Michael Lewis did a study on one-year-olds. He separated the child from their mother so that the child could see their mother, but could not touch her.
The male children did everything in their power to go around, over or through the divider, while the females cried, and screamed. (For the record, the females got what they wanted more quickly than their counterparts.)
Even at this age, these children displayed the characteristics of their sexes. So why do you think we were endowed, or born... with these characteristics?
Because, generally, there is positive energies in males and negative energies in females. It is the nature of the soul which incarnates into it's choice of either a male or female body. However, I have heard that Jaimie Lee Curtis had the genitalia of male and female and had the male aspect removed.
("History On November 22, 1958 a future scream queen, Baroness of Haden-Guest and Golden Globe winner named Jamie Lee Curtis came bouncing into the world at Cedars of Lebanon Hospital in Hollywood, California. She was the second daughter of power couple Tony Curtis ("Some Like It Hot") and Janet Leigh ("Psycho"), later following in both their comedic and thriller-capable footsteps in movies like "Halloween," "Trading Places" and "A Fish Called Wanda." Somewhere along the way "a doctor" leaked the information that Curtis was either born a hermaphrodite with both male and female genitalia or that she has "androgen insensitivity syndrome," meaning she was born with XY chromosones and is medically a male whose masculinization has been impaired." http://www.nextmovie.com/blog/jamie-lee … aphrodite/
Some souls incarnate into female bodies when they are male souls and vice versa… by accident? I do not know why some souls do not incarnate into the right bodies or in bodies which feature both sexes. Life is just plain weird. (This should generate some discussion, Beth!)
Yeah, maybe we wont use the thread to promote those kinds of rumors. If Jamie Lee happens by though, feel free to bring it up.
She's too busy advertising sh*crap*tty yogurt with a lot of bullsh*crap* claims to wander by, anyhow.
You are right, Beth... she has never admitted it. But it is a very widespread rumor.
It is and one that would have to be shared by Jaime, her parents or a doctor to be proven. As none of them have given it any credence, I say we take the high road as we wouldn't really have a reason to continue spreading it.
Agreed. However, what do you think about actual cases, such as the one I witnessed first hand? (...which I have edited out.) or is this off topic. If so, never mind.
PS It is a very interesting experiment and finding that you have revealed. What do you make of it?
I think it is a horrible thing for any child to face. I would imagine any mental or physical disorder would be, to say the least, an incredible odd to overcome... like retardation, heart disorders, spinal bifida, being born with AIDS, Downs Syndrome, etc. There's about 180 Atypical sexed children born a day. Im sure the number for other physical maladies are higher.
You know there are books that may shed some light on that nonsense.
Some doctor leaked the information about Jamie Lee? I think this is just gossip and it's really nobody's business anyway. And if the doctor did leak the information, what a scum bag he is and wouldn't he be sued? I just dislike the speculations, "Is she a girl, is she a boy?" and they don't even see the person anymore. The person becomes irrelevant it seems.
Some of the differences had to be hard wired as there are behavior differences evident between boys and girls at the earliest stages of life. There is quite a bit of nature there, in my opinion, to explain the behavior. But over time we can, with our ability to reason, not limit ourselves to having to behave in a manner traditionally attributed to one gender or the other.
The closest guess I can make is that it is in the hormonal makeup. Females are by nature more emotional and males more logical. Outside of that, I have no idea why God made us that way
I tried to find that study, but couldn't. Do you have a link?
It's the difference between testosterone and estrogen levels. Find a very masculine little girl, and she'll do the same exact thing the boy did, and vice versa with a feminine little boy.
I would have to say that we were endowed with these characteristics for procreation. I think the men are the hunters and gatherers and the women are the nurturers - requiring perhaps an extra dose of emotion! We are not as physical as men as a matter of biology (agreeing with the testosterone theory); more emotional, in general of course. I can say that as a mom, I can see the very basic differences of boys and girls and the differences each has in approaching problems. Your example seems to support what I have witnessed....
I agree. I love the way boys know inherently how to make motor sounds with their toy cars and trucks without anyone teaching them. I love how little girls pick up a doll and cradle her in their arms. Not that the kids outside of those molds aren't just as interesting and beautiful, but I just loved that study, that boys would knock down the walls as a means to an end. And the girl would weep with emotion over the loss of not being near her mother.
Even in the way we handle our problems... tell your problem to a man, he will do his best to fix it... to solve it. A woman will empathize, and give you a shoulder to cry on, and the best part of that study, to me, was the fact that these characteristics were born in these kids. It does speak to me of a creator and a definite plan.
I agree. And I love the fact that we are pondering and appreciating this truth in people today. It is so comforting to have a sense of where we come from, where the actions of our children derive from. It helps me to make sense of people's actions (and reactions) sometimes, especially if they seem to not be the ones I want in the moment! Sometimes, we cannot expect things of people that are beyond their makings...?
I agree as well. Which brings up the question of males "getting in touch" with their feelings. Is it really wise to feminize males, asking them to be more like women? To (paraphrasing) sit on the floor and cry rather than find a solution?
I get that all the time. See for some reason they are supposed to tell us their problems and we are supposed to listen and cry with them even though the answer to the problem may be starring us in the face.
My guess is no. I don't think I would do that to my sons! Unless they wanted to sit on the floor and cry.... However, it may be smart for men to be "in touch with their feelings" if it makes their wives/daughters happier or feel more loved...? Perhaps being sensitive can be a strategic, learned behavior that men might choose to employ at times?
Ever ask a 10 year old boy how they feel about anything? Good luck with that. They have feelings, they just can't process or articulate them. It's like asking girls to suppress their emotions.
…well, I have also heard that we are essentially both male and female, but one or the other is dominant in expression. So a male can be in touch with his feelings and be sensitive because he is in touch with a deeper reality of his own soul.
Do you do many drugs? Do you know anything about genetics at all? X and Y chromosomes?
Obviously, she doesn't.
I can think of some she should try though.
Judging from other posts, you have "heard" a whole plethora or things, very few of which have any connection to reality. You would be wise to consider them carefully before accepting all that you hear as truth.
But shouldn't women be encouraged to be active too and not just sit and cry? Nobody, regardless of sex, should be encouraged to sit and cry instead of trying to solve the problem or find a solution.
Recapping, and with more explanation, girls seem to have more, or stronger, emotions than males. Or at least different ones; the boys feelings at the separation in the OP may well be anger, frustration or other emotions not PC to act upon. The girls may be feeling despair, unhappiness or loneliness.
Yet males are being encouraged by women everywhere (or so it seems) to get in touch with their "feminine side", to "show their feelings" in ways that are unnatural to them. The obvious conclusions is that women are wanting males to become more feminine, to at least pretend to have these "feelings" that women do and to express them. In the case of the OP, to sit on the floor and cry rather than express and act upon their own, very natural, feelings.
We don't see men asking women to take on masculine feelings and reactions, as you are dong here, but the opposite is quite common. Personally, I would agree with you - little girls need to be taught to become problem solvers instead of buckets of emotional tears, but that isn't very PC.
The interesting thing here (for me at least) is that I've found through my own experience that women say they want us to be more sensitive, but if we do show emotions they tend to look at us as being week.
True. No one, male OR female, particularly likes the scene of a crying man. They will ask for it, but then usually don't like it when they get it - thousands of years has produced the image of an emotional (outside of anger) male being weak.
Humans are the only species that will follow an emotional volatile leader. It's somehow expectable for men to be angry and volatile, while even dogs will find a new leader if the leader is volatile. They don't even give volatile humans respect. If you want a dog to be submissive and obedient you have to be calm and confident.
I see this happening in society (men, show your emotions to prove that you have a heart) and a lot of con men are exploiting this need for tears. They can cry at the drop of a hat but it's an act and they feel nothing and a lot of women are taken in by them. If a man is too eager to cry, that's a big red flag. Some men are emotional, I'm not trying to put anybody down, but if tears are used to evoke sympathy, I say beware. I knew a male who cried a lot but he never seemed to cry for anybody but himself; it was the 'poor me' game and because he was really big and tall, people melted, "Look at the big man cry". That same man had dry eyes when he looked at other people's suffering. Women can use tears as a con too. I think expressing emotion is okay but it has to be mastered and I think people need to beware of people who use emotion to exploit people.
