Comment roundup 2/1 part II.

And the glory keeps coming.  Next is Harv, who doesn’t like perversity.

when DIVERSITY becomes PERVERSITY

The typical UNIVERSITY now prides itself on DIVERSITY. But watch out when DIVERSITY becomes PERVERSITY. That’s when God will put His CURSE-ITY on the whole world (see Malachi 4:6 – NIV)!
For dessert Google “Separation of Raunch and State,” “God to Same-Sexers: Hurry Up” and “Dangerous Radicals of the Religious Right.”

As we all know, if something rhymes is must be true.  That’s how Dr. Seuss got his PhD.

And god’s going to put his curse on the world?  How do you know?  Oh, the bible says it – consider me convinced.  You know, we’ve been hearing that god is going to curse the world for centuries for having more fun than he wants.  When is it going to happen?  What’s more, why did he make perversity feel so damn good if he didn’t want us to do it?

And last, we have Alessandra.  Brace yourself, this one’s pretty special.

What people need to realize is that liberals have normalized a variety of harmful views, concepts, and attitudes about sexuality, including homosexuality, promiscuity, prostitution, and spreading diseases with impunity, all of which have a disastrous effect on both young people and adults.

Sexual assault, manipulation, and exploitation of young people are real problems in society, and there are a variety of homosexual and bisexual perpetrators of all ages, who would greatly welcome the opportunity to be in an organization where it would be easy for them to act out their predatory or exploitative sexual feelings.

Liberals are gleefully throwing under the bus all the youths who will be sexually assaulted and molested by homosexuals in this future BSA. And there will be cover-ups, just like in the Catholic Church, and just like at Penn State, or just like in the cases of the myriad of homosexual/bisexual coaches and teachers who exploited or abused boys that have come to light, because society hasn’t changed much in this respect. Witness the comments around the net about the BSA. It’s all about the “gays” and not about the kids.

What will happen when someone with a homosexuality agenda is told of a supposed incident involving a homosexual teen? They will say it’s all lies, all prejudice, it’s the people who make the accusations who are bad… And that, in the case the boy victim is courageous enough and supported enough to make accusations. Since people who sexually exploit and harass others usually target their victims based on vulnerability, many of the victims will not be in a position to fight back, especially from a psychological standpoint. Furthermore, in case it’s not obvious, that is letting a boy be abused by a homosexual to then say, “oh, how terrible” – but it’s the adults who set up the system to let it happen in the first place.

It turns my stomach that this is what people with a homosexuality agenda want to inflict on innocent boys. At the same time, they would never let young men be the leaders for girls – and the reason is very simple: it’s a measure of protection for the girls.

Can any person in society identify who the people who are currently abusing children are (hetero or not)? Can anyone identify who the homosexuals and bisexuals abusing children are? You can’t – they are closeted. And yet, you want to shove a number of these closeted homosexual abusers onto boys – including letting them have a lot of access to vulnerable boys. The people with a homosexuality agenda will gleefully play the part of Joe Paterno in the BSA. Deny that there is a problem of sexual harassment and abuse in society, deny that homosexuals and bisexuals of all ages do harm and violence in society.

It’s not just the most serious kind of sexual assault that I’m talking about either. How about if a homosexual teen forces a kiss on another boy? “Oh, that’s just part of adolescence,” liberals will say. I’ve seen that happen when a homosexual man forced him onto a 18 yr old. “That’s just gays being gays – my son shouldn’t have gotten mad at the gay man who shoved his mouth on my boy” I was told by the mother of the 18 yr old. Or how about the real case of a homosexual scout leader who constantly said he and the boys needed to practice mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. Is anyone going to police what’s happening with every single individual in the BSA? No. If society is incapable of preventing the most abhorrent abuses by homosexuals today (James Rennie, Frank Lombard, plus all the other victims who have tried to commit suicide) – what’s going to happen in the BSA? And as I said, it will then be too late. You cannot turn back the clock and prevent the boys in question from being molested, assaulted, and violated. But what do liberals care? They must force homosexuals and homosexuality as normal and if, among homosexuals, there are many who are perverse, tough luck. For the boys, that is. Because the people shoving the dysfunctional homosexuals onto the boys are very safe and very privileged.

Juveniles account for more than one third of those known to police to have committed sex offenses to minors. It turns my stomach that a large swath of society are oblivious to the fact and will not protect boys. A homosexual agenda is a very destructive ideology indeed.

God, please make my enemies ridiculous…

Ok, here we go.

What people need to realize is that liberals have normalized a variety of harmful views, concepts, and attitudes about sexuality, including homosexuality, promiscuity, prostitution, and spreading diseases with impunity, all of which have a disastrous effect on both young people and adults.

Harmful?  How so?  Homosexuality seems to promote happiness, not harm.  Well, it makes bigots unhappy, but their bigotry is to blame for that.

Promiscuity?  I like promiscuity.  It’s like pizza – if handled responsibly, it makes your life better.

Prostitution?  What’s wrong with that?  I’m a writer for a living.  I make money doing what I love.  Why should other people be denied the same?  Of course, human trafficking and forced prostitution are reprehensible, but nobody I’ve ever met (and I keep some pretty liberal company) supports those things.

And we support spreading diseases with impunity?  Um, where’d you get that?  Last I checked, it was people like me who support sex education and condom use, all of which reduce STD rates.  It’s generally the religious who oppose the procedures that actually work for reducing STD transmission.

Sexual assault, manipulation, and exploitation of young people are real problems in society, and there are a variety of homosexual and bisexual perpetrators of all ages, who would greatly welcome the opportunity to be in an organization where it would be easy for them to act out their predatory or exploitative sexual feelings.

You’re conflating sexual predation with homosexuality.  That’s silly.  Almost all gay people are not sexual predators just like almost all straight people are not sexual predators.  In Alessandra’s world, we should hold all gay people guilty for the crimes of a few sexual predators who happen to share their sexual orientation.  Should we do the same with straight people?  Should Alessandra be kept away from kids because some straight people are sexual predators?

Liberals are gleefully throwing under the bus all the youths who will be sexually assaulted and molested by homosexuals in this future BSA.

Gay means that someone is attracted to people of the same gender, not to children.  You have no idea what you’re talking about and it shows.

And there will be cover-ups, just like in the Catholic Church, and just like at Penn State, or just like in the cases of the myriad of homosexual/bisexual coaches and teachers who exploited or abused boys that have come to light, because society hasn’t changed much in this respect.

That’s why it makes sense to run background checks on potential volunteers, like most groups similar to the BSA do.  When you don’t do that, well, it can come back to bite you in the ass…like it did with the BSA.

