Under the macroscope

[andrewducker]

Over here pigeonhed asked _why_ we needed to know what caused certain kinds of behaviour.

To which my response was that we didn't _need_ to know, but that many people want to know why people behave the way we do - me included. I'd love to know why I'm straight, geeky, smart, unable to draw (beyond very bad stick men), able to write tolerably well (but was completely incapable when at school), etc. I've spent huge numbers of hours reading about human behaviour, in an attempt to understand both myself and others better.

But I know that not everyone does this. And clearly some people find investigation of their behaviour uncomfortable - even when it's in the abstract (i.e. investigation of people that do the things they do).

[Poll #1245164]

Comments

[andrewducker]

I was trying to make the point that analysing sexuality is the same as analysing taste in other areas eg music or food

If swathes of people could eat any milk products at all, while being fine with all all foods except for that, then that would be worth investigating - and indeed, it has been. When swathes of people are only interested in a specific sex of partner, that too is worth investigating.

[pigeonhed.livejournal.com]

But they don't investigate why people are heterosexual, do they? They investigate the perceived abnormalities. Which is why this is a problem.

[andrewducker]

Yup, we do. There's lots of investigation into desire and how/why it works. It just doesn't get reported as widely, because it doesn't make for the big headlines.