Monday, October 27, 2014


My take on homosexuality has been neutral. While I do not necessarily support it as something normal, I don't even hold anything against those that are gay. I'm not a science preacher but I do respect Science immensely for it's basis of attempting to understand the world. I respect my religion too, at least the major part of it that teaches one to forgive, love and respect. I don't however adhere to relegating homosexuality as a "sin". I'm fact I don't think that the expression sodomy, originating from the biblical reference to Sodom, refers specifically to homosexuality. Sometime ago I researched into this aspect while preparing a Facebook comment in a FB debate on a friend's post.

The simple reason why I don't find homosexuality normal is that it does not lead to the normal functionality of procreation. Pundits from the field of Arts may take up arms against me on this, saying that sex, at least in the human context, does not merely imply procreation, maybe just like "food", in the human context, does not imply mere satiation of hunger. Although I do partly agree with this point, the fact also is that if food does not satiate your hunger and sustain your life, then what's the point of eating it?

Forgive my simpleton analogy on the subject but the point I'm trying to make is, that if a form of human sexuality, psychologically prevents someone from procreating, then it indeed does appear aberrant, just like you can indulge in the diverse culinary experiences but if it doesn't sustain your life, then it appears like an abnormal indulgence. On the other hand one can always claim that homosexual couples can have babies by artificial insemination or surrogate pregnancy. If I compare that with the aberrant food habit, it would possibly be an equivalent of someone taking nutrition via IV fluids to remain alive and healthy, alongside eating food that wouldn't sustain life.

The analogy isn't free of flaws, as one doesn't need to be heterosexual to be a normal, healthy, productive citizen, while someone who is on the analogous aforementioned diet, would find it rather hard to sustain his/her life.  The point is the "aspect" of life, i.e. hunger and sex, and the normal analogous effect, i.e. health and procreation. I understand we don't always eat food in a quantitative way to sustain health and life, like we don't just indulge in sexual activity to procreate but if that basic criteria cannot be naturally fulfilled, then the behavior does appear aberrant to me. Again the analogy may have more flaws but it does the job of explaining by providing a parallel.

The more important fact of the situation is "choice". The way the religious zealots of most major religions demonize it, it seems like they're implying that it is an individual choice but my common sense does not buy this. I'm heterosexual and I cannot, even by choice, turn myself homosexual. Not that growing up hasn't exposed me to mild forms of such experiences. Most of the guys I grew up with have had these experiences (I don't imply with me, I mean we've all talked about it when we were that age. Now we all really are Hetero men.

I think the reason can be found in the fact that in our country, most of us can't freely intermingle with girls at the beginning of puberty (or at least that was the case with many in the 80s and 90s here). A notable subset are too introverted and inhibited even well into their 20s to experience a normal sexual encounter. Those unfortunate ones, get trained to oppress it so much that their chances get bleaker with age. Of course it's not too much of a problem with some people as the Indian system of arranged marriage comes to their rescue by their mid-20s. Having said that I have a few bachelor buddies that've crossed 30 and have never been in bed with a girl! 

A hetero guy doesn't necessarily turn homosexual with age, if he has had homosexual encounters. I don't know if that may lead someone to become bisexual or homosexual. I sympathise  with gays. Homosexuality is normal for homosexuals; it is heterosexuality that is aberrant to them but living in a majority heterosexual world, the least they're fighting for is to let them be accepted for who they are. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. For me science helps understand the things that the world calls queer and religion teaches me to be nice to everyone, despite my shortcomings as a hetero male in this patriarchal world that unfairly empowers me in certain ways yet unjustly cripples me in others. 

No comments: