Homosexuality
This is a subject I'd rather not talk about but there is so much disinformation out there causing so much cognitive dissonance that people are separating into one of two camps. Pro-homosexuality and Anti-homosexuality. For those of you wondering which camp I'm in, I'm in one all my own. It's called antidisestablishmentarianism. No, wait it's called Anti-disinformation.
Here in Seattle we have a weekly show called Town Meeting, in it we discuss relevant issues, and last week's issue was gays in Prime Time. Brought about by the eminent episode of Ellen in which she reveals that she is a lesbian. There were two sides to the argument, homosexuals talking about their right to be who they are, and religious zealots quoting the bible to them.
Well, here I will attempt to make clear (Never say "clarify" around a lobster) my position on homosexuality, which I believe to be an objective, pragmatic view of the situation. I'll try and put in footnotes with links to medical papers so you don't think I'm some kook passing off my opinions as facts. Hopefully you will come away from this a little wiser and knowing the truth behind not only homosexuality, but behind people's attitudes about it as well. I'm not denying anyone's right to exist or live the lifestyle they choose, I'm just attempting to clear up some common misperceptions perpetuated by ignorant people, if it helps you that's good, but if not, please don't boil me!!
Are people born
homosexual?
Why would homosexuals
choose that lifestyle?
So what are you saying?
People shouldn't be gay?
More than half the
teenage suicides are homosexuals!
Two consenting adults can
do as they please.
Who are you to impose
your morals on me?
Scientists have proven
people are born gay!
You're forcing people
into the closet!
Are you homophobic?
No. I'm well aware of the fact that there are three developmental stages in which a hormonal wash determines different aspects of your sexuality, In fact, I did an essay about that in college, none of these result in someone being attracted to the same sex. Here is where it gets a bit graphic but in order to explain the hows and whys it is necessary.
First lets define our terms, shall we? Most people define homosexuality as a condition people are born into by which they are attracted exclusively to members of the same sex. Hopefully on this page I have made a strong enough case against this belief that you will realize that is not the case. Therefore according to that definition there is no such thing as a homosexual. Then there is Homosexuality as described by DSM IV as the capacity for erotic attraction to the same sex. By this definition everyone is a homosexual because we all have the capacity for such an erotic attraction. If you don't believe it ask yourself if you enjoy any sexual activity other than straight penetration. If the answer is yes, you must realize that those other sexual acts you enjoy are not the result of an instinctual mechanism but rather the result of consciously linking those acts with erotic thoughts thereby making them erotic. In the same manner you can make anything sexually erotic to yourself, be that whips, chains, dogs, homosexuality or like Ted Bundy, murder. Any abstract concept can be made erotic if you think about it in those terms.
Assuming a person is born with the sexual instincts of the opposite sex, they would not be homosexual. If it is a woman and she is born with a male sexual instinct, then she would have a compelling urge to penetrate a woman with her penis when fully aroused. Yet this woman has no penis therefore there is nothing she can do to fulfill this sexual urge. She can go through other motions with another women, none of which are sexual instincts so she may as well go through those same motions with a man.
At this point in the conversation someone usually points out that such a woman would be attracted to a woman and not a man therefore making "going through the motions with a man" just as unappealing to her as doing the same thing would be to me. For this we go back to the DSM IV definition of homosexuality in which we find that everyone is homosexual because everyone has the same capacity to make anything including their same sex erotic to themselves. It would simply be a matter of associating straight sex with erotic thoughts, and since it helps to get the adrenaline pumping and hurry this process along if you think you're doing something wrong which reinforces these neural links making such an attraction that much stronger, I would suggest you think of all the outspoken gay rights activists who would highly disapprove of you attempting to like straight sex. especially if you could have easily been swayed to finding homosexual sex erotic. :) But seriously, there is no shame in attempting to use self knowledge to manipulate your mind to get the desired results. I do it all the time!
Why would homosexuals choose that lifestyle?
Some homosexuals when confronted with the possibility that they choose to live they lifestyle they do will quickly point out that they are persecuted for their lifestyle and therefore it would make no sense to choose it.
This all falls back to cognitive dissonance (1), and a certain degree of denial. First, in order to justify to themselves a lifestyle which they themselves know is wrong, they must make it right in their minds, and this is accomplished by auto-suggestion that they were born attracted to the same sex, and they will more often than not look back on their childhood for any evidence to support their claim not realizing that before puberty, prior to developing one's secondary sexual characteristics, there is no sexual instinct. Even so I've heard people suggest they've always been gay because they wore a dress once as a child.
