Posts by fulltimestudent

30

Soon will be no choice but to invade North Korea.

by Witness 007 in

there is no way in hell that these brainwashed fools will cease making nukes.

their doctrines are based on "death to america"..."never surrender" they are much more messed up then iran!

war will be the final solution..

fulltimestudent

Some animals have developed a defensive tactic, like this fish:

The puffer fish puffs itself up purely for defence. And, that is likely to be the logic behind all the tomfoolery that the DPRK goes on with.

They know from bitter experience, that they will NOT win any war. In the closing phase of the previous Korean war, American saturation bombing almost obliterated any above ground structures, Then came the truce, and the north Koreans attempting to win the best deal, delayed any finality. Since then the ROK (south Korea) and the USA have consistently refused to finalise a Peace Treaty. So what could the DPRK do? Exactly what they have done. They are saying in effect, we know we will lose any future war, but we'll take a lot of people with us. Your victory will come at a very high cost.

I spent a year, at Sydney University studying Korea. The course co-ordinator was Leonid Petrov, who likely knows as much about North Korea as anyone (and, certainly is not an admirer of the regime). If you want to know more about him, he has a FB page and also this reference: https://leonidpetrov.wordpress.com/about-me/

Since then I regularly post about NK on a Macquarie University FB page, so I think by this time I may have also learnt something about NK. I often wonder why, when the Anglosphere has a supposedly free press, why most media commentary on the Korean situation lacks any balance in content, So what is wrong? Why do the N Koreans and their Korean Workers Party feel impelled to act like the pufferfish at the start of this post. Many commentators feel that its because the 'state of war' interrupted in 1953 still exists. The NK elite likely want some sort of assurance that there will be no attempts at regime change.

My opinion is that its worth a try. A former Australian Prime Minister (Bob Hawke), commented during some crisis with the military dictatorship in Myanmar, that the best way to help the people of these rogue states was not via sanctions, because sanctions hurt the ordinary people long before the sanctions hurt the top people. Hawke advocated doing anything possible to build a strong middle class. In the example of Myanmar, Hawke seems to have been right, and I suggest that this is a better course in dealing with North Korea,

China no longer has much influence on the NK government, and if NK uses nuclear weapons on the ROK, a cloud of radiation will drift over the border of China. A wave of refugees will also swamp the dongbei region of China. The river that forms the border is easily crossed in many places. In China, along the border, many Chinese citizens are ethnic Koreans. Many have relatives in NK. They certainly do not want to see a war. And, much of the smaller items of merchandise that are now sold in the small private markets that are transforming the NK economy are smuggled into NK from that part of China.

There is much more to know about the situation. And, the rest of the world also shares some blame. Perhaps Korea would've transformed differently if the rest of the world had intervened to prevent Japan taking over Korea in 1910. But in those days the world was controlled by Imperialists, so Imperial Japan got away with its attempt to make Korea part of Japan. Even the USA acquiesced and made an informal deal with Japan that supported their takeover of Korea and Japan supported the USA's invasion and nasty little war in taking over the Philippines,

So in the closing days of WW2, as Stalin honoured his agreement with Churchill and Roosevelt, a huge Russian invasion force swept across the Japanese state of Manchukuo (that had taken off China) and into Korea and the Northern islands of Japan (the Kuriles and Sakhalin). That's the background to a divided Korea. The Russian army could've easily taken all of Korea, but for some reason Stalin agreed to permitting the US Army to occupy the southern half.

This image purports to show Soviet troops somewhere in Korea

the Captions states:

Soviet soldiers on the march in northern Korea in October of 1945. Japan had ruled the Korean peninsula for 35 years, until the end of World War II. At that time, Allied leaders decided to temporarily occupy the country until elections could be held and a government established. Soviet forces occupied the north, while U.S. forces occupied the south. The planned elections did not take place, as the Soviet Union established a communist state in North Korea, and the U.S. set up a pro-western state in South Korea - each state claiming to be sovereign over the entire peninsula This standoff led to the Korean War in 1950, which ended in 1953 with the signing of an armistice -- but, to this day, the two countries are still technically at war with each other. (Waralbum.ru) #

