When the society decided to force men into 'compulsory' sex with women through marriage, and as a major corollary, decided to ban male-male sexuality entirely from the formal space, it made men and men's spaces extremely vulnerable in front of the vested interest groups, including women. However, the deal was that the society will keep enough tabs on male-female sex/ intimacy, including prohibiting its public display and restricting all powers and benefits granted to it within the institution of marriage, and in fact penalising male-female sex outside of marriage much more than male-male sex — which the society tended to ignore when it occured behind the scenes. This deal was the main pillar of the entire 'plan' as it created a kind of 'balance'. Especially important was the reigning in of female sexuality because of the immense power that was otherwise placed into females, as 'manhood' became dependant upon serving women sexually. Without this 'balance', men and men's spaces would have become totally vulnerable to being persecuted and exploited by the vested interest groups, that tended to gain by the restraining of men.
With this deal the following was ensured:
- The only motive for the society to invest so heavily into the persecution of men, was reproduction and (secondarily) marriage; so, while other forms of sexual needs —— primarily man-man sexuality —— were persecuted, man-to-woman sexuality, too, was not unfairly benefitted —— at least, not beyond what was necessary. And, extremely important was the fact that women's capability to harm men through the artificial 'sexual power' granted to them through the route of manhood, was also heavily reigned in. In a way, everyone —— including the vested interest groups —— sacrificed for the sake of reproduction. Some more, some less. All of this at least had a purpose. The society as a whole was being 'benefitted' —— at least, that is what was believed.
- Other forms of sexual intimacy, again, primarily male-male sexual bonds, thrived behind the scenes —— even if superficially (i.e., their intensity was controlled) —— in the men's spaces, which were very strong and served as breathing spaces for men, for periodic respites from social persectuion. The society was o.k. with it as long as it was not acknowledged and it didn't come in the way of marriage or reproduction. This provided a great behind-the-scene-vent to men, to air their same-sex sexual and bonding needs, even if it meant that the society was intentionally promoting 'hypocrisy'. Leading 'double lives' was extremely important in order to maintain 'unnatural' social structures without making life unbearable.
But today, it amounts to a gross injustice, when, riding on the back of westernisation, the society is being forcefully heterosexualised, whereby the human needs long forced underground are being buried further into the ground and then it is claimed that male-female bonding is the only sexual need present in humans (especially men) —— and goes ahead to remove tabs from it, including tabs that were placed on female sexuality —— all in the name of openness, fairness and freedom. The result is that the anti-men forces gain complete control of the formal, mainstream social spaces. Then, they start persecuting men to the extreme by weeding out man-to-man sexuality even from the secret underground hideouts that they'd built in the mainstream —— and throwing them into the 'third gender' fringes through the invalid western concept of 'homosexuality'. Indeed, in heterosexual societies like the US, two men cannot even hold hands on the street without being thought of, or even abused as, third gender/ gay/ effeminate.
These forces also bring upon men, especially the youth, immense pressure to, not only have sex with, but even to bond emotionally and socially with women.
The irony is that this new brand of male-female sex is non-reproductive (casual) and is termed as 'heterosexuality'. For all the social investment that goes into reigning in men to the extreme, and forcing them into 'heterosexuality', the society does not gain anything in return. The only people to gain are the vested interest groups —— which include some men, women and members of the third sex (gay) — who are immensely empowered (and the irony is that they believe this is all 'naturally' predestined). These vested interest forces are actually a minority, which is only made extremely powerful after men have been chained in through the age-old conspiracy against them.
And this is why the introduction of western 'heterosexual' celebrations like the "Valentine Day" should be opposed in India, alongwith other facets of heterosexualisation.
Oct 3, 2007
May 19, 2007
Two of the greatest myths about male gender and sexuality spread by the western society
(with strong backing from its scientific institution)
In the matter of human gender and sexuality, the western scientific institution has ------ instead of destroying the lies created by Christianity to manipulate male gender and sexuality ------ chosen to toe its line, and perpetuate ------ even strengthen those lies by giving it a stamp of science ------ by hook or crook.
