I'd add as #4, they have a vague feeling of squick and an aversion to looking critically at its relevance or consequences. IME, usually, when one wonders what people think, they do not think.
i will have to agree with this. its at least a contributor.
most people who have pretty firm sexual attractions (pardon the pun) have a lot of trouble wrapping their heads around anything too different. sex is one of the base drives (base meaning foundation) so it gets "under" a lot of reasoning and feelings.
This is one fo the reasons why , in my non expert opinion, a concentration on "civil rights" and "taxes" and "next of kin" will get a lot more support than "the right of people to love...."
people can think about taxes and civil stuff a LOT more calmly and reasonably than they think about sex and sexuality
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rm
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 10:37 am (UTC)ok, 4 things...
Date: 2009-12-04 02:08 pm (UTC)most people who have pretty firm sexual attractions (pardon the pun) have a lot of trouble wrapping their heads around anything too different.
sex is one of the base drives (base meaning foundation) so it gets "under" a lot of reasoning and feelings.
This is one fo the reasons why , in my non expert opinion, a concentration on "civil rights" and "taxes" and "next of kin" will get a lot more support than "the right of people to love...."
people can think about taxes and civil stuff a LOT more calmly and reasonably than they think about sex and sexuality