Reference: http://vfwpost2461.com/1945Photos/Rare%20Photos.htm

9

A Scientific American discussion of current thinking on a biological basis for same sex preferences

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

the scientific american web-site has the above article, dated april 25, 2017. its entitled, "cross-cultural evidence for the genetics of homosexuality - mexico's third gender sheds light on the biological correlates of sexual orientation.".

here's the link to the article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cross-cultural-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/?wt.mc=sa_facebook-share.

and the first few paragraphs .... the reasons behind why people are gay, straight, or bisexual have long been a source of public fascination.

fulltimestudent

My gay friend (also and ex-jw) sent me this reference to a commentary on Matthew 18:10-12 by Clement of Alexandria ( a second/third century CE. christian), which is interesting for his perspective that some males have a 'repulsion' to (presumably regarding sex with women) to women and therefore do well not to marry. So it seems that this Clement (different to the Clement who was a Bishop in Rome) had observed that some 'naturally' had a no attraction to women, but fails to carry his thought further and conclude that an attraction to the same sex could be natural to them,

Here's the quote:

Clement of Alexandria: The Stromata, or Miscellanies
Translation from: Henry Chadwick, ed, The Library of Christian Classics: Volume II, Alexandrian Christianity (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), pp. 40-92. (Transcription by Jay Raskin, 2002; corrected by Lance Owens, 2011.)
BOOK III.
CHAPTER I
I. The Valentinians, who hold that the union of man and woman is derived from the divine emanation in heaven above, approve of marriage. The followers of Basilides, on the other hand, say that when the apostles asked whether it was not better not to marry, the Lord replied: "Not all can receive this saying; there are some eunuchs who are so from their birth, others are so of necessity." And their explanation of this saying is roughly as follows: Some men, from their birth, have a natural sense of repulsion from a woman; and those who are naturally so constituted do well not to marry. Those who are eunuchs of necessity are those theatrical ascetics who only control themselves because they have a passion for the limelight. [And those who have suffered accidental castration have become eunuchs of necessity.] Those, then, who are eunuchs of necessity have no sound reason for their abstinence from marriage. But those who for the sake of the eternal kingdom have made themselves eunuchs derive this idea, they say, from a wish to avoid the distractions involved in marriage, because they are afraid of having to waste time in providing for the necessities of life.

Reference: http://www.gnosis.org/library/strom3.htm

23

Muslims are not the only terrorists

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

david goldman's hongkong based (and web published) media journal, the asia,times describes what may be the world's longest running terrorist insurrection in india.

their latest success was an attack on india's state security forces, in which they killed 26 members of the security force.. you can read the at's attempt to analyse the origins and causes of the naxalite (they are also called maoists) rebellions at: http://www.atimes.com/indias-maoist-violence-must-resolved-dialogue/.

the hindustan times has a table detailing the dead in this rebellion.. finally, i saw nothing about the latest attack (april) in the aussie media.

fulltimestudent

David Goldman's Hongkong based (and web published) media journal, the Asia,Times describes what may be the world's longest running terrorist insurrection in India. Their latest success was an attack on India's state security forces, in which they killed 26 members of the security force.

You can read the AT's attempt to analyse the origins and causes of the Naxalite (they are also called Maoists) rebellions at: http://www.atimes.com/indias-maoist-violence-must-resolved-dialogue/

The Hindustan Times has a table detailing the dead in this rebellion.

Finally, I saw nothing about the latest attack (April) in the Aussie media. I'm curious, if you saw a reference in your country, tell us about it.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/for-crpf-in-chhattisgarh-april-deadliest-month-2017-deadliest-year-in-7-yrs/story-9lWxgVFzdUZq1chltARBE

And a Youtube video provides a peep into this force:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVfZtdlItGY

9

A Scientific American discussion of current thinking on a biological basis for same sex preferences

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

the scientific american web-site has the above article, dated april 25, 2017. its entitled, "cross-cultural evidence for the genetics of homosexuality - mexico's third gender sheds light on the biological correlates of sexual orientation.".

here's the link to the article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cross-cultural-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/?wt.mc=sa_facebook-share.

