posted on Nov, 24 2002 @ 11:05 PM
I don't care whether anyone judges me. Really, look at this in the correct light. If we are all afraid of how we are judged by others then we
relinquish our free will. We become 'policed' by what we are told is popular opinion. I personally find this disturbing considering how we get our
information these days, especially with regards to our perception of public opinion. Realistically speaking, I can think of no benefits to the
destruction of the traditional family model. The unfortunate aspect is that 'traditional family model' was made to be synonymous with 'repression
of the female'. I do not, however see the average 18-25 year old single mother reaching the fullest of her potential and realizing the freedom that
this liberation from the 'traditional family model' has won her. That was just a generalized example, ad hoc. of how public opinion can be
manipulated using antipodal definition. Such as it is, I can see the benefits and drawbacks of 'allowing' homo-sexual marriages into the realm of
legality (which is really what the issue is about, not the moral ramifications, as we are lead to believe). I can also see the moral ramifications of
condoning it as an 'a-sexual' estate. This is what this strain truly alludes to. The fact of the matter is that children do learn from their
environment. This includes gender roles. Regardless of the sexual preference, these learned roles still play a key factor in the relationships the
child will have as an adult. For example, a male child is raised in a family where the maternal figure shows dominant characteristics and the male
displays subordinate characteristics. The child, being a male, learns to associate femininity with dominance and masculinity as subordinate. The
question posed is, will the male child grow up preferring dominant female characteristic in a partner, subordinate male characteristics in a partner,
dominant male characteristics in a partner or subordinate female characteristics in a partner? As well to be considered ; How has this association
between the characteristics of the parents and the development of the child affected the perception of himself, especially if he displays the
personality traits of the dominant female?
Confusing issue, yes? Now, include the irradication of gender into the equation, the non-specific roles, the complete void of gender specific
scenarios, and other similar issues and WoW! Then you have a really confusing issue, especially when that child hits the age of sexual awareness. I
digress, though.
On track, the underlying theme of marriage is to denote the responsibility of parentage to any child in question, making it a matter of legal
obligation. Love has nothing to do with marriage, and can live quite fine without it. My opinion is that homo-sexual marriages should not be
'legalized'. I also refute the 'fact' that homo-sexuality is natural. The aspect of homo-sexuality that we see in nature is not homo-sexuality. It
is the establishment of dominance between males and females in a group or unit. The difference is that it isn't done for sexual gratification, no
type of penetration is attempted, no copulation occurs. It is only in the perverse aspects of human psychology that we find this wholly un-natural
behaviour, and, it is due to un-natural conditions during the development of the individual. It has already been stated that the first two years of
infant development are the most relevant to its growing psychology. It is therefore not so unreasonable to assume that adverse environmental
conditions during that period could effect the future of the subject in question. As well, it would be beyond the recognition of the individual in
question as to their moment of self-sexual clarity because 'they've always been felt that way'. If you also include abuse suffered through
childhood into the factor of development, taking into account sub-consciental repression of traumatic events, and recognitave events, the realm of
homo-sexuality being a naturally occurring phenomenon and the numbers that represent it very well could be reduced to the realm of dodecadecimal. What
do you think? (not that I care) LOLOLOLOL