What had happened was that the institutions of science, like all the other small or big institutions of the western society was hijacked by the vested interests, quite early on ----- as soon as it started getting powerful.
Here we are going to look at two of the greatest lies spread by the western world about human, particularly male gender and sexuality.
Myths that the traditional, non-westernised world knows to be untrue:
MYTH 1:
GENDER IS NOT A BIOLOGICAL PHENOMENON
Human civilizations have, since the ancient times known about and recognized at least two distinct genders of males ------ the predominantly masculine gendered male and the transgendered male.
Femininity (as well as masculinity) in humans have long been established as a naturally occurring phenomenon. In fact in ancient India, in the Vedas the very word used for gender is “nature” (prakriti). In many ancient tribes, even today, there is this practice of identifying the 'different' male ----- the feminine gendered male, who is then raised not as a boy but as a distinct feminine gender.
Furthermore this femininity was not believed to be related with sexuality as is portrayed by the western world today. The feminine gendered male could chose female or male partner.
The politics of gender and sexuality has ever since, for long tried to redefine this 'third sex' space in terms of sexuality, and it was redefined to include only males who desired exclusive receptive sex from men. Although, these males were predominantly transgendered, the definitions were so mixed up that their transgenderism was considered to be a part of their sexuality for receptive sex where they treated their anus or mouth as vagina, and this kind of sex would fulfill their desire to be a woman (as they were performing the socially ascribed female role of a receptor).
In this process, the 'third sex' that liked women ----- that initially constituted the overwhelming majority of the 'third sex' category were totally wiped out of the scene……. they apparently went underground.
Also, those who went underground were masculine gendered males who liked receptive anal/ oral sex and the feminine gendered males who did not like receptive anal/ oral sex.
In the west however, the gender and sexual politics being played with males took a different route. Christianity came down heavily on transgenderism which was punishable by death. Soon transgenderism went almost completely underground for centuries, till even the phenomenon was totally wiped out from the society. When science took over from Christianity, it too disacknowldeged gender as a distinct biological phenomenon from human sex. It held that men were biologically supposed to be exclusively masculine while females were meant to be exclusively feminine. Any variance to this rule was considered to be a socially orchestrated anomaly.
And while the Scientific institution on one hand refused to acknowledge feminine gender in males as biological, it went on to deliberately confuse feminine male gender with male sexual desire for men. Because, like in the medieval times, the only visible group of males that liked men was the transgendered or the overly effeminate male who predominantly sought receptive sex with men. It was convenient for Science to only look at the issue from a superficial level and assume that what appeared on the surface was the true nature of male gender and sexuality.
The traditional societies considered only those males who sought exclusive receptive anal/ oral sex with males to be feminine gendered ------ which was also borne out by facts. However the west started to portray any kind of sexual desire between men as 'feminine' and 'different'.
And while the traditional world continued to accept transgendered males as a naturally different gender, the western science still considers it a disease, an abnormality, a socially caused phenomenon to be treated.
And while the scientific institution considers gender to be non-existent biologically, the social activists working around the issue of male gender and sexuality (including feminists and gays) consider male femininity or masculinity to be a matter of choosing socially prescribed roles of males and females that has nothing to do with nature. As per this belief, Femininity or masculinity doesn't reside within a person but is determined by, e.g., whether he wears male or female clothes………….. and is therefore considered a matter of social choice. Interestingly, sexuality is not considered to be a choice or to be socially orchestrated but instead held to be biologically ingrained in a person. This view of social scientists is quite different from that of the physical sciences, but both deny the truth of gender being a biologically occurring human phenomenon quite distinct from the outer sex.
The fallacy upon which the entire western outlook on male gender and sexuality is based can be understood in this way. There are two concurrent but different definitions of ‘gender’ popular in the west. And both of them are way off from the real thing.
(i) The first definition is the traditional western definition, where gender is equated with ‘sex’. Thus the masculine gender is the same as the male, and the feminine gender is the same as the female as per this definition.
