The sheer hypocrisy is staggering. Over the past fifty years, homosexuality has made incredible strides to become a recognized alternative lifestyle. When ever I get too upset about the stupidity surrounding the "gay marriage" issue, I remind myself that the question fifteen years ago was not whether or not they should be able to get married, but whether or not they should exist. It relieves a huge burden on the logic centers of my brain that I no longer hear the phrase: "It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." (Actually, it's neither, you brainwashed Bible zombie.)
I understand that a lot of gay people, when coming out of the closet, have this big scary cliff to leap off of where you go from pretending to be straight to embracing your gayness, but it isn't an either/or proposition for everyone.Personally, I'm of the belief that we are not born with a switch in our brain that points to straight or gay. I think sexuality is a lot more complicated than that. I also think that socialization has distorted the way we perceive sexuality. In Western culture, the insinuation has long been that sex is only acceptable in terms of vaginal intercourse by a married couple. I can't imagine how many lives this idea has ruined. Only in the latter half of the twentieth century with the sexual revolution did premarital and homosexual sex begin to be considered an acceptable alternative.
When moving from the idea of a single acceptable lifestyle, it is natural for a single alternative to become dominant, particularly in the case of gender preference where there are two clear distinctions. This gives root to binary thinking where individuals gravitate between two possible options. In our American culture, this includes heterosexual/homosexual, conservative/liberal, Christian/atheist, pro-Life/pro-Choice, pro-gun control/pro-gun rights, capitalist/socialist, PC/Mac, Coke/Pepsi... and so forth. This naturally excludes bisexual libertarian agnostics who use Unix, drink Hansen's, believe in some abortion limitations, and more control on assault weapons but not handguns. You know, non-conformists.
As for "faux-bians" (a derogatory term for straight girls who experiment with their sexuality), deal with it. Sexual experimentation is a healthy part of psychological development. If you are frustrated that a girl seems really interested one day, then not at all the next, welcome to dating girls! It sucks, but it's nothing that straight men haven't had to deal with.
It's only natural that women would be more likely to experiment sexually because male bonding is based on machismo... particularly in youth. We define ourselves by our fighting ability and sexual prowess. To be intimate with another man, you have to stop thinking of each other as competition and be emotionally vulnerable to him. That which is subordinate (read: a bottom) will be regarded (if only on a unconscious level) as weaker.
Girls have less of a compunction to be intimidated by homosexuality. There are no tops and bottoms in lesbianism (there can be, but then you can reverse the standard roles in heterosexuality as well). Also, women are generally able to emotionally bond with people much easier than men do. Theirs is a culture which promotes crying, hugging, sharing, and interdependency while male culture involves more emotional distance and competition. Women are also generally more aware of beauty and how to create it. Heterosexual, homosexual, or other, women tend to notice and emulate the beautification behavior of other woman. (The art of male heterosexual beauty is to look good without looking like you are trying to look good.)
All this is to say that those who come out of the closet have to overcome social pressure that stigmatizes them and brands them as other. In order to make this leap, they either have to be incredibly determined to express their natural impulses whatever they may be or (and this is the key) unable to happily live in a heterosexual lifestyle. Since I have met few people in life that fit this first category, I'm compelled to think that most fit into this latter category. Therefore, I imagine that there are many people with homosexual impulses happily living heterosexual lives because their sexuality is capable of encompassing both the male and the female, but they are not willing to claim homosexuality and not comfortable in the ambiguity of bisexuality.Personally, I think sexuality encompasses a range of attractions which may have absolutely no relation to gender. Although I don't hear it talked about much any more, a lot of attention used to be placed on women's hair color including men who would limit their sexuality to a particular shade (usually blondes or redheads). Sexuality is often determined by behavior with some preferring innocence and others aggressiveness (personally, I can find both very attractive, although I have a preference for the latter). And we've all seen that sexuality can conform to race, notably Asian women, black men, and Native Americans of both genders. I had a blond-haired, blue eyed friend who was only attracted to Latino women. I've also known plenty of white people only attracted to other white people, but I don't regard them as racist.