We should have seen this coming....Goddunnit!
I wonder what His definite plan is. LOL
Or genetics and hormons. The variety we see in people is only evidence of evolution. If homosexuality was a sin in Gods eyes none would be born.
And if God created everything, and there is a definite plan, then why did he create homosexuals? What is his definite plan for homosexuals? I'm sure Beth can answer this question, since she is the expert here.
She doesn't think (as I remember) that God created them. Something about someone being nice to them or something or parents or some such nonsense.
okay so Rad Man should read the bible more. okay so when Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of wisdom they made the choice to disobey God. by doing this they paved the path for their selves and their desendents(us) to make our own choices. if they hadnt the world wouldnt be as coruupt as it is now. but since they did people can choice to be homosexual or mean or disobedient. the choice is ours. And God does have a plan for all of us. We just dont know what it is.
That's a funny joke. You almost had me. No sane person would actually believe any of that childish drivel, but it does sound so funny. And....we were indoctrinated to say just that kind of nonsense. Indoctrination short circuits the mind.
Okay so Sydney should read up on science and facts instead of getting his/her information from ancient texts that have no bearing on reality. One doesn't chose there sexual orientation, I know for a fact I couldn't change mine, do you think you could change yours?
why are you misspelling words Rad Man?
Why are you saying that Jamie Lee Curtis has a penis Kathryn?
I bet you his reason for typos is better
What? Seriously....? Uh, I'm going to guess because he is human. Good grief!
can't a person wonder? he isn't usually so sloppy.
That's the best complement I've had all day, and I give myself lots. Thanks.
Well, capitalization matters! Since we're being sticklers here....
Because I'm dyslexic. I have problems differentiating words like choose and chose, quiet and quite and quit. Why are you so flaky. Did I spell that wrong? Sorry I do my best, but I understand that sometimes my best isn't good enough. I'm sorry if I've offended you with my spelling or lack there of. But to be honest it's not like I am spouting that females have bad energy or some such other nonsense.
I told you Kathryn. Don't ya feel like a heel?
"One doesn't chose there sexual orientation." Or maybe he is trying to slide some little unprovable fact right past us.
Because I think we do choose, (on the astral realm before we jump into the electrical charge which flashes the instant an egg is fertilized.) We determine our face, our body, our character… why not our sexual orientation?
I am getting confused. Too many choices:
* Sydneycharleston said we have choices in that we can choose to be homosexual.
*We can choose to be female before we come to earth… and then choose to be male after we get here, (usually when we are old enough to decide being a male would be somehow better.)
* If I had originally chosen to be a female, (on the astral plane,) I could choose to love either a male or a female, despite what sex I had originally wanted to be. After all, " Who the hell says that just because I am a female I am required to love a male?" (But logically, why would a female who is negative and who has estrogen be attracted to someone who is also negative and also has estrogen? I think because there is something masculine in one of the females. In a relationship between men, one of the men manifests ordinarily hidden feminine qualities.)
What was the topic again? and what was the point?
That was a really long time ago, 1966.
Can you please tell me the exact moment in time when you chose to be straight? Cause I never woke up one morning and said "oh hey....I really want to be a discriminated against minority, so I think I'm just going to decide to be gay" although that's what my southern baptist mother thinks happened.
I know exactly when I had my first crush on a girl - and my first kiss. I was in 4th grade. I was never sexually abused, raised as a christian by missionary parents - and I sure as hell didn't choose my sexual orientation. No one I know CHOSE their sexual orientation. You cannot control who you're attracted to or why. You can't force yourself to change your mind.
Most guys i know can't wake up tomorrow morning and decide that after their entire lives, they're just going to suddenly start being attracted to other guys. Could you change your mind this very moment and choose to be attracted to someone of the same sex? Yeah...didn't think so.
In addition - thanks for equating sexuality with being mean or disobedient, like we're all some petulant children. That's nice.
