Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (105386)	5/28/2005 7:55:52 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

I certainly think societal considerations were in place (and I'd guess Grainne does too)- bigotry for 100 years to be specific, but I'm not sure those are the societal considerations you had in mind. IMO this is exactly like the bigotry that influenced "scientists" who studied blacks and other darker skinned peoples- looking for data that confirmed their prejudices, instead of looking for the data that was naturally there. Ignoring the real world is always a problem, Even for scientists (who also happen to be part of society and so can also be prey to societies prejudices) and a huge reason why religion should not be interjected in to science- because the biggest errors in science (imo) have been the result of societal blindness causing scientists to reject or recast real data, so that it fit prejudices, rather than changing prejudices to accommodate new data- but truth eventually seems to out... You do not want to talk about the scientists who were convinced blacks were inferior to whites? I would be willing to talk about the errors scientists made at that time, and why they made them. There are some very interesting case studies which illumine the intersection of prejudice and science. I find that an interesting area of history- full of implications for the present day.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (105386)	5/28/2005 10:06:17 PM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

It is not the the mere mention of homosexuality that stirs the pot here. It gets stirred when someone makes a discriminatory remark about homosexuals. I am not sure why you do not understand this, but it offends a lot of people when you or someone else makes a bigoted comment about homosexuals. It is prejudice, just like racism and sexism are prejudice. It is hard for me to understand coming from you, because you seem in most of your expressions to be intelligent, well educated and gentlemanly, even. I think you would fare better trying to make points if you didn't use homosexuals as examples. And while my introduction to the American Psychiatric Assn.'s article used the word "seem", because it was just a gentle introduction to the more factual article, the body of text itself was quite concrete. Perhaps you do not understand what constitutes a mental disorder, then? I cannot find any other reason you would dispute their findings.