No they wouldn't. Gays and lesbians would still want families. If they were in charge they would make the necessary changes, rules, laws, etc. Human beings are much much more flexible than that. I can imagine they would provide cash incentivies to straight couples to have as many children as possible and pay surrogates handsomely. Think outside the box. Having children and families is not isoalted to hereros. And once our society accepts people for who they are you are likely to see gas and lesbians acting a helluva lot more like heteros in lots and lots of ways. Including having children and families. There has been a number of articial barriers in their way to permit this. Called laws. Or perceptions. Once those two things go away life won't be much different other than most children under that scenairio would be 'wanted' and 'planned.' That might not be such a bad thing.
Imagine A World Where Being "Gay" The Norm & Being "Straight" Would Be The Minority!
by Dis-Member 123 Replies latest social entertainment
-
-
Badfish
So in this imaginary world where the majority of the population is gay, does this also mean that the majority of these surrogate children being born will also be gay as well?
Will all the surrogates be adopted children from the minority of the population that is heterosexual? Or will the gay parents actually have sex with someone other than their gay partner with someone of the opposite sex to have children who are blood relatives?
Will the majority of the population be blood relatives to their legal parents?
I'm trying to imagine this world here.
I can imagine they would provide cash incentivies to straight couples to have as many children as possible and pay surrogates handsomely.
So basically, the minority heterosexuals could just make their careers and livings off of having babies and giving them up for adoption? Would any thought be given to the fact that children in this world are basically treated as pieces of property to be sold?
Would there be enough of these minority surrogate mothers willing to participate in the practice of giving their babies up for adoption to sustain the population indefinitely?
-
fulltimestudent
Posted:
I'm trying to imagine this world here.
Don't try too hard. The proposition was purely hypothetical, and meant (I guess) to try to illustrate to some people (guess who?) what it may be like to live in a world where some people were marginalised by theri sexual attraction. And, that IMO is where the argument should start and finish
To try to make a hypothetical world completely logical is difficult, because its construction would be predicated on different assumptions to our own contemporary world.
Anyway, I suggest that the most important fact about this argument is that homosexuality is not an either/or situation. The evidence suggests that there are gradations of intensity of desire, ranging from entirely to the opposite sex to entirely for the same sex., though Kinsey's original research sought to classify according to sexual experiences.
Kinsey was trained as a biologist. His entry in Wikipedia says:
He continued his graduate studies at Harvard University's Bussey Institute, which had one of the most highly regarded biology programs in the United States. It was there that Kinsey studied applied biology under William Morton Wheeler, a scientist who made outstanding contributions toentomology. Under Wheeler, Kinsey worked almost completely autonomously, which suited both men quite well.
Kinsey chose to do his doctoral thesis on gall wasps, and began zealously collecting samples of the species. He traveled widely and took 26 detailed measurements of hundreds of thousands of gall wasps; his methodology was itself an important contribution to entomology as a science. Kinsey was granted a Sc.D. degree in 1919 by Harvard University, and published several papers in 1920 under the auspices of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, introducing the gall wasp to the scientific community and describing its phylogeny. Of the more than 18 million insects in the museum's collection, some 5 million are gall wasps collected by Kinsey. [8]
As you may have noted (from the wiki quote), classification was important in his work. He put that training to good use when he turned his attention to human sexuality. At some point he decided to attempt to classify human sexuality by their experience with males or females, and he used this scale to do so.
The wiki entry suggests 1933 was the year in which Kinsey turned his interest toward human sexuality:
Kinsey is widely regarded as the first major figure in American sexology . He initially became interested in different forms of sexual practices in 1933, after discussing the topic extensively with a colleague, Robert Kroc. It is likely that Kinsey's study of the variations in mating practices among gall wasps led him to wonder how widely varied sexual practices among humans were. During this time he developed a scale measuring sexual orientation, now known as the Kinsey Scale which ranges from 0 to 6, where 0 is exclusively heterosexual and 6 is exclusively homosexual ; a rating of X , for asexual , was later added by Kinsey's associates.
What it all means is that many humans are grouped between the two poles of heterosexuality and homosexuality. An exclusively heterosexual world is as difficult to imagine as an exclusively homosexual world.
If our minds were not corrupted by Christianity - that would be easy to understand.
Gotta go out - so must cut this short.
-
Badfish
Don't try too hard.
I'm not trying very hard at all. Those questions popped into my head immediately after reading his comments.
DJS is making the argument that in this hypothetical world, the population would not die off because they would use surrogates to sustain the population. I'm asking legitimate questions that are directly related to his argument.