Lady Savage's Grumpy Chronicles
Moderators: Oggar, Badfellow, Mr Boozificator, Artful Drunktective, mistah willies, NYDingbat, oettinger, Judge
- Chimneyfish
- Boozing Like Bukowski
- Posts: 4026
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 1:22 am
- Location: California
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
I ended up in a gay bar on accident once too. Didn't realize it until I stood up and a guy asked if he could push my stool in.
-
- Juicing Like Jackie
- Posts: 12664
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 2:49 pm
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
Wow, 1987, let me laugh.Chimneyfish wrote:I ended up in a gay bar on accident once too. Didn't realize it until I stood up and a guy asked if he could push my stool in.
I'll miss you, pallie.
- Chimneyfish
- Boozing Like Bukowski
- Posts: 4026
- Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 1:22 am
- Location: California
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
For some reason I keep reading your posts in the voice of the comic book guy from The Simpsons. Can you post a picture so I can correct the image I have in my head?BeerMakesMeSmart wrote:Wow, 1987, let me laugh.
- Savage
- Juicing Like Jackie
- Posts: 25434
- Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 1:16 am
- Location: All my bags are packed, I'm ready to go
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
Anyway, my life would have been a lot more less stressful, if I had gone the popular 19th century spinster route. Bluestocking, I believe they would have called me. Of course, there is always the sex drive and the urge for maternity. Damn. We, females and males, I suppose, are doomed to suffer. It is our lot in life. Probably has something to do with Original Sin, or some other such bullshit.
like tears in rain
- Screwball
- Drinking Like W.C.
- Posts: 7064
- Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 6:30 pm
- Location: A half foot away from a cat's nutsack. I Gotta get the DevilKat Fixed!
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
Here's some rabbits jumping over some stuff just to prove a point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNPOdffkkLo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNPOdffkkLo
- Wingman
- Chugging Like Churchill
- Posts: 5078
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:44 pm
- Location: on my way to a bar
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
yes! i didn't say it was genetic, just not a choice.Chimneyfish wrote: Wouldn't the conditions of childbirth be evidence of homosexuality being based on environmental factors instead of genetic factors?
you guys are all a bunch of fags. except for that limey dude, and he's a pussy.
Stupid should hurt.
"We're better than mere people, we're DRUNKARDS."
--ThirstyDrunk
"We're better than mere people, we're DRUNKARDS."
--ThirstyDrunk
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
I dont think anyone would choose to be feared and hated by half the u.s. population..on the other hand though writting it off as a scientific anomolly is about the same as calling it a mental illness. why not just let some people love the cock..i know im a big fan of mine.
"Trinke liebchen, trinke schnell, trinken macht die augen hell!"
- Fool Ishy
- Lord of Benders
- Posts: 480
- Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:58 am
- Location: Somewhere in Washington state...or is that the State of Washington? Damned if I know...
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
Ahh, sorry I missed this earlier! Damn drunken internet surfing!
Before I was a drunk I was working on my Phd in Biological Anthropology studying human evolution under one of the leading Population Geneticists of this generation. I can definitively tell you there is no gene for "gayness", or anything else for that matter. Phenotypes (the physical and behavioral expression of genotypes) are never based on a single gene. Hell, eye color is based on (from what I remember) over a dozen different loci (places on a chromosome). Each locus has numerous alleles (variations), so the "genes" involved are ridiculously high. And that's just for eye color!
Oh, and most loci (or genes) are used over and over during development, kind of like ingredients in recipes. You can use flour to make cake, cookies, biscuits, corn bread, whatever. Same with genes. So there really is no such thing as a "gene" for anything.
Now, in my opinion, "homosexuality" is a cultural definition. To wax Foucaultion and all post-modernistic, we as a culture define what we consider "deviant" behavior. Consider the ancient Spartans, the baddest motherfuckers to walk the face of the Earth, each and everyone of those bastards was buggering a young boy. Look it up. Were they gay? Hell no, they were masters of their universe and defined their behavior any way they damn well wanted. We might call them gay (or "bisexual"), but that would be imposing modern norms on an ancient culture.
My point is, all of this is moot. As someone said earlier, an individual's attraction to one gender or another (and the difference between sex and gender is a whole other conversation!) is both biological and cultural. Attraction is defined by both physical and cultural indicators. Homosexuality (or "gayness") is completely defined by cultural norms.
Hell, even Bonobo chimps have same-sex sexual interactions. Wonder if they ever call each other fags?
Ok, drunken lecture is now over...
Before I was a drunk I was working on my Phd in Biological Anthropology studying human evolution under one of the leading Population Geneticists of this generation. I can definitively tell you there is no gene for "gayness", or anything else for that matter. Phenotypes (the physical and behavioral expression of genotypes) are never based on a single gene. Hell, eye color is based on (from what I remember) over a dozen different loci (places on a chromosome). Each locus has numerous alleles (variations), so the "genes" involved are ridiculously high. And that's just for eye color!
