(w)hole by Ruth Madison

[Emma]

Agreed Cake. I don't think devness is genetic in the way that our parents may also be devs but it is something we are born with, not something learned or nutured with our life experiences.

[Cake]

Would like to add, I'm not a 100 percent sure that it's innate. It could just as well have arisen from early childhood experiences (probably unconscious ones). Just saying I'm not excluding either as a possible origin.
Maybe it also differs from Dev to Dev.

[anais]

Cake, I didn't mean that it was non-profitable trait, like depression, which is obviously inherited
But with devoteeism we have a certain paradox. Stay with me now
For a gene to survive it has to be reproduced, right?. Since we are attracted to disabled guys, we have to mate with them (of course, not all of us, but just for the argument). Now, what were the chances of reproduction with para's or quads even 60 years ago? Probably zero. And what were the chances of survival for disabled people hundred years ago and before?
So, how could this trait have survived and been inherited?
Of course, there is the possibility, that it was passed on from mother to daughter through mating with AB guys. But still, it should have been extingushed somewhere along the way, since there was no practical use for it.

BTW, same argument in favor of the hypothesis of the non-genetical origins of homosexual preferences.

Anyway, it is just me theorizing

[Cake]

Oooh, I can see what you mean now! Thanks for explaining, interesting aspect...
I guess I didn't count in the passing of a gene over many generations when I thought of genetic inheritance.

So my definite theory concerning the genetics of Devoteeism is at follows:
Devoteeism can be genetically passed on from one generation to the other if
a) one parent lived through some kind of experience that could evoke such a longing in their child (whatever that experience may be, it can be very abstract, purely psychological) but hasn't made said parent a dev themselves
or
b) one parent has dev tendencies themselves, either by acquiring them through (a), or by certain events or feelings in early childhood.

If neither a) nor b) is the case, the devoteeism is either a cosmical mystery or the result of some kind of complex psychological abnormality.

For me personally, what comes closest to an explanation for my devoteeism is the brilliant expression someone brought up in chat the other day: "Erotic tragedy".

(BTW, "erotic tragedy" would also be my answer to lavly's question in the other thread as to why we're set off by the listed things.)


And here I'm ending my analytic rambling for today.

[lavly]

Nov 27, 2010 17:43:10 GMT -5 anais said:

For a gene to survive it has to be reproduced, right?. Since we are attracted to disabled guys, we have to mate with them (of course, not all of us, but just for the argument). Now, what were the chances of reproduction with para's or quads even 60 years ago? Probably zero. And what were the chances of survival for disabled people hundred years ago and before?
So, how could this trait have survived and been inherited?

Anyway, it is just me theorizing

man i love this ... its insain to me that i have been thinking about these questions for so long and now there is like real convo about them ... not just the air fair stuff (you just dont want to be hurt by a guy so you choose weak guys - bs).

the thing i hateeeeeee though is that i cant really talk when im typing ... like i cant get my thoughts out ... and i have so much to say about this... is there anyway you could come to yahoo chat one day when its just us girls? anais? ... i dont want to sound pushy but you can really get deeper when you have a voice chat about it ... ( or maybe i can get deeper.. who knows).

i loved how you sumed it up cake ... i was like great over view

but back to the nature verses nuter question ... maybe cake is right ... when she said its diffrent for every dev. asin it gets passed down like you said anais from a mum who was with an ab guy ... and for someone else it could have been trigered due to enviroment.

i dont know so much about this subject ... just the basics so i have a question ....

ok so we have subject one : tom

tom is a happy well agusted boy and his perents are wellrounded happy ppl (with the 2.4 kids and a picked fence). at the ages of 17 he loses all his famaly to a tragadi and from then on can not really get his life back on trak ... loses hope and now has clinkical depression ...

one night in his deep " i dont give a f..." stage, he goes out drinking all night at the local pub. there tom meets jane and they have baby lisa ...

so does the depressive gene passed down ? or is it not there cos toms depression was trigers not inhernt?

so then can that same analage be use for a dev ?


(if you cant understand what im saying ...all i can say is tough luck! cos you could have had me on a mic right now ... cos you know what im spitting is gold baby ,.. gold lol)

[Emma]

No Lavly, the way I understand genetics is its something your born with your genes don't convert once you have had an experience. So in your example, Tom does not now have the gene for depression since his depression was triggered.

I also want to throw in that I don't think devoteeism is a genetic trait that passed from generation to generation. I think it is something we were born with but it was caused somehow by how our brains developed, not a gene from a parent. It's very complex (as you all know) and has something to do with our pleasure center. Why do some people like the color purple and others prefer black? We don't know that and we certainly don't know why someone is sexually attracted to disabled guys.

[BA]

I also feel that this is NOT a genetic trait however, our TEMPERMENT is genetic (who will be a sensitive, excitable or calm baby). I think that devoteeism and other similar types of preferences develop based upon two things: the chemical constructs of the brain at birth and very, very early childhood (if not infant) experiences which probably have nothing to do at all with the issue of "disability". These experiences occur during a total primitive state of our development (before sexual feelings are even experienced conciously).

