From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sat Jun 16 2001 - 02:11:25 MDT
Ralph Lewis wrote:
>
> 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.
>
I've known almost as many would-be gay dads as lesbian would-be
moms. Sometimes they even get together to do the pragmatic
thing. Although I saw more of that in Canada than in the US.
> >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.
Biological fitter-ness will become increasingly irrelevant as
technology overcome biology.
> > 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...
Separatism is passe. Been there, done that. Sent the T-shirt
back as it didn't fit. Disowning 50% of the population is
terminally stupid. As is any implicit notion that all or more
good inherently adheres to one gender identity vs. the other.
> > 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.
Dunno. I think the whole gender thing is collapsing or at least
getting a lot less polarized for many people.
> > 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.
Gender conflict is yesterday's news. It is time to move on.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:09 MST