The Gay Bomb
This is a story that won't go away. For more than ten years the US military has said they were, no, they weren't, yes they were, no they weren't ... developing a "gay bomb," some kind of aphrodisiac they could use on enemy troops to make them irresistible to each other. Remember who this is -- these aren't guys with a real sophisticated sense of humor, and probably not the best understanding of the dimensions and nuances of human sexuality. Their intentions are also not my favorite; they want to make people romantic and friendly so they can kill them.
Never mind that discovery of a powerful aphrodisiac would create profits for drug companies that would the dwarf the amount of money made from Viagra. Like, there are two problems: he can't, and she doesn't want to. Honey, let me mix you a little drink after dinner.
Whatever it is these clowns have in mind, since we know the physiology of sexual orientation is a mystery, we know that the most they could hope to do is turn up the volume; in other words, whatever this is, it couldn't make enemy soldiers gay, it could only make them ... can I say "horny" here? And then the Pentagon must assume they'll act on their desires.
I'm trying to imagine that, being a soldier, say in a trench with some other guys, and suddenly feeling aroused. Sorry, I don't see it. Maybe after years in prison, I don't know, but I really can't imagine feeling so overcome with undirected passion that I would try to get amorous with some soldier. I think most guys would try to relieve the pressure some other way.
New Scientist had a story on this in 2005, which led to a kind of official hush-up. As they report this week, it does not appear that the project has actually gone away.
On a serious note, this does seem to be a legitimate research area, understanding how the sex drive itself works. By keeping their findings secret, the military is robbing science of what might be valuable knowledge. And it goes both ways. Real researchers know a lot about research methods, and have knowledge in their fields, that could help them get better results faster.
Never mind that discovery of a powerful aphrodisiac would create profits for drug companies that would the dwarf the amount of money made from Viagra. Like, there are two problems: he can't, and she doesn't want to. Honey, let me mix you a little drink after dinner.
Whatever it is these clowns have in mind, since we know the physiology of sexual orientation is a mystery, we know that the most they could hope to do is turn up the volume; in other words, whatever this is, it couldn't make enemy soldiers gay, it could only make them ... can I say "horny" here? And then the Pentagon must assume they'll act on their desires.
I'm trying to imagine that, being a soldier, say in a trench with some other guys, and suddenly feeling aroused. Sorry, I don't see it. Maybe after years in prison, I don't know, but I really can't imagine feeling so overcome with undirected passion that I would try to get amorous with some soldier. I think most guys would try to relieve the pressure some other way.
New Scientist had a story on this in 2005, which led to a kind of official hush-up. As they report this week, it does not appear that the project has actually gone away.
Feedback asked what happened to the US air force's Ig Nobel-winning "gay bomb" proposal after it was put forward in 1994 (13 October).
The Pentagon has played down the story ever since New Scientist covered it on 15 January 2005. One spokesman is quoted saying it was "rejected out of hand" and another claimed in 2005 that it was never considered "for further development".
These claims sit awkwardly with the known facts.
In 2000 - six years after the idea was proposed - the document describing the "gay bomb" was included in a CD-ROM produced by the Pentagon's Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, which was distributed to military and government agencies to encourage new projects.
In 2001, the proposal was one of a number which the JNLWD put forward for assessment by a scientific panel at the National Academy of Sciences.
No information has been released suggesting that the proposal was taken any further. However, aphrodisiacs would fall under the US military's broad new definition of a "calmative agent", the term it has chosen for "an antipersonnel chemical that leaves the victim awake and mobile but without the will or ability to meet military objectives or carry out criminal activity".
It seems there is considerable classified research in this area.
On a serious note, this does seem to be a legitimate research area, understanding how the sex drive itself works. By keeping their findings secret, the military is robbing science of what might be valuable knowledge. And it goes both ways. Real researchers know a lot about research methods, and have knowledge in their fields, that could help them get better results faster.
posted by JimK at 5:28 PM
21 Comments:
"NOTE: The Montgomery County Council is going to vote November 13th on bill 23-07, which will make it illegal to discriminate on the basis of gender identity in certain situations. You can read it HERE."
Odd thing for a group for educational advocacy group to be fixated on. Have you checked with legal counsel about if this is appropriate activity for a 501C3?
When are you going to tell us why we should support this bill. What will it accomplish.
"The CRC is trying to create the appearance of a controversy, and we need to make sure reasonable voices are heard, too."
You seem to doing just as much to stoke a controversy. I thought you think no one pays attention to CRC.
Anon, as a 501(c)(3) we are not allowed to promote a political party or candidate. We are allowed to take a position on issues, which is of course what we are doing here.
We know as well as anyone that the radical groups like CRC can get the newsletters going and can generate phone calls from all over the country, working through the Family Blah Blah groups. We also know they are a tiny minority in our county. The County Council knows these facts, too, but it is important for them to hear from the majority here, even though most people would take our view as common sense.
JimK
"We are allowed to take a position on issues, which is of course what we are doing here."
Actually, you're not just taking a position. You're urging people to contact their representatives to urge them to pass legislation.
When are you going to tell us why you favor this ridiculous bill?