Witness the comments around the net about the BSA. It’s all about the “gays” and not about the kids.

It’s about gay kids, who should be able to live in a world free from discrimination like their straight counterparts.  It is very much about the kids, but also about equality for adults.  What’s more, kids shouldn’t be denied a great scout leader on account of who the scout leader loves.

It turns my stomach that this is what people with a homosexuality agenda want to inflict on innocent boys.

You’re accusing us of wanting young boys sexually assaulted.  You’re an idiot.  What we want, what we obviously want, is equal treatment for gay people.  It’d also be nice if there could be fewer people in the world who see two men/women holding hands at the movies and automatically assume they’re looking for a six year-old to fuck.  But apparently those sources of misinformation are out there (usually propping up their hatred with a nice, shiny cross), and apparently there are plenty of gullible as hell people, like you, willing to buy it.

I’m done.  What a fucking idiot.

  • Glodson

    I think you were being nice when you called the guy a fucking idiot. I was being nice too earlier. But I really lacked the time to insult him properly. Lost opportunities… That comment got under my skin. Maybe it was I was just sick of seeing people treat homosexuality like it is some mental defect, or linking it to pedophilia that I just skipped the process of showing why that reasoning is bad and got right to the insult.

    It isn’t like there is evidence that homosexuality is linked to genetics(maybe epigenetic makers, but that would still make it not a conscious choice), so it isn’t like gay Scout Masters can inflict kids with the Gay like the Rage Virus in 28 Days Later. It isn’t like there are gay men and women who are active in their kid’s(yes, morons*, they have kids by either adoption of suroggates, or maybe even a more complex path) lives and are barred from taking an active role in Scouting. Or kids struggling with sexuality being made unwelcome in a place they should be able to make friends and have fun.

    It turns my stomach to think that backwards bigots like Alessandra could have any say on what happens to kids in scouting.

    *Morons is in reference to anyone that believe that gay people shouldn’t have children because gay people some how represent a threat to the welfare of a child. If you believe that, you are a moron and go fuck yourself. Love, Glodson

    • iknklast

      You know who was allowed to be a scout leader? My brother. A man who sexually abused his own sisters over many years. Oh, but…they were female, right? So the boys aren’t at risk, because he’s straight…and a god nut…gun nut…makes Rick Santorum look like a totally tolerant, reasonable liberal fellow. HE was able to be a scout leader, my ex-husband? Would never be allowed, though he has never abused a child in his life. But HE (ex) is both gay and atheist. So the kids are in danger from him…not from the asshole that has actually abused children (but not convicted…so, oh, that’s OK, then.)

      • Glodson

        This morning, they were doing a viewer’s call in thing they do once a week for the local Fox Affiliate. I live in Texas, and they were hyping that some people had comments about the Scouts today. I consider myself lucky that I missed it as I’m sure they flung around the same stupidity that would keep your ex from being involved in Scouting.

        People can be so fucking dumb.

      • invivoMark

        Iknklast… I’m so sorry.

  • iknklast

    “God, please make my enemies ridiculous…”

    Prayer answered. Maybe there is a God! ;-)

  • Scott Warner

    “It’s about gay kids, who should be able to live in a world free from discrimination like their straight counterparts.”
    I imagine this person believes that gay people are ‘made’ gay by the “homosexuality agenda,” rather than born gay. Obviously we need to keep those evil gays away from the kids, lest they turn gay too.

    • Loqi

      Apparently the gayification rays are quite strong. Gallup puts the total gay population at 3.4% in the US. So for every “gay influence,” there are ~33 straight ones. Are gays just 33x more potent than straights?

  • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

    When God puts his CURSE-ITY on the world, things will get WORSE-ITY!

    • invivoMark

      We’ll be driving away in a HEARSE-ITY! Don’t forget your PURSE-ITY!!

      • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

        And you won’t even be saved by prompt treatment by a NURSE-ITY!

        I’m running out of “ursities”.

        • Loqi

          Harv could have used some TERSE-ITY in his comment.

          • Stogoe

            Harv should know: Just adding some rhymes doesn’t make it VERSE-ITY!

  • Loqi

    Do schools offer remedial thinking classes? I’d be willing to pay some peoples’ tuition.

    • Glodson

      One of the saddest things I’ve noticed is that when some people learn the principals of logic, and critical thinking, they are adept at turning those tools on other people, but less successful when applying those tools to their own point of view. So they take the tools for rational thought and use them to rationalize their irrational beliefs.

      We can see the rudimentary effects in some theologies and the fallacious reasoning for bigotry. Instead of examining the issue, they just examine the opposing side with any sort of scrutiny.

  • Andrew Kohler

    Um, wow. That really was exhausting to read. The whole tiresome conflation of homosexuality with pedophilia and the absurd idea that people with heterosexual orientations are incapable of

    1. Tom Coburn, then a representative but now a senator from Oklahoma, said the following in support of the odious [Denial] of Marriage Act, HR 3396, in the Congressional Record: “We hear a lot about diversity in this chamber, but we don’t hear about perversity.” (That may not be the exact wording, but I will just depress myself if I reread it.) He also talked about how people in his district think homosexuality is “based on lust” (unlike heterosexuality?!) This was the 104th Congress, 2nd Session, I think 10 or 11 July, 1996. Fortunately, this was followed by John Lewis calling the bill the “Defense of Mean-Spirited Bigots Act,” which is pretty epic. Point being: idiots like Harv are in the Senate. But, we all knew that already.

    2. “Deny that there is a problem of sexual harassment and abuse in society, deny that homosexuals and bisexuals of all ages do harm and violence in society.” Who the hell is denying either of these things!? She seems to have confused LGBT rights advocates with those misogynist websites the Southern Poverty Law Center monitors. And I’ve never heard anyone say that only heterosexuals are capable of harm and violence. That would be absurd, just as it’s absurd to impute that only gay and bisexual people perpetrate such awful things, as this wing nut is doing. (At least she’s inclusive of bisexuals, by the way?)

    3. What’s up with the obsession with teenage perpetrators of sex crimes? Are there a lot of teenage cub scout leaders of something? And am I wrong to be skeptical of the claim that over a third of known sex offenders are juveniles?

    4. “And yet, you want to shove a number of these closeted homosexual abusers onto boys” Um, if these people are successfully closeted, THEN THEY CAN ALREADY PARTICIPATE IN THE BSA. THE POINT OF CHANGING THE POLICY IS SO THAT GAY AND BISEXUAL PEOPLE CAN PARTICIPATE *OPENLY.* GOOD FRICKIN’ GRIEF!!!! Sorry for the all caps. Sometimes one can’t help it.

