Prejudice in science fiction
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
I never said anything about sex. Aleck however focused entirely on that subject and put me in a position where I had no alternative but to address that topic.
Not true. I brought up 3 different and distinct reasons why cloning is, for the most part, vilified in science fiction. I spoke of evolutionary stagnation, the Puritanical anti-sex bias of Western culture, and homogeny/totalitarianism. Any of the two other topics would have been suitable for discussion. You, however, decided to focus on this subject.
quote[quote]An Aleck+followers vs. Lee topic is exactly what I was trying to avoid here (read my first post).[/quote]
Again with the insistence that I have followers. As Dr. Carl Sagan once said, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” (more on this quote below) If I have this band of followers, tell me, how am I leading them? How am I organizing them to oppose you? Jesus, I don’t have the *time* to organize bands of people to work against you. But, if you’re able to provide evidence that I am, in fact, organizing some strategic attack, I’ll buy into it. As long as you provide instructions on how I can go about reaping the financial benefits that I know I’m due.
quote[quote]And I didn’t say anything about myself except that I do not believe the theory that there is some sort of instinct that makes people have a sexual appetite.[/quote]
Again, not really accurate. You said, in your reply to my 3-point post, and I quote:
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
I do not believe that sexual appetite is something common to all humans as I have never felt it and I’ve always been taught that having such feelings would be bad.
In this post, the one you referred to above, you claim that there are two reasons why you don’t believe that sexual drives are common to all humans: (A) You’ve never felt them. Which, of course, has abso-LUTE-ly nothing to do with (B) the fact that you’ve always been taught that these feelings were bad.
quote[quote]Aleck is trying to make me out to be somehow abnormal. The fact is that I am just an average 18 year old American male college freshman.[/quote]
No, you’re doing a fine job of that yourself. I didn’t know anyone that fit your description when I was in college, so I think your self-description is a pretty “extraordinary claim” in and of itself. Give me a scientific mean of the libidos of 18-year-old males, and let’s see where you fall. Unless, of course, you’re just talking about *your* college, and it’s populated with some really screwed-up 18-year-old males.
quote[quote]As my hero Dr. Carl Sagan said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” I would like to hear some sort of legitimate scientific evidence that this notion of an inborn sex drive is accurate. I believe what is factually supported. Nothing more, nothing less.[/quote]
Ahhh, now here’s the quote. Now, let me just contradict myself by using this quote twice now by saying that you’re using this quote out of context. He was speaking of “paranormal” or “occult” events, *not* widely-accepted facts regarding human sexuality. Unless we’re talking about the sex lives of ghosts, this quote doesn’t apply. But, let’s see, inborn and non-trained sexual instincts…let’s talk about Dr. John Money of Johns Hopkins University (where he served as professor emeritus), and formerly of Harvard University. Dr. Money is, perhaps, the world’s leading scientist and researcher into the subject of sexuality. Among many other firsts, he designed the first curriculum in sexual medicine for medical students. He introduced the theory that androgen is the libido-fueling hormone for both sexes (which, of course operates on the pretext that libido is controlled by physiological traits), which has been widely accepted and confirmed. He was a pioneer in hormone therapy to increase self-control among sex offenders (again, supporting the libido/physiological construct). He was the first to explore the psychological concomitants of disorders in sex chromosomes (again…oh, you get the idea). He has also done research into the onanistic activities of pre-adolescents, and supported the fact that children come into this world equating pleasure and genital contact, even without external stimuli or “teachers” in this (some go farther in speaking about late-stage feti appearing to fondle their own genitalia while observed via ultrasound while in the womb, but that’s still debated).
quote[quote]Perhaps some members toward the beginning would require processes like therapy, instrumental conditioning, or even drugs to eliminate urges (as was done in Terrestria), but it would be done.[/quote]
Oooh, that just *reeks* of totalitarianism. That’s a *lovely* thought. No wonder cloning gets such a bad rap.
quote[quote]Now, today my psychology lecturer stated specifically that there is no evidence that a feeling manifests itself in another way after being eliminated (what Aleck said). That is just part of the Freudian dogma and has been discredited by serious studies. And it is certainly not the case with me. I have no personality glitches that could possibly attributed to such a thing.[/quote]
Not true in the least. Freud’s theories regarding defense mechanisms (what you’re talking about are repression and sublimation) are widely regarded as among the most, if not the very most, lasting contributions he made to the field of psychology. They have not only been confirmed by more recent study, but have been expanded on. You know, one of my junior high school teachers once said that race-mixing was wrong. I didn’t believe him. Just because a professor says it, that doesn’t mean that it’s the case. You could just have a lousy professor (and again, I ask, as I did in a lost post, what college do you *go* to, anyway??? Where do they *teach* this crap???).
Oh, and just for larfs, here’s DT’s Arrogant Point #352:
quote:
Originally posted by DalekTek790:
I happen to be incredibly intelligent.
Hoo boy.
–Aleck