Germany�s civilian homosexual population was defenseless and could therefore be a useful punching bag: police and military could dissipate aggression that might otherwise--and more justifiably--have been directed against the German leadership itself. So full-scale official persecution of homosexuals became politically expedient. And, at that point, began the chapter of the Nazi story that American popular culture circa 2007 was willing to recall.
While some academicians may affect disdain for popular culture (and while popular culture, in fact, often deserves disdain), mass media is important because it intimidates and influences politicians; it affects politicians, politics, and public policy.
Indeed, it intimidates academicians, as well. In 2007, few medical science academicians�at least few in non-religious schools--had any thought of challenging the popular rendition of the homosexual issue. And some in religious colleges may have been constrained in using evolutionary ideas in discussing the issue of homosexuality. As a net result, scientific work work having to do with sexual issues was compromised. Here we'll try to supply some of the objectivity that we thought was missing. Oral sex is discussed elsewhere on this site and we'll take a look at AIDS reserach in the next section.
But scientists who value their legacy should look to history and take a lesson from the pseudo-science that was produced under Stalin and Hitler.
In 2007 there was at least one authentic voice. It wasn�t in academia proper but in broadcasting. It was the voice of Dr. Laura Schlessinger, an Orthodox Jew with a Ph.D. in physiology. She was willing to say things that were reasonable, both in the light of Jewish twentieth century history and of older Jewish tradition. She had to endure a lot of negativism and personal attacks against her, and in my opinion, deserved a lot of credit.
Why were so many others silent? Ultimately, I think they were intimidated by Hollywood and perhaps by a desire to be seen as having a humane or gregarious outlook, and as being in tune with the spririt of the times. But, while the spirit of their times, was perhaps not unusually irrational or malevolent, neither was it precisely a golden age of reason or of progress.
Is sexual repression medically unhealthy? Thomas Mann was a writer with admitted bisexual tendencies. But Mann thought it would be wrong to act on such tendencies and so he didn�t do so. He married, had children, won the Nobel Prize, and lived to a ripe old age.
However, he had a son, Klaus.
Klaus also had homosexual tendencies. Klaus did act on his tendencies in a way that is somewhat familiar from the American scene, circa 1980-. But Klaus neither lived to a ripe old age nor won the Nobel Prize. Klaus wrote a homosexual manifesto--which was published and did receive some attention--and then he committed suicide.
Between father and son, and looking at the matter from a purely medical point of view, which patient had the better outcome?
While the American situation of 2007 wasn�t as dire as of Nazi Germany, it did provide reason for very serious concern. For one thing, Hitler�s device of railing against homosexuality for political purposes had been taken over by Muslim extremists. Homosexuality isn�t unknown in Muslim countries, so hypocrisy was involved there. With respect to the homosexual issue, though hypocrisy wasn�t a new element, as we have seen.
And the conflict against Muslim extremists was providing occasion for restricting civil liberties in the US.
Outright tyranny requires suppression of free press. While certain kinds of civil liberties abuses were being reported in the popular media in the US in 2007, other problems weren�t reported. For example, US national security agencies had moved onto some college campuses under cover of �informatics.� Campus freedom of speech was thereby curtailed. And, at least for me, the popular media�s �tyranny by fantasy or make-believe� had become a personal matter. Some of my ideas weren�t appreciated by my friends at some of the local TV stations. And, while indulging myself with thoughts that hadn't been approved by Mickey Mouse, I may have been suspected of failing to pay enough attention to ideas that did have Mr. Mouse's full stamp of approval. His ideas were being continually broadcast for the benefit of the public, inclucing me. Why wasn't I paying more attention?
And my friends at some TV stations weren�t at all shy about letting me know that they had their eye on me. (Of course, they were friendly, nice people. It was simply as if an older or �Big� Brother was watching me.)
That joke aside, I did feel uncomfortable. It looked as if the future might consist of a cross between Disneyland and the Third Reich. Well, I've made another joke. But all joking aside, those who enable bad sociological developments deserve to experience any adverse effects that may occur as a result.
I've alluded to a "cross between Disneyland and the Third Reich" in order to conform to my German theme here. So I should say that NBC, with its technological capability and connections to the military is actually a much greater threat than Disney or ABC. As it's been my lot to have dealt with all three networks, I can also say from experience that NBC poses an extreme danger to basic American values. In my opinion ?GE should be required to divest itself of NBC forthwith. There's more about NBC elsewhere on this site.
In 2007 there were multiple instances of shootings in malls and on college campuses. Such shootings were indicative of social tension and social dysfunction. While Americans may have had something to fear from those who were doing the shooting, they also had something to fear from increased security measures that such shootings made necessary.
As the Baby Boom generation was preparing to retire, there was also the possibility of a very ugly conflict between the generations. For some in the older generation it may have seemed to have been in their own self-interest to promote non-procreative sex among those who were younger. That is, for those at the top of large business and political establishments, low-paid singles were a useful sort of semi-slave.
Those large organizations were tending to emasculate young male employees. "Celibacy?" Who knew the definition of the word. Such organizations then embellished their little act by affecting an enlightened attitude toward homosexuality.
That might have been good for profits, but was it good for socieity?
Not really.
For that reason, I�ve proposed organizational reforms, which are discussed in other places on this site.
What else can be done to alleviate the problem of "reproductive equitY" or to understand it better? As has been explained in Section 2, all biological organization requires constraint, as does all human social organization. I suspect there�s something to be gained by comparing reproductive constraints at the cellular level with those experienced by humans in human society. It might be useful to know, for example, how cellular reproductive constraint evolved.
Perhaps someone has already written about that; and, although my ignorance prevents me from citing that person�s work at this time, I�ll be able to do so if this material is revised later.
Continue
. . . NBC poses an extreme danger to basic American values. In my opinion, GE should be required to divest itself of NBC forthwith.