Homosexuality

[Anto Kennedy]

The scientific community needs to grow some balls and state facts, not pander to a bunch of raging queers.

This statement raises a valid point; the politicization of science. Politicization of science undermines the objectivity of the researches.

The politicization of science is the manipulation of science for political gain. It occurs when government, business, or interest groups use legal or economic pressure to influence the findings of scientific research or the way it is disseminated, reported or interpreted.

In this instance, by the LBGT community and others who use the LBGT civil rights movement to undermine the dominant cultural and political groups of various Western and indeed non-Western societies. Some may call these people Freudo-Marxists.

Freudo-Marxism is a loose designation of several twentieth-century critical theory schools of thought that sought to synthesize the philosophy and political economy of Karl Marx with the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud.

While the movement to integrate socialist and psychoanalytic theory has taken several forms, each arose during the middle of the twentieth century in the hope of answering this question: why did Fascism have mass appeal? The fact of that appeal confounded much of orthodox Marxist thought. The gist of the answer Freudo-Marxists gave to that question is that the masses have internalized their oppression as suppression. The internalization of the upper class in the minds of the lower class is the super-ego, in the same way that crowd psychology, in particular Freud, considered the leader to work as the masses' super-ego.

People who have a limited understanding, and have been influenced by a watered-down version of Freudo-Marxism have come to the conclusion, perhaps subconsciously, that the "masses" have been indoctrinated by the "patriarchal control system" and that this indoctrination takes the form of what Freud called the Super-Ego. The Super-Ego, in their world-view, is composed of all the inhibitions; sexual, social & psychological, and that these inhibitions must be eradicated from the public consciousness in order to usher in a updated version of Marx's socialist utopia. Opposed to these inhibitions is the id, which is not evil, and which should be given free reign.

Heaven (Super Ego) - Hell (Id), Ice (Super Ego) - Fire (Id), Good (Fire) - Evil (Ice) Complete bullshit! Certain religious groups, although not all, reverse this dichotomy so that the fire is evil, and the ice, heaven, is the only good.

The artificial division of the human into two opposing components, and a politicalized group's campaigning on behalf of their element of preference is the source of so much conflict in modern society that is unnecessary, irrational and delusional.

______________________________________________________________________________________

Back on topic, the Freudo-Marxist interpretation of social/psychological forces (or whatever indeed this phenomena really goes by the name of, of if it even has a name as yet) has a very strong influence in scientific circles and in the world at large, concentrated primarily in university campuses where such impractical and fanciful theory can survive. I'm not even sure the "theory" has been articulated yet, if anyone can lead me to these answers I'd be grateful.

It is my opinion based on first-hand experience that the LBGT community has considerable political power, particularly when aided by the above-mentioned groups, and that they can, may, and in rare, quite rare cases, exert pressure on scientists in the fields of biology and psychology. This pressure may come in many forms, not just in it's overt manifestations, for example, an individual scientist conducting a study which touches on the subject of human sexual behaviour may, our of loyalty to a friend or loved one who is homosexual, violate established scientific rules of conduct. Scientists are still humans, not machines.

A 2005 study by researchers Gerulf Rieger, Meredith L. Chivers, and J. Michael Bailey,[8] which attracted media attention, purported to find that bisexuality is extremely rare in men. This was based on results of controversial penile plethysmograph testing when viewing pornographic material involving only men and pornography involving only women. Critics state that this study works from the assumption that a person is only truly bisexual if he or she exhibits virtually equal arousal responses to both opposite-sex and same-sex stimuli, and have consequently dismissed the self-identification of people whose arousal patterns showed even a mild preference for one sex. Some researchers say that the technique used in the study to measure genital arousal is too crude to capture the richness (erotic sensations, affection, admiration) that constitutes sexual attraction.[9] The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force called the study and The New York Times coverage of it flawed and biphobic.[10] FAIR also criticised the study.[11]

Bisexuality

Your assertions that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice holds no water. Please tell me, when did you decide to be straight?

Explain then why many homosexuals choose to be straight, get married and have kids? And why many of those individuals choose to come out and embrace a homosexual lifestyle.

Of course it's natural. I'm not bi nor am I a homosexual by definition. I find some females attractive sexually. I think it's only natural for all humans to find sexual attraction in their same sex. I am married to a male and I would be consdiered by society to be straight. I hate the term homosexual because it puts people into a box. We are just sexual and that's it.

Exactly right. The point I was trying to make when I said this,

As I said, I can watch gay porn and be arouse. I can watch beastiality too and sure enough, the little solider stands to attention. I could even suck a guys dick, and even make myself enjoy it. But I choose not too. My sexuality is all-encompassing, if it moves.....heck, it doesn't need to move, all hat's needed is a hole of phallic shaped object. Our impulses are that simple.

