What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

The declaration from Jason Collins that he is gay also caused some people to note that his identical twin brother is not. That led someone else (link not handy) to review some studies on correlation among identical twins on how many of them had the same sexual orientation (in other words, is "homosexuality" genetic?)

upon review of the evidence beyond this one set of twins, if i recall correctly, it appears that statistical studies of identical and fraternal twins have found that "homosexuality" is not highly correlated with heredity, though the correlation is twice as high for men as it is for women. Some have interpreted this to mean that there might be a "predisposition" based on genetic factors that requires an environmental trigger.
Showers with naked men?
 
Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

Why is virginity on the wedding night no longer an admired trait?
 
Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/mY711HJK7pg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>.

Unrelated to the topic, but I love this bit:
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/X4rIE3EscDw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

why? Is it a good thing?
Well, IMO,it has always been a good thing but much more valued in females than males. Males were expected to go out and sow their wild oats. Women were expected to be virgins because that ensured the pregnancy was a result of the marriage, not another union right before the marriage. When women didn't have the consequence of pregnancy the deterrent was gone. Of course the risk of STDs is still there (that's what condoms are for) and much higher is females and males but it took awhile for people to consider STDs as risk.

Medically the risk is much higher with early sexual activity both for STD and early pregnancy so the later the better. As a woman who grew up in a time where equality was novel, or in some places non-existent, I understand the cultural backlash of what is good for the gander is good for the goose.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top