[LMB] heteronormativity, was LMB - Modern masters etc.

Marc Wilson marc.wilson at gmx.co.uk
Tue Jul 7 12:17:19 BST 2015


On Mon, 6 Jul 2015 19:56:03 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard at brazee.net>
wrote:

>
>> On Jul 6, 2015, at 5:23 PM, Matthew George <matt.msg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> You can Humpty-Dumpty language as long as you like, but heterosexuality is
>> a norm in both the statistical sense and the evaluative one, the latter for
>> the simple reason that a society that fails to procreate sufficiently
>> rapidly ceases to exist.
>
>That latter clause may have been applicable in some marginal societies, but certainly doesn’t apply in most of the world today.    We have lots of examples in the animal kingdom where non-reproductive behavior has shown to be non-harmful and even beneficial.   And while we haven’t moved into Ethos technology, we do have homosexual people today who reproduce.
>
>So I’m calling you on that statement - please provide some evidence that homosexual behavior endangers sufficient procreation.

We're at least 3 or 4 billion beyond any conceivable[1] worry about
that.

[1] Yes, I know, but I left it in. :)


More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list