BTW, hope everyone caught the article in the Post Outlook section today about the next President of the U.S., Mike Huckabee. He's running second in Iowa. Looking back in history, the number two in Iowa usually does very well.
He's a man for a time such as this.
There's also a picture of him playing electric guitar.
"We also know they are a tiny minority in our county. The County Council knows these facts, too, but it is important for them to hear from the majority here, even though most people would take our view as common sense."
LOL. You know full well that such an assinine bill wouldn't pass a referendum vote.
He's a man for a time such as this.
Yeah we need a real middle ages kinda guy who believes in the supernatural and thinks mainstream scientific theories like evolution are blasphemy to keep us moving forward....
When are you going to tell us why you favor this ridiculous bill?
It's very simple, Anon. There is a lot of variety in how people experience and present their gender in the social world. It is simply natural variation in human characteristics, without any moral aspect to it, yet people who live in the tails of the distribution suffer at the hands of ignorant and hateful people near the middle.
We're against that. We think it's good to treat people as people, whether we understand them or not. This bill will go a long way toward that, and there is no negative side to it.
JimK
Andrea- not anon
I have to wonder(okay, I don't) about N. anon. often making comments about elections in MC and Maryland as if we didn't just have one not too long ago in which MC went overwhelmingly democratic and we elected a democratic Governor and Lt. Gov. Of course, N. anon assumes that we don't know how we vote just like we don't know what we sign for school. Only N. anon and the 2(or is it 1) CRCers who actually send their kids to MCPS know what they are doing.
FLASH FLASH
C Council relies on N.J. state transgender to give them advice. And she changed her sexual orientation too!
Jillian Todd Weiss New Jersey
[As for Weiss herself, who was married to a woman for 10 years before her operation: She's not completely sure of her orientation now, but "mostly I dig men."]
"yet people who live in the tails of the distribution suffer at the hands of ignorant and hateful people near the middle."
How do they suffer? What are these hateful and ignorant people doing to them?
"We're against that. We think it's good to treat people as people, whether we understand them or not."
Well there are lots of ways people are discriminated against. Can we make people treat people as people by passing a law? Don't transgenders have the same rights as everyone else?
Two women apply for the same secretarial position. The one that is built better gets the job. Should there be a law?
A Harvard grad and an Arizona State grad apply for the same sales manager postion. The Harvard guy gets the job. Should there be a law?
A fun guy and a grouchy guy waiting for a table at a restaurant. The fun guy gets it first. Should there be a law?
Don't you see this could go on and on.
"This bill will go a long way toward that,"
Not really.
"and there is no negative side to it."
The government can justify interfering in our personal day-to-day decision-making process, the poorer we are.
Can't you see that?
If you think transgender have a rough time of it, go ahead and help them out. Since you think all the common sense majority people in MC feel like you, they should be fine.
Anonymouse said...
“Odd thing for a group for educational advocacy group to be fixated on.”
Goodness me yes, so very odd that an actual educational advocacy group be so fixated on an “educational advocacy group” that LITERALLY equates certain MCPS students with human feces.
“Since you think all the common sense majority people in MC feel like you, they should be fine.”
The measure isn’t meant to protect transgendered citizens from the “common sense majority.”
It’s meant specifically to protect them from the discriminatory wiles of people like you, and those who run the CRC.
"Yeah we need a real middle ages kinda guy who believes in the supernatural and thinks mainstream scientific theories like evolution are blasphemy to keep us moving forward"
If you believe that religious belief is not relevant to our modern world, you really haven't been paying attention.
An atheist, in denial about the existence of God, is really not going to be an effective leader.
"The measure isn’t meant to protect transgendered citizens from the “common sense majority.”
It’s meant specifically to protect them from the discriminatory wiles of people like you, and those who run the CRC."
The purpose of discrimination laws is to keep the majority, not a tiny minority, from denying a normal life to a minority not a small handful of people. CRC really isn't controlling many jobs and bathrooms. There really isn't any evidence they would deny jobs or bathrooms to transgendered people even if they did have that much control.
If TTF is right, there are fewer CRCers than transgendered people in MC. CRC isn't asking to become a protected class.
Anonymous said "How do they suffer? What are these hateful and ignorant people doing to them?".
Firing them from their jobs, evicting them from their homes, physically assaulting them, forcing them to live in fear and isolation.
Anonymous said " Can we make people treat people as people by passing a law?"
Black people vote now, interracial couples get married, you can't be fired from your job for being a Christian - so the answer is yes.
Anonymous said "Don't transgenders have the same rights as everyone else?".
You know they don't, you liar. Religous people are protected from discrimination, transgendereds aren't - we don't have the same rights as you.
Anonymous said "If you believe that religious belief is not relevant to our modern world, you really haven't been paying attention".
Oh, its relevant all right, in a bad way. Religion is the reason people are flying planes into buildings, religion is the reason why people are massacuring each other and going to war - religion poisons everything.
Anonymous said "An atheist, in denial about the existence of God, is really not going to be an effective leader.".