and the first few paragraphs .... the reasons behind why people are gay, straight, or bisexual have long been a source of public fascination.

fulltimestudent

I liked this response by a gay student to an 'Ex-gay (christian) counselor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDipt48sVyo

9

A Scientific American discussion of current thinking on a biological basis for same sex preferences

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

the scientific american web-site has the above article, dated april 25, 2017. its entitled, "cross-cultural evidence for the genetics of homosexuality - mexico's third gender sheds light on the biological correlates of sexual orientation.".

here's the link to the article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cross-cultural-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/?wt.mc=sa_facebook-share.

and the first few paragraphs .... the reasons behind why people are gay, straight, or bisexual have long been a source of public fascination.

fulltimestudent

LoveUniHateExams : Interesting article.
But homosexual people do not form a third gender - gay men are still men and lesbians are still women. Transgender people do not form a third gender, either - they are merely transitioning from one gender to the other.

Basically I agree, most of the gay males I've met are male (in fact, some are SUPER masculine. But some effeminate* guys are surely NOT easily definable, even though they do not identify as trangender.

But is 'gender' identical to biological sex? Is the 'gender' of an effeminate* male identical to his XY genetic identity?

A study course I enrolled in at Sydney U insisted that 'gender' is an act, not a fact.

Think for a moment:

Reference: http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/gender-lines-science-transgender-identity/

And ...

Quote: Earlier this month, the Medical University of Vienna issued a press release announcing that “the very personal gender identity of every human being is reflected and verifiable in the cross-links between brain regions,” with distinctions specifically in what’s known as brain “white matter.”

Translation: We now have some proof of a neurological distinction between gender identity and biological sex. Says the report:
“While the biological gender is usually manifested in the physical appearance, the individual gender identity is not immediately discernible and primarily established in the psyche of a human being.” ..."

Reference: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ravishly/neuroscience-proves-what-_b_6494820.html

* apologies for using effeminate - I think its been rendered offensive, but I cant quickly think of an alternative word

25

Does the Average R&F JW understand what grace is in Christianity ?

by smiddy in

i`m showing my ignorance here , not being an active member of any church before joining jw`s as a 19 yr old ,whenever i was ever confronted with the question of "grace" i was always at a loss to give an effective answer from a jw point of view.. was it just me ?

or did anybody else have a similar experience ?.

(ps , i dont think i ever heard the expression " grace" in a religious sense in all my 33 years in the borg.studying the wt.).

fulltimestudent

Haha - I love discussions about charis, because it is unlikely that any christian, from any denomination understands how the word was used in early Greece.

But first let's get the biblical studies rubbish out of the way.

The Biblehub website has an extract from Strong's concordance on its web-site:

charis: grace, kindness

Original Word: χάρις, ιτος, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: charis
Phonetic Spelling: (khar'-ece)
Short Definition: grace, favor, kindness
Definition: (a) grace, as a gift or blessing brought to man by Jesus Christ, (b) favor, (c) gratitude, thanks, (d) a favor, kindness.

(Reference: http://biblehub.com/greek/5485.htm )

Translating from one language is always difficult, because there are seldom precise matches for words in different languages.

So you notice above that Strong's gives 3 words, "grace, favor, kindness" as suitable English words when translating charis. So the arguments about 'grace' versus Freddy's 'undeserved kindness,' are rather stupid, merely arguments about words. A lot of the statements about 'grace' by people advocating an American Protestant approach to the Bible are merely stating a development of the original text. Hence we can infer, that neither grace nor undeserved kindness has any particular claim to correctness of truthiness. Anyone who claims otherwise has not understood the word itself

So let's look at how charis may have been used in ancient Greece, for this we will see that 'favour' will come into play.

James Davidson is a Greek Scholar,and an academic at the UK's Warwick University. (His biography is at: )https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/classics/staff/jamesdavidson/ ).

Davidson is also the author of a book he called, " The Greeks and Greek Love: A Radical Appraisal of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece."

And, in a momenr, you will see why I like discussing charis. Its mainly because the ancient Greek usage of these words was often in the context of their penchant for romantic affairs with other males, particularly handsome young ones (and, usually not children in spite of ignorant and stupid allegations that the ancient Greeks were pedophiles).

