want to break free!!”
sang FREDDIE MERCURY of the QUEEN fame, and in this so called age of the
New Awakening we still DARE to raise homosexuality as an issue ,
as a topic to rave rant and debate about. But regardless of what we
“enlightened “ souls choose to define right / wrong , good /bad ,
the whole controversy of homosexuality remains a freedom protected by
our constitution, a freedom many countries had fought for and won. That
freedom which gave way to a
lot of nations /individuals to develop their potential/s to the
maximum---that freedom , none other than the freedom of CHOICE.
whole concept of sexual orientation, whether 'heterosexual' or
'homosexual', is a social delusion. People believe they have an
'orientation' because that is the prevailing myth in our society and
people just assume it is true. The whole concept of sexual orientation,
whether 'heterosexual' or 'homosexual', is a social delusion.
one is born with the sexual attractions that they manifest later in
life. If you are a 'heterosexual', why are you not attracted to all
members of the opposite sex, under all circumstances? The reality is,
you are sexually aroused by certain specific members of the opposite
sex, and only under specific circumstances. Let's say you are powerfully
sexually aroused by long-haired Latino girls who dress punk, when you
see them dancing. Can anyone seriously believe that information this
specific is coded in your genes? Instead of a generalized sexual
orientation, what people really have are Sexual and Affection Arousal
Cue Imprints. These are very specific, and are not genetic at all,
whether they are 'heterosexual' or 'homosexual' in nature. You cannot
"choose" what your Arousal Cue Imprints will be, they are
simply an accident of the process of development. Neither can they be
changed, once acquired - by force of will, prayer, or divine
BIOLOGICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL VIEW:
most people have a very long list of Arousal Cue Imprints, and many of
them are slight variations of the others, they become blurred together
in our minds, and we come to see them as a generalized 'orientation'.
However, careful observation of what specifically causes a sexual or
affection response in you will reveal that your Arousal Cue Imprints are
indeed very specific.
and Affection Arousal Cue Imprints account for all manifestations of
sexual desire, there are no exceptions. Therefore, this theory explains
things that cannot otherwise be explained by the theories of "genetics"
or "choice". For example, the existence of 'bi-sexual'
persons. If 'heterosexuality' and 'homosexuality' are genetic, where do
'bisexuals' come from? Similarly, if sexual arousal is a matter of
'choice', then why can't you just choose to be sexually aroused by
office furniture? Or your Grandparents? Try 'choosing' to be sexually
aroused by Rosie O'donnel or George Bush Sr., and see what happens. This
theory also accounts for sexual attractions considered to be deviancy
like bestiality, rubber and leather fetishes, sado-masochism, etc. No
one 'chooses' to be aroused by these things, and it is simply ridiculous
to think that they might be genetically coded.
have the Sexual and Affection Arousal Cues that are specific to you,
because a sub-conscious process that you cannot directly observe
recorded them, in some manner, at some point prior to your achieving
physical maturity. Please note that this does not mean that you will
have a conscious memory of the event which created your Imprint(s), nor
does this process necessarily require a rational correspondence between
an event and it's corresponding Imprint. In other words, you don't have
to be seduced by a blond German barmaid as a child in order to be
aroused by blond German barmaids in later life. The correspondence may
be quite oblique, but then, that is how the subconscious works.
Many other species have great difficulty achieving sexual arousal
unless If 'heterosexuality' and 'homosexuality' are genetic, where do
'bisexuals' come from?
This is why the existence of homosexual imprints is not a contradiction
of its purpose.
choice of what to do with our arousal is left to so-called "higher
functions", which determine our sense of morality. Some imprints
are quite unfortunate and may generate attractions that ought not to
ever be acted upon - such as attractions to minor persons or to
violence. Once again, however, the subconscious function that imprints
these things as attractions is unconcerned with morality. It cares not
at all whether our arousal ultimately leads to other people being harmed
or traumatized. It is up to us as individuals to harness our rational
function and exercise control over our impulses if they may lead to harm
THE GAY MARRIAGE ISSUE:
a person is supposed to search for that special someone who is right for
them , fall in love and ultimately marry for life. Politicians still get
a lot of mileage out of espousing family values and paying homage to a
marriage as the central institution in our society. Bridal magazines do
a roaring trade ,celebrity weddings attract huge
public interest and young girls especially continue to invest
considerable emotional capital in the dream of a “perfect
marriage”. Unfortunately reality is somewhat different - with nearly
half of all marriages ending in divorce – so called heterosexual
“right “ marriages. So what exactly makes these marriages seek a
status higher than the homosexual union? Nothing.
“ARGUMENTS” AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY:
various arguments presented are:
Gay union should not be allowed
because marriage is defined as the union of
a man and a woman. Funny . I always thought that the whole idea
of marriage is exactly that u promise each other loyalty and love.