    5. “How about if a homosexual teen forces a kiss on another boy?” Then that’s sexual harassment, just as if a male teen forces a kiss on a girl, or a girl forces a kiss on a girl, or a girl forces a kiss on a boy. And anyone who would say ‘That’s just gays being gays” is a homophobic idiot. Not that I believe Alessandra’s story, of course. Other notable incoherence include “Is anyone going to police what’s happening with every single individual in the BSA? ” (EVER SINGLE individual!!!) and “Because the people shoving the dysfunctional homosexuals onto the boys are very safe and very privileged”

    6. “Homosexuality agenda” sounds hilarious. I’m disappointed she correctly uses the adjective rather than the noun in the last sentence.

    7. I had never before thought of promiscuity as being similar to pizza. Your ability with analogies is one of the reasons I read this blog :-)

    And let’s hope we can see some crazy posts soon about the BSA changing its policy on *atheists.* Ahem. x-(

    • Andrew Kohler

      P.S. OH I think I get it: the gay KIDS will start to victimize other kids within Scout troupes? I’ve not heard people offer that as one of the dire consequences of the “homosexuality agenda” before.

      By the way, be sure to read the following:

      http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/blogsome-what-is-the-homosexuality-agenda/

      • Glodson

        Yea, I read that and his asinine post down in the Boy Scout thread. It had this gem: “Society needs to be concerned about homosexuality, not homosexual orientation. Homosexual attraction or desire is only a mere product of a myriad configurations of these aforementioned dysfunctional psycho-social dynamics.”

        It is an entire word salad of a post that exist only in attempt to legitimize the dismissal of gay rights and promoting this bigoted understanding of homosexuality. This poster is a loathsome individual. I read the post here, and that post you linked to, and my immediate reaction was this is a person not interested in having a dialogue in good faith. This is a person that will ignore any evidence we present as lies. It isn’t a conversation with having.

        Which is why I did what I rarely do. I skipped the formalities, and just called the person a fucking moron because this person is a fucking moron. Seemed easiest.

        • Andrew Kohler

          Can’t blame you–and if you got called a “pile of turd” by this person, you must have done something right! And the definition of homosexuality that precedes what you quoted is also a real gem. There’s another post called “Who’s doing violence to LGBT people (and everyone else?)” that is even more appalling–what you called her was if anything far too nice. Just goes to show that the crazier a person is, the more likely (s)he is to use the Statue of Liberty for a profile picture (because liberty is all about freeing society from gays, who are disproportionately violent and vicious).

          [BTW, speaking of word salad: One can either say "a myriad of [noun]” or use myriad as an adjective, as in “There are myriad reasons why this blog post is reprehensible and incoherent,” but not “a myriad [noun].” Maybe it was a typo, but I’m feeling snotty.]

          • Glodson

            If anyone is going to insult me, they better step up their game. I get called worse by own family, in an oddly dysfunctionally loving way.

            Am I alone in spotting that people who tend to use symbols for liberty have a tendency to grossly misunderstand what liberty actually is?

          • Andrew Kohler

            No, Glodson, you are not alone in noticing that. See also Liberty University and all the various right-wing anti-gay groups that blather incessantly about threats to their “liberty” from people refusing to be controlled by them.

            I just spent an excessive amount of time responding to this Alessandra over on the original post. I couldn’t help myself. Really odious stuff, and she just won’t accept defeat. Zinc Avenger and some others are continuing to go at her, too. Y’all should check it out, if you can bear it.

          • David

            Of course, ‘myriad’ originally meant ‘ten thousand’ in Classical Greek, but it has acquired the vague meaning of ‘an uncountably large number’ in English. This is disappointing. I think we should try to reinstate its mathematical value; thus: “I just got a pay rise to four myriad pounds a year”, or “Our language is still spoken by a few myriad people”.

            I feel the same way about the Hindi word ‘lakh’, meaning ‘one hundred thousand. But I don’t have much of a platform for language engineering :-)

            And don’t even get me started on the American billion and trillion that aren’t a million to the power of two and three respectively …

          • Andrew Kohler

            I quite agree that myriad should be used literally :-) In fact, I think I learned it from the Guinness Book of Numbers when I was little and thought it was actually for units of ten thousand initially; it was something of a disappointment to learn that it’s come to mean “a whole lot of.”

        • Zinc Avenger (Sarcasm Tags 3.0 Compliant)

          I know she’s a lost cause, but collateral education is a worthwhile goal.

          • Andrew Kohler

            My reasoning as well. My favorite part is how you told her to look at a study and she responded by questioning a bunch of stuff which could have been answered by, um, reading the study.

          • Glodson

            That is true. It is sometimes while I’ve stayed with something long after it has been shown to be fruitless.

            Until I get bored and start watching stupid stuff on youtube.

  • Andrew Kohler

    Oh, damn. I forgot to finish my first paragraph. (Would an edit feature a la Facebook be possible on this comment section? I’m also noticing now that I have “ever” instead of “every,” etc.) Anyhow, lest you be deprived of its full glory, here is a completed version:

    Um, wow. That really was exhausting to read. The whole tiresome conflation of homosexuality with pedophilia and the absurd idea that people with heterosexual orientations are never perpetrators of sex crimes are self-evidently asinine, and I can’t quite believe that people actually think such things. And yet, they do. So, I’ll not elaborate on them, instead choosing to focus on:

    [See above]

  • http://Reasonableconversation.wordpress.com Kaoru Negisa

    I am hanging out with a friend and just shared the first one with her. Her response, “Ned Flanders comments there? Seriously, ‘curse-ity’?”

  • mechtheist

    “Sexual assault, manipulation, and exploitation of young people are real problems”
    He inda forgot to mention the reason a lot of kids get put in a position that leaves them vulnerable to these things is due to parents, who think like this odious piece of shit, ostracizing their gay children .

  • KirikaSena
    • Glodson

      Yes, this song plays in my head as I attempt to read those comments.

    • Beutelratti

      I didn’t think my first reply on this blog would be telling someone how fucked up they are. I consider myself to be a very lucky person to live somewhere where I don’t to put up with this idiotic drivel on a daily basis.

      I’m still at a loss as to how someone can even go where that person went. Unbelievable.

      • Beutelratti

        *have to put up (obviously)

      • Glodson

        There’s times when I can put up with it, but that was just terrible.

        Much respect to Zinc, Andrew, and JT for trying to engage this person in a thoughtful manner.

        • Beutelratti

          I have a lot of respect for everyone who can converse with people like these without wanting to choke them. A lot of respect.

        • Andrew Kohler

          Thank you for the kind words :-) It makes me feel a little less like I’ve been pounding my head against a concrete wall for the last couple hours. (Now, if only I could have written that many words for my actual work today….)

          • Glodson

            I don’t mind writing a long post myself, when I think the person I’m writing it to will read it. Like I did in the Prayer thread a while back.

            But I did neglect to think about others who might be reading these comments, and maybe it would have been better to take a closer look at the bad posts. Maybe next time I won’t be in such a foul mood when a bigoted troll stumbles in.

  • http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/ Alessandra

    Harmful? How so? Homosexuality seems to promote happiness, not harm. Well, it makes bigots unhappy, but their bigotry is to blame for that.
    ===================
    You can’t deny then that normalizing pedophilia certainly promotes happiness, of the pedophiles. That’s what happens when you normalize any crap in society – all the deformed people are happy.

    “Promiscuity? I like promiscuity. It’s like pizza – if handled responsibly, it makes your life better.”
    Responsible promiscuity is an oxymoron.

    “Prostitution? What’s wrong with that? I’m a writer for a living. I make money doing what I love. Why should other people be denied the same? ”

    Because it degrades and exploits people sexually, when it doesn’t also involve serious acts of violence. Oh, no wonder you’re in favor of it. Anything that dehumanizes and brutalizes people and sex is right up your alley. And then you joke about it.

    “And we support spreading diseases with impunity? Um, where’d you get that? ”
    What legal punishment is there for anyone spreading STDs, like syphilis and HIV? Oh, and I suppose you know that homosexuals and bisexuals are the leaders in infesting society with these diseases. So many ways that liberals are destructive about sexuality.

    “Almost all gay people are not sexual predators just like almost all straight people are not sexual predators. ”
    Nice lie. There are millions of people in society who perpetrate all kinds of sexually exploitative, abusive acts, or harassment in society. About 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is a victim of child sexual abuse. People like yourself just cover it all up, trivialize it, dismiss it, like you are doing here. Moreover, the harm in any of these problem is not measured by how many victims there are.

    “Gay means that someone is attracted to people of the same gender, not to children. You have no idea what you’re talking about and it shows.”
    Plenty of “gays” and bisexuals who are abusive and violent. You have no idea what you are talking about and it shows.

    • Steve

      You are proof positive that religion destroys people’s natural moral compass

      • http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/ Alessandra

        You are proof that liberals have no moral compass.

        • Glodson

          I imagine you scream “Fucking liberals” as you encounter any problem.

          Stubbed toe: FUCKING LIBERALS!

          Cold coffee: FUCKING LIBERALS!

          Out of toilet paper: FUCKING LIBERALS!

          • http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/ Alessandra

            Glodson, more of your stupid bigotry. Yawn.

          • Glodson

            And more of your causal inability to understand what words mean.

    • Kodie

      Try to do some math once in a while before you post such a glaring imbalance between wholesome straight predators and perverted gay predators.

    • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ M

      Oh fun times, I needed something to raise my blood pressure today. Here goes:

      “You can’t deny then that normalizing pedophilia certainly promotes happiness, of the pedophiles. That’s what happens when you normalize any crap in society – all the deformed people are happy.”
      Um, but homosexuality doesn’t hurt anyone. Pedophiles hurt people because they prey on people too young to have strong boundaries, understand sexual intimacy, or give any sort of informed consent. Adults can do all those things. So we legalize and support the things that don’t hurt people while keeping illegal the things that do hurt people.

      “Responsible promiscuity is an oxymoron.”
      Nope! Responsible promiscuity involves open and honest communication, responsible and safe sex, and regular STD tests if needed. You know, the things relationships should have anyways. Besides, what is promiscuity? Pre-marital sex of any kind? Serial monogamy? Sex on the kitchen table instead of the bed? Threesomes? Sixsomes? Orgies? Primary couple with secondary sex partners? Asexual partner with sexual partner allowing the sexual partner to get off with others? There’s a gazillion forms relationships can take, and as long as the people in them are being careful, they’re being responsible.

      “Because it degrades and exploits people sexually, when it doesn’t also involve serious acts of violence. Oh, no wonder you’re in favor of it. Anything that dehumanizes and brutalizes people and sex is right up your alley. And then you joke about it.”
      Forced prostitution is rape. Human trafficking is slavery. Prostitution from desperation is … hard to describe, exactly, but definitely NOT OK. We agree that those are very very wrong. However, prostitution isn’t inherently wrong. Prostitution entered willingly, as “courtesan” or “escort”, is just another job selling one’s labor. Sex work can be degrading, but it doesn’t have to be, and acknowledging that some of the people who enter sex work do so willingly and enjoy their work is important.

      “What legal punishment is there for anyone spreading STDs, like syphilis and HIV? Oh, and I suppose you know that homosexuals and bisexuals are the leaders in infesting society with these diseases. So many ways that liberals are destructive about sexuality.”
      Actually, knowingly spreading HIV has resulted in assault charges, though the attempted murder charges were dropped. Other STDs are either curable or much more manageable, so they don’t carry nearly the legal consequences for spreading intentionally. Spreading STDs intentionally is also extremely rare, because you’re spreading them to your sexual partners who you, ya know, care about.
      And actually, while gay men have higher than average STD rates, lesbians have much lower than average STD rates. Using your “logic”, it looks like a big risk factor for STDs is having sex with men, not homosexuality or bisexuality, so … ban heterosexual sex! STDs spread through the heterosexual population too, btw- intravenous drugs and unprotected sex don’t care about gender. In fact, some of the higher rates of STDs are among hetero teens who got abstinence only education!
      Oh, and that case I mentioned above? It involved a man who got HIV from his ex-girlfriend deliberately infecting his current girlfriend and other women. So don’t tell me “teh gayz” are evil and “teh straights” are paragons of sexual virtue, cuz I ain’t buyin’ it.

      “Nice lie. There are millions of people in society who perpetrate all kinds of sexually exploitative, abusive acts, or harassment in society. About 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is a victim of child sexual abuse. People like yourself just cover it all up, trivialize it, dismiss it, like you are doing here. Moreover, the harm in any of these problem is not measured by how many victims there are.”
      Wow, you almost said right things. You’re right, the statistics on child abuse are horrible and each individual case is a tragedy. Here’s where you’re wrong though: the vast majority of those children were abused by straight people, not gay people. Men who abuse boys are usually straight- in their consensual relationships, they seek out women. They abuse boys for power, often because they were abused themselves and this is a twisted way of dealing with their own shame (I’m not a victim, see, I make victims!). In fact, the vast majority of child abusers are straight men. We need to break down masculinity into something healthier and less abusive for sure, but that definitely doesn’t involve blaming homosexuality for things heterosexuals do.