(ii) The second definition is used by the so-called progressive section of the western society ------ the intelligentia and the social scientists. As per this definition Gender denotes the artificial social roles fixed for each sex by the society (e.g. blue for boys and pink for girls). Thus as per this definition, you can become masculine just by wearing men’s clothes and smoking ciggerrettes. And you can become feminine just by wearing lipstick. Gender is seen as something that exists outside of us, as an artificial behaviour.
To understand the real, biological/ natural gender please click here.
MYTH 2
MALE SEXUAL NEED FOR MEN IS NOT A UNIVERSALLY OCCURING PHENOMENON
The west is a society where the mainstream society has been extremely heterosexualised, where most men's spaces have been destroyed by heterosexualising them, and there is extreme hostility against man-to-man bonds in these spaces ------ even against non-sexual intimacy between men. At the same time male-to-male bonds are only allowed under the label of 'homosexuality' in the third sex 'homosexual' sphere.
In the western heterosexual society, there is no difference between the sexual need of a transgendered male for another man and between that of a man for another man. Both are considered homosexual, since the western society does not recognize gender as a valid human phenomenon. The traditional world does not consider relationship between a transgendered male (Hijra) and a man to be 'homosexual' in nature, since they have different gender identities.
Interestingly the western world makes a difference between the transgendered male's attraction for women and that of a man's attraction for women. The former is not allowed the straight space/ identity and is clubbed together with the 'homosexuals' as 'queer' or LGBT.
The traditional society made a stark distinction between those who displayed an exclusive interest (which is closely related to their femininity ------ whether biologically or as an assertion of their social gender) in receptive anal/ oral sex on the one hand and those who were predominantly penetrators or those who did not indulge in anal/ oral sex at all. While indulging in receptive anal sex was not always considered unmanly (like during the Muslim period in India), but transgendered males were supposed to indulge primarily in receptive anal or oral sex and were considered a distinct gender.
The western world on the other hand does not make a difference between those with predominant interest in receptive anal/ oral sex, and those predominantly into the penetrator role or those not into anal or oral sex at all. It clubs all male to male sexuality into the previously third sex space which is rechristened 'homosexual' or 'gay'.
All of this is a part of the conspiracy of the forces of heterosexualisation to force men to be (exclusively) 'heterosexual'. Naturally, under such conditions only a few men ever acknowledge their sexual need for men and hide themselves behind fake heterosexual masks and a fake repulsion for male to male physical intimacy.
The western society, including its scientific institution then holds this misleading scenario as a 'proof' of the majority of men being exclusively heterosexual, and sexual need for men being a rare phenomenon, an anomaly that occurs only in a few individuals in whom it insists something somewhere has gone wrong.
On the contrary, most traditional societies were although not supportive of man to man sexual bonds most of the time -------- at least not formally, accepted the fact, at some level, even if it was at the peer (straight) male level ------- that man's sexual need for men was a universal male phenomenon and that all men are capable of being attracted sexually to other men. However, they expected men to have self-control and to fight these desires.
E.g. in India it is still largely believed that all men are capable of being sexually attracted towards other men ------ at least in the men's spaces. A certain amount of sexual play is even allowed between men. It is called "Masti". The situation and beliefs are diametrically opposite in heterosexualised, westernised urban, middle class India, where it is propagated that man to man sexuality is a thing for feminine gendered males called 'homosexuals'.
Even in the west in some pockets which have escaped wide-scale heterosexualisation, e.g. black or Latino working class spaces, where men's spaces are strong, straight (i.e. mainstream/ majority of) men still engage in sexual intimacy with other men without considering themselves as non-straights or 'homosexuals or 'bisexuals'. It is still believed to be something that all men are capable and willing of.
And the older generation of westerners and many Christians still realize that all men have this inner capability to be sexually attracted to other men. They should know because they have had to develop such intricate mechanisms to force men to suppress these sexual needs. These people still believe that if you accept same-sex bonds as valid and manly sexual need, then every man shall start indulging in them.