After they've convinced themselves (And again, this is not meant to be a blanket statement, I acknowledge that there are homosexuals out there that realize and admit to having made a choice) they have succeeded in relieving the cognitive dissonance caused by their erotic thoughts toward the same sex, and their basic knowledge that it's just plain wrong, by convincing themselves that they were born, through no fault of their own, with the capacity for erotic thoughts about the same sex because of some genetic mutation. And furthermore, since the reward for being homosexual is a society that looks down on you, they can't take comfort in that and must therefore make homosexuality in and of itself that much more rewarding to themselves. "I chose something that I didn't need and just made my life worse, that must mean I really really like being a homosexual despite the problems it brings" Another example of cognitive dissonance.
So what are you saying? People shouldn't be gay?
Hey! People can live their life anyway they choose to, I certainly do. I don't want to put people down for how they live their life, I don't even want to suggest to them how they should live their life. I just want to clear up some confusion on this very controversial issue. And if I am wrong lets talk about it and you can tell me where I am mistaken, there is certainly room for discussion.
I don't claim to know everything but I do claim to be unbiased, in a world where it doesn't pay to be unbiased, therefore I've convinced myself I was born unbiased in order to be able to deal with my unbiased ways. Seriously though I am a big fan of objective reality and the facts as they are, and I am not afraid to admit it when proven wrong.
Most teenage suicides are committed by gay teens!
That's an interesting argument, I don't know that it's true and indeed I have heard people say those numbers are a complete fabrication. Be that as it may it's irrelevant in the face of the true nature of homosexuality. Presumably the reason these confused individuals would be committing suicide is because they cannot face life in this society as a homosexual. Not to mention they would be looked down upon and then there is their own overwhelming feelings of guilt for having feelings they themselves know are not right.
After making this point, homosexuals then suggest that society be accepting of the homosexual lifestyle and portray homosexuals in the media as good people and fight for homosexual rights and recognition. Anyone who disagrees at this point is vilified and made to look like they are directly responsible for the deaths of young people. It reminds me of Sierra Anti-freeze commercials that insist you are directly responsible for killing puppies if you do not use their non-toxic, friendly to puppies product. The statement in question is such a slimy argument and it wins SO many people over! The reason it's a slimy argument is that the real source of self loathing and suicidal tendencies of these confused individuals is the misinformation spread by gay rights activists that if they have these feelings they are homosexual, were born that way and will always be that way. A teenager who realizes sexuality is a matter of choice would have no motivation to commit suicide, erotic thoughts about the same sex would be viewed as a quirk of growing up and not a undeniable sign of homosexuality. A teenager who thinks homosexuals are born homosexual will automatically assume s/he is a homosexual at the first sign of erotic thoughts about the same sex, making him/her deal with the idea that s/he will spend the rest of his/her life attracted to the same sex unable to have a normal healthy relationship. All this is thrust upon the shoulders of a person who is not mature enough to deal with the idea of lifelong relationships much less being forced to deal with a false image of what their only possible future will be like so they kill themselves. Like I said it's a slimy argument and allowing the spread of misinformation is not the way to fix the problem.
Notice I said misinformation not disinformation. I don't think most homosexuals are out to intentionally confuse the issue, I'm sure most of them truly believe the facts are on their side, it doesn't help that there are so called scientists like Dean Hamer or Simon LeVay who are gay activists as well as scientists and continue to confuse people with bad science. I can't say I'm surprised in a world where most people believe in god it's pretty obvious people fudge the facts in their favor to continue to believe as they do.
Two consenting adults can do as they please.
At this level of abstraction homosexuality is perfectly acceptable. I agree with this, they should be able to do anything they like with each other's bodies if they're are two consenting adults, I wouldn't dream of telling them they cannot do this thing or that. However, I don't want to hear about it. In the same way I'm sure no one wants to hear what I like to do sexually with women, and I would never be so forward to discuss it with anyone.
I might point out that at this same level you can find incest between a child past the age of consent and a parent. Should sexual relationships between daughters and their fathers or even daughters and their mothers be portrayed as normal, healthy alternative lifestyles? Of course you're going to answer no (If you didn't, seek help, you've got issues that you need to work out with a professional) but realize that this scenario meets the same criteria that makes homosexuality acceptable to be portrayed as a normal, healthy alternative lifestyle.
So what's the point? The point is there are many creative and twisted adults out there, they may be perfectly responsible people with normal jobs and a wonderful personality, or they may not, that's not the issue. The issue is respecting other's rights not to have to hear about those twisted and creative ways to have sex. If you feel the urge to let people know, send in a letter to any one of the alternative lifestyle rags in your area where your kink can be made known to others who care to know. If you try and force your kinkiness on other people you are being very rude and inconsiderate of their sensibilities.