-you need to cut heterosexuals some slack. How are we supposed to understand the phenomenon of homosexuality?
Perhaps you were a male in your last life.
Perhaps you are in touch with your hidden masculinity in this life.
That could possibly be the most insulting post I've ever read.
You're on a roll.
The sad thing is even if you were to study the post, it would never occur to you why it was so insulting.
Apparently, being a lesbian means you are somehow a man... or manly...
As a bi sexual, I am obviously a hermaphrodite. Me and Jamie Lee have something in common.
I am obviously confused. Yet no one who is attracted to the same sex ever explains how and why it is. Girls can be attracted to girls. Boys are attracted to boys? There has to be an explanation. You do not like mine? Why not?
You know when you are walking down the street and you see a cute guy?
That EXACTLY how it works. What are you having trouble wrapping your mind around?
I dont know about anyone else, but I don't like your explanation because it's wrong... and silly... and lacking in anything even remotely connected to the subject.
I don't understand. I never walk down the street and see a cute guy. Except perhaps for a very young Mel Gibson or perhaps brad Pit. I can tell those guys are nice looking, but aside from that all guys are the same to me. But I guess it's a choice.
How was my spelling?
Sloppy, but that's the opinion of a hermaphrodite that chose to be bi-sexual on an astral plane when my mother and father produced an electric shock that popped my spirit into an egg. Don't give it too much credence.
For you, it would be like seeing a pretty girl... Like me, or Julie. Except of course Julie is a man and I am a hermaphrodite...like Jamie Lee Curtis.
Rad Man, your spelling was absolutely flawless. Keep up the good work.
BTW as my bad karma would have it my spell check has stopped working! Is it the hub page police punishing me? Or just my computer? Very fishy.
And any woman could love the sight of a beautiful woman as much as a man, but they would n e v e r want to touch one sexually!
So you are having trouble wrapping your mind around being attracted to somebody.
You own cats don't you? Like lots of them?
No, I do not own a bunch of cats. Do you? And why would you ask me that?
Well, enlighten me! Please explain the cat thing.
I am not sexually attracted to the same sex. it is a revulsion to those who are straight. This is a fact of life.
What the hell does that have to do with anything?
And no, it isn't a revulsion to all straight people. My husband LOVES the fact that I am attracted to other women.
It IS repulsive to bigots. But who cares what they think? Most of them can't walk and chew gum at the same time.
Are you on a mission to insult everyone you come into contact with today, Kathryn? I am straight. Gay attraction is not a revulsion to me so please do not lump me in to your insults and intolerance. May I request that you stop speaking for ALL straight people because you do not speak for me! Thank you.
Why do you keep keyboarding to me? You know we are always at odds about every topic there is! Thats because you are on the other side of every fence that I am on. Why do we even bother commenting to one another? Why? We are refusing to understand each other.
So be it.
I have not insulted anyone. I have explained why is it is possible that someone could be sexually attracted to some one of the same gender. You do not agree that you are in touch with the masculine side of your soul? It is logical to me that the masculine can only be attracted to the feminine, sexually. I do not think you should conclude that I meant to be insulting. Just trying to understand it on a logical level. If there is nothing logical about it…
oh really? You told me that I'm really just a man - or have a man spirit... or something to that effect, but you don't think that's insulting?
You told a dyslexic he couldn't spell, told a lesbian she was a man and said Jamie Lee Curtis was born with a penis.
Then you said being gay was repulsive. You started by saying women were full of negative energy.
I'm pretty sure you've insulted EVERYBODY...
Negative in the terms of being on the negative side of a magnet. In Eastern philosophy, negative is feminine and positive is masculine. Not negative in having bad energy or jumping to bad conclusions.
...how have I insulted you? As I said, if it cannot be explained logically… oh well.
I give up.
Just to point out, not all people who own cats are freaks.
So, my dyslexia is just sloppiness and Julie needs to cut homosexuals some slack, because she couldn't possibly understand it.
Oh, there are a combination of drugs involved. Come on, be honest.
...because they (heterosexuals) can't understand it. Heterosexuals would never want to have sex with the same sex and therefore do not understand how anyone could.