At least the traditional society, including the western traditional society and religions like Christianity has been much more honest in their approach towards man to man sexual intimacy. The western society has on the other hand distorted facts and abused the institution of science in order to reach its goal of suppressing same-sex bonds in the mainstream without appearing to be 'violent' or 'unfair' on the surface.
In the matter of human gender and sexuality, the western scientific institution has ------ instead of destroying the lies created by Christianity to manipulate male gender and sexuality ------ chosen to toe its line, and perpetuate ------ even strengthen those lies by giving it a stamp of science ------ by hook or crook.
What had happened was that the institutions of science, like all the other small or big institutions of the western society was hijacked by the vested interests, quite early on ----- as soon as it started getting powerful.
Here we are going to look at two of the greatest lies spread by the western world about human, particularly male gender and sexuality.
Myths that the traditional, non-westernised world knows to be untrue:
MYTH 1:
GENDER IS NOT A BIOLOGICAL PHENOMENON
Human civilizations have, since the ancient times known about and recognized at least two distinct genders of males ------ the predominantly masculine gendered male and the transgendered male.
Femininity (as well as masculinity) in humans have long been established as a naturally occurring phenomenon. In fact in ancient India, in the Vedas the very word used for gender is “nature” (prakriti). In many ancient tribes, even today, there is this practice of identifying the 'different' male ----- the feminine gendered male, who is then raised not as a boy but as a distinct feminine gender.
Furthermore this femininity was not believed to be related with sexuality as is portrayed by the western world today. The feminine gendered male could chose female or male partner.
The politics of gender and sexuality has ever since, for long tried to redefine this 'third sex' space in terms of sexuality, and it was redefined to include only males who desired exclusive receptive sex from men. Although, these males were predominantly transgendered, the definitions were so mixed up that their transgenderism was considered to be a part of their sexuality for receptive sex where they treated their anus or mouth as vagina, and this kind of sex would fulfill their desire to be a woman (as they were performing the socially ascribed female role of a receptor).
In this process, the 'third sex' that liked women ----- that initially constituted the overwhelming majority of the 'third sex' category were totally wiped out of the scene……. they apparently went underground.
Also, those who went underground were masculine gendered males who liked receptive anal/ oral sex and the feminine gendered males who did not like receptive anal/ oral sex.
In the west however, the gender and sexual politics being played with males took a different route. Christianity came down heavily on transgenderism which was punishable by death. Soon transgenderism went almost completely underground for centuries, till even the phenomenon was totally wiped out from the society. When science took over from Christianity, it too disacknowldeged gender as a distinct biological phenomenon from human sex. It held that men were biologically supposed to be exclusively masculine while females were meant to be exclusively feminine. Any variance to this rule was considered to be a socially orchestrated anomaly.
And while the Scientific institution on one hand refused to acknowledge feminine gender in males as biological, it went on to deliberately confuse feminine male gender with male sexual desire for men. Because, like in the medieval times, the only visible group of males that liked men was the transgendered or the overly effeminate male who predominantly sought receptive sex with men. It was convenient for Science to only look at the issue from a superficial level and assume that what appeared on the surface was the true nature of male gender and sexuality.
The traditional societies considered only those males who sought exclusive receptive anal/ oral sex with males to be feminine gendered ------ which was also borne out by facts. However the west started to portray any kind of sexual desire between men as 'feminine' and 'different'.
And while the traditional world continued to accept transgendered males as a naturally different gender, the western science still considers it a disease, an abnormality, a socially caused phenomenon to be treated.
And while the scientific institution considers gender to be non-existent biologically, the social activists working around the issue of male gender and sexuality (including feminists and gays) consider male femininity or masculinity to be a matter of choosing socially prescribed roles of males and females that has nothing to do with nature. As per this belief, Femininity or masculinity doesn't reside within a person but is determined by, e.g., whether he wears male or female clothes………….. and is therefore considered a matter of social choice. Interestingly, sexuality is not considered to be a choice or to be socially orchestrated but instead held to be biologically ingrained in a person. This view of social scientists is quite different from that of the physical sciences, but both deny the truth of gender being a biologically occurring human phenomenon quite distinct from the outer sex.
The fallacy upon which the entire western outlook on male gender and sexuality is based can be understood in this way. There are two concurrent but different definitions of ‘gender’ popular in the west. And both of them are way off from the real thing.
(i) The first definition is the traditional western definition, where gender is equated with ‘sex’. Thus the masculine gender is the same as the male, and the feminine gender is the same as the female as per this definition.
(ii) The second definition is used by the so-called progressive section of the western society ------ the intelligentia and the social scientists. As per this definition Gender denotes the artificial social roles fixed for each sex by the society (e.g. blue for boys and pink for girls). Thus as per this definition, you can become masculine just by wearing men’s clothes and smoking ciggerrettes. And you can become feminine just by wearing lipstick. Gender is seen as something that exists outside of us, as an artificial behaviour.
To understand the real, biological/ natural gender please click here.
MYTH 2
MALE SEXUAL NEED FOR MEN IS NOT A UNIVERSALLY OCCURING PHENOMENON
The west is a society where the mainstream society has been extremely heterosexualised, where most men's spaces have been destroyed by heterosexualising them, and there is extreme hostility against man-to-man bonds in these spaces ------ even against non-sexual intimacy between men. At the same time male-to-male bonds are only allowed under the label of 'homosexuality' in the third sex 'homosexual' sphere.
In the western heterosexual society, there is no difference between the sexual need of a transgendered male for another man and between that of a man for another man. Both are considered homosexual, since the western society does not recognize gender as a valid human phenomenon. The traditional world does not consider relationship between a transgendered male (Hijra) and a man to be 'homosexual' in nature, since they have different gender identities.
Interestingly the western world makes a difference between the transgendered male's attraction for women and that of a man's attraction for women. The former is not allowed the straight space/ identity and is clubbed together with the 'homosexuals' as 'queer' or LGBT.
The traditional society made a stark distinction between those who displayed an exclusive interest (which is closely related to their femininity ------ whether biologically or as an assertion of their social gender) in receptive anal/ oral sex on the one hand and those who were predominantly penetrators or those who did not indulge in anal/ oral sex at all. While indulging in receptive anal sex was not always considered unmanly (like during the Muslim period in India), but transgendered males were supposed to indulge primarily in receptive anal or oral sex and were considered a distinct gender.
The western world on the other hand does not make a difference between those with predominant interest in receptive anal/ oral sex, and those predominantly into the penetrator role or those not into anal or oral sex at all. It clubs all male to male sexuality into the previously third sex space which is rechristened 'homosexual' or 'gay'.
All of this is a part of the conspiracy of the forces of heterosexualisation to force men to be (exclusively) 'heterosexual'. Naturally, under such conditions only a few men ever acknowledge their sexual need for men and hide themselves behind fake heterosexual masks and a fake repulsion for male to male physical intimacy.
The western society, including its scientific institution then holds this misleading scenario as a 'proof' of the majority of men being exclusively heterosexual, and sexual need for men being a rare phenomenon, an anomaly that occurs only in a few individuals in whom it insists something somewhere has gone wrong.
On the contrary, most traditional societies were although not supportive of man to man sexual bonds most of the time -------- at least not formally, accepted the fact, at some level, even if it was at the peer (straight) male level ------- that man's sexual need for men was a universal male phenomenon and that all men are capable of being attracted sexually to other men. However, they expected men to have self-control and to fight these desires.
E.g. in India it is still largely believed that all men are capable of being sexually attracted towards other men ------ at least in the men's spaces. A certain amount of sexual play is even allowed between men. It is called "Masti". The situation and beliefs are diametrically opposite in heterosexualised, westernised urban, middle class India, where it is propagated that man to man sexuality is a thing for feminine gendered males called 'homosexuals'.
Even in the west in some pockets which have escaped wide-scale heterosexualisation, e.g. black or Latino working class spaces, where men's spaces are strong, straight (i.e. mainstream/ majority of) men still engage in sexual intimacy with other men without considering themselves as non-straights or 'homosexuals or 'bisexuals'. It is still believed to be something that all men are capable and willing of.
And the older generation of westerners and many Christians still realize that all men have this inner capability to be sexually attracted to other men. They should know because they have had to develop such intricate mechanisms to force men to suppress these sexual needs. These people still believe that if you accept same-sex bonds as valid and manly sexual need, then every man shall start indulging in them.
At least the traditional society, including the western traditional society and religions like Christianity has been much more honest in their approach towards man to man sexual intimacy. The western society has on the other hand distorted facts and abused the institution of science in order to reach its goal of suppressing same-sex bonds in the mainstream without appearing to be 'violent' or 'unfair' on the surface.
Mar 24, 2007
HOMOSEXUALITY: WHAT KINSEY REALLY SAID
by William H. DuBay dubayw@delphi.com
FORTY YEARS after sex researcher Alfred Kinsey told us that the world is not made up of two different kinds of people, gay and straight, we still read in the papers, "According to Kinsey, one out of ten (or one out of seven or five, depending on who is writing the piece) is homosexual." Such statements must have Kinsey spinning in his grave. Not only did he never make any such statements, he went out of his way to disclaim them.
The study that Kinsey and his colleagues published (Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female in 1953) remains to date the largest and most significant study of human sexuality. Based on 16,000 in-depth personal interviews from the widest sampling of the general population, the Kinsey studies constitute most of what we know about homosexual behaviors.
Kinsey was not the first or the last to observe that "homosexual" is a label society has invented to stigmatize and control the behavior. He repeatedly condemned the practice of labelling people homosexual:
"The classification of sexual behavior as masturbatory, heterosexual, or homosexual, is, therefore, unfortunate if it suggests that only different types of persons seek out or accept each kind of sexual activity. There is nothing known in the anatomy or physiology of sexual response and orgasm which distinguishes masturbatory, heterosexual, or homosexual reactions...(Kinsey et al, 1953:446) It would clarify our thinking if the terms could be dropped completely out of our vocabulary (Kinsey et al, 1948:617).
"Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual... Only the human mind invents categories and tries to force facts into pigeonholes. The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects..(Kinsey et al, 1948:639).
"It is amazing to observe how many psychologists and psychiatrists have accepted this sort of propaganda, and have come to believe that homosexual males and females are discretely different from persons who respond to natural stimuli. Instead of using these terms as substantives which stand for persons, or even as adjectives to describe persons, they may better be used to describe the nature of the overt sexual relations, or of the stimuli to which an individual erotically responds (Kinsey et al, 1948:616-617).
"In regard to sexual behavior, it has been possible to maintain this dichotomy only by placing all persons who are exclusively heterosexual in a heterosexual category and all persons who have any amount of experience with their own sex, even including those with the slightest experience, in a homosexual category... The attempt to maintain a simple dichotomy on these matters exposes the traditional biases which are likely to enter whenever the heterosexual or homosexual classification of an individual is involved" (Kinsey et al, 1953:468-469)
While emphasizing the continuity of gradations between exclusively homosexual and exclusively heterosexual histories, Kinsey proposed his heterosexual-homosexual rating scale, based on both overt and psychological experiences (Kinsey et al, 1948:638-41):
0. Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual
1. Predominantly heterosexual, only incidental homosexual
2. Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally
homosexual
3. Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4. Predominantly homosexual but more than incidentally
heterosexual
5. Predominantly homosexual, but incidentally heterosexual
6. Exclusively homosexual.
Kinsey summarized his findings (Kinsey et al, 1948:650-51) on the incidence of homosexual behavior among white males in the U.S. population in these words:
"37 per cent of the total male population has at least some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm between adolescence and old age. This accounts for nearly 2 males out of every 5 that one may meet.
"50 per cent of the males who remain single until age 35 have had overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm, since the onset of adolescence.
"58 per cent of the males who belong to the group that goes into high school but not beyond, 50 per cent of the grade school level, and 47 per cent of the college level have had homosexual experience to the point of orgasm if they remain single to the age of 35.
"63 per cent of all males never have overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm after the onset of adolescence.
"50 per cent of all males (approximately) have neither overt nor psychic experience in the homosexual after the onset of adolescence.
"13 per cent of the males (approximately) react erotically to other males without having overt homosexual contacts after the onset of adolescence.
"30 per cent of all males have at least incidental homosexual experience or reactions (i.e., rate 1-6) over at least a three-year period between the ages of 16 and 55. This accounts for one male out of every three in the population who is past the early years of adolescence.
"25 per cent of the male population has more than incidental homosexual experience or reaction (i.e., rates 2-6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. In terms of averages, one male out of approximately every four has had or will have such distinct and continued homosexual experience.
"18 per cent of the males have at least as much of the homosexual as the heterosexual in their histories (i.e. rate 3-6) for at least three years between the
ages of 16 and 55. This is more than one in six of the white male population.
"13 per cent of the population has more of the homosexual than the heterosexual (i.e., rates 4-6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. This is one in eight of the white male population.
"10 per cent of the males are more or less exclusively homosexual (i.e., rate 5 or 6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. This is one
male in ten in the white population.
"8 per cent of the males are exclusively homosexual (i.e. rate a 6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. This is one male in every 13.
"4 per cent of the white males are exclusively homosexual throughout their lives, after the onset of adolescence."
The findings on homosexual behaviors of females are slightly lower but equally impressive.
Kinsey drew our attention to the common practice of labelling "heterosexual" only those who are exclusively homosexual, but labelling "homosexual" anyone who has had even minimal homosexual experience. "The persons who are identified as 'homosexuals'in much of the legal and social practice," he wrote, "have rated ing between 1 and 6 on the above scale" (Kinsey et al, 1948:651).
Investigators of Kinsey's Institute for Sex Research confirmed this important observation (Bell et al, 1981:9). They found that the sexual behaviors of 1000 gay-identified persons in the San Francisco area ranged from 2 to 5 on the Kinsey scale, a range so broad as to include a full third of the population of this country. Whatever gay-identified persons have in common with one another, it is clearly not their sexual behavior but their adoption of the homosexual role.
Kinsey felt that the high incidence of homosexual activity among males of high school education was of particular importance:
"These are the males who most often condemn the homosexual, most often ridicule and express disgust for such activity, and most often punish other males for their homosexuality. And yet, this is the group which has the largest amount of homosexual activity... As a group these males may strenuously deny that their sexual contacts have anything to do with homosexuality; but the full and complete record indicates that many of them have stronger psychic reactions to other males o admit. When they no longer find themselves being paid for such contacts, many of them begin paying other males for the privilege of sexual relations" (Kinsey et al, 1948:384).
Kinsey himself was surprised at the high incidence of homosexual behaviors in our society and continually challenged his own data. He finally concluded:
"Over a period of several years we were repeatedly assailed with doubts as to whether we were getting a fair cross section of the total population or whether a selection of cases was biasing the results. It has been our experience, however, that each new group into which we have gone has provided substantially the same data.
Whether the histories were taken in one large city or another, whether they were taken in large cities or small towns, or in rural areas, whether they came from one college or from another, a church school or a state university or some private institution, whether they came from one part of the country or from another, the incidence data on the homosexual have been ore or less the same.
While the validity of the data on all of the sexual outlets has been tested and retested throughout the study, especial attention has been given to testing the material on the homosexual" (Kinsey et al, 1948:625).
As to the origins of homosexual behaviors, Kinsey, like Freud, felt that all persons are born bisexual and one's sexual activities and pleasures depend on a wide variety of causes. Countless studies convinced him that any strong emotion can trigger sexual arousal. He wrote,
"The picture is that of the psychosexual emerging from a much more generalized and basic physiologic capacity which becomes sexual as the adult knows it, through experience and conditioning (Kinsey et al, 1953:165).
