web analytics


Instead of doing their god’s will, too many religious folks preoccupy themselves with doing their god’s job; calling it the “Lord’s work”. Rather than letting their little lights shine, self-righteous bigots of various religious shades devise all manner of ways to shine their dim lights in places they consider to be dark. Each one of these ‘soldiers’ in the army of their ‘lord and savior’ have convinced themselves that they are part of the ‘high command’.

The idea that someone could be turned ‘gay’ is a way of thinking that amounts to a strategy for anti-‘gay’ sentiments and in the most extreme case violence against ‘gays’.

First, this notion presumes that the default or normal sexual preference is ‘straight’ and that ‘straight’ is the norm from which someone turns or is turned to be ‘gay’. Default and normal, here, are based on an idea of majority rule and can not be attributed to immutable rules of nature. Nature is nothing if not and without the creative diversity and adaptations that are the motive forces of evolution.

To the degree that the default presumption of normal posits heterosexuality as a socially valid norm, verified by the female reproductive capacity, it goes without saying that ‘gay’ is abnormal and therefore unnatural. The scope of the abnormality arising out of this presumption is defined by a grey area in which reasonable people find it easy to agree that homosexuality is unnatural. The key to the salient tautology of this presumption is that the natural way of “being” is the way from which a person who is ‘gay’ is turned.

The Dubious Arguments for India’s Ban on Gay Sex  by Shivam Vij

Amarendra Sharan, the lawyer for the Delhi Commission for the Protection of Child Rights, argued that only sex between a man and a woman was “natural,” because it has the possibility of procreation. “Any penetration of the sexual organ” that does not, he continued, “will be against the order of nature.”

Unnatural sex is define not by what homosexuals do when it comes down to the sex part of sexuality and sexual preferences. Unnatural sex is defined by what ‘gays’ do not do, that is, ‘gays’ do not have sex that can be verified by the potential of the reproductive capacity of females. (The link between heterosexuality and reproduction is not a ‘no-brainer’: “The End of History and the last woman”)

holy holy

For most straight men their sexual arousal is the litmus test for which homosexual acts are natural or normal. This is in evidence when most of them overrule “god”, ‘nature’ and society for fleeting moments of being witness or party to two women having sex with each other. Basically, if they can get a rise out of a homosexual act it raises that instance of gay sex to the level of normal and natural verified by a blanket excuse they like to refer to as “primal instinct”.

“There are no varying degrees of homosexuality, though in certain circles within Latin America to be homosexual, and partaking in homosexual acts, are mutually exclusive. In the Dominican Republic a male who has sex with another male, supposedly maintains his masculinity if he is the one penetrating, and not being penetrated. This is because to be the “penetrator” implies a construction of power, and the man who is penetrating is in control, therefore still a man. Even in the jail cultures this is evident, as those who perform oral sex are ‘gay,’ while those who receive it are “straight.” (read more)

There are things that men attribute to “primal instinct” that a dog, rat or possum would never do during the course of their relative short and brutish life spans. Men, however, especially straight men, tend to elevate the lowest common denominators that we share with other animals to a moral basis for the conditions and circumstances of their ejaculation. In short, they will choose to get off rather than to get over their inhuman and irrational attitudes about “gays”.

What this first point boils down to is that some gay sex gets an exemption from the unnatural and abnormal stigma when straight men can’t exercise control over their libido.  As will be pointed out below this twisted irony is part of the impulse of many straight people to monitor and regulate sexual preferences other than their own. Why exercise control over yourself when it is so much easier to oppress a minority and to blame them for the mixed feelings and motives of heterosexual drives that spill over to homosexual sex acts?

In terms of sexual practices most heterosexual people do the exact same things as ‘gay’ people. The thing that makes ‘fellatio’ and ‘sodomy’, for example, compatible with natural and normal heterosexual preferences is the potential that one of them has to impregnate the other.  Unnatural is negatively defined and understood as the absence of a sex act that can realize the potential of the female sex organ to produce another human being. Other than this it is impossible for most straight people to speak of the ‘unnatural’ sex acts of ‘gay’ people without saying something about what they do behind closed doors.

