It's peer > pressure, and we conform. > If we are in a particularly accepting community and family, we may have > more flexibility, we may be accepting of others or our own desires to be > openly other-than-heterosexual, but it takes quite a personality to fight > that compulsion to conform. > For myself, I have always identified as heterosexual, and still do at the > age of 45, but I'm noting a softening of my assumption that I am only > interested in women. I doubt I will ever move toward bisexuality, but I > cannot say that it is impossible. As I've become more comfortable with my > own sexuality, I find the boundaries are less clear than I've always > assumed. > So in summary, I think sexual orientation is both chemical and a learned > behavior, and that sometimes we learn what our culture teaches, not what > our > chemistry would choose if left to its own devices. > Comments? > Best - Keith > > > > > -- > "It is a mistake to believe that God is primarily concerned with > religion." > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > The UUPoly-L mailing list has public archives. > Please keep that in mind when deciding how much to reveal about yourself. > UUPoly-L mailing list > UUPoly-L@uupa.org > http://www.uupa.org/mailman/listinfo/uupoly-l > > > End of UUPoly-L Digest, Vol 34, Issue 7 > *************************************** > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/885 - Release Date: 7/3/2007 > 10:02 AM > >

_______________________________________________
The UUPoly-L mailing list has public archives.
Please keep that in mind when deciding how much to reveal about yourself.
UUPoly-L mailing list
UUPoly-L@uupa.org
http://www.uupa.org/mailman/listinfo/uupoly-l




-- "It is a mistake to believe that God is primarily concerned with religion."




This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.