When did this happen? Without warning, I am now the go-to guy for every contentious discussion of which anyone in the office wishes to be a part. Recently, I have started to be hit with one line points of argument which make very little sense when flippantly thrown at me out of context and which make even less sense when given context by the aggressor.
Do you think you're born gay or do you turn gay? What do you make of the 2012 end of the world? Both of these minor issues were thrown at me within the space of three hours last week from co-workers. Now, there are quick answers (“It's not for me to decide” and “It's bullshit”, taken in order), but that wouldn't do the combative nature of the questions any justice. I was asked in earnest to shed light on the subjects at hand. Although, with my reputation for being opinionated, loud and, well, a prick, I think they asked me for entertainment purposes more than anything else, like asking the drunken conspiracy-theory-guy in the pub what really happened to Princess Diana and then standing back to watch the show.
The questions in the office came fully loaded, in that an opinion had already been formed by the questioner. “I just don't see how there is a gene that can make you gay”. “What about that other planet that will throw everything in the universe off?”.
Now, I love debate, and arguing, like a fat kid loves cake. But my side of these discussions was remarkably easy. Too easy in fact. Question: What does the research tell us?
There. Simple.
Now, let's be clear about the difference between listening to an expert and listening to the research. You can find an 'expert' to tell you anything. Hell, you can find an 'expert' who will tell you that it is a biological fact the the brains of black people are smaller than the brains of white people, or that we don't know how magnets work (thank you, Insane Clown Posse). However, listening to the research is something that the interested and impartial scientific community gives as its gift to the world.
Am I smart enough to know through my own endeavour whether being straight or gay is biological, environmental or, like bisexuality, a bit of both? No, of course not. I have neither the time nor the expertise to fully research such a complex subject, containing biological, psychological and sociological aspects. I do know, however, that there are two extreme theories on each end of the spectrum, with a multitude of other theories in between. What I do think is that the scientific community has researched the subject, with hypotheses hypothesised, experiments performed, data collected, conclusions drawn, papers presented and then torn to shreds by a team of peers who would like nothing more than for the person presenting the paper to be made to look as ignorant as a Scientologist, rather than a scientist. The researcher then has to defend their conclusions. Amazing, right?
You throw the majesty of Google into that mix and you remove the need for my opinion on whether the guy in the bar who is really loving the Queen track that just came on the jukebox loves 'We Are The Champions' because it represents a part of him which is as unchangeable as the colour of his eyes, or because his dad didn't pay enough attention to him as a teenager.
Of course, the Mayan calender, end of the world scenario takes significantly less time to discuss. Another planet that the Government is keeping secret? The first time in thousands of years that the entire galaxy will be in the southern region of the Milky Way? Come and ask me again on 22nd December 2012. I'm sure we'll both be around.
Do you think you're born gay or do you turn gay? What do you make of the 2012 end of the world? Both of these minor issues were thrown at me within the space of three hours last week from co-workers. Now, there are quick answers (“It's not for me to decide” and “It's bullshit”, taken in order), but that wouldn't do the combative nature of the questions any justice. I was asked in earnest to shed light on the subjects at hand. Although, with my reputation for being opinionated, loud and, well, a prick, I think they asked me for entertainment purposes more than anything else, like asking the drunken conspiracy-theory-guy in the pub what really happened to Princess Diana and then standing back to watch the show.
The questions in the office came fully loaded, in that an opinion had already been formed by the questioner. “I just don't see how there is a gene that can make you gay”. “What about that other planet that will throw everything in the universe off?”.
Now, I love debate, and arguing, like a fat kid loves cake. But my side of these discussions was remarkably easy. Too easy in fact. Question: What does the research tell us?
There. Simple.
Now, let's be clear about the difference between listening to an expert and listening to the research. You can find an 'expert' to tell you anything. Hell, you can find an 'expert' who will tell you that it is a biological fact the the brains of black people are smaller than the brains of white people, or that we don't know how magnets work (thank you, Insane Clown Posse). However, listening to the research is something that the interested and impartial scientific community gives as its gift to the world.
Am I smart enough to know through my own endeavour whether being straight or gay is biological, environmental or, like bisexuality, a bit of both? No, of course not. I have neither the time nor the expertise to fully research such a complex subject, containing biological, psychological and sociological aspects. I do know, however, that there are two extreme theories on each end of the spectrum, with a multitude of other theories in between. What I do think is that the scientific community has researched the subject, with hypotheses hypothesised, experiments performed, data collected, conclusions drawn, papers presented and then torn to shreds by a team of peers who would like nothing more than for the person presenting the paper to be made to look as ignorant as a Scientologist, rather than a scientist. The researcher then has to defend their conclusions. Amazing, right?
You throw the majesty of Google into that mix and you remove the need for my opinion on whether the guy in the bar who is really loving the Queen track that just came on the jukebox loves 'We Are The Champions' because it represents a part of him which is as unchangeable as the colour of his eyes, or because his dad didn't pay enough attention to him as a teenager.
Of course, the Mayan calender, end of the world scenario takes significantly less time to discuss. Another planet that the Government is keeping secret? The first time in thousands of years that the entire galaxy will be in the southern region of the Milky Way? Come and ask me again on 22nd December 2012. I'm sure we'll both be around.
Comments
Post a Comment