People who say that homosexuality exists and therefore we should talk about it openly seeing as how it's part of society and all seem to be forgetting that sexual practices are a private issue. Identifying people by the way they have sex is not an idea that appeals to me. I am not "Lobster, the heterosexual" I'm Lobster, the crustacean. I have my sexual kinks and behavioral anomalies but I'm not going to belittle myself by using them as my main identifier.
Who are you to impose your morals on me?
First off a warning, this argument gets kind of personal since morals are a personal issue. I'm not imposing my ideals on anyone, I'm simply pointing out that the majority of people are offended by the subject of sexual practice, most people agree that kinky sex is not a proper topic for polite conversation. I hardly consider asking someone to be respectful of another is persecuting them. Perhaps you feel you should be able to shout your sexual kinks from a mountain top, after all it is a free country. Well you can, but don't expect any sympathy from me when you are looked upon with disgust.
I am outraged by the way the media vilifies anyone who does not outright embrace the idea of homosexuality. In effect they are forcing me to lower my standards to what they feel is appropriate, thereby imposing their morals on ME under pain of being traduced. These shows also send a clear message that acceptance of the lifestyle results in a complete and total acceptance of the character that was just previously maligned to a bloody pulp. What's worse is the morons who get off on seeing that don't realize they're being played with, not unlike the male bashing commercials for household items such as laundry detergent, cleansers or other housewares. They show a woman as the one that's got it all together and in comes her dopey hubby screwing things up again! "Men, they're such a waste of human life!" the commercials seem to say, but the reason they say this is that they're for products a woman typically buys. Of course maybe I'm wrong and they're appealing to males who hate themselves, but from my point of view they're sending the message that a woman's place is in the home washing the man's clothes, ironing the man's shirt and making the man dinner for when he gets home. You don't think of it that way because they're bashing men and nurturing the woman's feelings of dissatisfaction with her brainless hubby who's only purpose in life is to lift heavy objects, fertilize her eggs and die. In the meantime you'll just have to clean up after the bugger! (Whoa went of on a bit of a rant there!)
In the same way television shows exploit the subject of homosexuality by kowtowing to masses now fully conditioned to accept the idea that people who do not like hearing about homosexuality are bad people. They are catering to politically correct demographics, they don't care if it's right or wrong, they want to see ratings! They want free advertising from the news for being so controversial. If any of those networks thought there was money to be made from making a weekly series about people putting peanutbutter on their privates and having their dogs lick it off they would do it.
Scientists have proven people are born gay!
It's pretty amazing to me people waste time and energy trying to find some biological anomaly to blame for the way they live their lives. Well people do and since the misinformation is out there I will address it.
Dr. Simon LeVay came out with a controversial study in 1991(2) stating that there was a biological connection to homosexuality because of differences in size of the neurotransmitters in the hypothalamus of straight men and gay men. This study has been thoroughly discredited as no other scientist has ever been able to reproduce LeVay's results. But by then it was too late, the study had made the news and the gay community had been relieved of responsibility for choosing to live as they do. At this point there are few homosexuals who will acknowledge the fact that LeVay's work was bunk, it's so much easier to say that anyone who disagrees with his work does so because of homophobia.
LeVay did not approach the subject objectively. Dr. LeVay, who is openly homosexual, told Newsweek that, after the death of his lover, he was determined to find a genetic cause for homosexuality or he would abandon science altogether. Furthermore, he admitted, he hoped to educate society about homosexuality, affecting legal and religious attitudes towards it.(3) None of which diminishes his credentials as a neuroscientist. But his research can hardly be said to have been unbiased.
I'm not accusing Simon LeVay of being an outright fraud, but you cannot ignore the fact that he is outspokenly gay and is looking for a specific thing, maybe he is trying to create disinformation, maybe he's just blinded by his own feelings, but the facts are even looking where he is for what he is suggests he's either very desperate or has forgotten all he learned about basic biology. I also feel Simon LeVay is getting special treatment, any other subject and people would laugh at this guy for trying to find something that cannot exist. It's the same as if someone were researching the "Polyester Gene" trying to find some biological link to why some people dressed in polyester leisure suits in the 70's. But do not take my word for it... check it out:
Dr. Richard Nakamura of the National Institute of Mental Health:
It will take a larger effort to be convinced there is a link between this structure and homosexuality.(4)
Dr. Anne-Fausto Sterling of Brown University:
My freshman biology students know enough to sink this study.(5)
Scientific American:
LeVay's study has yet to be fully replicated by another researcher.(6)
Dr. Dean Hamer's study (7) surrounding the gene Xq28 is flawed in it's conception, not to mention it's execution. First of all it takes sets of brothers and looks for correlations between a missing or present genes and homosexuality completely ignoring the fact that there is no instinct for homosexual sex therefore it's as likely to be a genetic problem as the clothes you wear. Secondly only 22% of the brothers that were heterosexual had the Xq28 gene, which supposedly proves that gene is responsible for homosexuality. Somehow the fact that some of the people studied were identical twins, of whom one was gay and the other was not did not strike anyone as odd. Indeed some of the researchers who worked with LeVay have come forward and admitted that sets of brothers who did not yield the data they were looking for were dropped from the study. Dean Hamer is also being investigated by the Office of Research Integrity, an American government agency that investigates possible scientific misconduct.