The one who determines reality based upon the evidence is going to be the most effective leader - that's an atheist. A religious person, someone who by definition accepts beliefs that have no basis in reality, by definition, cannot be the most effective leader. If you're willing to accept belief in the supernatural without evidence, you're prone to accepting beliefs in any falsehood at any time.
Anonymous said "The purpose of discrimination laws is to keep the majority, not a tiny minority, from denying a normal life to a minority not a small handful of people."
No, discrimination laws are meant to prevent discrimination in general, whether its a majority, minority, or individual doing the discrimination. And a small handful of people is by defintion a minority as well as a group that couldn't possible generate the "wave of lawsuits" you claimed this law would bring about.
Anonymous said "CRC really isn't controlling many jobs and bathrooms. There really isn't any evidence they would deny jobs or bathrooms to transgendered people even if they did have that much control.".
The only reason to oppose a discrimination law is the desire to discriminate. CRC wouldn't be opposing the law if they didn't intend to discriminate. CRC has made it clear that they would deny transexuals like me the right to a safe bathroom. The fact is that roughly half of the population believes its wrong to be gay or transexual, that group of people is likely to discriminate unless given the guidance not to.
Anonymous said "If TTF is right, there are fewer CRCers than transgendered people in MC. CRC isn't asking to become a protected class.".
No one is discriminating against CRC people - when and if the public starts doing so I'll be the first to support adding anti-discrimination protection for them.
Heterosexuals already have full equal rights but people of all sexual orientations and gender identities do not. Also, religious people, especially Christians, are already a protected class. In fact Christians get special treatment. Name any other religion that gets a US federal holiday. Think about fairness and equal rights while you enjoy paying all those federal employees to not work on Christmas.
There ARE fewer CRCers than trans persons in MoCo. Quite true.
"There ARE fewer CRCers than trans persons in MoCo. Quite true."
Any idea how many trans people there are, Dr?
In your opinion, also, how likely is it that if someone didn't already know the person, they would be able to tell? Just in general.
BTW, did you know that studies of homosexuality aren't the only area of science where the scientific establishment tries to prevent findings contrary to the status quo from seeing publication. Consider this:
"Take, for example, a 2004 Harvard University study of older women with heart disease. Researchers found that the more saturated fat these women consumed, the less likely it was their condition would worsen. Lead study author Dariush Mozaffarian, Ph.D., an assistant professor at Harvard's school of public health, recalls that before the paper was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, he encountered formidable politics from other journals.
"In the nutrition field, it's very difficult to get something published that goes against established dogma," says Mozaffarian. "The dogma says that saturated fat is harmful, but that is not based, to me, on unequivocal evidence." Mozaffarian says he believes it's critical that scientists remain open minded. "Our finding was surprising to us. And when there's a discovery that goes against what's established, it shouldn't be suppressed but rather disseminated and explored as much as possible."
Sorry, Virginia, science editors aren't as nice as Santa Claus.
Hey, no matter how you celebrated, I hope everyone had a great Guy Fawkes Day yesterday!
Hey, guess what, guys. Exodus International is supporting Huckabee because he wants to take action against global warming:
"Majority of evangelicals back action
In a poll last month by Ellison Research, 70 percent of self-described evangelicals said they believed global warming would have an impact on future generations, and 64 percent said action should begin immediately.
More than half — 54 percent — said they would be more likely to support candidates who worked to curb global warming.
“We’re putting it in a biblical context,” Cizik said. “We’re saying whatever the past was, it’s a new day. It’s the 21st century, and we are the new evangelicals, and we have a broad agenda. And caring for the Earth is one of those things.”
Climate change has emerged as a significant issue in the presidential campaign, and many of the candidates, Republican and Democratic alike, have sought to seize the environmentalist mantle. But only Republican former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas — otherwise considered among the more conservative candidates in the race — has explicitly aligned himself with the creation care movement.
“My own personal faith reminds me that ‘the earth is the Lord’s’ and that we are not its owners; merely its caretakers,” Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister, wrote in his 2007 autobiography, “From Hope to Higher Ground.”
As Huckabee has won favor among evangelicals in Iowa, where he has risen to second in recent Republican polls and assuaged some evangelicals’ concerns that he cannot win, he has begun picking up endorsements from evangelicals who stress his environmental position.
“I would suggest that as stewards of God resources, there needs to be a fresh look at this issue,” Rick Scarborough, head of Vision America, a prominent conservative evangelical group, wrote Thursday. “... Huckabee is forcing Republicans to discuss this issue, and that is healthy.”
Randy Thomas, vice president of Exodus International, an evangelical ministry, wrote last month that “I have decided to vote for Huckabee. Yes, it is because he is unabashedly Christian, but it is also that he does care for the environment.”
And also last month, Don Bosch, an environmental scientist and founder of the Evangelical Ecologist Web site, posted a prominent endorsement of Huckabee."
Anonymouse said...
“There really isn't any evidence they [the CRC] would deny jobs or bathrooms to transgendered people even if they did have that much control.”
The CRC is leading the fight to get other people to be against the measure and you think there’s no evidence “they would deny jobs or bathrooms to transgendered people” even if they could?
Wow. Truly wow. With “logic” like that, why not just dispute the fact that the CRC is even against the measure?
Post a Comment
<< Home