X-Message-Number: 16598
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 16:11:54 -0700
From: Jessica Lemler <>
Subject: In response to Homosexuals, cryonics, and the "natural order."

It is my understanding that the purpose of cryonics is to preserve as much
of the existing brain structure as possible to bring that brain structure
back to function in the future.  In so doing, it is the hope that as much
of a person s present thoughts and memories will be protected in order that
the individual may emerge from suspension with as much of the same brain
capacity he or she went into suspension with.  So correct me if I am wrong,
then, when I say that individual sexuality encompasses to a large degree
who he or she isit defines the way that person interacts with society and
with him or herself.  Therefore, I must agree with Mr. Darwin when he
states that the  fixing  of homosexuality in the future, as though it is
some type of disease or problem, is ludicrous.  Many homosexuals (as well
as heterosexuals and bixexuals) are quite content and comfortable within
their sexuality, and have found for themselves roles in society which suit
them quite nicely.  As so nicely pointed out by Mr. Darwin, nature has a
way of dealing many of us a bad hand.  Cryonics is not necessarily about
throwing all the cards back to the dealer and re-drawing.  
     I do have several problems, though, with Mr. Darwin s posting, and
several issues I would like to call attention to.  In too many areas of his
post, he alludes to  statistics  and  numbers,  yet he never cites the
sources which have allegedly provided him with these figures.  As a
heterosexual female, I found myself personally offended by his statement:
 Heterosexuals make lots of babies.  If you are heterosexual you will know
that babies and the wives that go with them consume almost all available
resources.   Yes, I do agree that heterosexuals make babies (obviously
homosexuals do not make babies).  I would like to know from what source,
other than simply  statistics tell us,  Mr. Darwin has pulled this
statement.  And to what resources are we referring?  If we are talking
about food, most men I know eat far more than their wives.  If we re
talking about paper or web space, this single female intends to use
considerably less space in this post than Mr. Darwin did in his.  
     I also wonder where his statistics on women in the military came from.
 He crassly states his opinion, which is:   neither do I support a coed
military with men and women on aircraft carriers and in trenches.  This
isn t working from the numbers (pregnancies, rapes, sexual harassment) I
can see.   All very well and good to have an opinion, and of course I am
entitled to disagree, but here again, I am left to wonder where these
 numbers  are coming from?  
     Here s another good one that gave me a laugh.   FactWomen want money
and stability (statistically) over looks and a quick roll in the hay.  And
why not, THEY get stuck with the kids and childbirth and childrearing are
not easy for single women even today.   Once again, Mr. Darwin, please show
me the source(s) of statistics.  
     I found much of the post to be loaded with propaganda for the gay man
and what the gay man has done for cryonicswhich is all well and good, mind
you, long as these accomplishments are accurate.  I do not consider myself
any sort of womens  rights activist by any means, and those of you who know
me realize this to be true, yet I did find parts of Mr. Darwin s article
rather bothersome.  I think if you read it closely, you will find that he
has made statements of  FACT  that lack statistical back-up with legitimate
sources.  Mr. Darwin, I challenge you to present these  sources  which you
have called upon to make such bold statements.  
     That is all, as this FEMALE does not wish to further exhaust the
natural resources of Cryonet.

 ~Jessica Lemler, Alcor Web Master

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16598