From: Ralph Lewis (rlewis10us@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Jun 15 2001 - 17:30:07 MDT
Since I am gay let me jump in here. I don't know any gay men who are
interested in having children. There are a lot of gay men who realized they
were gay AFTER
they were married and had kids and most I know are good parents. There are
also some bi guys who are married, have kids and have a male lover
(sometimes living with them and their wife), or have "boys night out".
I expect the few gay guys that want to have a kid are so rare they get news
coverage. I don't see this as a social trend.
I expect more gay guys would rather have a clone than a kid.
Best Ralph
At 06:02 PM 06/15/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>I wrote..
>> Now, when you have intelligent young men who are deeply
>> romantic, love children, and have great amounts of solid
>> nuclear family background....and they coldbloodedly
>> decide to opt for sperm storage and a vasectomy, and
>> a life without matrimony.... something serious is happening.
>Lee responded...
>Yes, but nature always corrects for mistakes. You will
>observe that the groups having the most children do not
>behave this way. It's simply a question of fitness. The
>"fads" of having small families, or vasectomies, will of
>course die out. There will simply be a demographic replacement
>of biologically inferior groups by biologically fitter groups.>
> Within the larger populations of the human species yes.
> Most of humanity will be churning on in the usual manner...
>but the "foot vote" away from feminine caprice is most
>noticable on the leading edge of the curve... that section
>of society that's likely going to be clading off into new
>subspecies any decade now. Good examples of this are
>the homosexual community in the West. Lots more gay
>men than dykes, they are the near the wave's crest so to
>speak...and their numbers and reproductive interest,
>and their disproportional representation among the
>meritocracy and intelligentsia means they are the the
>point of the wedge for males who are not self-identifying
>homosexuals (or are not especially attached to the
>lable anyway)...but who are cognizant of the simple
>fact that the old ways don't work anymore. I will probably
>get flamed for this..but it's a truism that the lesbian
>intelligentsia is not especially fond of het men (def:
>men who do not identify as queer). They are doing
>a fine job steering the women's movement on a course
>that get's them what they want...separatism. But it's
>not on women's terms...and here's why...
> The same technology that lets a male gay
>couple reproduce with a sympathetic dyke...
>is the technology that allows het or ambi males
>rent a uterus and go to town. The pill and sterile abortion
>technology may have "liberated women from men"...but
>IVF and ArtInsem, and a bit later nuclear transfer and
>genetic engineering, stand to "liberate the men from the
>women" on a much more fundamental level.
> Bifurcation (or should that be polyfurcation) of the species
>on the basis of gender...well..it gives gender conflict a
>whole new dimension...even if it's confined to small portions
>of the elites.
> Is this "biological fitness" in terms of "spread your genes
>throughout the human population"? No.
> Is it "biological fitness" in terms of evolve and diverge from
>your relatives? Not sure..but it bears watching....
>
>
>"he came into the world in the usual way...
> ...and it occured to me..my boy was just like me..."
>Brian
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:09 MST