Another ridiculous study which gets the "Bonk bonk on the head" award is one by Michael Bailey of Northwestern University and psychiatrist Richard Pillard of Boston University School of Medicine who compared sets of identical male twins to fraternal twins. In each set, at least one twin was homosexual. They found that, among the identical twins, 52% were both homosexual, as opposed to the fraternal twins, among whom only 22% shared a homosexual orientation.(8) Pillard and Bailey suggested the higher incidence of shared homosexuality among identical twins meant homosexuality was genetic in origin. Maybe I'm just plain ignorant and don't know what the heck I'm talking about... but aren't identical twins GENETICALLY identical? Not exactly something I would expect to get past a scientist but the very fact that these people spent time and money performing and publishing this experiment despite it's most obvious of flaws leaves me feeling like maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. How could they go through all the trouble in the face of that one major flaw that pretty much renders any statistics gained from such a survey irrelevant?
Oh, I forgot to mention, both of the above mentioned researchers are gay activists.
You would think that with all the information out there that points toward there being no such thing as a person born as a homosexual, it would be no problem at all for people to realize it. Yet you never hear this on the news. I remember hearing countless times about how this gene or that is suspected of being the cause for homosexuality.. giving the clear impression that it's widely accepted homosexuality is an inborn trait, the only point of contention being which gene is responsible for it.
Recently I sent a letter into MSNBC for being complete and total gits. Not only did they have a retarded article about the evils of genetic research and manipulation, they also went on to say how some jerks might screen their babies for homosexuality and have abortions just for that reason, or even worse *gasp* make them normal! Man alive, if you ever want to make me angry, try and tell me avoiding advances in technology would be a good thing because of some ignorant belief you hold that a high school graduate should know better than to believe.
Well, sorry if I ranted a bit there but I get so passionate about my views at times :)
You are forcing people into the closet!
Wow! Positively brilliant argument.. I've been thinking about how to "come out", as it were, to all my friends, family and co-workers about the fact that I like to give women oral sex. I mean, it's who I am and I cannot continue to live this lie as a guy who just likes the old missionary style and nothing more. I yearn to run free in cunnilingus rights parades and organize boycotts of anyone who does not speak of cunnilingus in anything but a positive and supporting tone. I want children in pre-schools to be able to read books about cunnilingus so they can learn about this most noble of practices and not judge those who are staunch supporters of the act, and who knows, perhaps even discover that they too like cunnilingus!
I want congress to extend recognition to cunnilingus enthusiasts as a subgroup of Americans with all the rights and protection other Americans enjoy! I want the media to portray us as good, hard working folk and viciously attack those who would mock our lifestyle or suggest we keep it to ourselves.
I want expensive studies to prove that people who enjoy cunnilingus do so as a result of some bizarre genetic mishap which takes the sexual instincts honed by billions of years of evolution and does wacky things to them! I want cunnilingus bars, neighborhoods, sports teams, newsgroups, cities, t-shirts and newspapers. I want to see an "I wish I could be eating you out right now" Hallmark card and I want equal representation in the workplace through affirmative action!
Ok, that was really really gross, but that's exactly the point I'm trying to make. Distinctions between people dealing with sexual practice are not proper ones to make. Sexual practice is a private issue (Well maybe not for exhibitionists *badoom ching*) and the whole idea that keeping your private issues private is some form of oppression is ludicrous! It's mindless rhetoric, a tenet so moronic that it beggars description! *cough* *spit* Weird, I just spat out a thesaurus.
The Onion had a great satirical article about a guy who insists people should TELL him they don't want to see his penis if that's how they feel, otherwise he must assume they would like to see his penis. That's the mentality behind the whole "In the closet" argument. It operates under the axiom that everyone out there wants or needs to know about your sexual practices, after you accept this then of COURSE it makes sense! Of course, all those people who would tell you not to go around telling everyone what you do sexually would seem like oppressive jerks. You're just giving people what they need, the truth about your sex life. It's the very least they deserve right? Oh and you might want to show them your private parts too, we can't keep those in your underwear.. those who don't like it are oppressive jerks... penisphobes. :)
Hopefully that puts things in perspective!