      “Plenty of “gays” and bisexuals who are abusive and violent. You have no idea what you are talking about and it shows.”
      Sure, GLBTQQIAAs can be abusive and violent. They’re people. People can be abusive and violent. Would you argue that because a lot of men beat their wives, heterosexuals are abusive and violent and should therefore be oppressed? The answer is to curb and punish domestic violence, not ban any relationships or claim that sexual orientation has anything to do with violence.

      It all comes down to people are people. You think some people are more equal than others, because the “others” have sex you don’t like. That’s absurd, and the sooner you wake up to that, the happier you’ll be.

      • Andrew Kohler

        Thanks so much for making these points, which are of the highest importance in this debate (if we may so dignify it)–very well said! I posted a comment on the “Not impressed with the Boy Scouts” thread (wherein it all began) telling people to read this.

        • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ M

          Thanks! It’s always nice to know people are reading the giant wall-of-texts that take some time to write.

    • sqlrob

      Pedophilia involves lack of consent and lack of ability to consent. Try again.

  • http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/ Alessandra

    In Alessandra’s world, we should hold all gay people guilty for the crimes of a few sexual predators who happen to share their sexual orientation. Should we do the same with straight people? Should Alessandra be kept away from kids because some straight people are sexual predators?
    ================
    I think people need to take responsibility for their psychological problems regarding sexuality. You don’t do that and you don’t want anyone to do that, including people with a homosexuality problem. So, normalizing homosexuality anywhere is destructive for society.
    Creating an environment where homosexuals and bisexuals are known to abuse vulnerable boys is a criminal action. And, yes, if you have a homosexual problem, and you don’t want to resolve it, you don’t join the boy scouts.
    And you already do the same thing with straight men – who are not allowed to be the leaders of the Girl Scouts. That’s to protect the girls.
    I shouldn’t be kept away from kids, because I like to see them protected from the abuse you want to inflict on them. The more we keep people like you away from kids, along with your destructive homosexual agenda, the better it will be for the kids- the ones you can care less about.

    • Beutelratti

      There has never been and never will be a “homosexual problem”.
      The only problem here is your limited mind.

      • http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/ Alessandra

        For people in denial, there are never problems, are there? That’s a liberal for you.

        • Beutelratti

          It’s so funny that you assume I’m one of your hated liberals. I’m not even American, you dumbass.

          • Glodson

            Ah, so you are one of those foreign commie liberals! Like Obama! GRRAGRRR!

            CONSERVATIVE AMERICAN RAGE!

    • Andrew Kohler

      If that really is the Girl Scouts’ policy, I think it is irrational.

      • Glodson

        It isn’t the policy.

        In fact I have this as well.

        Can boys or men participate?
        Girl Scouting exists to serve girls. Our many years of experience shows that girls have unique needs and interests that are best met in a program designed especially for them, delivered in an all-girl setting. Boys too, have unique needs and interests, which are addressed by organizations designed specifically for them. Adult men can volunteer in Girl Scouting in every capacity that women can. However, as one of the most valuable parts of a girls experience is gained through role modeling, each troop must have at least one female Leader.

        Seems rational to me. I can volunteer in any role that a woman can in Girl Scouts, I just need to make sure we have at least one woman as the Girl Scouts are there for young women and girls. Having the perspective of a woman is a great thing, but the leadership roles are open to everyone.

        Pesky reality and its liberal bias.

      • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ M

        Eh, considering the vast majority of child abusers are straight men, it makes some sort of sense. It’s still discriminatory, and potentially a problem, but from a purely statistical point of view it makes sense.

        There’s also a difference IMO between Daisies and Brownies (elementary school) and Girl Scouts (middle and high schools). I’m honestly not sure how comfortable I’d be with a hetero adult male leading a group of 15-year-old girls with minimal oversight- it just screams “potential for abuse” to me.

        • Andrew Kohler

          Fair enough, M. I’d say that it’s bad policy for one adult to lead a group of children off on camping trips and the like with minimal oversight in any circumstance. It’s better to have two adults lest there should be an emergency, too.

        • Glodson

          But it isn’t even the policy. All roles in the leadership of Girl Scouts are open to men and women, with the requirement that at least one leader in a group is a woman. The idea being that the Girl Scouts are about teaching and empowering girls and young women as they grow so the guidance of a woman who lived through all that is beneficial.

          • Andrew Kohler

            Sounds like a good policy to me (and one that should mitigate the potential for abuse)–thanks for the clarification! (I know I could have looked up the policy but am just too exhausted from Alessandra.)

          • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ M

            Ah good, thanks for that! I was in Girl Scouts only until 6th grade, so I don’t remember who could and could not be leaders. I just know all my scout leaders happened to be female.

          • Glodson

            @ Andrew: No problem. I had to look it up to be sure, but I do recall that women could take part in leadership roles in the Boy Scouts, at least in some of them back when I did it. I thought that the same would apply to men in the Girl Scouts, but I had to check.

            @ M: I assumed there was some roles for men, but I didn’t know that they allowed it to be at all levels. But it makes sense. Like I said above, I know that women could be involved with the Boy Scouts, which was good for a mother with sons in Scouting. As a father with a daughter now, it is good to know that I can take part in that part of her life as well.

            But I think making sure that women are still involved with a leadership role is a great idea. As well intentioned as I might be, my experiences growing up will never be the same as a woman’s growing up, and there’s just things I wouldn’t think to teach a young girl.

    • Kodie

      Your issue isn’t predation or you would be hostile to straight predators as well. Your issue is you don’t think gay people make good role models and only look for recruitment opportunities and turn the young boys gay. You see the world in such an ugly, biased way, Alessandra. There is nothing wrong with being gay, there is no “turning” someone gay by being around them or being gay in a leadership role to them. Of course your opinion is that there is only one way to get gay and that is to be abused as a child by a gay man, begetting all the foul gayness that you hate. So, you’re uneducated, you’re convinced that the problem is liberals, the gay “agenda”, tolerance, and you think you can stop homosexuality itself by keeping gay people from joining clubs where you think they necessarily predate upon boys.

      You don’t care about the girls though! You think the men in charge of their groups are straight, so if they rape the girls, then it is ok? Or you hate girls as much as you hate gay people? Either way, let me know so I can formulate a proper response to your fucking bullshit.