Homosexuality was cultural in ancient Greece. There were no moral objections for two men enjoying some sexual activity together. And all words the Bible uses like agape (which makes a mockery of the JW claim that agape is the highest form of love) and charis, were regularly used in conversations about love, sex and winning the heart of an attractive young man.

So now think of all the things a man may say to a sweet young girl, whose heart he wants to win. And then think of two men in a similar situation (for that's what you're faced with in cultures such as ancient Greece and Rome and Persia, and in Japan, and China, from ancient times to modern times). So In Davidson's book Ch 2, entitled "Grace, Sex and Favours' he talks first about the mysteries of charis - grace. The promoters of 'grace' may note with dislike, Davidson's comments on the church, when he says,

"But Greek charis is alien to a hierachical, institutionalised, rules-and regulations religion like Christianity, ..."

Of course, charis does have a religious connection, in Greek religious myth, three goddesses presided over the realm of charis - they were called the Charites. But discussing them moves away from the shocking usage of charis as a favour that I wanted to present.

I cannot appreciate all that Davidson says about the word, for I am not a Greek scholar, but I do appreciate the insights he gives to this ancient (pre-christian) culture.

So some six centuries before Jesus taught anything, a writer says (in archaic Greece, of course),

"Young man, since the goddess gave you such charis himeroessa (charm), and all, the young men are obsessed with the loveliness of your form ... don't forget my charis himeroessa (charm), knowing as you do that Eros is a hard thing for a man to bear,"

This missive is not only about outward charis that each bore, but a request for an exchange of charis.

Later Davidson states,

"Strange though it may be to us, the amorous and sexual exchanges between members of the same sex might be seen as the very epitome of the noblest form of charis ... Sexual charis stands for a particular construction of sex as part of a gracious exchange ..."

So here is a different aspect of the word charis, when the young man, the love target of another man, the one doing the chasing, if you like. When the young man finally agrees to sex, he is exercising charis,

I hope that by now all of us have a better understanding of how people may have viewed the word charis in biblical times,

16

Has China Already Become the Equal of the USA - superseding the Knorr/Franz March of World Powers?

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

i would personally say, this was going to happen, but not quite yet.

but then i noticed this recently published story in the south china morning post (a newspaper once owned by rupert murdoch, but now owned by jack ma, one of china's richest men).. quote:.

how china has become america’s equal, as showcased at a harvard forumauthor: robert delaneyon the campus of harvard business school this past weekend there was little doubt among corporate leaders and investors gathered for an annual conference that china had arrived as an equal to the united states.keynote speeches, panel discussions and a business pitch competition at the 20th annual harvard china forum convened under the theme “sharing the road ahead” in english.. and, i got to thinking about donald trump's reversal of all the things he said he was going to do to china in his campaign speeches, and the reality now that he acts as president of the usa.

fulltimestudent

Bobcat : Incidentally, China just launched their second carrier. Apparently they intend to give the US a run for its money, especially where Chinese interests prevail. ... I think Russia and China foresee a super Eurasian economic block that effectively isolates the US, both militarily and economically.

In the Anglosphere, there is a continual emphasis on possible enemies. I spend 3-4 hours every day reading (English) Chinese and Asian news sources. I see nothing that really says the China wants a war with the west. But, I do see a problem with emanating from the USA. Between 10 and 15 tears ago, there was a TV series about a USA Navy carrier formation, in which the captain of the carrier maintained that his ship was a spear pointed at the heart of China. Some have also used that term to describe the heavily armed island of Guam.

And, when we come to more recent times and the hassles over Chinese influence in the south China sea, do many journalists stop to ask about the function of the American base on Okinawa, which is also heavily fortified.

An American battle fleet was first sent to the western Pacific after the end of the Chinese civil war. Even though the American General commanding American forces in China thought that Chiang Kai Shek (Jiang Jieshi was useless (and, had been impressed by the Communist forces in the North, Truman made a decision to back (somewhat discreetly) the Kuomindang (Nationalist) administration after their defeat and escape to Taiwan (traditionally part of China for at least 400 years). The above American fleet was to prevent a mainland invasion of Taiwan.

Obama ( for whatever real reasons) decided to stage a 'pivot' to East Asia and sent the second battle fleet to the area. The Chinese (obviously) have been concerned about America's real intentions, After all, in its history the USA has invaded other countries many times to serve their own interests. That's why China is spending money on a military build-up. Why should they invade any other nation? The Chinese government knows there are better ways to influence events and nations, and that I think is what Bobcat is referring to, when he wrote:

I think Russia and China foresee a super Eurasian economic block that effectively isolates the US, both militarily and economically. They are building both the infrastructure and defensive capability to make that a reality within the next couple of decades.

The OBOR (one belt and one road) is a Chinese attempt to build a trade bloc, joining east Asia to Europe, they will provide development to all Asian and European nations that want to join. I see no effort to exclude the USA, but if America wants in, it will be as an equal and not as the boss.

16

Has China Already Become the Equal of the USA - superseding the Knorr/Franz March of World Powers?

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

i would personally say, this was going to happen, but not quite yet.

but then i noticed this recently published story in the south china morning post (a newspaper once owned by rupert murdoch, but now owned by jack ma, one of china's richest men).. quote:.

how china has become america’s equal, as showcased at a harvard forumauthor: robert delaneyon the campus of harvard business school this past weekend there was little doubt among corporate leaders and investors gathered for an annual conference that china had arrived as an equal to the united states.keynote speeches, panel discussions and a business pitch competition at the 20th annual harvard china forum convened under the theme “sharing the road ahead” in english.. and, i got to thinking about donald trump's reversal of all the things he said he was going to do to china in his campaign speeches, and the reality now that he acts as president of the usa.

fulltimestudent

Sir82: The WTS has claimed that the "seven world powers" were only seven because those were the ones who had a direct impact on "Jehovah's people".
It's why they can get away without mentioning, for example, 17th century Spain or 13th century Mongolia as "world powers" - while those were indeed "world powers" at the time, there were no organized "Jehovah's people" for them to boss around.

Smile!!! I do recall that caveat, that dear old Freddy placed on his interpretation of these scriptural texts. So let's look first at the of whether there were an 'organised people' in all the ages between the first century and the 20th C ? If there were not, is this not a direct contradiction of Matthew 28:19, 20? In that supposedly inspired statement we have Jesus saying:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." (NIV)

When I was young (in age and the 'truth') I recall the understanding that before 1914-1919 a faithful Christian would have been able to serve god faithfully in any church ( but after 1919 YHWH/JESUS would lead such a person to their 'selected' organisation). I've never seen that thought in print, but also no alternative view of pre-1914 faithfulness.

Obviously in light of the above text, Jesus (if he is who he claimed to be) expected to have faithful followers on earth until the end of the age. So, it is arguable the Mongolian world Empire could have impact on God's people, The 'christians' in Vienna obviously thought so, when they found Mongolian hordes at their gates (as a possible mythical statement). Other Christians however, may have been part of the Mongolian empire, as it is known that many Nestorian christians, lived under the Mongolians, and even served in that empire? Why did Freddy F. choose to ignore that empire? Clearly because to count the Mongolian Empire would stuff up his attempt at interpretation.

And it may be noted that the christian Byzantine Empire (aka the Eastern Roman Empire) even formed an alliance with the Mongols. And, one branch formed the ruling elite of early Russia. Quite clearly, just as influential in history as the British empire, why should they not be included in any march of world powers, if YHWH exists and can see history in advance?

Long before that of course, the Roman Empire had to face an invasion of Steppe nomads, that we know as the Huns. Interestingly, the Huns are thought to be identical to the Xiongnu who formed an confederate Empire to the north of China. They fought the nascent Chinese (if that term has any real meaning prior to the Qin dynasty) and their likely descendants often invaded northern China and formed alternate dynasties. Likely they formed various Korean Kingdoms and quite possibly may have had an influence on Japan. They and their allies brought an end to the Western Roman Empire and some scholarship argues that they formed the elite groups that took over the Frankish and Germanic kingdoms, that came to form modern Germany and France, Quite possibly Freddy knew little of the the great influence that the Huns exercised in history. And again we should ask, why would the influential Huns be excluded from any march of world powers.

But their inclusion would surely stuff up Freddy's concept, just as the political development of Chinese influence is now doing.

So what's left of all the evidence we used to teach to people to 'prove' that we were living in the final generation.

Like all christians, the JWs have no concept of scholarship.

16

Has China Already Become the Equal of the USA - superseding the Knorr/Franz March of World Powers?

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

i would personally say, this was going to happen, but not quite yet.

but then i noticed this recently published story in the south china morning post (a newspaper once owned by rupert murdoch, but now owned by jack ma, one of china's richest men).. quote:.

how china has become america’s equal, as showcased at a harvard forumauthor: robert delaneyon the campus of harvard business school this past weekend there was little doubt among corporate leaders and investors gathered for an annual conference that china had arrived as an equal to the united states.keynote speeches, panel discussions and a business pitch competition at the 20th annual harvard china forum convened under the theme “sharing the road ahead” in english.. and, i got to thinking about donald trump's reversal of all the things he said he was going to do to china in his campaign speeches, and the reality now that he acts as president of the usa.

fulltimestudent

I would personally say, this was going to happen, but not quite yet.

But then I noticed this recently published story in the South China Morning Post (a newspaper once owned by Rupert Murdoch, but now owned by Jack Ma, one of China's richest men).

Quote:

How China has become America’s equal, as showcased at a Harvard forum
Author: Robert Delaney
On the campus of Harvard Business School this past weekend there was little doubt among corporate leaders and investors gathered for an annual conference that China had arrived as an equal to the United States.
Keynote speeches, panel discussions and a business pitch competition at the 20th annual Harvard China Forum convened under the theme “Sharing the Road Ahead” in English.

And, I got to thinking about Donald Trump's reversal of all the things he said he was going to do to China in his campaign speeches, and the reality now that he acts as President of the USA. As President, what information did he become privy to? Information that apparently made him think twice about his previous statements.

So just like that history is made. NO war marked the transition. And also just like that, you can toss out the door another JW, prophecy.

Web-link: http://www.scmp.com/news/china/economy/article/2090387/how-china-has-become-americas-equal-showcased-harvard-forum

9

A Scientific American discussion of current thinking on a biological basis for same sex preferences

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

the scientific american web-site has the above article, dated april 25, 2017. its entitled, "cross-cultural evidence for the genetics of homosexuality - mexico's third gender sheds light on the biological correlates of sexual orientation.".

here's the link to the article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cross-cultural-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/?wt.mc=sa_facebook-share.

and the first few paragraphs .... the reasons behind why people are gay, straight, or bisexual have long been a source of public fascination.

fulltimestudent

The Scientific American web-site has the above article, dated April 25, 2017. Its entitled, "Cross-Cultural Evidence for the Genetics of Homosexuality - Mexico's third gender sheds light on the biological correlates of sexual orientation."

Here's the link to the article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cross-cultural-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/?wt.mc=SA_Facebook-Share

And the first few paragraphs ...

The reasons behind why people are gay, straight, or bisexual have long been a source of public fascination. Indeed, research on the topic of sexual orientation offers a powerful window into understanding human sexuality. The Archives of Sexual Behavior recently published a special edition devoted to research in this area, titled “The Puzzle of Sexual Orientation.” One study, conducted by scientists at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, offers compelling, cross-cultural evidence that common genetic factors underlie same-sex, sexual preference in men.
In southern Mexico, individuals who are biologically male and sexually attracted to men are known as muxes. They are recognized as a third gender: Muxe nguiiu tend to be masculine in their appearance and behavior, while muxe gunaa are feminine. In Western cultures, they would be considered gay men and transgender women, respectively.
Several correlates of male androphilia — biological males who are sexually attracted to men — have been shown across different cultures, which is suggestive of a common biological foundation among them. For example, the fraternal birth order effect—the phenomenon whereby male androphilia is predicted by having a higher number of biological older brothers—is evident in both Western and Samoan cultures.