Stating that gay couples can’t marry because WE don’t marry gay
couples is an empty tautology that reeks of bigotry and fossiled
argument which comes forth is the question-“Are we humans taking too
many things in our own opinion disregarding all previous distinctions
set upon it?” How awful –humans taking things in their own
consideration !! This argument clearly implies that someone knows better
than humans what humans need and want from life!!
another amusing argument that comes our way is that apparently “gay people are
seeking to alter an anchored tradition by creating an uproar merely to
satisfy their own needs of not seeming abnormal in anyway.” I guess
whoever raised this argument must think that the other need marriage
serves –having one’s relationship legally recognized and protected
–aren’t worth having for their own sake.
No.4 we have this:
may believe that we are wiser with age but actually we seem only to
disregard previous rules which played a vital role in getting to this
point in the future.”
disregarding previous rules that deliberately set out to harm people has
been the main source of sound justice throughout the last century or
two. At the beginning of this century the rules were that women were the
property of their husbands ,that divorce was illegal , and that women
rights were something to be mocked at. All these things were changed for
the better by DISREGARDING those
evil rules. The same thing goes for the “ rule” that gay people
aren’t allowed to EXIST.
isn’t a single reasonable argument as to why we shouldn’t let same
–sex couples choose to have their relationship accepted and legally
recognized in just the same way as different sex couples do. These
arguments are an empty appeal to “tradition” and “moral values”
which appear to consist of nothing more than the belief that it is moral
to treat homosexuals badly.
ANTI –GAY MOVEMENTS-A SATIRE:
RIGHT TO HATE???
is a movement underway in North America today, a wave of anti-Gay
sentiment, sometimes described as a ‘backlash’ against the recent
progress of Gay and Lesbian persons to achieve civil rights and
liberties on an equal basis with other citizens. What is behind this
‘backlash’? Is it entirely an orchestrated political manifestation
of the extreme religious right? Or is there something more fundamental,
more darkly sinister at the root of these outbursts?
There is a rather common personality type, which has been described by a
variety of terms by a variety of researchers over the years, but that
has two main and very distinctive traits:
- an overwhelming need to feel in control, not only of themselves, but
of everything and everyone around them.
- an inability to accept responsibility for their own faults,
weaknesses, and failures, and a need to cast blame onto someone else
when things go wrong.
the moment, we will term these personalities - Scapegoating Control
Freaks - (SCFs). Life has not been easy for these individuals and their
clone-like offspring since the end of WW2. Revelations about the Death
Camps and the role of anti-Semitism in creating an atmosphere in which
they could exist, took away the "right" to hate Jews and
practice discrimination against them for many of the SCFs. Where once it
was socially acceptable to hate Jews and to blame them for all of life's
problems, it now became socially unacceptable. Things got even worse for
the SCFs when the Civil Rights movement came along in the 60's - now it
was unacceptable to hate Blacks and blame them for all their problems
(or to hate Whites - if you happened to be a SCF of color). And then the
Women's Movement came along, and it became unacceptable to be openly
misogynistic and more and more difficult to dominate and unquestioningly
control their wives and children. Some women even started to demand an
equal voice in the household and in society at large. Can we even begin
to understand how frightening and threatening all this was for the SCFs?
And then - a final shattering blow - the end of communism and the Iron
Curtain. Now there weren't even any godless commies around anymore to
hate and to blame for all those disturbing changes happening all around
the SCFs, that they couldn't stop and that made them feel so powerless,
But there remained one refuge, one solace and consolation - it would
surely always be acceptable to hate faggots and dykes! After all, God
himself had declared them to be an abomination, hadn't He?
we are witnessing today, this so-called "backlash", this wave
of anti-Gay sentiment, is in fact the last desperate stand of those
marginal personalities in our society who have a compelling and
compulsive need to hate someone and blame others for their problems -
real or imagined. It is a cry of -"Dammit! I have a RIGHT to hate
someone, to hate THESE people, and you aren't going to take that away
from me!!" Like a cornered bear, the SCFs can be expected to be
irrationally vicious in attacking every manifestation of a liberalized
view and acceptance of homosexuality in our society. It is not the Gay
and Lesbian members of our society who are suffering from an emotional
illness - it is in fact those persons who are passionately and
irrationally opposed to equal civil rights for all members of our
nations who need psychological help.
is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice,
no degradation. It cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to
be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of
sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and
modern times have been homosexual, several of the greatest men among
them (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci etc.).
a great injustice to present homosexuality as a crime---and moreover a
cruelty beyond description.
say India is a diverse society, but is it really? Homosexuals are human
just as much as heterosexuals YET society thinks it has the right to put
gays/lesbians down. Isn’t it about time we put our differences aside
and gave people the rights they deserve, and whether you like it or not
homosexuals deserve just as much right as you.
To conclude, no one does it better than Derek Jarman, British
filmmaker,artist and author.
that sexuality is as wide as the sea.
Understand that YOUR morality is NOT law. Understand that if we
decide to be the way we are , it is OUR decision and you have no goddamn
right to interfere.”
Author is a 1st Yr. Engg. student from Bangalore and also a content
developer for Campusrox.com.