Oh, and most loci (or genes) are used over and over during development, kind of like ingredients in recipes. You can use flour to make cake, cookies, biscuits, corn bread, whatever. Same with genes. So there really is no such thing as a "gene" for anything.
Now, in my opinion, "homosexuality" is a cultural definition. To wax Foucaultion and all post-modernistic, we as a culture define what we consider "deviant" behavior. Consider the ancient Spartans, the baddest motherfuckers to walk the face of the Earth, each and everyone of those bastards was buggering a young boy. Look it up. Were they gay? Hell no, they were masters of their universe and defined their behavior any way they damn well wanted. We might call them gay (or "bisexual"), but that would be imposing modern norms on an ancient culture.
My point is, all of this is moot. As someone said earlier, an individual's attraction to one gender or another (and the difference between sex and gender is a whole other conversation!) is both biological and cultural. Attraction is defined by both physical and cultural indicators. Homosexuality (or "gayness") is completely defined by cultural norms.
Hell, even Bonobo chimps have same-sex sexual interactions. Wonder if they ever call each other fags?
Ok, drunken lecture is now over...
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." Oscar Wilde
- ThirstyDrunk
- Juicing Like Jackie
- Posts: 12703
- Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:35 pm
- Location: Xenia
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
QueerFool Ishy wrote:Ahh, sorry I missed this earlier! Damn drunken internet surfing!
Before I was a drunk I was working on my Phd in Biological Anthropology studying human evolution under one of the leading Population Geneticists of this generation. I can definitively tell you there is no gene for "gayness", or anything else for that matter. Phenotypes (the physical and behavioral expression of genotypes) are never based on a single gene. Hell, eye color is based on (from what I remember) over a dozen different loci (places on a chromosome). Each locus has numerous alleles (variations), so the "genes" involved are ridiculously high. And that's just for eye color!
Oh, and most loci (or genes) are used over and over during development, kind of like ingredients in recipes. You can use flour to make cake, cookies, biscuits, corn bread, whatever. Same with genes. So there really is no such thing as a "gene" for anything.
Now, in my opinion, "homosexuality" is a cultural definition. To wax Foucaultion and all post-modernistic, we as a culture define what we consider "deviant" behavior. Consider the ancient Spartans, the baddest motherfuckers to walk the face of the Earth, each and everyone of those bastards was buggering a young boy. Look it up. Were they gay? Hell no, they were masters of their universe and defined their behavior any way they damn well wanted. We might call them gay (or "bisexual"), but that would be imposing modern norms on an ancient culture.
My point is, all of this is moot. As someone said earlier, an individual's attraction to one gender or another (and the difference between sex and gender is a whole other conversation!) is both biological and cultural. Attraction is defined by both physical and cultural indicators. Homosexuality (or "gayness") is completely defined by cultural norms.
Hell, even Bonobo chimps have same-sex sexual interactions. Wonder if they ever call each other fags?
Ok, drunken lecture is now over...
Like a desperate thirst in a raging drought
- Fool Ishy
- Lord of Benders
- Posts: 480
- Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:58 am
- Location: Somewhere in Washington state...or is that the State of Washington? Damned if I know...
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
Yes...ThirstyDrunk wrote:QueerFool Ishy wrote:Ahh, sorry I missed this earlier! Damn drunken internet surfing!
Before I was a drunk I was working on my Phd in Biological Anthropology studying human evolution under one of the leading Population Geneticists of this generation. I can definitively tell you there is no gene for "gayness", or anything else for that matter. Phenotypes (the physical and behavioral expression of genotypes) are never based on a single gene. Hell, eye color is based on (from what I remember) over a dozen different loci (places on a chromosome). Each locus has numerous alleles (variations), so the "genes" involved are ridiculously high. And that's just for eye color!
Oh, and most loci (or genes) are used over and over during development, kind of like ingredients in recipes. You can use flour to make cake, cookies, biscuits, corn bread, whatever. Same with genes. So there really is no such thing as a "gene" for anything.
Now, in my opinion, "homosexuality" is a cultural definition. To wax Foucaultion and all post-modernistic, we as a culture define what we consider "deviant" behavior. Consider the ancient Spartans, the baddest motherfuckers to walk the face of the Earth, each and everyone of those bastards was buggering a young boy. Look it up. Were they gay? Hell no, they were masters of their universe and defined their behavior any way they damn well wanted. We might call them gay (or "bisexual"), but that would be imposing modern norms on an ancient culture.
My point is, all of this is moot. As someone said earlier, an individual's attraction to one gender or another (and the difference between sex and gender is a whole other conversation!) is both biological and cultural. Attraction is defined by both physical and cultural indicators. Homosexuality (or "gayness") is completely defined by cultural norms.
Hell, even Bonobo chimps have same-sex sexual interactions. Wonder if they ever call each other fags?
