Of course to talk about human nature is for anyone a matter of process and degree. Much time has passed since positions were taken over whether to be masculine meant to be 100% masculine, and to be feminine meant to be 100% feminine. Now it is generally accepted that we all move somewhere on a linear scale between femininity and masculinity; though I’d want to add a temporal line as well that recognizes the effect of age and experience and situation. And almost as I write this article below comes from NYT Magazine!

“There’s a sense of fluidity and permissiveness and a smashing of binaries. We’re all becoming one another.”

For long, Biblical conservatives have surely had to nurture (forgive the pun) that being gay had nothing to do with nature; this was important because if nature had a role then surely God had some real and responsible engagement in the creation of “straight” and “gay”. For many of us, though, it is almost redundant to worry about such genetic niceties. The divine acceptance of us, whatever our sexuality, was a given inasmuch as God is creator and gracious Sustainer.

But now from the US comes evidence for the proponents of nurture and, I guess, some mental challenge to those who only propound nurture. Even as I write all this, it seems so silly but this has been the parameters of the discussion for too, too long.

Nature wins over nurture and so, to some, presents a theological challenge

The peculiar observation now is that the “nurturists” seem more comfortable in their new research and discoveries than the “naturists” in UK.

Right now, for the moment, not quite sure what to make of that observation…