You have the right to you opinion but you don't speak for all heterosexuals. Aslo when you use the word 'they' it sounds like you are not a heterosexual yourself or you would use the word We. Don't speak for other people.
I know, right?
And she doesn't even get that the comment was bigoted bordering on hate speech and completely and utterly lacking in anything even remotely close to actual fact.
And you don't get that your comments are nonsense based on nothing. This is an arena of ideas… and you come completely empty handed.
I don't think I've ever been so shocked and gob-smacked on these forums as I have been tonight. I cannot believe the open bigotry, intolerance, rudeness, and absolute callousness she has shown people here. If that's the best I could ever do, I just wouldn't speak.
This thread should come with a warning label. I have now stared into the IQ sucking abyss of ignorance.
I was determined to read it all though, in hopes that some nugget of wisdom would rise from the quagmire of "making s*** up because it sounds good" quasi-pseudo-science. Now I have forgotten how to open doors and work the microwave.
Well, it would seem that being awful toward your fellow man is/was your mission tonight or else you wouldn't have to be "testing" to see if you've been banned yet. Why would you be expecting to be banned? Sad.
Kathryn, is everything okay today? I've never seen you act this way. Are you having a bad day?
You are just one of the pack.
- why do you not say something to contribute to Beth's OP? Then maybe we could get somewhere with discussing truth.
My concern is genuine. Sorry I asked. No need to attack me for being concerned.
Edit- just because a group of people agree does not make them a pack. Would this mean that you are part of a pack attack when you join in with others or are you thinking for yourself and your thoughts happen to line up with others?
I was referring to Alice in Wonderland's, "You're noting but a pack of cards!" ...not a pack of wolves.
Perhaps, but remember that that "pack of cards" was still trying to attack and capture a lost little girl trying to find her way back home.
Look, Kathryn, I like you, believe it or not. And despite opinions to the contrary I am a genuine person. Despite how it appears, I don't think you mean to offend with some of the things you post. But the biggest issue a lot of us face (myself included) is that we sometimes do not want to think that we offended anyone even by accident, but instead of apologizing for any misunderstanding we defend and try to clarify our intent so vehemently that we almost become belligerent. This often causes more harm than help
Why do people feel the need to insult people they don't understand? Seems like life would be easier if we either tried to understand by asking reasonable questions in a respectful way or simply stated that we don't understand and let it lie. But...we act like jerks, hurl cruel, hateful, and insulting words...then complain about how mean the world is for not understanding us. Easily gob smacked? If you are not disgusted by the things said here, then there are serious issues.
Cream puff accidentally sanitizes the unseemly boy. Indeed, an unseemly dissident shares a shower with a bicep around another mirror. Sometimes the menagé à trois behind a shadow rejoices, but a chic bubble bath always secretly admires a non-chalantly ghastly somnambulist! A bubble bath about the dahlia laughs and drinks all night with another toothache.
I am perceiving hatred. I am pinpointing hatred. I am pinpointing it because I am tired of it. You will counter to tell me I am spewing hatred.
But I'm not.
I neither think you are spewing hatred nor anyone hates you. I think you are seeing something that may not be there, which is easy to do in these forums.
I love ya babe, but speak for yourself. I do think she's spewing hatred and she might be correctly picking up her first social cue through this whole thread.
Pay attention, love. I said I did not think she was spewing hatred nor do I think anyone hates her.
Oh hon, I got that.
I just happen to disagree on both counts... well at least on the first count... the second count is still up in the air...it's a close race between that and pity. I'll let you know which one wins out.
Yeah, I get what you were saying now. My bad. Sorry hon.
Deepes was speaking for himself; he said, "I think", not not "we think". And when he pointed this out, you didn't acknowledge that you were wrong but instead wrote, "Oh hon, I got that". What's that suppose to mean? You were wrong. You can disagree with what he said, that's your right, but you were wrong in accusing him of speaking for others but you didn't even admit it yet you expect others to admit their mistakes. Lead by example.