I don't think we will ever fully understand the range of human behavior and all the why's and wherefores. Whatever it was we experienced gave us a heightened sense of arousal and a feeling of comfort at the same time at an extremely young age. Freud would say it is pure "Id" and the guilt that follows for some of us is a function of the super-ego and the way we internalized the values of our parents and society at large.

Whatever it is, it is certainly hard wired but I do not believe it is something passed down from parent to child.

[lavly]

see i totaly get ya emma ... but i was watching this doco about this very thing. and from my understaning of clinical depersion ... ( well what i got for the doco) is that once you have trigerd that impales then there is a physialogical change in your brain waves. and that your dna is a mirrio of that change and there for can be passed down.

but the hole thing got me sooooooooooo lost ... cos you know as a dev the first thing i think about is ok well what about sci or amputations why are they not mirroed in our dna.

im still lost ... i dont get it

[lavly]

oh one last thing i get what you saying about it having "something to do with our pleasure center" i think i agree.

[anais]

lavly, as with most of the psychological phenomena, depression is a combination of inherited predispostition and environmental triggers.
If you are a very strong person innately, if you don't have family history of depression, the chances that you will not get it after a traumatic experience are higher, than in the case of being genetically predisposed to it.
That doesn't mean, that if your relatives have had depression, you will certainly get it after loosing your job, boyfriend or whatever causes pain.
Statistically though, if we want to predict depression, the prediction is higher for those, whose families members are known for being depressed=genetical factor.

I think the same is with "devoteeism", and I agree on this with Emma and BA.
Probably, because of having innately sensitive pleasure center (genetic factor) we were more predisposed to feel aroused (sexually and emotionally) because of certain things (environmental factor), that might have left less sensitive individuals indifferent.
Supposedly, in early lives we were triggered by the experience of disability, we quickly learned to connect it with pleasure (learning centers are connected with emotional ones) and that what made us devs.
Perhaps, other highly sensitive individuals, who were accidently triggered, I donno, say by old people, became geriatric-fetishists (sorry, don't know any eufimism for this phenomena
So it is indeed an "erotic tragedy". But, I think, in our case it is one of the best cases of tragedy.
Imagine those, who are aroused by underaged kids? This is a real tragedy.
Luckyly, we got the fun stuff and mostly unharmfull for the objects of our desire

[Inigo Montoya]

This was a wild experience. In the early parts of the book I had to read a little and then stop. I'd get that feeling... where your tummy kind of fists up. I recognize sooo much of myself in her. Who knows how things would've turned out if I had had her self awareness and the internet at her age.

I'm not sure where I fall on the genetic/environment thing. I've recently remembered that there WAS a disabled guy in my early childhood. A neighbor who ambulated with crutches, he grew up with my parents and was disabled in a car accident with my uncle. I hated him. I don't even know why... but I remember hating when he'd come over. Not liking it when he'd call. He worked on cars and I remember hating it when I felt like my parents were doing things for him or his family out of pity. And then feeling like I was a bad person for not having compassion. (Feeling mildly f*cked up over this. lol)

BA and I have talked some about my desire vs. fear. That the more I want something the harder I'll push it away sometimes. So I don't know if that's why I hated him... because early on I recognized somewhere inside that he was the visual representation of my sexual desire? That's another thing that interested me in the book. The discussion of sexuality in early childhood and infancy.

I want to go back to the obsession and the guilt. I don't remember who said it about not being able to function like that. But I wanted to say that I have. And she's aware but (imo) seemed pretty detached from it. Very outside herself and aware. But it's just kind of woven into your day... the filter through which you view things. It kind of reminds me about how you function through grief or other strong emotions that last. It's just always tickling the edge of your psyche. Lurking.

Speaking of... that's how the guilt is for me. I'm mostly over it, thanks to this place and some interaction with some guys (particularly my life coach) who are okay with what we are. But the guilt is always lurking. I'm aware of it waiting to pounce and I'm mildly vigilant about battling it. Like, "oh, hello, guilt... there you are... thanks for visiting, now begone!"

Anyway... that's all for now (finished it last night ) and I'm sorry I was late to the discussion.

[Cake]

Nov 27, 2010 20:04:40 GMT -5 Emma said:

I also want to throw in that I don't think devoteeism is a genetic trait that passed from generation to generation. I think it is something we were born with but it was caused somehow by how our brains developed, not a gene from a parent. It's very complex (as you all know) and has something to do with our pleasure center. Why do some people like the color purple and others prefer black? We don't know that and we certainly don't know why someone is sexually attracted to disabled guys.

