Comments on: A new blog for New Directions

By: Ann

Ann — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:19:01 +0000

Jayhuck,
me too – good night

By: Ann

Ann — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:15:52 +0000

I’m not sure about that Ann – I’m not usually attracted to things I can’t relate to or don’t understand

Jayhuck,
I am glad you quesitoned this –
I mean attraction usually begins because of physical attraction, however, it cannot be sustained unless an interest is formed – that only happens if you are curious about the individual and want to know more about them. This can sustain the attraction for a lifetime.
p.s. – I totally understand the attraction to geeks, especially if they are Jewish!

By: jayhuck

jayhuck — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:12:53 +0000

I agree with you Ann – I don’t think, now, that what you and I are talking about, or what you and Evan are talking about, is what Evan and I were talking about earlier – I’m off to bed 😉

By: Ann

Ann — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 05:09:33 +0000

I sometimes think it would be great to know WHY I am attracted to these things and then other times I think its best that that remain a mystery

Jayhuck,
You never have to worry about chiming in on any post I am involved with – I always value your input.
I have often looked back and wondered what it was about certain individuals that held my captivation compared to the kind of person I am attracted to now. I can pinpoint many similarities but also many differences. The one thing that remains consistant is the element of curiousity for that which I do not know – no matter how insignificant it is.

By: jayhuck

jayhuck — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:45:32 +0000

I’m starting to think maybe I should just go to bed – I apparently can’t form complete sentences anymore 😉

By: jayhuck

jayhuck — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:38:11 +0000

I’m not sure about that Ann – I’m not usually attracted to things I can’t relate to or don’t understand – for me I have to be able to relate and understand on some level in order for there to be some attraction – I think it really all depends on what we mean when we talk about what is unknown or known, or what we mean be being able to relate to or even what we mean when we say – lots of unknown and problems with definitions – not sure we’re all on the same page with all these either – I’m a little lost 🙂

By: Ann

Ann — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:33:14 +0000

I’m all ears
Evan,
🙂 and 😉

By: Ann

Ann — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:31:19 +0000

I believe that Bem’s idea that we are attracted to the unknown is simply one of many theories of attraction and orientation – it is NOT fact

Jayhuck,
I don’t know who Bem is (sorry) and just thought this (the unknown) was common knowledge. When the mind is stimulated with curiosity and of that which we do not know or cannot relate to, desire is stirred as well, often sexual.

By: jayhuck

jayhuck — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:25:44 +0000

Daryl Bem, as I understand his study, was trying to further the idea that the Environment played a larger role in determining orientation, which stands in contrast to the findings of this current study – I culled this from The Box Turtle Bulletin:
“But until now, the question has remained as to what came first, the orientation or the brain development.
To get round this, Savic and her colleague, Per Lindström, chose to measure brain parameters likely to have been fixed at birth.”

By: jayhuck

jayhuck — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 04:22:37 +0000

I thought you were trying to push Daryl Bem’s view, which is different and with not nearly as much emphasis on the biological/genetic. My apologies!!!! This study adds to the growing body of evidence that homosexuality is largely a biologically “fixed trait” 🙂