Just incase your unaware, you can go in and edit your own post for a certain amount of time after you've posted it, I have to do it all the time. Just hit the edit button by the reply bottom under your post.
What they are not agreeing to is the idea that our souls are a combination of male and female. I was saying, in the male individual, the female nature or aspect of the soul is hidden. In the female individual the masculine nature is hidden. They really couldn't get on board with that idea and it has caused all the bad feelings.
So, Deepes Mind, what is your opinion on the nature of the soul. Is it made in the image of God? Is God masculine only? Or is the soul made in the image of a combination of male and female? I reason that God is a combination of male and female, therefore so are we. Furthermore, *Mother* Nature had to have originated from the essence of *Father/Mother* God!
I am suggesting these things just for something to think about...not to insult. It relates to the topic brought up by Beth. Although I think she made her point and perhaps I should create a forum thread regarding the dual nature of the soul...
I think not.
But I never listen to myself...
No one cares about your silly little theory. No one takes such things seriously.
Surely you can't lack understanding of social interactions at that level. No one can be that insensitive or slow to understand and still function in society.
You said that lesbians are essentially men. That's insulting and excessively lacking in any understanding of gender vs. sexual orientation. You do understand that right? You essentially said that lesbians are lesbians because they should have a penis but don't. You accused of lesbians of being manly. You do get that...right?
That is a stereotype. A very uneducated stereotype.
Then you said that homosexuality was repulsive to straight people. That is a very, very bigotous,inflammatory and insulting statement. You HAVE to know that. In addition. it's completely incorrect. There is an entire industry build on the fact that lesbianism is NOT repulsive to straight. people. What you were saying was that it was repulsive to YOU. Which is an insult.
No one is in awe of your intellect or disagrees with your theories from lack of enlightenment... trust me. Really. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the opposite opinion holds sway.
Your lack of education and knowledge on the topic of homosexuality is glaringly obvious. The statements that come from that place are essentially hate speech.
If you are OK with spreading hate speech, fine. But don't think people are mad at you for any other reason than that. Don't delude yourself.
Are you still up? And reading? and misconstruing big time?
I hope you will join in my new discussion, MelissaBarrett, however, I will understand if you don't wish to.
Kathryn, if I thought you had anything worthwhile to say, I would be happy to join in a conversation with you.
I've never seen that happen.
But I do think prejudice and hate need to be addressed when they are being so liberally poured out. It's obvious that you lack the tact to apologize and are fine with posting homophobic prattle. So be prepared to deal with the backlash.
It just means that everyone is going to take your post even less seriously than they already do.
Which is amazing considering public opinion on your posts.
In addition, the Rebecca of Sunny Brook farm act is fooling no-one. You have no desire to keep the thread on-topic. You have a desire for everyone to forget your behavior. Good luck with that.
Please c and v what was homophobic prattle. I will apologize if I see I need to. I am only here to explore viewpoints. Why do you take things so subjectively, as opposed to objectively. To me, you seem defensive for no reason what so ever!
"In addition, the Rebecca of Sunny Brook farm act is fooling no-one. You have no desire to keep the thread on-topic. You have a desire for everyone to forget your behavior. Good luck with that."
This is very funny.
"It just means that everyone is going to take your post even less seriously than they already do. Which is amazing considering public opinion on your posts."
This is even funnier.
I bring up topics and share my view points. My view points are not that offensive, as far as I know. You need to prove how I was offensive with quotes, please.
Well, it's been pointed out about 15 times... but lets see if this helps...
"I am not sexually attracted to the same sex. it is a revulsion to those who are straight. This is a fact of life."
"Perhaps you were a male in your last life.
Perhaps you are in touch with your hidden masculinity in this life."
"You do not agree that you are in touch with the masculine side of your soul? It is logical to me that the masculine can only be attracted to the feminine, sexually."
What you are essentially saying, without saying-because that would be improper- is that all Lesbians are Butch, which is the most polite slur to describe what you are implying. You have defined a huge stereotype with lots of homophobic words to describe it, without actually saying the words.
Now, because you obviously don't see the insanity in implying that I am masculine...Especially since pretty much every predominate trait about me is a historically associated with femininity
Edit: I self-removed the link because my McAfee had a fit for some reason.
