[lbo-talk] dixor

[Kelley]

At 12:43 PM 10/6/03 -0400, Luke Weiger wrote:
>Justin wrote:
>
> > There area number of really fundamental confusions in
> > this discussion. Ever since what's-is-name's work on
> > "gay brains,"
>
>LeVay.
>
> > it has become increasingly popular among
> > some GLB people to insist that being gay is
> > biologically determined. The idea that it's not a
> > matter of choice is supposed to remove sexual
> > orientation from the realm of moral evaluation. Being
> > GLB is supposed to be something one can't help.
>
>I wrote a paper for my sociology of gender course that made many (if not
>all) of the same points you make in this post.  However, the
>constructionists are at least as misguided as the essentialists: to discount
>the possibility that genetic or hormonal differences have anything to do
>with whether one becomes a homosexual is an act of faith.

i'm curious: what social constructionists make this claim? i'm prepared to 
believe that there are a subgroup who do make these sorts of claims, but 
most of the ones i'm familiar with do not discount biological facts.

kelley