Wouldn’t be the first time authors were misrepresented, misquoted, misunderstood. Read the entire article.
It’s a spectrum.
The problems with quotes like this being bounced back and forth between people who have zero expertise - you’ve decided that “other biological influences” doesn’t count, and that 25% is meaningless. On what basis?
All the while you’re deliberately ignoring that matter of a little humanity in how we treat others, who are different.
Big tough AK15 waving macho-machos, scared to death of a few queens trying to make it through the night. Pathetic.
No, it really doesn’t. It is still mentally damaging, but then again, it seems to me many religion like mentally damaged people, who enjoy raping young girls.
Yes, the article says it’s not the final word on the cause of homosexuality. There is rarely a final word in science. But we can’t ignore the findings just because it contradicts the fashionable “born this way” mentality.
If you mean they will outbreed us , you may be right.
But they don’t outlive us anywhere near.
Nation Continues to Age as It Becomes More Diverse
The median age in Muslim-majority countries, for example, rose from 19 in 1990 to 24 in 2010 and is expected to climb to 30 by 2030. But it will still be lower than the median age in North America, Europe and other more-developed regions, which rose from 34 to 40 between 1990 and 2010 and is projected to be 44 in 2030.Jan 27, 2011
Here’s why your biological age is a better health indicator than your actual age
Mar 20, 2023
With the unprecedented growth of the world’s aging population, I believe that figuring out ways to measure biological age and how to maintain or delay its advance is critical not only for individual health, but also for the social, political and economic health of our society. Detecting rapid agers early on presents an opportunity to delay, change or even reverse the trajectory of biological aging.
No, they won’t. The young a girl has a baby, the more likely she will die, because she’s not physically mature enough to have a baby. Maternal death goes up as well as fetal death the younger the girl is. Of course, the older the female is, does not mean that maternal and fetal death is 0. Anytime a woman becomes pregnant, it is a risk to life of both the woman and the offspring growing in her uterus. All it means is that the younger the female is, the higher the death rate. A less advance species, which is what you are encouraging by wanting 12 y.o. girls to become pregnant, cannot outlive a more advanced species if if the host (the female) of the parasite (blastocyst, embryo, fetus…) dies during pregnancy or childbirth. The society, which pushes procreation to sometime in the 20s or later is more likely to survive and prosper.
“no final word” is a principle of science. That’s why I read past the conclusion, into the parts about how many studies have been done, the methodologies, and thoughts on what needs to be done next.
“born this way” is not science. It comes from the people who are reporting that they don’t fit the non-scientific categories of the past. Those are the categories that were claimed to be 100% factual by whatever elite there was and are still being said to be the only possible categories by people who are in charge of making laws. They aren’t looking at the details of scientific studies and they don’t want anyone else learning about those studies or discussing them and certainly not acting on them.
A real live human being doesn’t report to us that their DNA is a certain mix, or that their hormone levels are outside of an average. They just know how they feel and what they remember. Real people have been reporting that for as long as we have recorded reports, and we see it in nature, so it’s pretty safe to assume it’s part of being a mammal. Now, since it has become safe to say it (well, safer) and some lawmakers and medical professionals are listening, those stuck in the past have to come up with new narratives, stuff like “woke” or “fashionable”.
It’s backward. I lived through the time when it was acceptable to harm someone that was different. I saw it in the schoolyard and read about much worse in the news. Change came because of that harm, from laws protecting equal employment to grandmothers accepting their gay grandchildren. But, because it’s different, there are still those who can’t accept it, so they made up how they are harmed and how understanding the science of sexuality is harmful to children. I hope I live long enough to see that fade away.
Early marriage does not necessarily mean a new baby 9 months after the wedding. At any rate, even with the risks involved, those cultures have existed far longer than ours has.
Discover Magazine gave me this one free article. It’s more comprehensive than anything I’ve seen. It keeps repeating that sex is not binary
I copied the text, not all the links. This bit is the highest irony
Intersex is an umbrella term for individuals born possessing both ovaries and testes, or with some combination of male and female reproductive anatomy. Rather than embrace intersexuality as part and parcel of human sexual variation, Western doctors have long taken it upon themselves to surgically alter the genitalia of newborns so that they fit the binary. This is done even though research has established that most of the time these variations are perfectly healthy, according to Rubin: “There is nothing pathological or abnormal [about them], even though they may be atypical.” These procedures, which can have devastating consequences, may now be on the decline as activists wage legislative battles to prevent them.
So, it was the conservative thing to do to change a child’s body when the doctor and parents thought it was wrong, but now, when a young person can discuss it and the science is better, they aren’t allowed.
This argument keeps coming up in these discussions, and I just repeat the fact that a very small percentage of people do not fit the binary understanding of sex. Sexual identity is simple for most humans, so there is no reason overhaul the whole system.
An analogy would be something like cancer screening; sometimes young people do develop cancer, but generally they don’t. It’s a disease of older age. That’s why doctors don’t recommend screening for young people. The field of oncology doesn’t have to broken down and rebuilt because of the rare young cancer patient.
Iranian culture is just one where child marriage is allowed. (The recent protests there did not accomplish much of anything, fwiw). The Islamic world isn’t even the biggest offender with child marriage – that would be the hunter-gatherer cultures.