    • sqlrob

      I think people need to take responsibility for their psychological problems regarding sexuality.

      Yes, yes they do. BTW, there’s a beam in your eye.

  • http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/ Alessandra

    That’s why it makes sense to run background checks on potential volunteers, like most groups similar to the BSA do.
    =================
    Oh, yeah because that would have prevented Sandusky, Rennie, Lombard, and the millions of other abusers and exploiters that have no record. Liberals are such morons when they want to lie to themselves about the problems related to abuse.

    • Anat

      Since Sandusky is straight his case does not support your point. Straight men who are abusers abuse vulnerable people – whether the same sex or the opposite sex. The sex of the abuse victims isn’t indicative of the abuser’s orientation.

  • http://alessandrareflections.wordpress.com/ Alessandra

    You’re accusing us of wanting young boys sexually assaulted.
    ======================
    That’s because shoving homosexuality as normal, along with putting homosexuals and bisexuals in positions of power and in positions of perpetrating all kinds of harassing, abusive, and exploitative acts in the Boy Scouts will result in assault, exploitation, and harassment of boys. That’s what happens in reality, not your little homosexual agenda fairy tale. So, if you have to choose between acknowledging that your homosexuality agenda will cause harm to countless boys, and protecting them, or pretending that nothing bad is going to happen, and you get to shove the gays, what do you choose?
    The sexual exploitation and abuse of boys, their human rights be damned. You must shove people with a homosexuality problem everywhere, no matter how much harm or what kind of harm they do to others. And mostly with impunity of course.

    ” It’d also be nice if there could be fewer people in the world who see two men/women holding hands at the movies and automatically assume they’re looking for a six year-old to fuck. ”

    It would be nicer if no homosexual or bisexual ever abused or exploited others, I think. But that’s the difference between you and me. You just love to cover up abuse and exploitation if it involves a homosexual or bisexual perpetrator.

    • Andrew Kohler

      I think JT will agree with me that the world would be better if no one ever exploited anyone else. It would also be nice if the world were rid of hatred against gay and bisexual people. These things are not mutually exclusive.

    • Beutelratti

      How have you still not gotten this: Homosexuality =/= Paedophilia

      It’s actually pretty disgusting that you’re now going around accusing people of wanting to cover up child abuse. I’m gonna make one last attempt at making this as easy as possible:
      - when a man abuses a 6-year-old girl, he’s a paedophile, he’s a horrible person and he’s a criminal that needs to be punished
      - when a man abuses a 6-year-old boy, he’s a paedophile, he’s a horrible person and he’s a criminal that needs to be punished
      - when a woman abuses a 6-year-old girl, she’s a paedophile, she’s a horrible person and she’s a criminal that needs to be punished
      - when a woman abuses a 6-year-old boy, she’s a paedophile, she’s a horrible person and she’s a criminal that needs to be punished
      - when a man and a woman want to have consensual sex with each other, they are perfectly within their rights to do so
      - when a man and a man want to have consensual sex with each other, they are perfectly within their rights to do so
      - when a woman and woman want to have consensual sex with each other, they are perfectly within their rights to do so

      Got it? No? Didn’t think so.

      • pjmaertz

        You summed it up as best as you could, but Alessandra’s brain is unwilling to accept any facts that don’t support her worldview. Fuck her. To paraphrase Christopher Hitchens, it’s too bad there’s not a hell for her to go to when she dies.

    • Kodie

      You do realize if people can’t be gay out in the open, they will still be gay and not say anything to anyone? That means that predators will take what advantages they can whether they say they are gay or pretend not to be gay. You don’t seem to understand what you’re proposing wouldn’t change all the bad things that happen to children or the people who seek opportunities to be close to children for the purpose of abusing them.

      That means you pretty much just trust straight people or people who say they are straight, and you distrust people who are gay, but you don’t distrust people who lie about being gay to get into your club? It seems to me you know that you are protecting child abusers with your method as much as anyone. Your real problem is that you don’t want young boys to have a gay man for a role model. You are merely making up a heap of lies to cover this fact, because the way it is with no gay people, there are still gay people. The way it is now, there are still predators. Gay people are not the same as predators – your numbers of 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is abused – bears that out pretty directly. Even an idiot like you would have to see what that really means. What your problem is is with gay people promoting their own “lifestyle” out in the open and might turn the young boys gay, or use his position to recruit. Alessandra, you’re deluded if you think hiding them makes everything better.

    • indradawn

      It’s not so dark outside the closet, Alessandra. Just come out already.

  • indradawn

    Clearly Alessandra is gay.

  • smrnda

    Announcement: First, I have tried to address Allesandra’s points without any name calling in the original post on the BSA. I studied social psychology and I vetted proposals for papers and experiments, so I have some experience with sorting out what people are claiming is true, and how to devise experiments and studies to test the hypothesis, and how to determine whether or not a study accomplishes a goal. I am not an expert, but I do have some experience.

    Second, given that Allesandra has made a lot of observations about homosexuality and has said that Allesandra’s points are backed up by the evidence, I have asked Allesandra a few questions about psychology in order to determine what level of understanding Allesandra has of the field on the original blog post. I have also asked Allesandra to supply me with some sources Allesandra used in forming opinions on the matter, since appealing to anything but peer-reviewed literature or well-compiled statistics is meaningless here.

    To save time and space, I’ll rephrase some points I made and give Allesandra a chance at responding to some questions. I dislike double-posting but I want to be thorough.

    Allesandra argues that my education in psychology has been deficient in that it has taught me that, regardless of my level of training, I cannot understand or know another person’s motives, issues, thought and feelings; relevant to the issue at hand, it could be said that my education has taught me that I cannot possibly know why someone has turned out to be homosexual. I’m assuming that Allesandra has encountered people who claim that they can explain homosexuality, and so it appears that they know something that I do not.

    The early pioneers of psychology – Freud, Jung, and Adler, developed psychoanalytic theories of human behavior and development. The idea was that any sort of psychological problem could be traced to some sort of trauma or unresolved conflict from earlier in life. The goal of the therapist was to sort out the issues of the client in order to see what conflict in the past had caused problems in the present. The notion of the ‘unconscious mind’ was extremely relevant to early psychoanalysis, since it was believed that traumas were often repressed and that patients were unable to face them and that their symptoms often contained coded information that, if interpreted by a skillful therapist, could be a key that would unlock their problems. The therapist was able to do this by having the benefit of knowing various psychoanalytic theories which the patient did not know, and because of being free from unresolved trauma.

