Hydroxycut (Day 5), linguistics and more gay.
HYDROXYCUT (Day 5)
I can say this about Hydroxycut. The appetite supressant works for sure. Okay, I did just finish eating a large Quizno’s sandwich but that’s mainly because I only had yogurt and granola for lunch. Pecan, praline granola sweetened with maple syrup from Trader Joe’s. Strangely, I don’t really like pecans, pralines or maple syrup and yet I bought it anyway because, apparently, I liked the packaging. I done been played. Eh, I guess it’s alright with yogurt.
My sleep schedule has gotten a little wacky. The first day I took the pills I had trouble getting to sleep that night. You know the feeling. Mind wide awake despite a very fatigued body. Since then … well, in the evenings I’m at work and dying to get out of there and get home and relax and do something constructive. I get home and don’t feel like doing anything or I’m really moody so at 9pm or 9:30 I get in bed. Fall asleep around 10:30pm, wake up at 3:30am or so and can’t fall asleep for an hour or two. Then I fall asleep and wake up right before the alarm clock goes off. I’ve had wide mood swings this week but I can’t pin that on diet pills. There’s lots of other stuff going on.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing … except for going to bed so early instead of doing something useful. I haven’t noticed any other side effects — nothing negative, I mean. I’ll keep you posted, though. I suppose at some point I’ll have to get on the scale. I’m not looking forward to that. The day does seem to pass faster and I do feel more energetic. Hmmmm. I’m still skeptical so I’ll follow the directions and warnings and see what happens over the next month.
Remember in the last blog entry I said that I don’t think people are born gay? I realize that’s a controversial statement but I do believe that. I don’t know a whole lot about genetics but I did take a linguistics class in college (stay with me for a second here). The psychology of language is fascinating. We are wired, our biological computer hardware, is wired/routed for language. Infant/toddler brains are neural computers for face recognition and language acquisition. To me, that’s miraculous. The amount of information and processing and computing capacity to use language is phenomenal and we come pre-packaged for it. The instructions for making a language machine is in our DNA, an organic storage device made out of tiny building blocks of woven, coded proteins. Still, no one is born speaking English or Japanese or Latin.
I believe that this is analagous to sexuality and even personality. The fundamentals are in place but the specifics have to be taught or learned. We come equipped with the hardware — hard drive, CPU, BIOS* and so on. But the operating system — the metaphysically metaphorical Apple, Linux, Windows, Unix — is acquired, installed, inculcated through a lifetime with the bulk and core of personality, tastes, preferences, etc. being established in the formative years.
You know what I mean? I don’t think anyone is born being attracted to, say, redheads or tattoos or lopsided smiles or button noses or hazel colored eyes. My theory is that we acquire those tastes. We aren’t born serial killers or altruists. We’re not exactly blank slates but our “hardware” voraciously internalizes socialization and experiences.
Hmmm. That’s all I’ve got for now. If I find the words for more I’ll be back later.
Okay. Thank you for putting up with my gedunken experiment and letting me develop this line of thought a little further. That was just running through my head this evening and I felt like writing. I refuse to give up on the day and go to bed for lack of anything better to do again. What next? Music, maybe? Movie?
*BIOS, in computing, stands for Basic Input/Output System or Basic Integrated Operating System. BIOS refers to the software code run by a computer when first powered on. The primary function of BIOS is to prepare the machine so other software programs stored on various media (such as hard drives, floppies, and CDs) can load, execute, and assume control of the computer. This process is known as booting up.
BIOS can also be said to be a coded program embedded on a chip that recognises and controls various devices that make up the computer.
While the name BIOS is an acronym, it may also be a play on the Greek word ??? (bios) life.
Currently listening :
By The Postal Service
Release date: By 18 February, 2003
Synchronicity! Last night on 60 minutes was a piece on the very issue of this blog. No, not hydroxycut, but how homosexuality begins. The focused on two pairs of twins. The first was a pair of fraternal twins – one gay and one straight. Since fraternal twins are different eggs, but raised the exact same this would tend to support the Born Gay theory. However, the second pair of twins were identical. Again, they were raised the same, and yet they grew up to have different sexual orientations. Being identical, they were genetically the same at birth, so this would tend to support the Raised Gay theory. So what was the conclusion of this piece? Well … they did start talking about how the more older brothers a man has, the more likely he will be gay (according to statistics), unless he is left-handed and then his chances are the same as anyone else. Uh … your guess is as good as mine.
