Saturday, March 06, 2004
Pro-homosexual tactics that include violence - more conceptual problems
From sinisterninja:
I recently witnessed someone with homosexual tendencies attack someone with heterosexual tendencies, calling them archaic, and something else... I don't remember. Some homosexuals actually have the nerve to tell a heterosexual that they are being archaic, and following a book written by a man, for not wanting to have sex with someone of their own gender. Really? Are you serious? I'm not saying homosexuality is right or wrong, but to attack a heterosexual's preference, and/or aversion to homosexual acts, is fucking ridiculous.
Pro-homosexuals must necessarily attack others, or they cannot impose their ideology. This is not a worldview that permits multiple beliefs, it is dogmatic and exclusionary. Everyone who disagrees must be attacked and destroyed because the belief that homosexuality should exist can only be sustained by destroying the right to be free from it.
In order to legitimize homosexuality, any opposition to it must be construed as pathological, aberrant, and ignorant.
The logic that is used to impose homosexuality as legitimate is also borrowed and used to impose other sexual ideologies and behaviors. Supporters of paradigms and praxi such as prostitution, pornography, pedophilia, S/M, bestiality, etc., have been using several of the same conceptual frameworks as pro-homosexuals.
I think also sinisterninja above represents a lot of people who have bought in the concept that homosexuality is right and healthy and not a result of mental/psychological/developmental/relationship problems, a concept I disagree with.
Which brings us to the question of choice. I find that one view that is quite absent from the mass media and informal talk about homosexuality and the question of choice is exactly the issue of mental/psychological/developmental/relationship problems. For example, if someone has repeated unpleasant experiences while growing up with swimming and then that persons comes to hate and be turned off by swimming, can you say that this person has chosen to dislike swimming? Obviously not, it is a result of a series of complex experiences. My views on why people are the way they are at a particular moment in life regarding their sexuality, psychology and intellectual state of mind, are analogous to this example. I don´t see people as having complete control over everything they are (some "homosexuality is a complete choice" theories), but not the simplistic opposite either ("I can´t help being, thinking, and feeling anything that´s homosexual, therefore everything I think, feel, and am is fine, and, consequently, I have a right to do everything I want with my sexuality, including doing it to others, and if you disagree, you are bigoted and discriminating me").
Each individual is a complex mix resulting from the entirety of their life experiences. For a person in the metaphor above with aversion to swimming then say that they have "a swimming aversion gene and they can´t help it, so it´s just good and healthy that they hate swimming" is an interpretation that encompasses a lot of ignorance about themselves, even if it might make them feel better thinking there is nothing wrong with them.
I recently witnessed someone with homosexual tendencies attack someone with heterosexual tendencies, calling them archaic, and something else... I don't remember. Some homosexuals actually have the nerve to tell a heterosexual that they are being archaic, and following a book written by a man, for not wanting to have sex with someone of their own gender. Really? Are you serious? I'm not saying homosexuality is right or wrong, but to attack a heterosexual's preference, and/or aversion to homosexual acts, is fucking ridiculous.
Pro-homosexuals must necessarily attack others, or they cannot impose their ideology. This is not a worldview that permits multiple beliefs, it is dogmatic and exclusionary. Everyone who disagrees must be attacked and destroyed because the belief that homosexuality should exist can only be sustained by destroying the right to be free from it.
In order to legitimize homosexuality, any opposition to it must be construed as pathological, aberrant, and ignorant.
The logic that is used to impose homosexuality as legitimate is also borrowed and used to impose other sexual ideologies and behaviors. Supporters of paradigms and praxi such as prostitution, pornography, pedophilia, S/M, bestiality, etc., have been using several of the same conceptual frameworks as pro-homosexuals.
I think also sinisterninja above represents a lot of people who have bought in the concept that homosexuality is right and healthy and not a result of mental/psychological/developmental/relationship problems, a concept I disagree with.
Which brings us to the question of choice. I find that one view that is quite absent from the mass media and informal talk about homosexuality and the question of choice is exactly the issue of mental/psychological/developmental/relationship problems. For example, if someone has repeated unpleasant experiences while growing up with swimming and then that persons comes to hate and be turned off by swimming, can you say that this person has chosen to dislike swimming? Obviously not, it is a result of a series of complex experiences. My views on why people are the way they are at a particular moment in life regarding their sexuality, psychology and intellectual state of mind, are analogous to this example. I don´t see people as having complete control over everything they are (some "homosexuality is a complete choice" theories), but not the simplistic opposite either ("I can´t help being, thinking, and feeling anything that´s homosexual, therefore everything I think, feel, and am is fine, and, consequently, I have a right to do everything I want with my sexuality, including doing it to others, and if you disagree, you are bigoted and discriminating me").
Each individual is a complex mix resulting from the entirety of their life experiences. For a person in the metaphor above with aversion to swimming then say that they have "a swimming aversion gene and they can´t help it, so it´s just good and healthy that they hate swimming" is an interpretation that encompasses a lot of ignorance about themselves, even if it might make them feel better thinking there is nothing wrong with them.