Ok, drunken lecture is now over...
Oops, I thought you said Queen, my bad.
Same difference... bitches!
Actually, I wouldn't mind be "homosexual" or "bisexual." At this point in my life, any "sexual" at all would be a good thing.
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." Oscar Wilde
- Savage
- Juicing Like Jackie
- Posts: 25434
- Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 1:16 am
- Location: All my bags are packed, I'm ready to go
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
OMG. I just died from the cute overload. You now owe Grumpy the cost of one funeral. With cool music, if you please. I especially liked the bits when the bunnies came upon the puzzlement stations. I could almost see the little wheels turning in their heads. And then came the one who balked, and had to led aside and talked to--threatened with a lifelong loss of carrots, or what not--and then it jumped like a champion. And of course, the spectators, applauding as if it were a golfing match, which is about comparable to the seriousness of this, as I see it. Except that bunnies are way funnier and better entertainment than people waving metal sticks about and slapping at balls.Screwball wrote:Here's some rabbits jumping over some stuff just to prove a point.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNPOdffkkLo
like tears in rain
- Savage
- Juicing Like Jackie
- Posts: 25434
- Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 1:16 am
- Location: All my bags are packed, I'm ready to go
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
And by the way, my first post died. No idea why, and no way to retrieve it. So much for the whole "The internet is forever. BEWARE!"
like tears in rain
- Wingman
- Chugging Like Churchill
- Posts: 5078
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:44 pm
- Location: on my way to a bar
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
well isn't that just too fucking convenient?Fool Ishy wrote: Before I was a drunk I was working on my Phd in Biological Anthropology studying human evolution under one of the leading Population Geneticists of this generation.
like woody allen said, "one thing you can say about bisexuality, it doubles your chances of a date on friday night."Fool Ishy wrote: At this point in my life, any "sexual" at all would be a good thing.
Stupid should hurt.
"We're better than mere people, we're DRUNKARDS."
--ThirstyDrunk
"We're better than mere people, we're DRUNKARDS."
--ThirstyDrunk
- DeeboCools
- King Cockeyed
- Posts: 1888
- Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 10:37 pm
- Location: Maryland
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
YOU WIN THE THREADFool Ishy wrote:Ahh, sorry I missed this earlier! Damn drunken internet surfing!
Before I was a drunk I was working on my Phd in Biological Anthropology studying human evolution under one of the leading Population Geneticists of this generation. I can definitively tell you there is no gene for "gayness", or anything else for that matter. Phenotypes (the physical and behavioral expression of genotypes) are never based on a single gene. Hell, eye color is based on (from what I remember) over a dozen different loci (places on a chromosome). Each locus has numerous alleles (variations), so the "genes" involved are ridiculously high. And that's just for eye color!
Oh, and most loci (or genes) are used over and over during development, kind of like ingredients in recipes. You can use flour to make cake, cookies, biscuits, corn bread, whatever. Same with genes. So there really is no such thing as a "gene" for anything.
Now, in my opinion, "homosexuality" is a cultural definition. To wax Foucaultion and all post-modernistic, we as a culture define what we consider "deviant" behavior. Consider the ancient Spartans, the baddest motherfuckers to walk the face of the Earth, each and everyone of those bastards was buggering a young boy. Look it up. Were they gay? Hell no, they were masters of their universe and defined their behavior any way they damn well wanted. We might call them gay (or "bisexual"), but that would be imposing modern norms on an ancient culture.
My point is, all of this is moot. As someone said earlier, an individual's attraction to one gender or another (and the difference between sex and gender is a whole other conversation!) is both biological and cultural. Attraction is defined by both physical and cultural indicators. Homosexuality (or "gayness") is completely defined by cultural norms.
Hell, even Bonobo chimps have same-sex sexual interactions. Wonder if they ever call each other fags?
Ok, drunken lecture is now over...
"S0briety diminishes, discriminates, and says no; drunkenness expands, unites, and says yes." -William James
- peetie44
- Juicing Like Jackie
- Posts: 10389
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:05 am
- Location: Belgium, Austin TX, SoCal, Branson MO, Cape Cod MA
Re: Grumpy have a theory, that I think is bullshit
That'll happen when you go into a bar called "The White Swallow."Chimneyfish wrote:I ended up in a gay bar on accident once too. Didn't realize it until I stood up and a guy asked if he could push my stool in.
"Man i once bought $101 worth of insect candy because it was free shipping on orders over 100 bucks." -- ThirstyDrunk
"I wanted a shark high on crack dumped into a piranha tank! I wanted college AD's to pull their human faces off, then dive at each other's lizard throats!" -- waahoohah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q01p7k6T ... e=youtu.be
"I wanted a shark high on crack dumped into a piranha tank! I wanted college AD's to pull their human faces off, then dive at each other's lizard throats!" -- waahoohah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q01p7k6T ... e=youtu.be