Our hypocritic view of LGBTQ people
If I try to write on this issue by filling the refill of my pen by the colorless ink of mainstream discussions on this issue, I’m pretty sure that mal de tete would be the end result for many of you; as it has been with me every time I tried to understand what’s actually flowing in this stream through the eye specs I borrowed from the mainstream whose one side belonged to conservatives, orthodox religious men, and the other side belonged to the ones who see themselves as “progressives” or “rebels”.
In one of the videos, Pastor John showcases his brilliant memory power as he tries to prove that homosexuality is a “sin” and heterosexuality is what someone called as God demands from us, and the reasoning he put forward sounded something like: “Bible says so.”
“With every sin, there are multiple levels of why it’s offensive to God and to be avoided. The simplest is clearly to say ‘The Bible says it is.’
It’s spoken clearly in Romans 1:24-29 that it [same-sex relations] is wrong and to be avoided, and I think Paul in first Corinthians 6:9-10 lists very unusual phrase about homosexuality.”
In the intellectual arena, you’d see people formulating a set of words in a compelling way and make it sound like heterosexuals are normal while the others are the losers who specialize in breaking the law of the nature.
On the other side of the table would you see the people with same appearance as their opponents but having a different set of words to solidify their convictions.
And when I say that both have the same appearance, I mean that both are body-identified; both are running after the body of either the same sex or the opposite sex. I won’t say that one is superior to the other because………. let’s understand it with an example.
If there was a society in which everyone walks with their faces upward, their reaction upon seeing someone walking with his face downward would be similar to what we see from the heterosexuals toward homosexuals. Even though both are bumping into things and missing out on the natural beauty around them, still the downward lookers would be seen as the crazy ones.
Again, I am not putting a case for any of them. I am just trying to show how they both float on the same water in the same boat.
Our society is dominated by the upward lookers, and since it’s the job of a society to oppose everything that’s out of the norm, we find ourselves questioning the eligibility of downward lookers.
Opposing homosexuality or trying to paint it with the colors of shame would have made some sense if the same rhetoric was used against heterosexuality as well, but we formulate very convincing reasons proving why one is justified and the other is not. As long as we see heterosexuals and homosexuals as two opposing entities, we would continue to see the latter as an alien force trying to destabilize the natural order.
Under the swaddling bands of “natural law,” “it’s irreligious,” or “it’s immoral” would you find the plain truth that both homosexuals and heterosexuals draw their waters from the same river of body-identification.
Heterosexuals, being the dominant ones, have an advantage (just like any other dominant group in a society). They can be both hypocrite and ignorant; hypocrite toward homosexuals and ignorant toward themselves. You are free to express your attraction toward the body of the opposite sex in a poetic way, but merely stating your attraction toward the body of the same sex puts you in a boiling pot of tradition, as seen by the new anti-LGBTQ bill in Uganda.
We should also not forget to talk about why homosexuality has come to become such a big issue.
At the bedrock of our civilization sits this tendency to identify ourselves as flesh and blood, and therefore, seeing others as the same. We see others not as limitless consciousness having a certain appearance, but as a limited creature of flesh, bones, and blood. Having that idea of ourselves and others so deeply wired into our understanding designs the retina in such a way it sees someone approaching as either male or female. Anything that’s concerned with these two identities, which are very dear to us, is destined to become a matter of prime importance.
The purpose of this article is not the form a case for or against any group, it’s just to discuss this issue as fundamentally as possible and as noiseless as possible.
“But isn’t it natural for two opposite sexes to be attracted toward each other? It happens in the natural world all the time; a lion wants lioness, and similar is the case with every other animal.”
I know that many of you have this notion sitting in their heads, which makes this issue even more complicating, but this notion is fundamentally wrong. If I have to address this in a single sentence, it would be: Humans are not animals.
But merely saying this doesn’t clear anything, does it? That’s why it needs to be discussed clearly, which can’t be done in this article because it would be too lengthy and, I suspect, too tiring for you to read. Therefore, I’m leaving this subject for our next article.
Until then, ponder over how the masculine-feminine relation between animals is different from humans.
Financial help will be helpful a lot because it would allow me to keep advancing this project. If interested, you can become a paying member today or you can leave some coins on Patreon or Kofi.
You can share and follow me on twitter: