|
August 3, 2004
The
Homosexual Relationship
by Farjam Majd, J.D.
Overview
The male-female relationship in human society is
the most fundamental and important type of human
relationship because it is not only the cornerstone
of procreation, but also the unique bond in the
principally perfect union of the two complementary
halves of humanity. As such, this bond is special
and its unique qualities should be acknowledged and
strengthened, not denied and degraded by regarding
it simply as one of the many alternatives.
The homosexual activists and their supporters
have had considerable success in favorably framing
the issues in terms of what they want to focus on,
and coining the language to their liking in the
contemporary debate over homosexuality. Indeed, the
core issue of homosexuality, that of the essence of
the relationship itself, has been lost in the
debate and secondary issues such as tolerance,
acceptance, civil rights, adoption and homosexual
marriage have been promoted to take the center
stage. In effect, the underlying relationship has
been accepted as valid, and as a result, the rest
of the claims will have to be accepted because they
logically follow. But, these issues are not
fundamental and only flow by implication from the
basic assumptions about the normalcy of the
homosexual relationship.
In this essay, I refocus the attention on the
essence of the homosexual relationship. I will
argue that, despite the popular and often
irrelevant claims to the contrary, homosexuality is
a pathological condition of the sexual system. This
argument is in the bigger context of the sexual
system and the fundamental, gender-based,
and complementary relationship between male
and female. Because men and women are not
interchangeable, a homosexual relationship cannot
be a valid substitute for a heterosexual
relationship. The fundamental harm which lies in
homosexual tendencies and behaviors results from
the depravation of one sex from the complementary
characteristics and influences of the opposite
sex.
I will briefly touch on many aspects of this
debate for completeness and to rebut the oft made
and invalid arguments on these basis.
The Homosexual
Aspirations and Agenda
There has been a trend in recent years, and
becoming more widespread, where people with certain
identifiable problems try to redefine their
problems as traits of diversity. For example, in a
recent news story a deaf child was born to deaf
parents (who were, incidentally, a lesbian pair).
The child's impairment could be treated and cured
but the parents refused to allow treatment on the
grounds that deafness is not a defect but a
culture! Their argument was based on that deaf
people have their own language and way of life and
therefore are a distinct culture and by curing
their child they would be turning their back on
their culture. It is hard to imagine a more selfish
and absurd argument. They want to deprive their own
child of a major sense because they think that
their physical impairment amounts to a culture.
This quest for normalcy, through the
redefinition of problems as diversity traits, is a
strong and emotional driver for activists to
promote acceptance and normalization of their
condition. The conviction behind this activism is
further strengthened by the historical bigotry and
unreasonable discriminations that people with these
problems were made to bear. They are now united
partly because of this common discrimination that
they endured over the decades and centuries past.
This is one reason why they feel so self-righteous
and are so dedicated to their causes.
To this end, the homosexual activists and their
supporters now want to get as much media exposure
as they can, promote their condition as normal
through educational establishments and
entertainment outlets and gain sympathy and
acceptance by irrelevant comparisons to racial
minorities and arguments on the basis of civil
rights. Even past this stage, they have reached the
point of coercing the rest of the society to accept
their viewpoints by judicial decree and favorable
interpretations of law. This is a classic case of
the tyranny of minority.
Trivialized Male-Female
Differences
Probably the most important of the intellectual
and emotional enablers of the current permissive
and positive attitudes towards homosexuality is the
trivialization of the differences between men and
women in pop culture, politics and law. This
attempt at trivializing the differences stems from
the emotional quest for equality through sameness.
After all, if we are all the same, there can be no
argument about who is better or worse in a
particular respect. But this quest is misguided in
its approach. By denying the differences, they are
also denying the unique and irreplaceable values
that each sex brings to the table. Ironically, one
of the negative results of the feminist movement
has been the undervaluation of femininity. From the
inception, the feminist movement tried to deny and
trivialize male-female differences and directly or
by implication regard them as a social strategy
devised by men to keep women down. They
aggressively promoted male behavior and manners in
women to "show" everybody that women can do
everything just as well as men. Unwittingly, the
feminists are also sending the message that women
can only have value if they act like men,
undervaluing their potential based on their own
feminine traits.
If we accept the proposition that men and women
are basically the same (other than some obvious
anatomical differences) in terms of behavior,
traits, and inclinations, then we can logically
conclude that they are interchangeable in general.