If studies on sexuality are to be believed, there may be a biological reason for some forms of sexual preference. Using the earlier examples of Asian women and black men, Asian women tend to be smaller and have higher pitched voices which is unconsciously interpreted as being more feminine while black men tend to be taller with deeper voices indicating more masculinity and more testosterone. Generally speaking, we are attracted to the extremes because they indicate better genetic stock.
Although the biological reason for homosexuality is not known, it is clear that homosexuality exists in nature and is not a man-made invention, as some have claimed. My brother-in-law mentioned once that every large family he knew, about half of them were gay. My sister jokingly suggested that this might be a natural reaction to overpopulation. I don't know, although I do believe that psychological factors may contribute to homosexuality or at least to the open expression of this desire.
My theory is regarding sexuality simple: Sex feels good, having sex is a bonding experience, therefore sex has a social function which promotes harmony. The homosexuality of the Greeks is considered by historians to have created better soldiers because (1) they weren't sexual frustrated and (2) they had an intimate interest in each other's well-being.I also believe power has a great deal to do with sexual interest and compatibility. No relationship that I have witnessed is entirely balanced. One person ultimately has more power over the other, although they express their power in different ways and this power dynamic may change due to circumstance. Part of being in a healthy and happy relationship is trusting the other person to have power over you. Traditionally, the men would have ultimate power in a relationship while women would exercise whatever power the men allowed them to have... such as religious moral authority, influence over children, and the network of gossipy housewives. Although women officially have the same rights as men, in practice, men are still overwhelmingly dominant, however whether this is a societal construct of dependency or a biological imperative is still up to debate. Homosexuals, lacking in defined roles, have had to create them for themselves leading to the oversimplification of the "bitch or butch" theory.
But as with all dualistic issues, there is small minority that throws the entire concept into disarray and defies all previous definitions. This is sometimes very loosely referred to as "the third gender," but it encompasses many distinct groups including hermaphrodites, transsexuals, and crossdressers. Male-to-female crossdressers create a particular problem for most straight men because their macho programming encourages an extreme embrace of heterosexual behavior and an absolute rejection of homosexual behavior. Therefore, if he sees a sexy crossdresser, he will usually engage in several sexual acts mentally before realizing that this individual is biologically male resulting in confusion between his penis (which actually sends chemical signals to the brain when stimulated which impair rational judgment and increase perceived attractiveness) and the logic center of his brain which is programmed to reject males as suitable sexual companions.Personally, I am comfortable eroticizing a cute crossdresser. I don't see another penis as a threat to me, or in modern parlance, I could tap that. I doubt I could date a male-to-female crossdresser, however, as I would be uncomfortable with their lack of commitment to femininity... which I feel is an intrinsic part of my sexuality. A transsexual woman, however, might be different. And of course, I wouldn't be attracted to a crossdresser with masculine features (i.e. drag queen) any more than I would a woman with masculine features.
Therefore, while I admit that my sexuality crosses the line of heterosexual behavior, I do not believe that this makes me gay nor does it make me bisexual. Furthermore, bisexuality implies an equal interest in men and women, but I have trouble imagining that this is true for most. Surely there has to be a lot of people with a 60/40 interest one way or the other. If someone is 75% heterosexual, is that enough to be considered straight? If someone is 75% homosexual, is that gay or bi?
Then there is the pornography industry wherein both males and females who identify as straight and live out their lives with a partner of the opposite sex will engage in homosexual behavior for money. This is referred to in the industry as "gay for pay" because pornographers generally find gay porn, male or female, to be more rare and therefore more profitable. And if you were to ask them how they felt about performing homosexual acts, most would say it was fun. Period.Part of the problem is that we wrap up three very different concepts in sexuality: love, physical attraction, and sexual compatibility. It is possible to have a deep and rewarding monogamous love with someone you are not physically attracted to or interested in having sex with. It is also possible to have intense physical attraction to someone without love or sexual compatibility. Really, any combination of the above is viable. Our modern conception of the romantic ideal is to have all three of these qualities in one person which, as we all know, is extremely difficult. Many people who are bisexual find this lifestyle not only satisfying, but logical, since you are more likely to find your perfect match if you have twice as many people to choose from.
Of course, then we enter issues of monogamy and whether or not this is a natural practice, but I will save that for another conversation.
Very interesting read.
ReplyDelete