Slashdot Mirror
Monkeys Pay for Monkey Porn
An anonymous reader writes "Give a monkey some spending money, and he'll blow it on pictures of women monkeys. He'll also pay to see dominant monkeys. But you'll have to pay him to look at inferior monkeys. That's the upshot of a study out of Duke that was designed to explore the 'social machinery of the brain with an eye toward helping autism patients.' Next up -- seriously -- the researchers want to run the same test on Joe Sixpack (sans the monkey business)."
Would there be anything wrong with this sentence: give a human some spending money and he'll blow it on pictures of female humans?
I guess I'm objecting to the notion that being male is the norm.
Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
Watching sports is not a sexual behaviour, but rather a herd behaviour. It strengthens the bond to the "herd", in this case the followers of the same team. It also appeals to the competitive side of humans, since sports (usually? always?) are a competition. It's hardly a display of gay sexuality.
Nah, I lump rabid sports fans in the same catagory of Star Trek fans.
Let's look at this.
1. Both fans get dressed up as their favorite character/player.
2. They both will buy lots of memorabilia.
3. Both are always glued to the TV to watch their show/game.
4. Both talk non-stop with other people about their show/game...even with people that couldn't give a shit.
5. Both know minute trivia about their favorite show/game.
But one is generally accepted and welcomed in pursuing their passion while the other is shunned and joked and beat-up by the other.
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
A lot of guys already do this - they pay to see ESPN -it's considered dominant males by those who watch it.
Personally, I think most sports fans are a little "gay". They'd rather watch a bunch of sweaty guys jumping all over eachother, than, say fashion TV - where hot models walk down the runway.
Insightfull start but why did you flush it down the toilet with nimwit remark. It even counters your starts.
1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
There's a subtle sexualisation of contact
The sexualisation happens in your head, dude. Physical contact is not inherently sexual, it's just christianity's fucked up relationship with sexuality that makes it so.
In many cultures it is perfectly natural to take someone by the hand to show them the way somewhere, even if both parties are adult males. Most americans would consider it "gay". Now what sort of mental condition and view of sexuality does that require?
Not that many other cultures don't have their own serious hangups, of course.
sudo ergo sum
Well, it used to be christianity - now it's mostly various under-occupied university types who seek to sexualise pretty much everything.
The problem here is that your son is going to have to live and socialize with people who are not autists. While a "cure" might be impossible, it certainly is possible to come up with ways of making it easier for people with autism to interact with those around them.
I'd say that rather your view of Christianity is rather fucked up. Somehow in Eastern, Orthodox Europe it is OK for males to kiss for greeting in the lips, somehow in Poland, supposedly extreme-Catholic country, it is OK for males to walk and talk hugging each other. OK, maybe walking hand in hand would be considered gay, or rather "feminine", not even gay, but many other physical contacts between males are really OK, without any homesexual undertones.
AFAIK it is the same (or even more) in Italy, Spain, Greece. I don't know...
So, have you considered, that this fuck-up happened rather in Anglosaxon culture than in "christianity"? OK, it might be something protestant in the background, but I don't know enough about Protestants to draw any conclusions.
And Christian (well, at least Catholic and Orthodox) view of sexuality, while it might seem restrictive from the outside, is coherent and based on viable basis. Of course, there are some devots who still think it is much worse to show a tit in TV than to show dead bodies of terrorist bombing victims, but I don't think it has much to do with Christianity either.
So before you rant, please do some investigation in the subject.
Raf
Lovely. Listen, is your boy high functioning, or low? Is he the next Temple Grandin, or is he one of the ones that rocks incessantly and can't dress himself at the age of ten?
Just because you find your boy easy to deal with doesn't mean everyone else's kid is the same. Some autistics can survive in the world, many can't. For them amelioration of the effects means not having a "normal" life, but having a shot at any kind of independence.
All the technology in the world won't hide your lack of vision, talent, or understanding.
Simply put, I am a person with a vision "disorder". My sight is not 20-20. I am sure that everyone knows someone who meets this criteria. This is most likely an inherited trait. Should I consider it part of who I am, and never learn to read/drive/etc. Or should I get these new-fangled things called glasses (or contacts, or worse, laser-surgery) so that I can function 'normally' in society. The parent poster should read his own sig. Just because it's new doesn't mean it's bad. I'm sure there are autistic individuals that exist that would like nothing more than to be 'normal'.
Thank you. I felt like that was the point someone needed to make. I've spent nearly five years working with autistic kids, and am now working for a study doing public health surveillance for autism and other disabilities.
Autism *Spectrum* Disorders cover such a broad range of levels of functionality, it really isn't fair to use the term "autistic" when someone says "Children with autism do not need to be cured." A lot of doctors have differing views on what actually constitutes a pervasive developmental disorder, and there can be motivations behind getting the diagnosis for your child.
A child I work with has broken bones in his feet and fractured bones in his face due to self-injurious behavior. He could stand to be cured, if it was possible. But if a child has problems with eye contact and perseverates on trains and is called autistic, it is a lot easier to say "There's nothing wrong with autism. YOU people are the ones who are going to need to change!"
My agenda is "keeping it real", which means that I don't get along well with far left socialist liberals and far right Bible-thumping republicans. How can all the people in the middle get along when you have both sides trying to take over the world? They're troublemakers.