    This is relevant to the issue at hand because psychologists were nearly universal in believing that there existed some psychoanalytic explanation for homosexuality, typically involving father/son bonds that were deficient. Likewise, various anxieties and neurosis were blamed on things like bad parenting or traumatic experiences early on in life.

    These days, this isn’t how psychology works. We no longer pretend that therapists have magical powers to know what motivates other people, and it’s impossible to actually test many psychoanalytic ‘theories’ since they contain notions which are unfalsifiable. If I say that your symptoms are caused by a repressed trauma you don’t remember, there’s no way to prove that wrong since we don’t likely have a detailed report about a person’s entire life. We also have the problem (thank you Elizabeth Loftus) that autobiographical memory isn’t that reliable, so we can’t even rely on self-reporting of the past much of the time. We also don’t believe that therapists are capable of such piercing, superhuman insights into what motivates and drives people as used to be believed.

    The other problem is that when a person offers a psychoanalytic explanation for why someone is gay, the problem is that if that therapist finds a client who doesn’t match the original theory, they simply come up with a new theory but do not discard the old one. If something requires a multitude of case-by-case explanations, then we do not have a ‘theory’ of why it happens, we have a mess of hypothesis that are true sometimes and false in other times, and that’s not a coherent theory. Psychoanalytic explanations had/have a tendency to be kind of ‘make something up that fits each case on the spot’ – and that’s not a theory.

    I think psychoanalytic explanations still seem appealing because they attempt to explain everything in terms of narratives we can easily understand and that make intuitive sense. To admit that we can’t find an *explanation* for something about a person is frustrating, but by now, psychology, like medicine, is mature enough to accept we don’t have all the answers. We certainly don’t have reliable information on why anybody is homosexual at this time.

    If interested, Allesandra can find my questions about psychology on older post. I’d be interested in the answers. I’m not trying to be patronizing, just if someone tells me that my understanding of a subject is deficient and provides no credentials, I’d like to find out what the person does or does not know. There’s also a problem that poorly informed people believe themselves to be more knowledgeable than they are, and lack the knowledge to determine whether a source is reliable or nor or accurate or not. Even if a person disagrees with modern conclusions, they should at least be able to explain what psychologists are saying accurately, since if they can’t accurately characterize what is currently being said, how can they really be informed in being against it?

    Now, a person can tell me that all psychology since say, Freud, has just been one mistake after another and that we should get back to what was proposed long ago, but we have better results now than in the past, so I’d say our understanding has improved.

  • baal
    Liberals are gleefully throwing under the bus all the youths who will be sexually assaulted and molested by homosexuals in this future BSA.

    Gay means that someone is attracted to people of the same gender, not to children. You have no idea what you’re talking about and it shows.

    Jerry Sandusky and other males who abuse male children are typically hetero with adults. Child abuse has more to do with shielded men having closed door access to ‘troubled’ (or other vulnerable group) children than specific gender roles. The sooner the religious get on with actually understand the facts of the problem the sooner kids will have better lives.
    On a related note, when businesses want to reduce the number of sex abuse cases, they put in glass sides to offices or big windows into the doors. They also invite 3rd parties to discipline actions or other closed door activities. They don’t round up the gays and make them have a fire drill, it wouldn’t help. Really, blaming the gays is bigoted behaviour, misunderstands human sexuality, doesn’t help or solve the problem and prevents you from thinking up more relevant actual ways to fix things.

  • Desiree

    I’m bisexual and have no desire to molest children. I enjoy sex with consenting adults. Like most straights, gays, and bis, I find the idea of having sex with children disgusting and wrong.

    • Glodson

      There’s a number of people that seem to not understand that most of us consider informed consent to be the most important part of sex. Without it, sex doesn’t happen, which means that we all expect the person to say “yes” and be capable giving consent in a meaningful way, like being of age.

      Sadly, some conflate the the idea that people who aren’t heterosexual with perversion which links them with pedophilia. Which is just stupid and wrong. It is like saying that me, as a heterosexual male, is a threat to young girls. I’m not. I have no interest in young girls. Like you, I like consenting adults. Seems to be a good standard that most people agree on, across all sexual orientations.

      • Desiree

        It’s a pretty easy standard to follow. Consentual adult. That’s it. Simple. Anything else is potentially rape. Even adults under 21 to 18 look too young for me sometimes. Most adults like people who look like and are legal adults. It’s like these bigots go to the extremes because they can not conceive that not everyone else in the world is not hetero. The only difference between them and me is that I like to have sex with someone of the same sex. Other than that few minutes or hours, my life is the same as theirs. Work, pay bills, cook dinner, wash clothes, etc. Bis and gays are not some other species.

        • Glodson

          A book I read a few years ago put an interesting thought in my head. It was about gender pluralism in Southeast Asia since early modern times, called Gender Pluralism In Southeast Asia Since Early Modern Times…

          Lame joke aside, it introduced me to the concept of hetreogender relationships. Men could have homosexual relationships, which were approved of, if one partner was transgender. So it was a man with a woman gendered but of the male sex. This was related to their religious understandings, and it didn’t work with women. Or men with another man who wasn’t transgendered. The reactions to these transgressions differed from social disapproval to violent reactions, depending on the people and time period.

          It did get me to ask how tightly my idea of my own sexual orientation is tied to gender rather than sex. Just an idle thought.

          • Desiree

            I know in some places out in Asia where there is a segment of society is adovcating for a third gender. Men living as women. That is part of the push back against LGBT community by some. We make people question their own orientation, which alot do not handle in positive ways. Many people want this concrete identity of gay or straight. Well there is much in between. Like I am in a hetero relationship with a hetero man while I am a bi woman. Before that I was in a triad with a bi woman and hetero man. Yet all of this is consentual and we are not hurting anyone.

          • Glodson

            It really is a fascinating take on gender. Reading up on that helped me get past our heavily ingrained cultural prejudices against transgender people. It was an education in both cultural anthropology and my own backwards attitudes(at the time).

            I still don’t understand why people feel the need to assert their own sexual morality into the bedrooms of others. Even when I was a fucking Baptist, it didn’t make any sense to me. Might be why I’m not one anymore.

  • pjmaertz

    The only thing one can do when encountering someone who is a fucking stupid as Alessandra is laugh. No amount of explaination, however supported by facts and logic it may be, will get through this horrible primate’s thick, thick skull. Fuck you Alessandra. LOLOLOLZ.

