“Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them. (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime –and a cruelty, too.” -Sigmund Freud, Psychoanalyst.
Well. Again and again the words “gay sex is against nature” is constantly diffusing. But what is against nature? Gay sex or the call to ban gay sex, as it is unnatural?
Science can have well definite answers for this. But the findings of science strongly suggest gay sex is not at all unnatural. Homosexuality is found in nature. Well documented in 500 species and observed in 1500 species apart from human species, exclusive homosexuality occurs in the species Ovis Aries apart from human species. So, now say, which assumption is against nature? Accepting homosexuality as natural or accepting it as unnatural? Some people who might have lack of scientific knowledge on this issue may select the second choice..!!!
Some people still accepting the fact that homosexuality occurs in nature, still denies the acceptance of the homosexuality be means of the argument, “if gay sex were accepted then sex with animals will be also subjected to acceptance”.
Well, is this means whether two men or two women who wish to have a consented sex between them switches to the level of animals in this case? Is this is what the logic that justifies the homophobic comment of comparing animal sex to gay sex? Well, whether the animal can give consent?
So people who follow this line of idea against homosexuality, thinks that people who wish to have a consented sex who belongs to the same gender is always a matter of abuse? Whether people turn speechless creatures non capable of giving a consent when coming to gay sex? Well, we have to think over it..!!!
Really, it is exclamatory when some people comment that homosexual relationships are against the social order and calling it immoral. Okay..!!! If it is so, are they ready to prove that homosexuality collapsed the order of societies which had appreciated the homosexual relationships?
Whether Plato and Socrates, who came from a Greek society, where homosexual relationships are seen as normal, gave ideas which are against the social order? Or, well the great Alexander collapsed the order of society in which he was raised? Well, those who say homosexuals are against the social order, can you please think about the contributions of homosexuals, which had a great effect in society? Leanardo-da-vinci, whose paintings are still admired and Michelangelo, whose sculptures are still considered very artistic piece, Alan Turning, who was the first one who had introduced the concept of “algorithm” in computer science etc, were the people who were against the social order? Whether their contributions played the role of against society? Are they immoral people? Well, this comment on homosexuals is unbearable..!!!
Some people still say that AIDS is spread by homosexuality. Risk for transmitting HIV through unprotected anal intercourse is greater than the risk from vaginal intercourse or oral sex.
but this fact never denies that HIV is caused by vaginal intercourse also. And not at all sex in homosexuality is anal sex. Moreover the AIDS is transmitted only by unprotected sex. Do, the opponents of homosexuality think that gay sex is unprotected sex? So, what is the assumption they are using to justify that HIV is spread by gay sex. HIV is spread by any sex, any unprotected sex. Whether they think that it is unable to use condoms in gay sex and calling it unprotected one? But, if we are attributing
homosexuality with the spread of AIDS, does it mean that the patients who are affected with AIDS are homosexuals or they had sex? Still, the opponents are ready to ensure that only vaginal sex occurs in heterosexuality? Don’t they know the anal intercourse or oral intercourse occurring between heterosexual partners? Well, in the country of India, where homosexuality is considered unnatural and a public statement is made that it is immoral, several thousands of years ago, the book written from here, the Kamasutra, discuss widely on other than the vaginal intercourse, even between males…!! Does this mean that homosexuality is a western “disease”? No.!! If it is the opponents claiming that Kamasutra is a western book? No, east has the long tradition of accepting the homosexual relationships. So, whether AIDS is spread by gay sex or unprotected sex?
Well, the diversity of gender and sexual orientation is well documented even in literature and in case of Vedas too! The erotic depictions of homosexuality can be still found in khajuraho temples. Rig Veda says “vikruti evam prakurti” (“what seems unnatural is also natural”). So, following a Vedic line of thought can opponents justify that homosexuality is against nature? India is one of the countries which had accepted the variations of gender and sexuality. Even the separate sects for transgender called hijira, the aravan cult of Tamilnadu etc are some of the best examples.
Gender and sexual ambiguity was well documented and recorded in the history of India. So, how can one justify the fact that homosexuality is a western disease? Homoerotic themes are wide spread across the mythology of Hindu religion. Only after the advent of the Abrahamic religions, homosexuality was condemned and made unnatural in the rule of British. Freud says every being posses Latent Homosexual tendency MSM (Men Sex with Men) and WSW (Women Sex with Women) all MSM are not gays and all WSW are not Lesbians. Gay & Lesbian relationship have to do a lot with the Mutual understanding more than sex so a person will not become gay or lesbian after having sex with the person of same gender.
The main point, what we wish to indicate here is the educational system, which preaches that there are only two genders and single sexuality-the heterosexuality. But there are more than 25 types of genders with more than 12 types of sexual attraction and gender ambiguous people are recorded well, like transgender(people who feels that the gender assigned them by means of society based on reproductive organs is not applicable for them and follow a different one or combination of others), transsexuals(people who feel that their biological sex assigned at birth ahs to be changed), intersex(people having ambiguous genitalia or physical characteristics), androgynous (people who feel never gender or consider themselves neither male nor female), trigenders(who moves between male, female and third genders), gender fluids(who don’t have a constant gender perception of themselves),bigender(who considers that they are both male and female), gender nonconformists, agenders(who rejects the gender roles), gays(men attracted to men), lesbians(women attracted to women), bisexuals(attracted to both men and women), polysexuals(attracted to more than two genders), pansexual(attracted to all irrespective of biological sex,gender and sexual orientation),asexual(who do no feel sexual attraction to any one),guydykes and girlfags(straight men and straight women who are attracted more to bisexual/lesbian women or bisexual/gay men respectively) etc and several other categories . Such a wide and vast categories of sexuality and gender exists, still the educational system propagates that there exists the two genders and one sexuality..!!
Well, India is said to be a country of rich diversity and we learn that Indians are proud of “unity in diversity”. But where this “unity in diversity “shrinks out, when come to the discussion of sexuality and gender? Why we are still reluctant to accept the wide diversity in sexuality and gender and celebrate those identities?
Think what happens if people who possessing wider diversity of sexual and gender orientation are compelled to hide their true identity and allowed to marry a person who not suits for them? For example, think the “sweetness” of marriage life one experience, if a gay person, who finds love and attachment with another male, is compelled to marry a straight girl? Please think a while..!!!
Finally please read the response to a mother who asked Sigmund Freud, one of the great psychologists of this century regarding “curing” her homosexual son.
“I gather from your letter that your son is a homosexual. I am most impressed by the fact that you do not mention this term yourself in your information about him. May I question you why you avoid it? Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation; it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them. (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime –and a cruelty, too. If you do not believe me, read the books of Havelock Ellis.”