Hercules Rockefeller said:
"Expertise"? You're an expert? :bugeye:
Hmmmmm, let’s see, having expertise in “sexuality” implies that you are a psychologist. Is your degree in psychology? Postgrad, maybe? Or perhaps you are medically trained? Are you in psych medicine? A psychiatrist, maybe? In which medical institution do you work?
Then again, having expertise in “gender” implies that you have training in the developmental biology of sex determination. I’m a developmental biologist! If you want to talk about the genetics of sex determination during embryonic development, then I’m all ears. Is your background in genetics like me or have you come from a physiology/biochemistry background? All this large body of work you refer to must mean you are at least postgraduate, if not postdoctoral. In which academic institution do you work? I presume you are published, so where can I read some of your work?<P>
First things first.
I will entertain your posts (or anyone else for that matter!) only if you sincerely want to discuss, remain within the limits of civilised behaviour as required by a serious discussion board like this one and stop trying to disrupt the discussion. Remember, whether you want to prove me right or wrong, you must want to add to the discussion not disrupt/ sabotage it. This post was within the limits of such discussion, and that is why I have chosen to answer it.
Surely, all that education would have taught you decency (although humblness is not one of your forte!). Use your education and expertise to tell/ guide us lesser mortals about how and where we are wrong --- not to act like an extremist.
Now to the points that you have raised:
My theories and assertions may be outlandish, the wierdest that you have heard. I may be totally off the mark. But at least I am sincere. + I’ve been following the rules. I have put my assertions up for a debate. Afterall, this is what a discussion board is for. This means that I can easily be proved wrong especially by such knowledgable luminaries such as yourself. I regret that you have to come down to discussing issues with ordinary mortals like me, but then this is a space for commoners not an exclusive academic space. If you’re ashamed to do this don’t slum around here.
Or else, let the moderators of this site make a rule that only people with degrees in the respective fields can participate in a discussion or start a thread. And require that only statements that have been proven with wrtten/ published papers be accepted as arguments. In that case lesser mortals like me will not waste our time here.
But perhaps you would do well to remember words by Albert Einstein:
“The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education”.
You don’t need to go to any college to understand life and nature --- especially the most simple truths. In fact education takes you away from these truths. You could be completely illiterate and know more about life than the person with the highest academic degrees and honours.
The entire scientific community together with the latest technologies and most qualified scientists could not predict the Tsunami. But some pre-historic tribes, with no connection at all with the ‘civilised’ world, living in isolated islands pre sensed the coming danger and managed to save themselves. And so did many animals.
A scientist who only knows what he has been taught, and is closed to other information will never know the real truth --- however material advancement he may make. A scientist must work closely with people in other fields and with laymen in order to make his knowledge more practical and to improve upon it.
All through the history, people who have contributed to human advancement and wisdom have been the people who have dared to look beyond what their contemporary society taught them --- whether formally or informally. It’s often the formal education which tries to manipulate the truth in order to suit those in power.
No degree in science prepared Newton to ponder about the apple that fell. He made his theories much before he acquired his degrees. I doubt that he would have been able to ponder about such an ordinary event had he completed his education.
Formal education may help you in two ways:
a. By giving you tools and resources: to further work upon your discoveries that you acquired through your wisdom/ experience.
b. By allowing you into the vistas of power: because it is difficult for someone to be heard or taken seriously in a westernised, highly controlled/ organised society.
But education plays an extremely negative role too: It kills the ability of an individual to think on his own and to experience this world on his own using his natural intuitions. To look beyond the square. It cripples the ability of the individual to question things. It makes him a conformist. Therefore, degrees have an intrinsic worth only if they are acquired after one has had the chance to experience/ understand this world on his own. If education makes a person incapable of looking beyond what he has been told --- education and degrees are worthless.
The modern scientific establishment is totally controlled by the forces of heterosexualisation. It gives the stamp of scientific validity to only those things that further the heterosexual agenda. Fortunately, internet discussion sites provide a forum to those whom the powerful scientific lobby has shut out. The sabotage efforts initiated by you and a few others is a reprehensible bullying attempt by these heterosexual forces to silence a scientific discussion which harms the heterosexual agenda.
“The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking!”
Albert Einstein
Science is not only that which is approved by the established bodies and allowed in it’s publications. Science is there in anyone --- including the illiterate --- who can analyse life’s situations logically/ scientifically (not necessarily conforming to established scientific positions if he has valid reasons to do so), and can establish a pattern and relationship between cause and effect.
