jskains wrote:Buffalo wrote:Yes, it's too bad he included a few jabs. It gave you a way to weasel out of actually responding to his argument.
His argument is false. I do not need to know a man or woman's sexual preferences to know their contributions. Do you need to know who butt-screwed who or who liked oral or who liked to fondle goats or who liked to dress in candy underwear to know a person. It's the liberal community that is so hardcore about exposing the bedroom affairs of others. Conservatives generally think those are private matters not for public consumption.
by the way, do you want to tell us all your dirty little bedroom activities? I bet it gives me a better view of your "human" experience.
JMS
Sexual orientation could be examined as a subset of identity studies. As homosexuals contribute through their own filter of this identity, it is possible that to understand their motivations, and their influence on history, we must understand the identity and how its construction has changes through time.
Or it could be reflected in theories that deal with hegemony. Could homosexuality be an expression in response to a proposed structure? Only way to know is study the individuals and their counter culture.
Or it could be a symptom of a crack in various class structures, for example showing the resolve of class identity is soft and call Marxist approaches into question.
Or it could really inform gender studies and how and why genders are created by cultures over time. This could lend light as to this potential identity as well.
Or a number of other important implications that only homosexual studies could help the historian with, that is, if bigots who should be mocked to scorn don't feel that the history and development of two to ten percent of the human population is unworthy of study in itself...
Willful ignorant bigotry.