Tyler's Turn Blog

One of my reasons for opposing the war in Iraq was that any attempt to impose a democratic government from the outside would be culturally inappropriate. Better, I thought, to bolster the opposition that must certainly exist in Iraq.

Many of my pro-war friends poo-pooed the idea that any opposition could exist under Saddam's heavy hand. However, as soon the initial invasion was over, fully-formed political parties sprang up almost overnight, indicating underground networks had existed before Saddam's overthrow.

Of course, the main problem with my idea of fostering dissension was that we had almost no intelligence personnel on the ground in Iraq. Our own heavy-handed sanctions regime had completely closed off Iraq to us — hence our utter failure on the WMD intelligence.

Now, we're looking at Iran and wondering what we should do about that autocratic regime. And, once again, the only options on the table are draconian sanctions or military force. Why not learn from our mistakes, open up a cultural dialog between our countries, and help bolster the opposition that already exists?

Whatever one thinks of Nixon and Reagan, their legacy in China and Russia is certainly better than Clinton and Bush's legacy in Iraq. Or maybe we should take a page from Sting's songbook, and sing "I hope the Iranians love their children too." Whatever the posturing of the leaders, I believe everyday Iranians do love their children, and want a better world for them.

Thanks to Andrew Sullivan for the link to the Iranian opposition.

I've had several people ask me what I think about the gay younger brother study. Usually, they preface it with something like, "Isn't this ridiculous? You don't have any older brothers do you?"

But I don't think it's ridiculous. The study was prompted by a statistical fact: men who have several older brothers are much more likely than other men to be gay. It doesn't mean all gay men are younger brothers, but it does mean younger brothers are likely to be gay.

Scientists being scientists, this fact intrigued some of them and they wanted to see if they could figure out why. So, they interviewed a bunch of gay younger brothers and their families, to see if there might be some environmental factor at work. Turns out, they couldn't find any common environmental denominator. They also ruled out genetics, so now they think it must have something to do with the environment of the mother's womb.

It's not the sort of thing I'd spend time studying, but it seems like a pretty reasonable conclusion to me. It also cuts against the ex-gay "bad parents" theory. And, as a survivor of ex-gay therapy, I think anything that debunks that pseudo-science is a good thing.