heeeeey!

So, in regards to the post yesterday (“I got the Cruise Control Set at 35”)
Jarret asks a good question:

Q:
Ok the awesome story of the begining of The Lawrence Arms aside let me start by saying I'm 100% pro gay but isn't the whole your born with leanings not absolutes kind of lending credibility to the Christian-Right with their whole "your not born gay" stuff? Just wondering what everyone else thinks

A:
Well, here’s the thing, man. What I said yesterday, and let’s make no mistake, I’m no geneticist, I’m no biologist, in fact, I’m nothing with an ‘ist’ on the end of it as far as a quick scan has determined (sure, I’m a bassist, vocalist, blogist, egocentrist, beastialist, sensualist, Methodist, pansexualist, Athiest, polythieist, oligarchist, man with a wrist, master of the sensual fist, and so forth, but you get my meaning) but what I was saying (which, again, I’d like to stress I heard on a radio show about training dogs, so we’re dealing with some high science here) was that people have all these genetic predispositions that need triggers in the real world to set them off. Eventually, a bunch of them get fired off and you end up just like your parents after a while (this is really very depressing info that’s probably much better articulated in the last entry). That’s not saying that you’re born with leanings and not absolutes. That’s saying that there usually needs to be a trigger for these absolutes to manifest. Lots of them happen almost right away, and lots of them wait until you’re at a diner celebrating your seventieth birthday alone and someone brings you cold coffee and you just fucking snap.
Now, without listing my lack of credentials again, let me just say that when it comes to sexuality, I don’t think that ANYONE is really very sexual when they’re infants. I think people are born with preferences and awareness of difference. There’s a difference between the way my son interacts with males and females, and I’d tend to say, based on my empirical observation, that he seems like he’s a heterosexual child. If that’s not the case, great. I like this kid a lot and whoever makes him happy makes me happy. I don’t care if they’ve got a dick or tits or both, honestly. It’s really not something I worry about. Fuck, if he’s gay, he’ll probably be able to tell me about a lot cooler of restaurants when he gets older, right? BUT, regardless, like I said, I think he seems like a heterosexual child. However, I don’t think that ANY of his interactions at this point, be they with males or females, are sexual in any way. He just hasn’t developed like that yet. He’s a baby. He likes drooling on shit and slapping shit and putting shit in his mouth (hey, that sounds like the beginnings of GREAT sex, actually!) but he’s not doing anything sexual at any time…I’m sure that develops soon, but you know, little boys’ balls aren’t even where they’re supposed to be yet, uh, and so forth. Whatever, this is not the point.
The point is, that when it comes to DNA coding and the idea that a preference is wired into you, or a proclivity, like my example yesterday of being bipolar, or liking spinach, the theory I was talking about said it usually needed a trigger to come out. that could be anything, and it could happen when you’re a baby or when you’re old or maybe never. In the case of sexuality, I’d posit that everyone is coded in a certain way at birth, but they probably have no interest in that shit for a while (much like we don’t have any interest in courtroom television until we become like seventy five) and when they do, it just takes a trigger to launch their own, already coded preference. Hmmmm…What do you think a trigger would be that would launch gayness, or straightness? Maybe a dick, or a pussy or something? Maybe a good looking person who you’re attracted to who awakens in you the idea that you have a sexual personality? I mean, to put it another way, NONONONONONONONONNONONONONONONNONONONO there’s no fucking evidence in this that points to the retarded conclusion that nurture brings about sexuality. Man, all you need is a trigger. Here’s the thing, at this crucial time, when you’re awakening sexually, you see an attractive girl (to you…okay. Subjectivity aside), on TV, at the pool, on the bus, at school---do you want to (whatever is the most primordial, infantile version of) fuck her? Yes? Are you a female? Then you’re gay. Are you a male? Then you’re straight. Some combo? You’re some combo. That’s not nature versus nurture, that’s an empirical trigger unleashing a DNA encoded predisposition, which is exactly what I was talking about before.
In a word, if you think that anyone would, in the kind of dumb, backwards world we live in, CHOOSE to be in a situation where they’re persecuted, killed, systematically denied basic liberties and made fun of for being catty and fey (or burly and cheap, depending) just because of who they want to bang, you’re fucking nuts. There you go. That’s my sexuality/genetics class for the day. Class dismissed. Get out there and live! It’s gay day somewhere people. Probably on Halstead, actually. See you at the manhole.