Tuesday, August 24, 2004
Now, only in a very violent, sick society, is this labeled free speech and not immediately framed as what it is, incitement to sexual violence in the sphere of the family.
In our deeply putrid world, "hate" speech is defined as:
- Hate speech is a controversial term for speech intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability.
Notice that no speech that intends to hurt and intimidate someone (even in the case of a child) regarding the sexual sphere is included above.
- For example, for a college professor to say, "Lesbians should not be schoolteachers," could be considered hate speech. The professor could be denied tenure, even if he were expressing his religiously-based belief that homosexuals should not be put in positions where they can influence young people. Underlying such a claim is the belief that homosexuals in positions of influence over young people might influence their sexuality. Opponents would argue that the underlying theory behind the words suggests a false understanding of the nature of human sexuality with their usage designed to promote fear of homosexuals and their supposed influence on children among non-homosexuals, so leading to hatred of, and discrimination against, homosexuals. (same link as above)
It is easy to note the irresponsible pro-homosexual bias in the above explanation.
Adults, the media, peer pressure, family experience, etc., are always having influence and impact on an individual. What influence, how much, in what way, etc, is what varies.
Furthermore, the above explanation, in order to legitimize homosexuality, does not distinguish between desire (or the ridiculously murky concept of orientation) and sexuality. Human sexuality is the full aggregate of a person´s psychology (both conscious and unconscious), their intellectual thinking, their attitudes, their values, their desires, their dysfunctions, their emotions, and their behaviors about sex/body/intimacy. It is like comparing a pebble to a mountain.
Therefore any adult could possibly influence another person´s sexuality. A person´s environment, their experiences, their relationships, in short, anything and everything can have an impact on a human being. This does not mean we are clones and experience everything in the same way. Given that human beings are not ameobae and a lot of our psychological make-up is due to external influence, to say a homosexual could not influence others regarding sexuality is profoundly untrue.
Notice also that in the example given, the criticism is from a religious perspective. That is only one anti-homosexual perspective, but there are other ones, such as the social sciences themselves. One does not need to be of a certain religion to understand why homo and bisexuality are dysfunctional and to know they include every form of psychological and behavior problems we have in the world (such as psychological/sexual violence, prostitution, sexual harassment, emotional/personality development problems, bigotry, ignorance, lack of respect/aggression, etc).
This is where the current homosexist culture we live shows it´s true colors. When it frames the objection to homosexuality (which includes all these problems above) as a form of hate and not as a legitimite criticism to a whole set of dysfunctional, and in many cases, harassful and violent actions, it is simply legitimating a lot of aggression, denigration, and violence committed by homosexuals and bisexuals.
So, how is speech being framed in our wonderful society? Objecting to homosexuality (which includes the full range of violent behaviors we know of regarding sex between people of the same sex, although not for all homosexuals) is currently framed as "hate" speech. Pedophilia, which is very similar to adult homosexuality, another dysfunctional form of human sexuality, is just barely not being framed as a legitimate make-up of a person. Therefore, we can still object to pedophilia and not be labeled filled with "hate." Who knows how long that will last. Inciting people to sexually torture children is "free" speech, specially if framed in a pornographic text format.
One of the reasons for this barbaric state of affairs, is that homosexuals are one of the most prominent circuses in society (in the bread and circus sense - see below). Their propaganda functions as a distraction to the horrible problems we have with violence and emotional and mental diseases, which are very much a part of many people´s sexuality.
I also think that to denigrate sexuality, in all its expressions and behaviors where there is a component of sleaze, is a form of aggression. Obviously, in a sick society, denigrating sexuality in every way, except when it has something to do with objecting the norm/legitimation of homosexuality, is deemed free speech.
A homo or bisexual can write or say sexually sleazy things to a person, and this is not hate speech, but if this person objects to homosexuality, this is hate speech. To take the contrast degree one level higher, a homosexual can incite homosexual incest with children, such as in the initial example, and that is not deemed hate speech, if it is done in a pornographic format, but if the child objects to homosexuality, the child is "filled with hate," to use one of gay activists most used propaganda slogans.
It´s just barbaric.