Nina’s Hypothesis of Human Sexuality part 1 Birth to Population Demographics

I am a science buff and a fiction writer. I studied anthropology and many of the soft sciences at college and my father has a Masters Degree in Behavioral Psychology.

So, growing up, I learned about behavioral studies and was encouraged to experiment and explore the world around me. I was encouraged to be curious about the world, to learn and to express myself. I grew up in the 1970’s in the lower mainland of British Columbia and I went to an elementary and high school in the Canadian public education system, where I did a broad range of subjects and I continued my studies at college, university and I continue to read a variety of science publications ranging from archeology to psychology.

My work history has allowed me to observe people in a range of settings and most significantly, I have been a Federal Government employee, who’s work has been largely to collect, analyze and collate massive amounts of data.

I am also a writer of several formats and a graphic artist – so I am a lab coat and a art smock at the same time. Additionally, as a lesbian and atheist – I am not really bound by traditional thinking or social conventions.

With that introduction – here’s my drawings and thoughts about the impact of birth order, inter-generational relationships on sexuality.

Where it begins:

This drawing is an over view – at the top corner we have the biological parents represented with the 4 potential off-spring types – pink and blue circles represent heterosexual gender offspring and the purple circles are for queer/transgendered offspring with birth gender represented by the chromosomes.

The nurture factors are represented by colour lines.

The orange box represents childhood – the 3 colour line the sexuality/gender of the child, with gold representing the optimal ideal conditions being non abuse, house/food/financial security, a supportive environment where learning is encouraged and quality values taught – basically how educational, artistic, social responsibility, compassion/tolerance and other ethics are taught without children being limited to oppressive gender role traditions and being able to balance protectiveness vs allowing age appropriate decisions to be made by the child.

The purple box repeats this concepts as experienced in the teenage phase of development. Again, non-abuse, socialization with peers, age appropriate separation and individualized from parents and positive reinforcement of risk assessment, value judgements and sexuality development and access to education, arts, athletics and other social and intellectual development factors.

Females have an XX and males have an XY – and the Y is basically an X with one quarter of the sequence missing – this is why the drawing indicates females as 100% genetically complete and males at 87.% – this is just basic math – and in my view, why women are more adaptive multi-taskers and more sexually fluid over their lifetimes while males are more linear task oriented thinkers and hard wired in their sexuality.

In this image, I formula human life – all potential life begins with the egg – and the potential life is realized with the fertilization from a sperm delivering the other half of the genetics – either an X or a Y.

Now, as an aside, while a fertilized egg is the start of the potential human life, this is not a compelling moral or legal argument for the rights, bodily integrity or decision/self determination of the women to suddenly be suspended in favor of a mass of cells smaller than the period at the end of this sentence, and especially not in favor of the religious or personal views of anyone who is not the woman in question. I specify potential human life because there are many reasons why a fertilized egg may not result in a viable offspring.

This drawing represents the born and viable offspring – the majority will be heterosexual male or females with some minority percentage being lesbian, gay, bisexual, asexual and other rarer non-heterosexual  in terms of sexuality as well as transgendered, gender outlaws and gender non-conformists – including hermaphrodites.

So our genetics give us our nature and what happens in childhood – does not remain in childhood, but is the nurturing basis that forms our personalities through our lives – how we deal with adversity, manage interpersonal relationships to our interests, hobbies and everything about us as individuals being socially capable and functional.

I have always thought that our nature gives us our potential and our nurture provides our limitations – which we can then either fall within or strive to exceed – again depending on personality, experiences through life and social opportunities.

The black box in the drawing is a reminder that there are in a normal population where gender selection abortion or female infanticide does not occur, that there are 104 male infants born for every 100 female infants – and that in a normal population in a secular democratic nation with modern medicine access, 6 male infants will not reach their first birthday – this is naturally and not including infant deaths owing to neglect, abuse or intentional abandonment following birth. In a normal population, females comprise 51% of the population. Which means that women are the majority….

Pop Psychology – women are cats and men are dogs
the top row is women – het, queer and male identified
the bottom row is men – female identified, queer and het

so then extrapolating that to population demographics and likely to rare outcomes:

Born what way?

We are born and we are taught to beleive many things – but until we are taught the beliefs, we don’t already have belief or sense of the beliefs – childhood is learning what the norms are for your family and what the range of norms are in your respective society

the question is whether we continue learning to put context on our childhood

or whether we stay as children and don’t question or seek meaningful answers

We make friends as children and engage in play at other children’s homes – and we see the differences and the similarities. So we begin to develop a sense of what’s normal and what’s normal for me.

But if a childhood is sub-optimal, poverty, abuse, absentee parent(s), or we don’t learn to distinguish between social norms and personal norms – or we learn that our normal was sub-optimal and no adults intervened to correct the situation – then our experience of society is very different than the norms.

Our ability to accept social norms is tainted by experience into cynicism or perpetual victimhood or perpetual aggressor behaviour – as in out for number 1, except that number 1 is unworthy, so relationships become complicated even before a second person is connected to.

We are born as information and experience sponges – we are able to recognize faces and voices very early and we learn how to understand the facial expressions and vocal tones – which is why, with just a baby engaged tone of voice, you can have a baby happily cooing and eating while you  recite the phone book.

So it’s the experiences and the quality of care-taking that shapes what we beleive about ourselves, the world and our place in the world – that puts the limitations on our potential. Nurture informs nature.

So, we really do need to think of the children – think about the messages they get in society.

And I wonder, how people who think like Michele Bachman can look at a child and tell them that their family, that they experience as loving and is their whole world – and say that their parents shouldn’t be allowed to be together or have a child.

How can people who claim to follow a god of love – look at the families that gays and lesbians have created and beleive that ours are lesser than their families.

That our children are being harmed when it’s us who give them love and comfort and the religious people who judge and act as if their judgement is legally valid, when it’s religiously derived and not legally valid.

Seriously, if they really beleive that god sorts everyone out – then leave people to live their lives as they see fit.

I can only think that this need to make people’s lives miserable is because religious proponents secretly suspect there is no god, so they have to make the sinners suffer now, in case there is no final judgement.

After all, how many other nations have allowed gays and lesbians marriage and not been subjected to Armageddon?