What’s Russian for “Homosexual Propaganda”? – by Julia Ioffe

Second, the notion of someone turning ‘gay’ implies that individual ‘will’ and ‘choice’ are being exercised against society, civilization and the species. This implication puts an emphasis on the word ‘preference’ in the phrase ‘sexual preference’ that privileges the meaning of the word ‘preference’ indicating ‘the act of preferring’ rather than of ‘that which is preferred’. ‘The act of preferring’ makes ‘choice’ and ‘will’ the impulse of individuals who prefer members of the same sex or gender. ‘That which is preferred’ makes ‘choice’ and ‘will’ agents of self-determination in the realizations of biological and genetic predispositions towards a particular sex or gender.

In China, Gender Roles Help Eradicate a Stigma

Third, presuming the normality of heterosexuality and privileging ‘the act of preferring’ in understanding ‘sexual preference’ establishes a default position that ‘the act of preferring’ members of the same sex or gender is at the same time a willful wrong choice. The ‘sexual preference’ here is considered unnatural, abnormal and anti-social by reproductive standards.

The mere idea that sexual preference can be a willful and wrong choice becomes divisive when it buttresses a moral imperative to advocate a particular ‘right choice’ as a corrective measure. The idea of sexual preference as a willful wrong choice becomes hateful when an individual who is believed to have made the wrong choice is held accountable for a given sexual preference. The idea of sexual preference as a willful wrong choice becomes dangerous when in the name of society, nature, and the species direct action is taken to negate the sexual preference of an individual.

South Africa’s lesbians fear ‘corrective rape’ By Pumza Fihlani BBC News

Because of the large number of people who are swayed by the first and second points a relative small number of those who become dangers to ‘gays’ are empowered to carry out acts of violence against ‘gays’ with impunity. When horrible acts are committed against ‘gays’ the perpetrators are punished with the understanding that two wrongs do not make a right.

“We know sexual orientation is not a choice. We know homosexuality is not a mental illness. We know you can’t ‘pray the gay away.'” Julian Bond

Fourth, if a person can be turned ‘gay’, ‘gays’ are not just making willful wrong choices but are a constant threat to the majority of people who make the right choice. Generally speaking, most straight people do not think of their sexual preference as a choice that implies that they have chosen to be straight. Yet, many entertain the notion that ‘one can turn ‘gay’. Here turning ‘gay’ is not so much about ‘gays’ or ‘being ‘gay’ as it is about a subtle fear of the implication associated with any undefined intimacy arising out of their relationships with members of the same sex or gender.

“No Surprise for Bisexual Men: Report Indicates They Exist” by David Tuller

There is a fear and aversion to ‘gay’ among many straight people that manifests itself as a constant need to categorize, to define and to clarify their thoughts, feelings, emotions and those occasions that they find members of the same sex or gender attractive. At this point ‘gay’ becomes a measuring stick for their heterosexuality and a vigilance to push back against ‘gay influences’ that make it difficult for them to categorize, to define and to clarify any thoughts, feelings, emotions and attractive qualities they find among members of the same sex or gender.

Lesbians Escape From Ecuador’s “Ex-Gay” Torture Centers

Fifth, ‘gays’ that protest that ‘gay’ is not a matter of ‘will’ or ‘choice’ are pathologized as victims of a ‘gay’ culture and life style that has diminished their capacity and ‘will’ to prefer heterosexuality. Because these weak minded ‘gays’ do not know any better, it becomes that much more important for those who know better and best to monitor and regulate sexual preferences other than their own. Here law making and lawlessness meet at an intersection of humanity where both are recognised as an imperative to do what is best for the ‘gay’ and for society. For ‘gays’ that try to take a stand in their own defence, judgement is summary in a society where each straight person is both a “natural” judge and jury in the trials and tribulations of ‘gay’ people.