That is either a brilliant move on the gay rights activist's part or an incredibly fortunate stroke of luck for them! To come up with an argument that takes the wrong out of being gay and puts squarely onto the shoulders of those who do not agree with that lifestyle. If you don't like homosexuality that means there is something wrong with YOU! Not only is this an effective tool to keep people from voicing their disapproval of the homosexual lifestyle, it also chips away at the egos of "macho" men who are suddenly being accused of being afraid of something, encouraging them to show how brave they are by accepting this lifestyle!
This is without a doubt one of the slickest propaganda mechanisms I have seen.. it's like some automatic tool that you send out there and it does your work for you. I can't help but think the gay community hired the RAND corporation or some other such think tank to come up with that one! (No I'm not being sarcastic this time) This seems even more effective when homosexuals suggest that people who do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle, are often closet homosexuals themselves, I personally have known people who totally become convinced that they are homosexuals, and the reason they spoke out against it before was because they didn't want to admit it to themselves. Very slick! Applied Cognitive Dissonance!
Anyways, lets address the issue of homophobia. According to gay rights activists, those who do not agree with them are suffering from an unnatural fear of homosexuals. I work in a mostly homosexual neighborhood in Seattle, not a day goes by that I don't see a bumper sticker that reads "Hatred is not a family value" or "Straight but not Narrow" and I realize that if I were to come up with a pithy remark like "Neither is sexual perversion" in deference to the hatred remark and put that on my car, I can expect to get my windows smashed in, tires slashed and probably pummeled. That is a real fear and I guess in that way I'm afraid of homosexuals. It is a reasonable fear though and I challenge anyone who doesn't think so to try it.
There is a fear of homosexuals in the media though, it's not by people who fear hearing about homosexuals or that they may be homosexuals, but rather by people who don't agree with homosexuals about their lifestyle choice but are afraid of the aggressive attacks by the oh-so-vocal gay activists or the many minions they've won over with their arguments. I've been at the receiving end of one such volley and believe me you it was not a good time! One day I'm one of the group, admired for my technical knowledge, revered for my creativity and accomplishments, the next day I'm defending myself as each and every one of the thirty some people who just the day before were proud to call me their friend, launch an all out war of personal attacks after learning that I did not believe people are born homosexual. Suddenly my accomplishments were not so great after all, my technical knowledge non-existent and anything that escaped my lips was a lie. It was astounding, I had seen it done to others but never experienced it first hand. When I attempted to come back at them point by point on their personal attacks it was clear I had reason on my side, pointing out petty personal attacks which were unfounded while attempting to address the issues. More than one person even commented that the group usually argued about everything amongst themselves but on this issue they were all against me.
THAT is scary! How on earth did everybody get so conditioned to defend anything so aggressively? I can't help but think that I missed the "get conditioned to turn into a rabid dog whenever someone suggests homosexuality is not a good thing" day at school. Cognitive Dissonance at work?
Well, that's my position on homosexuality. I hope we can think of each other as humans, one not necessarily better or worse than the other one. And to paraphrase a really dull old guy: I fail to see why during life we must make artificial distinctions between ourselves.
I hope this page helps you in some way, if you want to discuss the issue further I've made some room for it in my politics message board area. Please no religious arguments, if you want to talk religion visit the religion page or the religious message area. As an atheist I don't tend to be very sympathetic to arguments about how god condemns homosexuality.
Main Page | MST 3K | Sci-Fi | Amaze & Amuse | Downloads | Services
Lobby's: | Brain | Fav TV | Family | Religious Views | Political Views | Career
Campaign $$ | Business | Abortion | Justice | Homosexuality
© 1996 Algo computer web productions, a division of Lobster's 'R' Us
Please note: None of these references are from right wing sources
1. Behm, J. & Cohen, A. Explorations in Cognitive Dissonance. New York: Wiley.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
2. LeVay, Simon. "A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men," Science, August 30, 1991, p. 1034-1037.
3. "Is This Child Gay?", p. 52.
4. Los Angeles Times, August 30, 1991, Section A, Page 1.
5. Newsweek, September 9, 1991, p. 52.
6. "Gay Genes Revisited," Scientific American, Nov. 1995, p. 26.
7. Hamer, Dean. "A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation," Science, 261, July 16, 1993, p. 321-327.
8. Bailey and Pillard. "A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation," Archives of General Psychiatry #48, 1991, p. 1089-1096.