It's funny because it's true. Sorry for the reality check. You seem to need one.
Please read my new post. You are really not understanding me. You are taking what I am saying personally. why go there? Try to comprehend what I am saying objectively. Essentially, I am agreeing with Beth's premise, but adding another dimension to it. My view-point is that I believe in God, but that God has a blueprint which is deeper than we generally comprehend. We are each one of us male and female! It actually explains how some people can be homosexual! You have been jumping to erroneous conclusions!
Your new post is irrelevant. You've got several other posts to account for. Posts that were bigoted, stereotypical, and homophobic.
Sorry, you can't make that go away.
Those are the posts that I am talking about.
I'm not defensive, I'm not taking anything personally...
I don't care what Beth's premise was.
I care about those three clearly quoted homophobic posts.
There is absolutely nothing you can say to excuse those posts. You can try and figure out WHY they were so offensive (if you aren't just feigning ignorance) and you can apologize in general and in specific to Julie. That's how people generally handle things when they have been offensive. Those who care about other people's feelings at least.
Edit: People are homosexual because they are attracted to members of the same sex. No further explanation is needed, especially from someone who hasn't the slightest knowledge of the subject.
I think it is insulting to try to dissect someone based on their sexuality. If a person is gay, that's their business. If they are straight, that's their business. Looking at a gay person under a microscope, "Hmm, I wonder why", is like speculating about Jamie Lee's supposed penis that she supposedly had lopped off as a baby; it's rude and it's nobody's business.
I don't want anybody speculating about me and turning me into a science experiment.
And now you are speaking for everyone, "No one cares about your silly little theory", yet you tell other people not to speak for you (when they didn't). I'm not interested in Kathryn's beliefs but maybe some people are interested.
It isn't the disagreement with your position about the nature of the soul that caused the bad feelings. It's the fact that you admitted to not understanding homosexuality then told JM she must have been a man in a past life. That is highly offensive, whether you meant it that way or not. You also mentioned Rad Man's spelling errors then even when he explained that he has a learning disability you said it again. Again offensive, especially when that comes down to a real condition. It is never disagreement that causes the tension. It is the reaction of the person at times that is being disagreed with. Sometimes when someone doesn't like being disagreed with they veer off of the topic and make personal comments about the person disagreeing.
It's not so much that there is any essence of any soul that has both genders. It's actually simpler than that. It's a matter that the body regulates itself by emitting a small amount of testosterone in women and estrogen in males as a way of balancing hormones. This is not related to the soul in any way as the soul has no actual gender. The soul is simply the spark of life that animates us.
As we cannot know the nature of God, I cannot answer as to whether God even has a physical body to have a gender. God was given a gender when the bible was written by men who would not have any idea of what he really looks like. If God truly revealed himself to them, it more than likely was in a form that they could handle.
by insidiousglamour4 years ago
The notion of gender neutrality seems as ridiculous to me as the notion of being color-blind in regards to race. There are physiological and biological characteristics that differentiate male and female. What is the...
by .mely.6 years ago
Love ... well love is confusing yet not to be confused with obsession ,how is it two completely different people or in this case genders can come to such an agreement... With my personal experiences i dont think all men...
by icountthetimes4 years ago
I've noticed that some people nowadays do not view gender in a binary sense. By that I don't mean that they are transgendered, but instead they do not see things strictly in terms of male and female. Of course the vast...
by pixelsweet3 years ago
There is a lot of confusion and errors in this hub. And the correction is out of love, for those God loves he corrects. So, all that's been written here is out of a man misinterpreting of the scriptures for we are to...
by Greatest I am4 years ago
Women. God’s afterthought and man’s curse to rule.I think it quite ironic that God, who tells us to reproduce as his first commandment to man in Genesis 1, does not give us something to reproduce with till...
by Over The Hill5 years ago
Isn`t this an unbalanced union that`s not beneficial for the children.Has it not been said by doctors and psychiatrist that a child needs both male and female instruction in growing up to be well balanced and healthy?
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.