This fallacious proposition is largely responsible
for the justification and acceptance of the
homosexual relationship because if men and women
are interchangeable, then based on one's
inclinations, be they biologically based or not,
one may validly choose either a man or a woman as
his/her sexual partner. That is, anything goes.
Of course, men and women are very different in
their behaviors, traits, and inclinations. The
differences are very visible at all levels of their
existence from sub-cellular level XX & XY
chromosomes, to the highest levels of cognitive
characteristics as I discuss below.
What is the Sexual
System?
Sex is often identified with mating and that is
probably the most visible manifestation of the
sexual system. But there is a lot more to the
sexual system than mere sex. The sexual system is a
means of diversifying and thus strengthening the
gene pool by requiring the mixing of the
chromosomes of two individuals, the male and the
female. But it doesn't end there. In advanced
animals and especially in humans, this is a
multilevel system where at each level there are
complex adaptations that support the particular
sex's (i.e. male's or female's) sexual strategy for
survival. Some of the identifiable levels include
sub-cellular (e.g.: chromosomes), cellular (e.g.:
sex cells), physiological (e.g.: hormones,
circulation), anatomical (e.g.: do you really need
an example for this?!), emotional (how we feel
about a given event), behavioral (how we react to
and deal with events), and cognitive (how we
understand and view intellectual matters)
levels.
Male-Female
Differences
Male and female are different in each of the
levels mentioned above. What is more, these
differences are complementary to those of the
opposite sex, not arbitrary. At some levels, such
as the sub-cellular and cellular levels where you
consider the makeup of XX-XY chromosomes and
behaviors of sperm and egg, respectively, this
complementation is obvious. At other levels the
complementation is more subtle, but it is there.
Some of these levels are discussed below.
At the cognitive level, generally, both men and
women can do everything, but how they do it
and how they approach problems and solutions are
different because of their different outlooks on
life necessitated by their gender. Women tend to be
more holistic in their approach to problems and men
tend to be more black and white and focused. These
differences are neither trivial nor incidental.
They represent two fundamental and complementary
approaches to problem solving and dealing with
life's challenges. In some problem areas we need to
focus intensely, be methodical, and dig deep, while
in other areas we need to consider all factors and
relationships involved. This may partially explain
why men tend to be the technical specialists while
women excel in management skills, multitasking, and
social relationships. It is noteworthy that in
adopting one of these problem solving strategies,
it is not only the capabilities that are important
but also the inclination and enjoyment involved
because people tend to do what they enjoy in the
absence of ulterior sociopolitical motives.
At the behavioral level, one of the differences
is that women tend to react to conflicts with more
physically peaceful means (although the
attitude may be combative), whereas men are more
likely to resort to physical violence to settle the
dispute. The complementation lies in that both
types of reactions are sometimes called for and
neither one alone can resolve all conflicts. Hence,
the two together complement each other and create a
balanced strategy for dealing with all
situations.
Because sex is the differentiator of male and
female at many levels, it follows that "homo" --
"sex" is a contradiction in terms. In this context,
"sex" means difference. So, these gender-based
differences are fundamental (i.e. it applies
to everybody), not incidental, they are
complementary, not merely collaborative, and
they are gender-based, not individual-based.
It is important to note that in addition to these
sexual characteristics within the individual, the
functioning of the sexual system also depends upon
the coming together of the sexes to fulfill the
complementation. So, it follows that the sexual
system may be impaired in two ways: one, by a
defect in one of the levels listed above within one
individual (intra-sex problem), and two, by one
individual failing to join with his/her complement,
namely the opposite sex. The latter could happen in
the form of lack of attraction to the opposite sex
(inter-sex problem).
It is important to recognize the difference
between complementation and collaboration.
Collaboration means the two collaborating entities
basically perform the same function but more of it.
Whereas, complementation means the two
complementing entities perform different functions
to achieve a common goal. The four wheels in a car
are collaborative because they merely divide the
load, while the engine and the transmission perform
different functions of power generation and power
transmission, respectively, to achieve the common
goal of motion. When two same-sex individuals
form
a partnership, the partnership is necessarily and
fundamentally collaborative, whereas when two
opposite-sex (i.e. a male and a female) individuals
form a partnership (marriage or otherwise), they
necessarily complement each other with respect to
fundamental functions of life. The fact that a
heterosexual couple may be mismatched does not
negate this principle, just as a badly made car
does not negate the principles of physics.
The book Brain
Sex: The Real Difference Between Men and Women,
by Anne Moir, is instructive about male-female
differences.
Continued On
Page Two
|