It’s a peculiar Christian mentality --- that is perhaps the precursur of the over-organised and controlled society that the west today is. A Christian mentality where only what the powerful, authoritative body decided was accepted as god’s word, and the power of the individual to relate with and find god was snatched. You can’t represent god unless you enroll as a formal member of the church and accept its training. The same mentality rules the human institution of sceince which has become today’s religion. This helps those in power to consolidate and perpetuate their control by manipulating with truth.
As far as your qualifications are concerned, I don’t see how a degree in micro-biology can prepare you to understand or analyse human sexuality. As I have commented earlier, sceince is only effective when dealing with things that we can see or things that have a material existence. The area of human needs and nature is not one of them, even though that does not stop science to attempt it through streams like Psychology. Even social science is not an exact science.
As far as the scientific study of human sexuality goes, it’s worth considering another quote from Albert Einstein:
“No, this trick won’t work! How on earth are you ever going to explain in terms of chemistry and physics so important a biological phemomenon as first love!”
Psychology in particular has been an effective tool in the hands of the scientific community to further the heterosexual agenda by manipulating the truth. If you look at psychology’s history in this field, if had for a long time held that ‘homosexuality’ (sic) is a disease, a mental disorder. It had proved this with several ‘scientific’ studies. Several dangerous forms of treatments, including electirc shock therapy was employed to treat the ‘patients’. Today, when so-called homosexuals gained political power the psychologists withdrew ‘homosexuality’ from its list of diseases. That is a complete turn around. How can you trust a ‘science’ like that, which works for those in power not for the truth?
A series of latest discoveries by both heterosexual and homosexual scientists have brought out the drawbacks of science when dealing with human nature. Today, one scientist will find a gene that makes people gay, tomorrow another will prove it false. There is any number of such studies pouring in which primarily deal with the reason of homosexuality, but which are all misleading because there is no such thing as homosexuality, the latest being one involving pheromones.
Even an exact science like biology and medicine is heavily manipulated by the forces of heterosexuality/ Christianity. For long it maintained that masturbation is extremely harmful. Today it does a complete turnaround, when actually there may be a remote element of truth in the statement --- at least under certain conditions. Similarly, the scientific lobby aggressively campaigns for the Christian practise of circumcision, maintaining it has several health benefits including a protection from STD’s and AIDS, and they are not speaking the complete truth. They ignore protests by several non-mainstream scientists that try to point out the dangers of circumcision.
For centuries, scientists have misinformed us about animal sexuality in keeping with heterosexualisation. Even today, scientists like M.J. Bailey, Ray Blanchard and Anne Lawrence openly and blatantly abuse science by conducting misleading studies on sexuality to further the heterosexual agenda. The scientific authorities and the media give them full supprot because of this. So much for wrtten/ published papers and scientists with degrees.
“Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal”
Albert Einstein
And now coming down to my qualifications.
I’m a social worker and have worked at the ground level for a long time. I have a degree but not in social work, mind you, but I have built a niche for myself because of the quality of my work. I have had several trainings --- from doctors on the medical aspects of sexual health and on counseling, from leading organisations working on sexuality and gender on those issues. But I must tell you that as my work experiences often contradicted what I had been told by the experts (who use western knowledge), I started searching the truth on my own --- which has led me to reach the conclusions I’m sharing on this board.
I have presented several papers in national and international conferences based on my work experiences, where I have shared the dais with leading scientists and scholars, from across the world --- and I must say the response and respect I get is totally different from how you treat non-scientists. They value empirical evidence immensely. In at least two conferences my papers dominated the talks. I have written several more papers which have been presented by my colleagues. I have developed booklets, books, posters, plays, etc. on these issues. And they have been widely acknowldeged in my country and abroad. I’m writing two books for an international agency right now. Of course, I cannot write everything I know. I am told that certain things, though they may be true are not to be written because they will be unacceptable to the society. That is the truth about formal organisations.
However, I’m bound by no such boundations on this open board, and I thank the administrators for this wonderful opportunity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the end I can only say that I am an ignorant soul. Kindly show me the way through your utter knowledge and wisdom, out of my mess. And tell me how and where I have faultered in my analysis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds!"
Albert Einstein
