Mike Luckovich for June 28, 2015

  1. Image
    magicwalnut Premium Member almost 7 years ago

    I was there for the first one, and I’m delighted that I’m here for this one! Well done!

     •  Reply
  2. Rustfungus2a
    Cerabooge  almost 7 years ago

    I got a good laugh from that – at the same time I went “ewww”.

    Too bad the WW II kiss didn’t take place on VE day, because this is very much a Victory for Equality. And long overdue. Now the scars from those wounds which have been inflicted for so long on the LGBT community can, hopefully, begin to heal.

     •  Reply
  3. 046135725661lg
    20watt  almost 7 years ago

    Legislation can’t stop disgust.

     •  Reply
  4. Missing large
    Sammie Long Premium Member almost 7 years ago

    Sick. Not even funny

     •  Reply
  5. Profile pic
    Clare Haney  almost 7 years ago

    Shouldn’t the V-J be changed to something else?This was not a Victory in Japan.

     •  Reply
  6. Irish  1
    Zen-of-Zinfandel  almost 7 years ago

    You’ve got the balls to replace Edith the nurse.

     •  Reply
  7. Missing large
    manteo16nc  almost 7 years ago

    Luckovich does understand what the term “V-J” means, doesn’t he?

     •  Reply
  8. 300px little nemo 1906 02 11 last panel
    lonecat  almost 7 years ago

    Seminal?

     •  Reply
  9. John adams1
    Motivemagus  almost 7 years ago

    I could be wrong, but I suspect OldCoal was talking about behavioral dominance rather than genetic dominance. Certainly agree that it is polygenic at the very least, even leaving out the issues of variations in expressivity and gene penetrance. I saw one article that suggested it was epigenetic, but this is not my field. I can talk to the range of psychological expression — a spectrum, not a switch — but not the genes!

     •  Reply
  10. 300px little nemo 1906 02 11 last panel
    lonecat  almost 7 years ago

    No, I wish I knew more. That sounds very interesting.

     •  Reply
  11. 300px little nemo 1906 02 11 last panel
    lonecat  almost 7 years ago

    I don’t know the biology or the psychology, but historically there seems to be variation in how much same-sex activity is allowed/tolerated/ecouraged etc. Famously, there was a lot of bisexuality in ancient Greece, though not much exclusive homosexuality. The best evidence comes from classical Athens, where there was a lot of bisexuality among at least the upper classes, perhaps less in the middle classes. In Athens and in some other places we know of (Crete, for instance) it was fairly common for an older man (the “erastes”) to take a younger lover (the “eromenos”). The classic text is Plato’s “Symposium”, but there’s lots of other evidence. There’s an interesting court case about such a relationship, either Lysias I or Lysias 3, I can’t remember just now which. My own hunch is that quite a lot of people are at least a little bisexual, and whether or not it gets expressed depends partly on social circumstances.

     •  Reply
  12. John adams1
    Motivemagus  almost 7 years ago

    Totally agree. And things that are technically the same behavior can be used for different purposes as well, including more negative or more positive. As I recall, dolphins are pretty playful sexually, including same-sex. Wolves less so, and there are more dominance hierarchies involved.

     •  Reply
  13. 046135725661lg
    20watt  almost 7 years ago

    I said: “Rather I believe it is a normal reaction to an unfortunate – and abnormal – condition.”

    Hiram Bingham said, “Not a condition, a ‘conditioning.’”

    Are you saying that sexuality is due, all or in part, to our conditioning? (I partially agree, and only up to a point). But what about all the discourse here regarding genetically-based behavior? The contributors seem to be well-versed in their knowledge. Can their opinions be dismissed?

     •  Reply
  14. 300px little nemo 1906 02 11 last panel
    lonecat  almost 7 years ago

    That’s technical for sure, but what I can follow is very interesting. It seems that genetics is a tad more complicated than wrinkled or smooth pea pods.

     •  Reply
  15. 300px little nemo 1906 02 11 last panel
    lonecat  almost 7 years ago

    I wonder if different levels of explanation are appropriate for different purposes. I’m pretty much a materialist, but I’m not opposed to explanations of behavior at the psychological level, the historical level, the social or cultural level, etc. If I’m trying to explain some aspect of Greek or Roman behavior (such as Why did the Romans of the Imperial period accept the cult of the Emperors? or Why did the Roman magistrates prosecute Christians who didn’t acknowledge the cult of the Emperors?) I don’t go to physical explanation, I go to historical and social explanation.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Mike Luckovich