Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 29, 2013, 02:35 PM   #26
Technarchy
macrumors 68040
 
Technarchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by hulugu View Post
I'm not sure "Gladiator" is an especially good source for how the Romans spoke to each other or how to use a Greek and Latin hybrid in modern speech.

The Romans didn't have a direct translation of the word homosexual (which is a modern hybrid of Latin and Greek), but instead had a flurry of words and phrases that connoted specific meanings to relationships defined by status and notions of manliness.

In this case, same sex relations or homosexual relations would make far more sense in usage than gay and the problem with queer is it defines the relationships as odd or spoiled, which seems inaccurate for a zoologist's usage.
Ecce homo. Behold the giraffe?
Homo sapien. Wise giraffe?

This is toying with language, applied to a animal scenario to create a pseudo normalcy for humans.

Some humans eat feces. Lots of dogs eat feces, therefor it must be okay for humans to eat feces.

What?

Last edited by Technarchy; Dec 29, 2013 at 02:57 PM.
Technarchy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2013, 02:54 PM   #27
hulugu
macrumors 68000
 
hulugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: the faraway towns
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post
Ecce homo. Behold the giraffe?
Well, what you do think he would have said when saying "queer?" Ineptus, insulsas? Probably not prodigialis?

I don't actually know the answer, but since the Roman language was highly descriptive, he could have used a number of terms to convey a slightly different meaning.

But, this is an academic discussion that I'm not well-versed in. Is the term homosexual the right term for describing a norm in animal behavior, probably? Would the Romans have used it? No, because homosexual is a modern invention and we don't really follow Latin in the English language—though many have tried very hard build cases for proscriptive usages using Latin.
__________________
I look like a soldier; I feel like a thief
hulugu is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2013, 03:02 PM   #28
BenTrovato
macrumors 6502a
 
BenTrovato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Toronto
To really answer this question I think you have to agree to the definition of normal and average. When you look up the terms normal in biology is without disease. So if many people have diabetes, they cannot be normal seeing as diabetes is classified as a treatable disease. Yet if a great number of people have diabetes, then that could be considered the average.

It's an interesting discussion to have with a group of people or online but it is only interesting because people have skewed the definition of normal and average to mean something other that the generally accepted value for the two words. If you stick to their definitions, the conversation isn't nearly as interesting or open to debate.
BenTrovato is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2013, 03:03 PM   #29
Technarchy
macrumors 68040
 
Technarchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by hulugu View Post
Well, what you do think he would have said when saying "queer?" Ineptus, insulsas? Probably not prodigialis?

I don't actually know the answer, but since the Roman language was highly descriptive, he could have used a number of terms to convey a slightly different meaning.

But, this is an academic discussion that I'm not well-versed in. Is the term homosexual the right term for describing a norm in animal behavior, probably? Would the Romans have used it? No, because homosexual is a modern invention and we don't really follow Latin in the English language—though many have tried very hard build cases for proscriptive usages using Latin.
We have no idea what goes on in the brain of most animals. Their desires and motivations elude us. Some apes being the exception.

That makes the parallels related to sexuality completely inappropriate. We know the thoughts and intentions of homosexuals, we haven't a clue what drives a giraffe to do what it does.
Technarchy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2013, 03:15 PM   #30
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post
We have no idea what goes on in the brain of most animals. Their desires and motivations elude us. Some apes being the exception.

That makes the parallels related to sexuality completely inappropriate. We know the thoughts and intentions of homosexuals, we haven't a clue what drives a giraffe to do what it does.
If 1,500 species exhibit this behaviour, why assume that human homosexuals do so for different reasons? Those giraffes are obviously depraved too.
__________________
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
skunk is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2013, 03:47 PM   #31
Technarchy
macrumors 68040
 
Technarchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by skunk View Post
If 1,500 species exhibit this behaviour, why assume that human homosexuals do so for different reasons? Those giraffes are obviously depraved too.
How prepared are you to apply this logic to other scenarios. Or is this a selective bias to prove a point?

How many of these "1500" species have a high level of commonality with humans?
__________________
Steve Jobs, January 9th 2007, 10:44am: "We filed for over 200 patents for all the inventions in iPhone and we intend to protect them."

Last edited by Technarchy; Dec 29, 2013 at 03:53 PM.
Technarchy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2013, 03:56 PM   #32
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post
How prepared are you to apply this logic to other scenarios. Or is this a selective bias to prove a point?

How many of these "1500" species have a high level of commonality with humans?
How many do you need?
skunk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2013, 04:09 PM   #33
LIVEFRMNYC
Thread Starter
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenTrovato View Post
To really answer this question I think you have to agree to the definition of normal and average. When you look up the terms normal in biology is without disease. So if many people have diabetes, they cannot be normal seeing as diabetes is classified as a treatable disease. Yet if a great number of people have diabetes, then that could be considered the average.

It's an interesting discussion to have with a group of people or online but it is only interesting because people have skewed the definition of normal and average to mean something other that the generally accepted value for the two words. If you stick to their definitions, the conversation isn't nearly as interesting or open to debate.
Agree 100%.
LIVEFRMNYC is online now   1 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Am I getting insanely unlucky or is this the norm? chrisrosemusic1 iPhone 11 Apr 23, 2013 05:10 PM
Norm's BIG Escape now on iTunes! rachelgutierrez iPhone and iPod touch Apps 0 Nov 12, 2012 09:45 PM
I feel like clear skins should be come the new norm. LiquidDexter iPhone Accessories 7 Oct 3, 2012 11:33 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:34 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC