km2_33
Firstly, describe how homosexuality facilitates reproduction.
Secondly, ‘singlehood’ is a cultural construct and not a natural state.
Being single is only possible in relation to a cultural norm which has made marriage an artificial norm.
Thirdly, the ill and the handicapped within which we can correctly include homosexuality or any divergence or mutation that goes against health, are superfluous from a natural perspective.
The fact that they are tolerated in our present society is due to multiple reasons, many of which I’ve mentioned in my original essay, but here are some of them again:
1- Superfluity, excess and luxury are only possible in environments of abundance. Within such environments toleration is possible because it doesn’t threaten immediate survival and so the unproductive and the unessential are produced through wealth. Decadence is the final stage of such abundance.
2- Technology is making sex, and as a by-product gender, superfluous. Copulation is, presently, not the only method of reproduction and if we can imagine a near future where cloning and artificial insemination progress, the act itself will be relegated to a primitive remnant of a bygone age. Also with the advent of contraceptives the act of sex has ceased to have much significance. As a consequence sex has lost its weightiness and severity. It is now practiced as a physical release and a psychological need, which also serves as a social bonding mechanism. Eventually these functions will diminish in time as well. Sex is now a means for entertainment and its past mystical character, as a way of producing life nonetheless, and its spiritual qualities are devalued. This is how alternative sexual practices and life-styles are gaining acceptance and ‘normality’. In a world where sex does not necessarily lead to life and where it has become a pastime, a hedonistic tool or a preference and in a world where other methods can be used to reproduce sex and sexuality ceases to mean anything. Male/female labels diminish as relevant and especially the concept of maleness becomes obsolete.
3- The present system itself is dependant upon resources, and human beings are another resource. The maintenance and growth of a system, particularly when it exceeds a certain natural limit as ours has, demands a reinterpretation or a breaking of the original natural rules that made it possible, in the first place. As such the system creates its own ideals and its own rules, which are promoted and enforced through mechanisms which include religious and institutional authority. Law and order, and morality are two ways by which the individuals, or the parts of the whole, become indoctrinated within a framework of acceptable and unacceptable behaviours. Because of this systemic requirement, particularly in the west, for growth and stability based on access to resources, imitation and conformity are raised as virtues, while still maintaining the illusions of individuality which have not yet been cleansed out of our species psychological makeup, consumerism is promoted as an emblem of contentment and extreme thoughtless risk taking is presented as an ideal to be strived for, ethics play the part of keeping harmony, law punishes all that threatens the stability of the whole and punishes all expressions of disregard for cultural norms, life, and the hypothetical respect for human life especially, becomes a sacred concept to be protected by the systems institutions and by religious dogma and in the process diminishing the value of life itself.
In other words evolution diminishes the individual and promotes larger, higher unities.
The act of offering “strengths†and withdrawing “weaknesses†is the act of ‘plugging into the system’ and becoming indiscernible from it and totally dependant on it.
I won’t speak for all of them but Wittgenstein I’m not sure was homosexual. He was more asexual.
Michel Foucault, as well, had a low opinion of sex in general so we cannot say his thinking is a derivative of his sexuality but despite it.
But anyways.
As for Alexander the Great!!! and Plato!!! You fail to take into account the cultural settings within which these two figures lived in.
One can say that homosexual practices were popular within the Aristocracy of later day ancient Greece and this because of multiple reasons and especially as a sign of decline and decadence.
Are we then to say that all Greeks were homosexual or all upper-class Greeks were so?
It was customary for a teacher to teach all aspects of life to a student, back then, and this included sex. Also they did not have our Judeo-Christian sexual hang-ups about intercourse.
This, however, does not denote a preference or a homosexual inclination.
Homosexuality denotes a preference and an exclusive attraction for members of ones own sex as sexual partners.
This cannot be said to be the case for Plato or Alexander.
We can say that these ancient Hellenes were more ephivophiles [love of youth and adolescence] than homosexuals.
But that’s not the point.
We aren’t talking about these individuals here from a sexual perspective.
When we speak about homosexuality we are focusing our attentions on individuals from a sexual perspective and so we infer what productive elements are derived from this particular characteristic.
When we speak of an individual who is creative and talented we are talking about those aspects of him/her and we are not concerned as to what they prefer to fuck.
It can be said that heterosexuality is productive since it leads to an outcome.
Where does homosexuality lead to?
Sex, in nature, exists for a specific, simple reason: Reproduction.
It only has added functions because of social reasons which divert the original intent.
From a genetic perspective homosexuals are a dead end, even if they might be helpful or productive as thinkers or artists or workers or whatever.
So homosexuality per se is superfluous and is only tolerated because of the before mentioned reasons and because the individual within society, if he is not disruptive or overly free-thinking, offers other productive qualities which are more essential to the group or culture.
The fact that homosexuality coincides with the general trend towards a more docile, passive, unchallenging male makes it all the more tolerable to the present system and to the culture, since it serves the ‘Feminization’ process or perhaps it is a symptom of it.
You mean, like yours, right?
I agree.