posted on Apr, 29 2012 @ 07:02 PM
I am gay. And I don't think I was born that way. But then to understand that, you'd have to: 1. Not be stuck on an antiquated religion and start
thinking for yourself. 2. Understand that I don't think heterosexuals were born that way either.
This in no way means that anyone feels or remembers consciously choosing to be gay or straight. It's a social process to choose either one. In
current Western culture, it is a societal norm to be fully heterosexual. And that is what most infants and children grow up with and accept on very
unconscious levels. They see it, they feel it, and it is unconsciously and consciously communicated to them at a very early age. In the same way that
a child's early experience might be instrumental in that child growing up to be a serial killer or a president, so their sexuality is formed
Have there been cultures where homosexuality or bisexuality were an accepted norm? Yes. And what happened to those born into THOSE cultures - the same
thing: they ended up like everyone else in their culture, some of them gay, some of them straight, some of them bi.
In this culture we're currently in, while more and more people are accepting of homosexuals, it's still a culture that roots itself in pure
heterosexuality being the norm. The heterosexual people who have no problems with gays, who accept them and love them (and no, OP that doesn't
include you) are still one-dimensional in that while being accepting of homosexuality in others, they would never accept it in themselves. They were
taught not to - and this information was handed to them, as I said consciously and unconsciously long ago and there is no reason they shouldn't be
What happens to homosexuals, again - in this present culture - is that they are also very one-dimensional, but in an opposite way. They did something
rare. When being handed this information through various unconscious and conscious methods, they rejected it. The reasons are too many to go into
here. Suffice it to say that they rejected pure heterosexuality. Now, what's left over to them as a choice, APPEARS to them to be only the complete
other side: homosexuality. Gays are rejecting heterosexuality, but not sexual exclusivity. Being one or the other is taught - but certainly not being
both. Therefore homosexuals, while rejecting part of the conditioning, haven't rejected all of it. Thus they end up just as one-dimensional as
It's bisexual people who are the true pioneers, who have rejected both those morays and are thus able to experience the full multi-dimensionality of
their personalities, their sexualities and their identification with what constitutes masculinity and femininity.
90% of what we consider to be innate, inborn characteristics of masculinity and femininity are actually cultural. There have been and still are
cultures where women rule, and actually embody much of what we think of as masculine behavior. Many characteristics of what our present culture
considers to be masculinity or femininity are purely fabricated by us. This is one of the reasons homosexuals tend to make caricatures out of
masculine and feminine roles - the dressing up in drag and plastered in make up, heels and lipstick, or the wearing of leather, chains and motorcycles
- because they want to claim some kind of identify somewhere in all of these perplexing roles that they on the one hand have rejected, but on the
other hand seek, if only to fit in somehow.
Gay men don't lisp from any genetic predisposition. It's an affectation they adopt in response to their inner reaction to what masculinity or
femininity is supposed to mean in our culture.
There is NO gay gene. There is NO proof whatsoever that there is any genetic component to being gay. There are extremely rare cases of chromosome
abnormalities such as a women being born with XXY (women are XX), and a man being born with XXY (men are XY) - X being female chromosome and Y being
male. But aside from these RARE abnormalities, there is no gay gene. Homosexuals would like there to be one since it proves that they were 'born this
way." If there is one, it had NOT been proven or found. The hullabaloo in the 90s about that was based on SPECULATION that never went anywhere. All
the scientists know this; it's the media that never let it go.
Human consciousness, personalities, experience, sexuality is far too complex to be dependent on a gene.
In our current society, there is nothing wrong with being fully straight or fully gay (I'm fully gay), but both are contingent upon what we accept
now, and both are ultimately highly one-dimensional and psychologically exclusive and limiting.
Hatred for homosexuals will always exist until ultimately, society can see the openness of human consciousness, until both straights and gays
understand their innate bisexuality. And though I make these assertions about unconsciously choosing, do YOU remember choosing to be straight?