|
Here is a gist of the reasons why "sexual orientation is an invalid
concept"
1. Sexuality is only a preference, a liking.
It's not an orientation. It is Gender which is our basic orientation and
hence identity.
(It's only the feminine gendered male who considers sexual preference an
orientation, because he confuses it with his gender).
2. The concept of sexual orientation
confuses/ mixes gender orientation (femininity) with sexual preferences
(male-male desire) thus facilitating false stereotypes.
(E.g. the example of the 'feminised brain theory' propounded by some
scientists.)
3. There is no such concept (as of sexual
orientation) in the entire history of mankind, except in the modern
heterosexualised west. It is also not found anywhere in the modern non-western(ised)
world.
4. DOUBLE STANDARDS: The concept of
sexual orientation is unevenly applied. While it denies male-male desires
the facility of gender differentiation, it allows male-female sexuality to
be divided into 'straight' and 'transgendered'.
this makes any comparison between the two, especially in terms of their
'masculinity' or 'femininity', unfair. It also facilitates false
stereotypes about both male-male and male-female sexuality.
5. The concept of sexual orientation seeks to
define us on the basis of the 'sex' of our partner, rather than our own
gender orientation.
How can I be known not by who I am but whether my partner has a penis or a
vagina?
6. INCOMPLETE: The concept of sexual
orientation does not even do justice to our sexual preferences. It fails
to define its essence. It fails to take into account the gender
orientation of our partner(s). It only talks about their outer sex.
Defining it as being directed towards men or women only serves the
interests of the forces of heterosexualisation who want to isolate same
sex behaviour from the mainstream.
But what does it tell you about the sexual interests of the individual.
Is it enought to say that "Tom" likes men?
Does it mean that "Tom" will like any good looking man.
In all probability Tom will like either masculine gendered males or
feminine gendered males.
7. MISLEADING: Sexual preference can
not be defined in terms of the sex of our parteners. Rather it should be
defined in terms of the activities preferred by the person.
A man may only like to do mutual masturbation and such stuff with another
guy even when his predominant attraction is towards men. He may actually
hate anal sex.
How can he be considered to have the same sexual preference or orientation
as the one who lives to be fucked.
Most men I have spoken to who like to penetrate anally, like it
irrespective of who they do it with --- whether men or women or eunuchs.
In all non-heterosexualised societies, including most contemporary and all
of the ancient societies, sexuality was defined in terms of the activities
preferred.
8.
People don't choose identities based on their natural traits, but based on
power magnets: When the basic human identities like Gender (or any
other identity based on one's characteristics) is heavily politicised,
their definitions are arbitrarily and unnaturally fixed, and some
identities are given extreme powers while others extreme disempowerment,
then people don't choose their social identities based on their actual
traits but based on where the social powers are.
The conspirators against men have placed power magnets with the
heterosexual identity. while it is defined as 'heterosexual', its
basically the masculine gendered male space.
Now anyone with the slightest sexual need for women attaches himself to
the power magnets that say "heterosexuality", rather than go to the
disempowered 'homosexual' identity. Although, the true heterosexuals don't
really fit into the 'masculine' magnet of the heterosexual identity, they
get to taste the powers because of their heterosexuality.
Then come men (i.e. masculine gendered males) who may not have any sexual
need for women at all, but they realise that the 'heterosexual' space is
actually their space -- for masculine gendered males. So, they hang on to
it using their masculinity, although for it, they not only have to pretend
sexual interest in girls, they also have to suppress, like the 100% of
other straight men, that their sexual interest in men.
It is only when one is left out of the 'heterosexual' group, both because
of a lack of heterosexuality and a lack of masculinity, that one is forced
to think about leaving the powerful 'heterosexual' group and joining the
'homosexual' space.
9. WRONG DEFINITION: But one of the most
important reason why sexual orientation is an invalid concept is HOW IT
IS DEFINED.
It says: heterosexual is someone of the opposite-sex.
Homosexual is defined as the same-sex.
Gay is defined as sexual desire of a man for another man.
The problem is with what is defined as 'same-sex' and what is defined as
'opposite-sex'. Who are same-sex, who are 'opposite sex'?
And who is a man?
I am saying that the post Christian west has distorted the definitions of
these terms in such a manner that they don't reflect the reality.
Let's start with the definition of man.
Who is a man?
The modern west says anyone born with a penis is a man.
A man with a penis may spend his entire life feeling he is a woman. May
live like women. May dress, eat, have sex like women. But he will always
be considered a man by the West. A diseased man, albeit.
This is because Christianity destroyed the notion of gender from the
western society. So femininity in males is not recognised.
In the pre-Christian and non-Christian world, feminine gendered males are
not considered men at all. Of course, they are not women either. They are
considered a third gender, different than men and women.
They themselves don't consider themselves men. (Many are however in
between masculine and feminine). When you don't acknowledge the third
gender then feminine gendered men are automatically seen as diseased.
But even in the modern west, the gender difference plays an immense,
although hidden role in everyday gender and sexual life of people. There
is still a difference between 'real men' and 'lesser men' (transgendered
males now become lesser men). Then, this manhood or the masculine man
identity quietly becomes 'straight' identity and is cleverly associated
with exclusive heterosexuality, thus translating into a 'sexual identity'
instead of a gender one. And thereby driving same-sex bonds outside of the
mainstream, masculine space.
The third gender space is then converted into the 'homosexual' space.
What ensues is complete confusion.
So now we come to the question of who is really same-sex.
Is a masculine man the same sex as a transgender/ transvestite?
Not if you consider their gender orientation!
Sex between masculine men and transgendered males (catamite, fa'afafine,
Hijra, Koti, Ali, Berdache, etc., etc. etc.) have always, always, always
been considered 'opposite sex', not the same.
Transgendered/ effeminate men who have sex with men see themselves as
'women' having sex with men. They also tend to have a special, sometimes
exclusive thing for receptive anal sex.
Men who have sex with effeminate men do not see themselves as having sex
with men (unless they are living in gender-blind west). They see
themselves as men having sex with the third gender. They often only like
to fu** feminine gendered males (just as they do with women), while with
masculine gendered males (men), men do things like mutual masturbation,
etc. Sexual relationships between men tend to be 'equal', and thus same in
the real sense, but between men and third gender are actually opposites,
and are never equal.
So the basic definition used in the theory of 'sexual orientation' is
wrong. |