Nov 27, 2010 21:41:46 GMT -5 BA said:

I also feel that this is NOT a genetic trait however, our TEMPERMENT is genetic (who will be a sensitive, excitable or calm baby). I think that devoteeism and other similar types of preferences develop based upon two things: the chemical constructs of the brain at birth and very, very early childhood (if not infant) experiences which probably have nothing to do at all with the issue of "disability". These experiences occur during a total primitive state of our development (before sexual feelings are even experienced conciously).

I don't think we will ever fully understand the range of human behavior and all the why's and wherefores. Whatever it was we experienced gave us a heightened sense of arousal and a feeling of comfort at the same time at an extremely young age. Freud would say it is pure "Id" and the guilt that follows for some of us is a function of the super-ego and the way we internalized the values of our parents and society at large.

Whatever it is, it is certainly hard wired but I do not believe it is something passed down from parent to child.

Hm... I guess you two are right. It makes much more sense.

[Emma]

I read the book in 24 hours (on and off, obviously) and completely loved it. I'm so sad it isn't longer. Just like the rest of you I identified with her and loved seeing a true, real, mostly normal dev put on paper and published.

I loved the parts where she struggled with what to tell her friends and how different she felt than them in relation to guys.

I loved how she talked about seeing his disabled body as beautiful.

I loved how she recognized her opportunity when she met him and took advantage of it.

I love how normal and confident she came off to him yet in her head was thinking something different.

I really hope to find the author online and thank her for her wonderful book. Any similar book suggestions?

[Pij02]

My copy of (W)hole arrived today. I have read the first seven chapters, and so far I am pleasantly surprised. I am enjoying it greatly! However, it is still too early in the story for me to form an overall opinion. I hope the idea for a book club can gain some momentum, because I think it is a terrific idea! I cant wait to discuss...

On the genetic/environment sub-topic...

Devoteeism defiantly has a genetic component, environmental component, and psychological component. Genes cause predispositions in ones personality, via the physical construction/development of the brain and hormone/chemical/neurotransmitter production. Environmental stimulation, via experiences/culture/learned behavior, can trigger those predispositions.

For a VERY simplistic example...

• One may be genetically predisposed for empathy, and live in a culture (like ours
  ) where people with disabilities are pitied. If exposed to such attitudes during stages of sexual development one may begin to sexualize disability because of heightened empathy for the disabled.
  

• One may be genetically predisposed to low self esteem, and live in a culture (like ours) where people with disabilities are considered “non-threatening” or “asexual”. Hence, one would sexualize disability because they feel safe.
  

• One may be genetically predisposed to dominant/aggressive tendencies, and live in a culture (like ours) where the disabled are considered weak and submissive. Hence, one would sexualize disability because they feel superior/dominant.
  

• One may be genetically predisposed to nurturing or mothering behaviors, and live in a culture (like ours) where people assume that the disabled need cared for. Hence one would sexualize disability because of a heightened caregiver instinct.
  

All of these example would take place in early childhood, when sexuality is first being defined. By the time we are adults we simply know that we “think guys in wheelchairs are hot.”, without being aware of the rationale that shaped those preferences.

Also, to say there is a gene for devoteeism is a mistake. Every behavior is the result of MANY genes acting together in mind-numbingly complex ways. There is no one sequence of genetic code that is responsible for devoteeism, but a constellation of genes contributing pieces to a puzzle, as well as many other puzzles. Add in the relevant psychological tendencies (also influenced by a constellation of genes and the environment), and the environmental factors (influenced by learned behaviors, memes, culture, genes). As you can see the web of complexity becomes almost to much to imagine much less navigate.

In addition, I would like to speak briefly on the idea that devoteeism is not able to evolve by Darwinian Natural Selection. Of course it can! Things like art, music and mathematics have NO evolutionary advantage and were not directly selected for. However, we are evolved to love music, create art and have an aptitude for math. That’s because these are each cases of evolved adaptions being hijacked.

• We love music because we have an evolved ability to analyze and comprehend repeated rhythmic patterns. We evolved this ability to make speech second nature to use. Every child can learn the vast complexities of language in only a few years. Music simply hijacks and hyper-stimulates this innate ability.
  

• We can create and use mathematics because we have massive brains that are evolved to process probabilities, quantities, and patterns. We evolved this adaptation in order to analyze our surrounding, determine the probability of danger/safety, discover pattern in the behavior of animals/rivals/natural phenomena. Mathematics simply takes advantage of the architecture that was evolved for a different purpose entirely.
  

Things do not have to be beneficial adaptations to be explained in evolutionary terms. I am not saying that we can discover the evolutionary origins of devoteeism, I am just saying that there is no reason why it is not possible for devoteeism to be explained (partially) in terms of evolutionary psychology.

[shadow=red,left,300][glow=red,2,300]
~Paige[/glow][/shadow]

[Emma]

Wow Paige, you certainly seem to know a lot about the science of genetics and inheritance. That all makes sense and the complexity of it all is why I'm not trying to understand the reason why I'm a dev, I just accept it.