  • smrnda

    Allesandra replied with more verbiage, but did not answer my factual questions about psychology, so I think the Dunning Kruger effect is at work. Allesandra has not demonstrated any knowledge about psychology, but yet Allessandra continues to attack my understanding of the field.

    The questions I ask (and will repeat) was to explain the causes (as currently understood) of schizophrenia and what it was originally or previously believed to be caused by (perhaps with a history of how our understanding of cause effect treatment and its success), to explain cognitive behavior therapy and its relevance to eating disorders, whether or not bipolar disorder and schizo-affective disorder are considered to represent different etiologies (and if now, why there are still 2 disorders listed in the DSM-IV). I tried to stick with questions that would be relevant to clinical diagnosis and abnormal psychology, since it’s relevant to the discussion.

    Could someone do me a favor and just post that yes, these questions are meaningful questions within the realm of psychology, and that if you can’t answer any of them, you probably don’t even know enough to read a paper?

    • Glodson

      I’ll have more time tomorrow. I will do my best to find some evidence to back up these claims, and dive into these questions. Sorry, I actually need time to research this. My psychology is rather rusty. Been awhile since I’ve tried the pry open that part of my brain. But these questions are meaningful, both in terms of psychology and even neurology.

      • smrnda

        It’s just that Allessandra keeps taking pity on poor me who has, apparently, been educated incorrectly. I wanted to ask these questions to basically determine whether or not Allessandra knew anything about psychology at all; people who are very incompetent not only overestimate their own abilities,they know so little that they can’t read an article and actually come away understanding it, but they think they do. So no need for anyone but Allessandra to answer the questions.

        My prediction was that Allesandra would either not answer them, or say “I won’t answer them since you didn’t answer all of my questions” (which doesn’t make sense – why would a person who wants to sound smart not want to be able to say ‘you didn’t answer my questions but I could answer yours?’) or else would argue that the entire field of psychology has got it all wrong.

        But thanks, it’s just I’ve rarely had anyone tell me that I ‘knew nothing’ about psychology, or understood it all wrong. I mean, the idea of the ‘unconscious mind’ as presented by Freud, Jung is no longer a model anybody adheres to, but it does not mean that the word ‘unconscious’ is never used. I did some research on unconscious racial bias, but that has nothing to do with the ‘unconscious mind’ as envisioned by classical psychoanalysis, and it’s that model that’s normally used to ‘explain’ homosexuality.

        Also, Allessandra apparently has accused me of not believing in science since I think that if a person has a theory on why one person kills, and that that hypothesis is incorrect for another person and they come up with a new model, that this isn’t science. Despite it’s popularity in movies and TV, ‘criminal profiling’ isn’t a real science and many psychiatrists and psychologists don’t take it seriously. If you want to see an example of the uselessness of profiling, check out the book ‘Green River Running Red’ – they came up with a profile for the killer that could have fit say, 50% of men in the area. Some science people :-) A relatively interesting example of an ‘unconscious factor’ is (if you look it up) when Christian Bros. Brandy was losing out to E and J – despite nobody mentioning it, rigorous testing demonstrated that the bottle was what was driving people to E and J, and then Christian Bros re-shaped their bottle. It’s a fun story about how rigorous experimentation led to a discovery.

        All said, I think I’m not getting any more responses. But thanks for the interest. I’m actually embarrassed that I don’t know much about neuroscience – I got into psychology kind of accidentally after being a programmer.

        • Glodson

          The questions I ask (and will repeat) was to explain the causes (as currently understood) of schizophrenia and what it was originally or previously believed to be caused by (perhaps with a history of how our understanding of cause effect treatment and its success)…

          I suspected this to be the case, but our modern take on the disorder is that the root cause is likely genetic with a combination of environmental factors. The genetic case is suspected as there seems to be a higher rate in families in which the disorder is found rather than in the general population. The rate at which it occurs in a family with the disorder is about ten times the rate of that of a general population. Furthermore we see that if own twin has the disorder, this raises the rate at which we see the disorder to 40-65% in the twin. For reference, the rate at which this disorder appears in the general population is around 1%.

          If it was solely caused by our genetics, we would expect to see the rate for both twins having the disorder to be even higher. We also see the rates change as we add in other factors. Like drug use can be linked to the disorder. However, that could be that people who have this, or tendencies to develop, disorder might already be drawn into drug abuse. But of course, it could be that these are linked in a more symbiotic manner.

          In the brains of patients with schizophrenia, we see a imbalance with certain key neurotransmitters. Notably dopamine and glutamate. I know you know, but if anyone else doesn’t know, the role that neurotransmitters play in the brain is to communicate the signals across the gaps called synapses. Having more of these chemicals, the imbalance, can cause certain signals to strengthening, resulting in a change in behavior. What these two named neurotransmitters do isn’t exactly easy to sum up, and even harder for someone with limited knowledge in the field to explain. But as I understand it, Glutamate is what is called excitatory, meaning it increases the potential for a signal to fire. This particular neurotransmitter is the most common in the body, and it is considered to be linked to learning and regulation, among other functions. Dopamine is probably more well known. It is related the reward system of your brain. Most people have heard of this as it relates to drug use, in that certain drugs trigger the dopamine system resulting in a euphoric state. Another area where people might have heard of it is in regard to the runner’s high.

          With those imbalances, and the genetics leading to a slightly different brain structure, can lead to one developing schizophrenia. The changes we experience at puberty can trigger the symptoms of the disorder to emerge, as might the aforementioned drug use or maybe even other triggers due to emotional stress. But I cannot be sure about all this.

          I did find this article I would like to share. It is quite interesting about the link between schizophrenia and how he have a hemispheric dominance in regards to language and the left side of the brain. I can’t say I understand all of it, but it is an interesting read.

          Sorry, I didn’t get to the rest. This was a wealth of information I found, and I spent much of my time reading up, and trying to digest it all. But my point in writing this is to show that you have legitimate answers, as you noted, to inform others interested but who may lack the time to read up on their own, and to examine it for myself.

          • smrnda

            I was really just hoping Allessandra would demonstrate some competence, but I guess you get an A and she gets an F :-) I mean, what’s the point in me listening to someone like Allessandra editorialize about a field she knows nothing about?

          • Glodson

            There’s another reason I did this.

            I’m still bitter over people telling me I didn’t understand physics about a year and half ago when OPERA claimed that they had FTL neutrinos. I tried to explain why this was most likely a measurement error, and I tried to explain why, if confirmed, it would require a massive retooling of our best theories, and why the experiment needed to be run again, and why the statement “I always knew this stuff would be overturned” was pure bullshit.

            It is really frustrating.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X