5 ms·
In the first paragraph, did I understand the author right in saying that happy homosexual couples are a recent invention? "[other couples] of more recent vinta
by lolc 10y ago
In the first paragraph, did I understand the author right in saying that happy homosexual couples are a recent invention?
"[other couples] of more recent vintage with chromosomes exactly matched,"
To me, literal reading of that fragment would posit identical twins as married couples. Any other interpretations?
- jplasmeier 10y agoBy matching the author implies couples with XX,XX and XY,XY chromosomes, not necessarily identical chromosomes. Though, it is an odd way of introducing queer couples and does conflate gender with sex chromosomes (and intersex people _do_ exist).
- ozy 10y ago> and intersex people _do_ exist Chromosomally speaking, or by self identification?
- trprog 10y agoBoth I would think. Genetic chimerism is a thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics) Not sure what other conditions can lead to being intersex but I imagine there are others.
- lexhaynes 10y agoXXY (Klinefelter's) and X (Turner's syndrome) are both very real chromosomal intersex conditions, though perhaps intersex isn't the PC word.
- milkmiruku 10y agoAFAIK it is the PC term for most. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex
- TheOtherHobbes 10y agoOnly a meta interp - the tone is literary virtue signalling. It seems to be oblique PR for people who want other people to know they read a lot. Honestly, I couldn't find any non-trite content among all the references and allusions. There's certainly a lot that could be said about families, but nothing of life-changing interest or value is being said here.
- zamalek 10y agoI disagree strongly that homosexual couples are recent "invention" given that it is so easy to hypothesize how it could occur as a evolutionary response, and that it occurs in as many as 1500 species[1]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
- lolc 10y agoWell, the author was talking about happy couples in that list. In my interpretation it says that there were no happy, gay couples before our time. That is both wrong and ignorant. The author was too busy minding his obtuse style to pay attention to meaning I'd say.
- inimino 10y agoThe context is not couples but specifically marriages.
- lolc 10y agoAh yes, that escaped me. In that context the statement is acceptable. Thanks for clarifying that.