Doctor testing drug to 'prevent' lesbianism, interest in 'male careers'

Originally posted by kerrichin
another idea here why are they so concerned about women not wanting children what about men.
there are people out there that dont go gooy over ickle babies

Mainly because men can't have babies and they only have to be involved (physically, not morally) in the fun part at the start of the whole process.

Anyway, I doubt that that is what this research is all about. As stated in a previous post, it's more than likely more about trying to prevent empowered women and to keep them "in their place".

IMO if women ruled the world, it would be a much more peaceful place... 3 weeks out of the month at least anyway! Sorry, couldn't resist.

reply to post by nik1halo


i dont know about peaceful bitchy id say

Originally posted by kerrichin
reply to post by nik1halo

 

i dont know about peaceful bitchy id say

Yeah, but they would be bitching so much, they wouldn't have time to fight.

I wonder if you could solve international crises with a mud wrestling event......... *goes off into a daydream*............

While i dont agree with this....what ever it is. I have wondered why they stopped looking at homosexuality as a mental disorder.

I mean.....pedophilia is a mental thing. according to the studies i have read. And before the gay mafia jumops down my throat im not saying homosexuality is as bad as pedophilia.

What i am saying is that i find it weird that they stopped researching homosexuality in the brain.

Take transgenderism as a example........that is a mental freaking illness. i ont care what you say. If you are a girl who thinks you are a boy...stuck in a boys body.....thats a mental illness. Even the whole premise reeks of a mental illness.

Of course Doctors and scientists stopped researching that line of thought....why? POLITICLE CORRECTNESS. The LGBT community obviously did not like being thought of as being 'crazy'.

Its all PC crap anyways.

I like tomboys myself....in fact i like a dominate women in the bedroom *gets out chains and whips*

Yes this sounds like some mad nazi super sexist in the dark castle high on the hill...lightning flashing....Dr Manenstein. ..Dark Dark Manenstein.....working off a governement grant naturaly.

First of all, how do they know what percentage of the population of women have moderately elevated androgens WITHOUT having any "negative" side affects? People dont tend to be tested for hormonal inmbalances unless it is a problem for them. Which could very well skew our idea of what androgens do and dont do when moderately elevated. I could not find one piece of data the showed the percentage of all females with elevated androgens, likely, because it does not exist. For all we know elevated androgens are a correllary, not a cause.

I also think, in regard to your question about tampering with the natural order, that it should be obvious that we are. Variation is necessary in a species if it is to withstand the natural tests of time. There seem to be quite a few homosexuals, male and female, with an interest in having children, so it isnt as if they are endangering our numbers in any significant way. In fact some well known biologists are calling the fact that women are demonstrating a willingness to have fewer children as a whole the "salvation of the species." So why we would them want to pump up artificially this desire in a world where resources are becoming scarce, I have no earthly idea.

Perhaps we should just leave people the hell alone. I personally find hyper feminine women oozing all over themselves about babies and hair, and clothes (ways to make themselves candidates for impregnation) to be annoying in the extreme. Thank goodness for variety in the species.

I haven't read the whole article, and it is worded badly.

But perhaps it is taken slightly out of context? Mmmm worded offensively though.

en.wikipedia.org...

I know a little about the topic, and I know for some people it's not neccessarily a good. I'm sure other people know about it, too but for some its actually quite stressful.

reply to post by Pinke



No matter what context this is taken in, it still doesn't justify

the fact that this procedure would be done before a child is

even born. This is not a consenting adult who has had trouble

coping with this so called chemical imbalance or mental illness

(as it is so crassly put) and would welcome relief from its

symptoms.

That being said, they are trying to change a person into

someone she is not supposed to be. Picture this, in a few years

from now you walk in for a pre-natal appointment and are

offered all these options for engineering your child to your own

standards. Gone are the days of individuality and diversity

which make life so interesting and are probably the reason we

have advanced so far technologically and culturally.



[edit on 6/30/2010 by Hatcookie]

Why is it so important what kind of career a woman wants, or whether she has an instinct to be motherly, or be a girly girl ? Sounds like some major agenda going on here other than fixing a possible defect.

And since when is a woman that shows an interest in a "man's career" a lesbian ? "Gender-related behavior" hogwash. When I was a kid I liked to play with dolls, etc, but I also liked to play with cars, guns, trains, and I was always outside with the boys climbing trees, jumping fences, fishing, etc. I never liked dresses, and heels, no way (I'm tall enough without em) and who needs the pain, makeup nah, don't like it, don't need it. I'm a jeans & t-shirt hair in a ponytail fresh faced kinda girl, doesn't make me any less of a woman, neither does the fact that I can take a carburetor apart clean it and put it back together again, change the starter, or any other number of things on a car, and it sure doesn't make me a lesbian.

Didn't stop me from wanting kids, I have two sons, good men both of them & two grandkids. I know plenty of girly girls that don't want kids, and they're not lesbians, and I know some lesbians that do want kids. This is something that could set women back a couple of generations or more, they need to leave well enough alone and let nature take it's course.

If a woman doesn't have the mothering instinct and doesn't want kids, so be it leave her alone, she wouldn't be a good mother anyway. Trying to force an instinct and desire on females that isn't naturally there could have devastating effects for all concerened.

I read this article and all I could think about was the original movie, Stepford Wives

I wonder if Monsanto has anything to do with this

reply to post by chise61


It's this generation's version of Eugenics.


I HAVE noticed an increasing level of "back to the kitchen" advertisement in New York City. This is just my own views, but it does seem that there is an agenda.

personally, my mother taught me a great lesson. Any nation that throws away half its work force is doomed to fail.

As I wrote back on page 1 as the first response, it CAN be done. All humans start off generic XX chromosome black slabs. Small amounts of Chemicals that are produces from the DNA being converted into proteins then tell it to become XY or stay XX. After that, more chemicals than the number of humans that have ever been born adjust it. Then after that,birth, while the child is growing up, more chemicals set the personality.

So yea, it is possible. But is it responsible? As a Parent? No.

My view is a bit more conservative perhaps, but I do not think the parent should force their wished on a child's genes or livelihood. Of course, for me this means Abortion is wrong, genetic modification is wrong, and many other things are wrong. pretty much the only thing I can understand is preventing crippling diseases. But to make the child a housewife? For me, that's as bad as abortion.

Now maybe I'm old fashion for my youth, but this doctor is just doing what people want. More control over their perfect little lives of bliss. Control from a government, control from parents to the very behavior of their children. Is there really a difference?

The ultimate endpoint is a Spartan-like society of Eugenics where the poor and unfit have unknowingly committed suicide and where only a very few amount of supermen and superwoman remain. yea sure its great in the end. But how many died to get there? How much diversity did you kill to get there?


In the end, it's soft fascism.

That's really quite an odd little piece. I had no idea that there was a such thing as a "male career". Also, why in the world would anybody want to do this? The thing they are trying to cure seems like a good thing to me, what with the extreme overpopulation we have at the moment.

I see nothing wrong with the fact that a female might not want to be married, have kids and traditional female jobs. I would rather a woman see this in herself and not do it then to enter into something because of family, social pressures, etc and then not be cut out for it. That leads to depression in the women which in turns effects others in their lives such as thier children. No child wants a Mother that didn't really want to be a Mother - this comes from an unwanted child , that being myself - I always knew my Mother didn't really want me - I was abused and how many times thru anger did she tell me she didn't want me. Strong be the woman who follows her own footsteps.