The homosexual lifestyle is a behavioural/social phenomena. From this point I suggested further that each citizen has a social obligation to: generate income, pay taxes, support the civil authorities, vote; and yes people this really is a social obligation to get married (or at least find a mating partner), have kids, raise those children with your partner and impart on them knowledge of their rights and obligations in and to society so that there will be another generation of upstanding citizens. Society does not propel itself; it is advanced on the backs on the individual citizen's personal sacrifices and moral integrity. And the homosexual community, isolating itself in LBGT ghettoes in every major city in Western civilization does not satisfy the requirements set by society. (although this can be easily ofset through charitable work, national service etc. However, just like the mainstream heterosexual community, this is rare)

Let's examine the sociological phenomena of homosexual lifestyles.

Lesbian as a concept, used to differentiate women with a shared sexual orientation, is a 20th-century construct. Although female homosexuality has appeared in many cultures throughout time, not until recently has lesbian described a group of people. In the late 19th century, sexologists published their observations on same-sex desire and behavior, and designated lesbians in Western culture as a distinct entity. As a result, women who became aware of their new medical status formed underground subcultures in Europe and North America.

Not an isolated occurence. We see individuals finding a foundation for identity in scientific classifications in wide variety of sub-cultures within society. Relatively recently we have seen the rise of individuals who find an explanation for their social maladjustment by self-designating themselves, just like homosexuals, with a psychiatric classification of behaviour and identity (Asperger's syndrome) Likewise homosexual do not seek the expert opinion of a trained psychiatrist/sexologist, to detemine their sexuality through testing. Instead they rely on their understanding of popular science, which is watered down and ineffective in guiding an individuals lifestyle decisions.

Scientific classifcation of sexuality is an on-going issue itself. The Kinsey scale, ranging from two extremes of homo and hetero sexuality, is one of the simplest classification systems in use. In this system, based on the findings of Alfred Kinsey, finds only a tiny minority of individuals within any sample fall within either extreme. Instead human sexuality, in the majority of cases, is found to be much more fluid and adaptive.

Many sexologists now are, ironically, moving away from sex. The term "sexual orientation" and the classification of individuals based on their sexuality reduces the individual, and their emotions, desires, affections and attachments to mere sex. A new term, and new classification model based on Affectional orientation is becoming more and more prevalent. In this system an individual is given a "label" based on a broader nature of their orientation i.e. do they become more attached emotionally to males or females.

To show the fluidity of human sexuality, and the artificiality of exclusively homosexual lifestyles, let's now examine the phenomena of DL homosexuals, bi-curious, hetero-sexuals who engage in threesome and individuals who are "questioning" experimenting with both genders to determine which lifestyle suits them best.

“Human sexuality is not simply imposed by instinct or stereotypical conducts, as it happens in animals, but it is influenced both by superior mental activity and by social, cultural, educational and normative characteristics of those places where the subjects grow up and their personality develops. Consequently, the analysis of sexual sphere must be based on the convergence of several lines of development such as affectivity, emotions and relations”.[

Boccadoro L., Carulli S. (2008) Il posto dell'amore negato. Sessualità e psicopatologie segrete. Tecnoprint Editrice, Ancona. ISBN 978-88-95554-03-7

Down-low homosexuals engage in homosexual activities "for fun". Whilst still pursuing sexual and emotional relationships with members of the opposite sex.

Bi-curious individuals are either hetero or homo sexuals who wish to alter their normative behaviour and experiment. Likewise with those who are "questioning".

Many heterosexual men have engaged in homosexual behaviours throughout their childhood such as mutual masturbation. This is a normal experimentation, this does not lead to a permanent change in orientation.

In the case of threesomes, individuals may find themselves in a situation where they engage in homosexual behaviours, rarely does this lead to a permanent change of orientation.

Both male and female heterosexual pornographic actors may engage in homosexual activities (and much more) whilst not leading to a permanent change in orientaion, this is known as "gay for pay".

Homosexuality is an artificial construct.

In a longitudinal study about sexual identity development among lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) youths, its authors "found evidence of both considerable consistency and change in LGB sexual identity over time." Youths who had identified as both gay/lesbian and bisexual prior to baseline were approximately three times more likely to identify as gay/lesbian than as bisexual at subsequent assessments. Of youths who had identified only as bisexual at earlier assessments, 60-70% continued to identify as bisexual, while approximately 30-40% assumed a gay/lesbian identity over time. Authors suggested that "although there were youths who consistently self-identified as bisexual throughout the study, for other youths, a bisexual identity served as a transitional identity to a subsequent gay/lesbian identity."

Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E., Hunter, J., & Braun, L. (2006, February). Sexual identity development among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: Consistency and change over time. Journal of Sex Research, 43(1), 46-58. Retrieved April 4, 2009, from PsycINFO database.

If it's natural, if it's biological, why all the transitioning and changing, amongst "homosexuals" and "heterosexuals" alike?

Call me a bigot all you want, my only opposition is to the myth of homosexuality and the formation of ghettoised sub-cultures that are openly hostile to the predominant culture.

Anyone who has studied sexuality in depth, and explored their own and others sexuality, will know what I'm talking about.

It's just a scientific classification invented by scientists who set out to study sexuality. In the same way that a physicist will invent "virtual" particles to balance an equation.