I see official acceptance of homosexuality as only a reaction against sexual liberalisation and a restoration of sexist stereotypes. When I was a teenager it was possible to say that a boy has long hair, likes
girly things and rejects traditional images of masculinity (and of course a girl likewise equivalent) and may even admit to sexual experimentaion with other boys that most have always had but kept quiet about - but that doesn't make him
queer.
Today it does. We are back to the time before that liberalization when you either conformed to heterosexist stereotype or learnt to cut yourself out and be
one of them. OK, so it doesn't have the same opprobrium any more, but that does not make it any less oppressive typecasting. It's like telling women that if they are not virgins when they marry, they are whores - but there's nothing wrong with being a whore, just don't pretend you are not.
Personally, I regard anything as a
perversion if it takes precedence over
mating and replaces it. I see no connection between homosexual activity and rejection of heterosexuality except prejudice specific to this culture. Ancient Greek men notoriously had young boyfriends and upper-class boys around puberty were coached in the same kind of
petulant flounciness as later girls in for instance
Gigi. Yet
Lysistrata could imagine women sexually significant enough for refusal of sex to be a credible constraint upon men.
All the traditional prejudices about what distinguishes heterosexual from homosexual teenagers for the rest of their life are alive and kicking, and where before there was some leeway to say
Just because I look or dress or act that way doesn't mean I can't relate to the other sex, now there is greater pressure of
You don't need to hide what we have decided you areTo have homosexual relationships is one thing. To use them - or even believe them - as a justification for eliminating the other sex from equal relationships in advance is something entirely different. It is the difference between admitting to masturbation and claiming that providing your own thrills exempts you from need for relationship but should be recognized as an equal 'sexuality'. People who flaunt
homosexuality as an excuse for rejecting relationship with the other sex are no different from people who would flaunt their
natural predeliction for their own race to excuse rejecting even the possibility of relationship with any other race in advance.
At best, they have been brought up with severe inhibitions against those different from themselves. At worst, they are inventing an
orientation to excuse their prejudice against
the other. It's easy to see how -parents can instill prejudice against the other sex and sex with them while teaching no such prohibition against homosexuality because it would not enter their thoughts even to condemn. So their children grow up prejudiced against the other sex but with no inhibitions against sensation with their own. Likewise, public display of specific characteristics and mannerism as excluding from heterosexuality teaches children to grow up believing that if they behave that way, they cannt love the other sex as equal human beings like their own - and the heterosexual conservative ideal remains unchallenged. Exactly the same happens among racists except reversed, where it is
heteroraciality that is seen as the
outsider and
homoraciality as the norm.
Exclusive homosexuality is the sexual equivalent to racism and should be treated as such.
Gay Pride might as well be called
White Pride or
Black Pride and serves the conservative purpose of telling children
You behave like this and you can't have lovers of the other sex; if you want the other sex to accept you, don't behave like this. We don't get parades of other sexual fetishes to encourage to join in
as well as 'vanilla sex' do we? Although strictly an inverse, it might as well be licensed blacks in Dixieland warning whites to avoid jazz or Nazi exhibitions of
Degenerate Jewish Art. Its whole point is to isolate, segregate and denigrate.