Posted by Stan on Mar 13, 2006 10:03 AM
Thanks for the comment, Stan.
Okay. I just read the transcript. Fascinating. Now I have to erase my many ignorant statements I just wrote and start over.
It would seem that hormonal differences do affect behavior along gender lines. So, say, the male rat injected with estrogen while in the womb will, later in life, do that lordosis (a sexually submissive posture, I’ll say, which is usually a lady rat thing of course) when being sexually assaulted or humped (if you don’t mind me getting all scientifical) by an alpha male rat. Apparently, these especially macho rats will hump anything, male or female. For now, I’ll leave that one alone even though I find it interesting that researchers don’t label that rat gay. I suppose humping anything that moves is a very male, testosterrific (yes, I did just make that word up) trait. Anyway, the submissive posture doesn’t necessarily mean that the lordosis-ing male rats are gay, according to the researchers, but they do exhibit effeminate rodent behavior.
Man, this is getting weird.
Regarding the young twins in the 60 Minute article I just read, there’s a lot of info there that makes my head spin. That one kid seems as gay as the day is long. They cite the fact that he likes dolls, has a lot of pastel colors in his room, paints his fingernails, says he thinks he was meant to be a girl, etc. The mother said she noticed a difference when he was 18 months old and he wanted to play with a barbie doll whereas his brother wanted to play with a fire truck.
Doesn’t the issue then get blurred at that point? I mean, the mother — the family — react to those kids differently based on their interpretations of the kids’ behavior. What does sexuality have to do with painting one’s fingernails? Or pastel colors? Aren’t those societal traits? Once a boy shows some effete trait, he’s treated differently. It sounds like the too-young-to-be-labeled-gay kid in that family is identifying with the feminine — but is that because of genetic/hormonal traits or is that because it’s a path of identity that he’s been allowed or even encouraged to pursue? Or because that identity is a niche he stumbled upon that resulted in affirming self-identification?
No two children are ever raised the same. It’s a very different experience for each child and it seems like the more similar two kids are the more they find ways to distinguish themselves in the eyes of their parents and the world — the sibling struggle for dominance, acceptance, identity, individuality. And the response of their parents and their environment is reflexively different. This is all happening at the subconscious or at least sub-awareness level.
Hmmm. I just thought of something. In the article about the TV piece, the scientists and researchers are defining homosexuality as a hormonally feminine thing. As in gay = biologically girly. What about macho, masculine gay men? Are they like the alpha rats? Humping anything in a manly, macho fashion but not really gay?
I’m going to say something here that I’ve said before. Our notion of sexuality is very odd. Again, I believe that sexuality is a spectrum. I mean, let’s make the little leap and say that hormones can cause someone to be congenitally homosexual. Is there a tipping point of sexuality? Does the hormone ratio affect the sexuality ratio directly? Does being girly automatically mean that that kid in the article will be sexually attracted to guys? Have his attractions been established yet? What about people who are “turned” gay by a proto-sexual experience — whether it be molestation or otherwise? Is that another kind of gayness? Like … Type 1 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes? Can hormone levels be affected in formative or adult years? What about eunichs? I don’t know how to spell that word.
More questions than answers. It is apparent that the sensibility of the day, the goal of researchers, seems to be to prove that sexuality is inborn. The pendulum has swung from labeling homosexuality as a psychological disease or defect to an inescapable hormono-genetic trait so that it is as biologically and epidemiologically conclusive as race or ethnicity. I predict that the cultural conclusion will be the politically expedient one. In other words, whoever has the political power will determine the nature of this argument.
Man, I’m rambling big time. Watch me think myself in circles like a dog chasing its own tail. I’m outta here. Peace out.
Posted by Gary Young on Mar 13, 2006 6:25 PM