Family & Society

 Paws down

Okay, everyone simply add a thumbs up or down on this.

Let's make it a hat trick. Sorry, @flarex.

 It's definitely a referendum on heterosexual culture.

 All of you live under a ticking clock.  It's shocking to observe they way heterosexual society stigmatises straight people who don't marry and reproduce by a certain age.  

GLBT's are endlessly fascinated by what we regard as social class consciousness and obsession to be the perfect person.  We talk about it all the time, especially when women are a certain age and can't reproduce...or a man who doesn't get married or can't stay married.

 Yes, but I think the focus should be distinctly on heterosexual construction of a relationship (man and woman), which is very different dynamic than man-man and/or woman-woman.  

I think that there is a debate over arbitrarily reproducing - people claim the Bible says "be fruitful and multiply" but we're in a current age where science extends life, people don't die in their 30's, and popping out five to six children in relative to the world resources is a significant issue.

Also relative is the fact that iirc... China limits you to two children per family?

Is it appropriate to regulate reproduction?

Is it appropriate for governments to regulate reproduction?

Should populations be regulated?

I know this sounds weird, but reading the question made me think of this...

Is monogamy inherently humane?

I don't know if that makes any sense to ask... however, I'd be curious to see what people would say about the 'humanity' of a concept such as monogamy versus polygamy, etc.

Hmm... at first glance I was thinking the issue might be extreme, but then the whole concept of the movie "Children of Men" popped into my head... which lead to the debate over human sterilization... but how would we debate this issue as currently worded? Who should even have the right to decide whether heterosexual couples should be allowed to reproduce... or even homosexuals who decide to have kids jointly with single, heterosexual women?

There are a lot of aspects to consider here...

OK, I think this issue might be similar to the other issue you proposed (Are heterosexuals who do not marry or have children regarded as failures in society?), but I think this wording actually opens up an interesting debate... isn't this the overlying question to the whole "Sex and the City" culture, after all?

Thanks.

I think we should have as many "heterosexual" issues published under sexuality as we currently and disproportionately-I may add have for "homosexual" issues.  

As a gay man, I feel that holding my culture up to microscope without any kind of the same analysis is a systematic bias on behalf of the editorial staff of whereistand, I would like that to be corrected.

I've provided MANY proposed issues, more than half of which employ bias free wording.