Gay-lib sees the words ‘same-sex attractions’ as very offensive. These words appear to diminish the concept of homosexuality, which they see as a full blown and equal form of sexuality. According to this world-view, it just pops out of nowhere. Gay-lib gets furious when it is labelled as nothing more than just feelings, things that come and go. So angry that they want to use legislation to ban any other world-view than their own. They want to call in state violence, which is basically just violence, by use of horror stories.
We see for example, the National Centre for Lesbian Rights (click here), a small local law firm in Los Angeles that falsely claims to be nationwide. This $5 million dollar firm sets out to “shape the legal landscape for all LGBT people and families across the nation through its precedent- setting legislation”. They do not set out to convince, debate or connect to people with other views. Theirs is not a compassionate or caring way to promote mutual understanding. This very small group of hostile lesbians has been setting out for years to use legal force to push and intimidate others into desired behaviour and to set precedents in small trials which then can be used to coerce others in other places to enforce the same desired behaviour, according to their website. They want to throw their weight around in society. They intend to become your worst enemy.
So we are facing a very fierce crowd. The phrase ‘do unto others as you would that they do unto you’ is no part of radical gay-lib ideology.
These radical feminist lesbians do not cooperate with men. Not even with gay guys, who could be very good allies to beat the crap out of heterosexuals. Their movement is for radical lesbians, and radical lesbians only. No love, compassion, connecting, sharing, no common humanity. Their message to the world is: “I will see you in court”. It doesn’t get any more hostile than this.
The activists in the gay-lib movement are not kind, sweet or adorable people. They are agitated and ruthless. They are as passionate and intolerant as people used to be decades ago, when homosexuality was banned by law. They seek, so they say, to “crush”, “eradicate”, “purge”, “remove for once and for all” all other views on the human condition. The gay revolutionary of yesterday is becoming today’s tyrant himself, a pattern seen so often in history. In order to counter it, let us investigate the mind of gay-lib and their ever increasing desire to lock people up for being different.
The view of gay-lib
Gay-lib ideology is old fashioned and rooted in the previous century; research in Australia in the year 2000 (click here) has shown that homosexuality is not an inborn trait or a fixed part of your core being. By studying thousands of identical twins, researchers have proved that with your genes you can take on a homosexual identity or a heterosexual one too. It is not predetermined by genes or maternal hormones: you are not “born that way”. With almost 90% of gay men who have an identical twin brother, that brother identifies as heterosexual. So it can’t be genetic, scientists conclude.
In the outmoded view of gay activists on the other hand, it is assumed that homosexuality has no cause. It would be innate and grows inside you, just like your wisdom teeth do too. Sooner or later, it is bound to pop out, and by coming out “gay”, this will lead you to become the man or woman you “really are”.
Gay Affirmative Therapy
Gay Affirmative Therapy was fabricated by activists in the last two decades and is all about using social struggle as the framework of reference. It is highly politically motivated. In 2003 G. Perlman (click here) writes:
“GAT is a political argument, in the sense that politics has to do with how people experience their selves in the world. This to me is the fundamental business of psychotherapy and counselling”.
GAT is not based in any science. It constitutes science fraud, or as the Journal Of Orthopsychiatry expressed in 2012 (click here):
“Although a fair amount has been written about gay affirmative psychotherapy, there has not been a clear consensus on what actually constitutes gay affirmative therapy. Because there are no real theoretical framework, operational definitions, or outcome measures, psychotherapists are left unsure about how to incorporate it into their practice and researchers are unsure how best to investigate it.”
GAT strives to induce a coming-out process, so that the individual can take on a lasting gay identity or label, and set him/herself apart from others. No way to avoid it, so they say, no reason to either. When entering homosexuality, you can always check in but you can never check out, so you are told.