Finally, there are the views of ‘gay’ inspired by religion. Instead of doing their god’s will, too many religious folks preoccupy themselves with doing their god’s job. Rather than letting their little lights shine, self-righteous bigots of various religious shades devise all manner of ways to shine their dim lights in places they consider to be dark. Each one of these ‘soldiers’ in the army of their ‘lord and savior’ have convinced themselves that they are part of the ‘high command’. As such, it is up to them to submit the ‘free will’ of other human beings to their understanding of a “ benevolent being” who is on record in ‘sacred’ texts as having allowed his creations the ‘will’ and ‘choice’ to choose which path in life to follow. In the case of ‘christianity’, if their god were a ‘true christian’, humanity would still be in the ‘garden of eden’ because ‘Adam’ would have been harassed, legislated, beaten and called all kinds of derogatory names while being dragged kicking and screaming from ‘the tree of life’.  And all this because Adam chose an apple instead of Eve.

The fight for civil rights: Homosexuality and the Dominican Republic

“For many years a key figure in politics, society, and culture, the Church has played a hand in creating the conservative atmosphere that is subtly opposed to homosexuality, in any form, on the island. This is held evident in recent comments by the Cardinal of Santo Domingo, Nicolas de Jesus Lopez Rodriguez. The Cardinal affirmed in comments that the Church does not discriminate against homosexuals, but that they do not belong in seminaries. He stated that “we must have a healthy, intelligent, and manly clergy that is neither effeminate nor womanly,” but that “homosexuality is a disorder that can be corrected and managed.” (read more)”

Uganda Convicts Gay Activist’s Killer as Parliament Debates Anti-Homosexuality Bill

The ‘Sissy Boy’ Experiment: Why Gender-Related Cases Call for Scientists’ Humility By Maia Szalavitz

God, Gays and the Atlanta Fire Department

Egypt’s Appalling Crackdown on Gays

“On Dec. 7, Mona Iraqi, a television journalist who works for a pro-government channel, barged into a traditional hammam, or bathhouse, in Cairo, to document what she billed as “the biggest den of group perversion” in the Egyptian capital. The police, operating in concert with her, promptly raided the establishment. Ms. Iraqi posted photos of naked men being corralled by authorities and promised viewers, in a since-deleted Facebook post, that her exposé would feature the “whole story of the dens for spreading AIDS in Egypt.”” – NYT: EDITORIAL BOARD


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Curriculum Vitae

Tom L. States PhD Candidate

Fields of Interest: Political Theory, International Relations, Marxist Political Economy

Research Topic: eRacism - Conflicts of Difference

Education History: Williams College, BA Political Science; New York University, MA Politics; York University PhD Candidate

Languages: English, German

Hometown: Greenwood, Mississippi

Words of Wisdom: “IT” is what you are when you are young. Your youth mistakes certainty of the few things that you think you know for knowledge of things that it takes a life time to understand. With time and a few life experiences “IT” becomes the thing you pursue to give your life meaning. Somewhere along the way of having or getting “IT” you ask yourself, ‘Is this “IT”? Panic sets in when you realize that “IT” is your life. Fear and insecurity is that feeling you get when “IT” has not been worth a life time.


Harvey, David. Justice, Nature, and the Geography of Difference. New York: Longman, 1996.

Fanon, Frantz. Black Skin White Masks. Trans. Charles Lam Markmann. New York: Grove Press. 1967.

Cancian, Francesca M. Gender Politics: Love and Power in the Private and Public Spheres. Gender and the Life Course. Ed. Alice S. Rossi. New York: Aldine, 1985.

Sand, Shlomo. The Invention of the Jewish People. New York: Verso, 2009.

Lay, Shawn. The Invisible Empire In The West: Toward a New Historical Appraisal of the Ku Klux Klan of the 1920's. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2004.


Carothers, Thomas. Think Again: Civil Society. Foreign Policy Date, (Winter: 1999-2000).

Ober, Josiah. The original meaning of "democracy": Capacity to do things, not majority rule. Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics. American Political Science Association meetings, Philadelphia, (2006).