Last login: Tuesday, July 19, 2011
I came on here because I listened to this story yesterday, and wanted to discuss how Randy Thomasson's statements that. . .
"You inherit your race, you inherit your ethnicity that's a put in then, "lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons" that is not a fit because you cannot inherit these attributes, there's no so called gay gene. In fact, there are thousands and thousands of former homosexuals that you don't find a former black person, you don't find a former Hispanic or Asian."
This is an inconsistent comparison because while it can be determined with absolute certainty that someone cannot change their race, the same cannot truly be said for someone with regards to their sexuality. While I am certainly open to the possibility that some people MAY choose their sexuality, and can therefore change it, it is much more likely that someone feeling pressure or the desire to change their sexuality may claim falsely to have done so to satisfy either themselves or those around them. I also find the absolute tone of his statement that there is "no gay gene" to be misleading for several reasons. Firstly, while scientists may not have discovered a particular gene linked to sexuality yet, that doesn't mean that one will not be discovered. Also, as our understanding of genetics has grown, it has become apparent that that genes interact in more complex ways than previously thought. For example, it used to be believed that eye color was a simple recessive trait, this of course has proven untrue as we now know eye color is vastly complex and linked to multiple genes spanning several chromosomes (check out the study here, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/...). More to the point however, I'd just like to say that when we are attempting to understand historical figures, we cannot fully appreciate the person unless we can consider the whole of their being. The implication being that if their sexuality is known, then that knowledge should not be ignored, because to disregard that aspect of someone is to lie to ourselves about that person's true nature. To teach students about historical figures sexuality does not mean we are taking sides in the debate about sexual morality, we are simply teaching the true nature of the person being discussed.
July 19, 2011 at 10:22 p.m.
( permalink | suggest removal )
© 2016 KPBS Public Broadcasting