The gay sauna and darkrooms ideologically have entrances, but no exits. GAT therapists feel you can’t push a wisdom tooth back into the jaw. So in their train of thought, reparative therapy dentists with their other world-view do much “harm” to healthy gay guys flashing their stunning teeth. No need even to prove that harm, it is all self-evident, so we are led to believe.
Gay-lib rhetoric then goes on to make comparisons to other natural biological wisdom teeth: the colour of your eyes and hair, or your facial appearance. In doing so things are then turned into a civil rights issue, a battle fought by suppressed minorities who are distinctly biologically different from each other.
Definition of sexuality
At exgaycalling we don’t agree. We insist that there are no two sexualities, but merely one: sexuality. And we explain that sexuality as the innate human capability to sexualize and desexualize not only other people, but also your own body, things and even events.
And this process is a never ending activity of the human mind, in the same way as cells in bone tissue (osteoclasts and osteoblasts) continually tear down and rebuild bone, the physical core of your human body which many see as an unchangeable framework, and as dead as stone. (Except for the occasional fracture which needs to be fixed.) People fail to see that bone tissue is “fixing” itself daily and weekly. Homosexuality is seen by many as an inert, dead and unchangeable characteristic of the human condition, that does not need any “fixing”. They fail to see that this “fixing” and changing goes on all the time.
Continuously you sexualize and desexualize things. People, spouses, events, one night stands, they all can turn you on sexually. Only later do you notice that they now “turn you off”. Within 24 hours the gorgeous person you met in the bar and decided to take home, becomes a complete stranger next morning when you are compelled to offer him or her at least a breakfast. Or suddenly you find you want to buy leather gear to go to the leather party which has become so exciting. Three years later you put the gear up for sale. You have desexualized these things.
Some try to label conduct and feelings as a distinct and separate form of sexuality, but from our inclusive view, there is just one comprehensive sexuality. There are no forms, there are no variations, there is but one all encompassing sexuality. We are all equal, we are not different. Homosexuality is not a variant of sexuality, because sexuality doesn’t have variations. Everyone has the same huge vast potential inside him/herself, which constantly expresses itself and is always on the move, always changing slowly but surely. Labels are merely an expression of language, but they are not real entities. Labels are stigmas, social constructs, and simply a way of communicating.
The personal expression of the ever moving and changing sexuality can be understood by individual psychology and psychiatry. It is nothing to get all steamed up and aggressive about.
Clash of paradigms
What we are seeing here is the clash of paradigms, the basic way that human feelings are defined and then defended. Gay-lib and GAT activism, which stem from obsolete notions, would have it that homosexual feelings constitute a basic part of your humanness, your genetic way of being, your inner core. You would be distinctly different from other people. Doubting homosexuality is hence doubting someone’s right to just be him/herself.
Ideologically, the words “same-sex attractions” stand for another world-view, making it possible to perhaps even influence these feelings, given we have the right therapists and therapies. In the eyes of gay-lib, it is like looking lovingly at the works of Dr. Mengele, the Nazi doctor who sought to “cure” the colours of his victim’s eyes and turn them into blue, he sought to “cure” the dark colour of his victims’ hair and turn it into blond, he sought to “cure” the Jewish appearance of his victims’ face and turn it into a more Aryan facial build.
The term “same-sex attractions” sounds to gay-libbers as if it diminishes or denies the existence of homosexuality. Gay-libbers hate it. It is the core of their hatred towards people who identify as having unwanted SSA’s. They would say: How can you not want to have this blessing that can endow a man or a woman? You must be out of your mind, “brainwashed”, suffering from the “heteronormative coercion of a discriminating and misunderstanding society that robs people of the right to find their “true gay selves”, so the rhetoric goes on. Surely you are not doing this freely, it must be forced onto you.
