Actress and lesbian Cynthia Nixon has caused a firestorm in the gayosphere by saying that for her, sexual orientation was a choice.
Obviously, this view undermines the arguments of gay political orthodoxy, and gives the right wingnuts who run “gay rehabilitation prayer camps” support that they were right all along–“See Harold, I told you he was just doing it to be ornery.” Of course, the truth is probably like most things: The truth is somewhere in between. It may be for her, but it isn’t for most gay people.
At any rate, this becomes pretty scary when coupled with another news item from the week, news that conservatives are conservative because they are stupid.
Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found.
And this isn’t some progressive spoof either, it’s a peer reviewed study based on longitudinal market research in the U.K. Now on first blush, you’d think this would bring a smile to our liberal faces. And it did. I admit it. (Although I started to send it to my conservative friends, but didn’t, since I thought it might be cruel. Probably not, since they don’t believe in science and statistics anyway.)
But the more you think about it, the bigger problem it is for us. Because if people are conservative because they’re stupid, then that’s a problem because one of our core tenets is: It’s off-limits to persecute people for things they have no control over like skin color, sexual orientation, intelligence, etc. I can see it now. At some Florida supermarket somewhere, a small boy is pointing to a seventy year-old woman wearing a halter top, hot pants and a Newt Gingrich button and his mom is saying, “Shhhhh! Don’t point, Alex. She’s a Republican, but she can’t help it.” And this means that we have to stop mocking Rush and all right-wing positions on climate, gun control, taxes and the like, because they are too dumb to understand why their ideas are bad.
Just outside Chicago, one hospital is advertising its obesity clinic with billboards that say, “It’s a disease, not a decision.”
Romney-Santorum 2012. It’s a condition, not a choice.
Categories: Freedom/Privacy, Funny, LGBT, Politics/Law/Government, Race/Gender, Science/Technology, Sex
The idea that sexual orientation is a choice strikes me as particularly suspicious. I know that I couldn’t “choose” to be gay. I mean, I guess I could force myself to sleep with a man, but … why the hell would I?
If Nixon cold genuinely choose, then it can only mean that in her wiring she’s pretty bisexual. Choosing to sleep with women instead of men is a choice, yes, but she hasn’t chosen what she IS.
As for the conservatives, bless their simple little hearts…..
I should have added that I now look forward to seeing whether stupid conservatives argue that theirs is a lifestyle choice or whether they instead play the nature card.
Now that we’ve gotten “homosexual” out of the DSM, should we see about getting “conservative” in?
The real question is, if it is a choice, why would anyone choose to be gay? I’ve had that discussion with my gay friends and they all agree that coming out is an extraordinarily painful process, and one that few people would choose. There’s also the matter of why you would choose to have sex with someone of your own sex if you were not naturally aroused by them (unless Evangelicals are arguing that everyone is aroused by their own sex, which is a little scary.) And the matter of why you would choose a lifestyle where you will be faced with discrimination, harassment and downright danger. Finally, for most gays, the choice greatly reduces the likelihood of the having a family, which is important to many people. The whole choice argument simply doesnt make sense.
“Those stupid conservatives….”
Such medaciousness feeds the bigoted and prejudiced soul. You know who you are.
I have an IQ of 138, a BS/MS in Metallurgical Engineering, publications, patents, and +24 years experience providing the aircraft, launch systems, satellites and technology that makes our modern world possible, defends our nation, and provides the systems necessary to deliver editorial drivel such as was posted by ‘otherwise’ above globally.
I’m a conservative. The majority of the highly intelligent engineers, scientists, and physicists I work with are also. We don’t ‘believe’ in science and statistics. Faith is not required, where facts, data and careful analysis are used honestly. We use them (chemistry, physics, thermodynamics, and mathematics) every day for critical analyses to design, build, and guarantee the high reliability systems that transport millions of people and their critical data every minute of every day.
Enjoy your ‘stupid’ titilation, if it feeds your needs to feel superior. But remember, every time you board an airplane, train, bus, motorcycle, scooter, or bicycle, it was designed by a ‘stupid’ engineer. Every message you convey by phone, email, facebook, or twitter depends on their ‘stupid’ intellect to make the global communications nets work. Your food delivery systems, roads, housing, water, sanitation, clothing, and energy sources are all delivered thanks to those ‘stupid’ people you so despise. Saddest and perhaps most telling of all of your unfounded transgressions, most liberals do not understand how any of these systems really ‘work’. I know. I have had a number of ‘smart’ liberals (Ask them.. they’ll tell you they are!) query me as to how some bit of modern technology works. Invariably, their eyes glaze over and comprehension is lost within 30 seconds… because they are too ‘smart’ to understand the basic physical principles. Orwellian, isn’t it?
You wouldn’t think that the basic tenets of logic would need to be explained to a person with a 138 I.Q., but apparently it is necessary, allow me.
The study is not asserting that all conservatives are stupid. It says that stupid people tend to hold conservative values. That stupid people tend to be conservative does not preclude smart people from being conservative; it only makes a statement about the sort of company smart conservatives keep.
And “Orwellian” probably doesn’t mean what you think it means.
A “liberal” who does, in fact, understand how our power is produced and delivered. Who’s currently designing and building a water treatment plant for a specialty application. Who can also discuss the literature of Orwell and its underlying social message. And who’s not even a trained enginerd.
And anyway Invictus, last time I took an IQ test it was in the high 140’s and the 150’s before that. I also have two degress, including one in engineering. Blah, blah, blah. You really want to compare resumes with me? Don’t think so. Save your boasting and your pretentious screen names to impress the girls at the Keokuk Dairy Queen.
Obviously a high IQ does not preclude narrcissim. And being a bit stupid too.
“And “Orwellian” probably doesn’t mean what you think it means.”
Not sure if you’re trying to whack me or Invictus for narcissism (although if you’re shooting at me, you probably mean egoism,) but since I deserve a whack I will take it.
I should never have fired back at Invictus.
First, I should not have used myself in the argument. In my entire life, I have never told anyone my IQ–not my friends, not my wife, not my clients, because (1) I really do believe you have no right to brag about things you are, only things you do. That is, I don’t think Dwight Howard should brag about being 7 feet tall, but if and when he wins an MVP he can brag about that. (2) I know a lot of putzes who have high IQ’s but don’t accomplish much. Mensa? So what?
Second, I said I wasn’t going to pick on conservatives becasue they can’t help it, then I went and slapped the poor guy. He can’t help it that he only has a 138 and a Master’s,or that it sounds like he’s been stuck in the quasi-governmental defense industry for 24 years instead of making it in the private sector. It’s really not his fault.
Third, he actually has a point in his little ramble. I think experience supports the idea that conservatives are generally stupid, or at least limited thinkers, but I also think experience supports that liberals tend to be lazy thinkers. We often propose solutions without really thinking them through, e.g., ending the draft, which has been a disaster and means that we are now stuck in endless wars. (And perhaps Obama.)
Thanks for the comment.