In defense of science, without seeing the full context of this tweet, looking a causes of an observable trait x is not in itself pathologising or x-phobic. If you look for it in order to intervene, that is. But it is a genuinely interesting question and defensible curiousness.
-
-
But that is the definition of any trait - a genetically predisposed characteristic. Whilst I don't think it's helpful to reduce LGBT to a single "phenotype" (urgh), I don't think the word is misused here.
-
But I do agree that it's like saying "your whole body type is a trait". Clearly a misnomer.
-
Being LGBT is a collection of behaviours and thoughts and much much more than just physical characteristics or a "body type". It's like saying a culture is a trait. Being Cypriot (me), isn't a trait.
-
Exactly. "Defining characteristics" are sociologically divisive, especially when you try to mix genetics in to fuel that divisiveness, like Blanchard.
-
Sorry, I've lost you. You said you don't think the word is misused but you also agree with me that claiming LGBT people have a different trait is wrong?
-
I think you put it better than me. A collection of traits. My cold-addled brain is running on slow.
-
I'm sorry you're sick! I'm still confused because I do not think LGBT is a collection of traits.
-
I just saw this response out of context and thought to myself "Oh no, this is the point in the conversation when someone calls comeone sick. I knew I should have resisted to comment"
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Trait may be the wrong word, sorry. But to me, another interesting question is around nature vs nurture: to what degree is sexuality a biologically determined quality and to what degree it is learned or conscious decision
-
Just because LGBT is a sensitive topic, we should not make it impossible or hard for people to ask genuine questions about or comment on it by blanket labelling it as homophobic and retrofitting a motivation.
-
Lots of great research on nature and nurture is done. The biggest flaw in any study is framing it as either or. Thankfully the whole "versus" thing has been dropped within science for a good number of years. Outside of science, like you noted, it's sadly still framed wrongly!
-
You know what I meant though, hence my use of “to what extent”
-
The answer is more on par with the answer to "what are the genetic substrates for liking and using twitter?" than to "what are the genetic substrates for having a certain height?"
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.