Gay-libbers even spread rumours in the Pan American Health Organisation (click here) that reparative therapists lock youngsters up in cellars for months at a time, depriving them of their freedom, and physically and verbally abusing them until they finally cave in. In doing so, they are trying to set up the best part of mankind against us:
“The victims were interned and deprived of their liberty, sometimes to the extent of being kept in isolation during several months. The testimonies provide accounts of degrading treatment, extreme humiliation, physical violence, aversive conditioning through electric shock or emetic substances, and even sexual harassment and attempts of “reparative rape,” especially in the case of lesbian women”.
So we are into raping of lesbians. No-one challenges them. And because of that, radical gay-lib can then go on to make a parallel with racism, fascism and all the gut feelings they can provoke with these comparisons to degrading ideologies which must be beaten for once and for all. In their romantic struggle for identity, little gay boys grow up to become Superman, fighting for Truth, Justice and the American Way of Life (see our article on gay website “Truth Wins Out”, click here). It has an extremely appealing quality, it feels so right, at the expense of others with another outlook on sexuality. He says he has issues. As a psychiatrist, I couldn’t agree more, but then from a shrink’s point of view.
They might state: We, the new gay Supermen, don’t need all the “doctors Mengele” to state our case. Their testimonies, books and research are the works of Filth. You need not look into it. Their works are ‘not done’, we are ‘not amused’, all we need is a big bonfire to burn the Filth and banish it from Earth. Ten thousand testimonies on sexual change will not change the obvious fact that we are looking Filth straight in the face. So we don’t need those testimonies or books or research articles. We have already made up our minds. And a new era of freedom, liberty and human rights will at last come into being.
Gay liberation is hence the only way to go. No-one is to look into his heterosexual potential. And with God’s blessing, gay-lib ideology will reign the world of sexuality.
Superman’s to-do list
So much for gay-lib. This is the clash of paradigms. And a clash that people who experience unwanted same-sex attractions cannot afford to ignore either. We are next on Superman’s to-do list. First ban therapy efforts involving discussion and exploration of heterosexual feelings, next lock up the therapists for breaking the new law, next identify and persecute unbelievers who dare contradict the paradigms of an (obsolete) world-view.
Houston, we have a problem.
Gay-libbers feel that by not embracing all they have fought for (the recognition of the gay label as opposed to a heterosexual identity) you are denouncing all they have stood up for. Your choices seem to be a slap in their face.
Imagine me not wanting my pregnant wife to have an abortion, although pressure groups have successfully managed to make abortion an option for couples. Am I then to be seen as a person who denounces the right to have abortion? Have my wife and I joined up in the anti-abortion lobby? Is our gynaecologist our newly found ally and should he therefore lose his medical license? Yes, says gay-lib: that is exactly our point, these sorts of anti-abortion fanatics do a great deal of “harm” to society. But my question is: how can our gynaecologist do harm by letting a healthy pregnancy proceed?
Imagine me having cancer and my doctor suggests the subject of euthanasia (which is allowed in many European countries). I decline the offer. Am I then to be seen as a person who denounces the right to have euthanasia? Have I joined up in the anti-euthanasia lobby? Should my doctor therefore lose his medical license? Yes, says gay-lib: that is exactly our point, these sorts of anti-euthanasia fanatics do a great deal of “harm” in society. But my question is: how can he do harm by not killing me?
Imagine me experiencing same-sex attractions. I decline Obama’s offer to see a gay affirmative therapist. I would rather see a psychotherapist who knows his stuff on the journey to broaden your sexual horizon. Am I then to be seen as a person who denounces gay rights? Have I become homophobic and discriminating to my fellow man? Have I joined an anti-gay lobby? Is my therapist a newly found political ally, and should he therefore lose his medical license? Yes, says gay-lib: that is exactly our point.
Choices made on a personal level about your own life do not necessarily equal choices made on a political level concerning the freedom of others. We have an intolerant gay-lib who does not agree to disagree. And that is a great danger for the human rights of each child, adolescent and adult who does not sign on the dotted lines of gay-lib ideology. Gay-lib is heterophobic and homosexist. The tyrant is coming into bloom.