This is the most common response that I’ve heard from homosexuals, whether coming to terms with their sexual identity or confirming it.
Seems simple. G-d is good. He made me with attraction to men (or women if you’re a woman). This must be my “normal.” I have to couple with a man.
Here’s my problem. I agree that G-d is good. But, why, then did He create me with an attraction to women that didn’t cease when I got married? Does it follow that he wants to me to be sexually active outside of marriage? Since women are still attractive to me, should I ask my wife for permission to have a couple of lovers? Bad idea!
I’d like to suggest that the ideal is a monogamous heterosexual relationship. One person. Tell me please. Do homosexual men relate to women as something akin to a desk – no sexual attraction – or more like a toilet? There is a big difference. If it’s the former, then I’d suggest that it’s not as hard as we’re told to become, in practice, if not in feelings, a monogamous heterosexual. If the thought of being together with a woman is like licking a toilet, then two thoughts come to mind. The first is, “I’m sorry.” I have not a clue in the world what I’m saying. Every single homosexual to whom I have posed this question have answered that it’s not a matter of being disgusting – rather not as stimulating or not at all. Okay. The second thought is that if it’s disgusting to you, then that would make you a heterophobe.
Really! Sure! And seriously!
Just reverse the roles. If I were to say that I’m disgusted by the idea of two men kissing, I’d be called a homophobe. No problemo. But let’s just be a bit consistent.
So . . . just like I can make it a goal to “deconstruct” (a post soon to come (hopefully)) my extra-marital desires, you, too, my dear seeming homosexual friend can “deconstruct” this paradigm of yours. Oops. Dangerously close to calling for a cure. But, what can I do. G-d is good, and He told us that we are not allowed to engage in homosexual sex. There has to be an answer to this problem.
There is much to develop here. Is this really the way that G-d has made us? When does attraction become sexual in nature? Does a desire equal something to which we should give in to? Is my analogy fair? Can I compare my attraction to women to a homosexual attraction? Stay tuned.
Z said
Speaking of consistency, you seem to have missed a bit. Reversing the roles would mean going over what you think of kissing a man yourself, not watching it happen. I know no people that would label someone uninterested in sex within their gender homophobic. If you were talking about someone that would have heterosexuality erased, then you would have a heterophobe.
clarityman said
The idea of kissing a man passionately to me is strange. What’s the point?
There is a semantic issue that I’ve addressed some others here and elsewhere about a broad definition of homophobia that would include a person who believes that it is immoral. My argument is that such a definition is a shame because, like probably every homosexual, I hate the bigoted scum with the “G-d hates fags” signs or the people who beat up people because of their sexual orientation. I am not into the Taliban. Someone suggested heteronormative. I like it, but I don’t expect it to catch on.
As for having homosexuality erased, you are too quick to lump me together with a group to which I do not belong. My desire is not to get it erased. It is (yes, here is a view to my “agenda”) to stop pretending that it is normative, moral, a lifestyle choice, or an arrangement into which the word marriage should be applied.
Thank you for the comments.
Z said
My apologies, I mistook your abreviated presentation for a shift in argument. The change of perpectives confused me. However you did leave out an item or two. You negleted to go over that the audience you were addressing is the one that defines homophobe as someone who finds homosexuality disgusting, in which case it would be consistent to consider some who finds heterosexuality disgusting a heterophobe. You yourself have gone over the shifting definition and how it may be misused.
Z said
I spent half an hour on the last post and missed your reply.
Z said
I also apologize for my poor phrasing and hyperbole.
Z said
I didn’t call you a homophobe. I wrongly accused you of inconsistency. And I spoke of what I would consider HETEROphobia. My first post was rash and I can only apologize for that. I won’t bother you further.
clarityman said
No bother. And please continue to comment. I hope to get so many comments that I can’t respond to each one, but as long the comments are respectful and intelligent, they will be responded to as time allows.
I am purposefully brief in my posts. One: it makes for easier reading. Two: it makes for more frequent posts.
I am working out my thoughts that have been developed over several years, and sometimes I’ll write something that does not properly consider every angle. I expect to make mistakes. I think your label of inconsistent would be more accurately called underdeveloped. That’s what this blog helps me with.
Seriously, thank you!