"Considering the physiology of sexual response and the mammalian backgrounds of human behavior, it is not so difficult to explain why a human animal does a particular thing sexually. It is more difficult to explain why each and every individual is not in every type of sexual activity...(Kinsey et al, 1953:451)
"I think that much of human sexual behavior is no more complicated than a person's likes or dislikes for particular foods, books, amusements, or anything else. Through it all, association is a very important factor. This means that what a person happens to do one time is avoided or repeated another time, depending upon the pleasure derived from the first experience (in Pomeroy, 1972:324).
"This problem, is after all, part of the broader problem of choices in general: the choice of the road that one takes, of the clothes that one wears, of the food that one eats, of the place in which one sleeps, and of the endless other things that one is constantly choosing. A choice of a partner in a sexual relation becomes more significant only because society demands that there be a particular choice in this matter, and does not so often dictate one's choice of food or of clothing" (Kinsey et al, 1948:661).
In a 1983 review of 228 major studies on sexual orientation published in 48 different journals, Psychologist John DeCecco and his colleagues at San Francisco State University found that the investigators were unable to define the term, much less come up with any evidence for its existence (Shively et al, 1983/84). This paper and others reinforced Kinsey's position that what makes an act homosexual is the object of the desire and not the subject. As Kinsey insisted, "If the term homosexual is restricted as it should be, the homosexuality or heterosexuality of any activity becomes apparent by determining the sexes of the two individuals in the relationship (Kinsey et al,
1948:615)."
In short, Kinsey gave us a picture of human sexuality quite different than the rigid categories of gay and straight propagated in the media. Instead, he gave us a picture of an astounding variety in human sexual experience, a variety, he insisted, that is quite unlike anything else in nature, a variety that physiological differences alone cannot explain.
Kinsey concluded his chapter on homosexuality in the "Male" volume with this paragraph:
"If all persons with any trace of homosexual history, or those who were predominantly homosexual, were eliminated from the population today, there is no reason for believing that the incidence of the homosexual in the next generation would be materially reduced. The homosexual has been a significant part of human sexual activity since the dawn of history, primarily because it is an expression of capacities that are basic in the human animal" (Kinsey et al, 1948:666).
William H. DuBay is a writer living in Costa Mesa, California. His books include Gay Identity: The Self Under Ban, McFarland, 1987.
Bibliography
Bell, A.P., Weinberg, M.S., and Hammersmith, S.K. Sexual Preference: Its Development in Men and Women. Bloomington, Indiana: University of Indiana Press, 1981.
Kinsey, A.C., Pomeroy, W.P., and Martin, C.E. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1948.and Gebhard, P.H. Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1953.
Pomeroy, W.B. Dr Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Resarch. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Shively, M.G., Jones, C., and De Cecco, J.P. "Research on Sexual Orientation." Journal of Homosexuality 9(2/3), Winter/Spring 1983/84:127-36.
HOMOSEXUALITY: WHAT KINSEY REALLY SAID William H. DuBay - 11
(Source: HOMOSEXUALITY: WHAT KINSEY REALLY SAID)
FORTY YEARS after sex researcher Alfred Kinsey told us that the world is not made up of two different kinds of people, gay and straight, we still read in the papers, "According to Kinsey, one out of ten (or one out of seven or five, depending on who is writing the piece) is homosexual." Such statements must have Kinsey spinning in his grave. Not only did he never make any such statements, he went out of his way to disclaim them.
The study that Kinsey and his colleagues published (Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female in 1953) remains to date the largest and most significant study of human sexuality. Based on 16,000 in-depth personal interviews from the widest sampling of the general population, the Kinsey studies constitute most of what we know about homosexual behaviors.
Kinsey was not the first or the last to observe that "homosexual" is a label society has invented to stigmatize and control the behavior. He repeatedly condemned the practice of labelling people homosexual:
"The classification of sexual behavior as masturbatory, heterosexual, or homosexual, is, therefore, unfortunate if it suggests that only different types of persons seek out or accept each kind of sexual activity. There is nothing known in the anatomy or physiology of sexual response and orgasm which distinguishes masturbatory, heterosexual, or homosexual reactions...(Kinsey et al, 1953:446) It would clarify our thinking if the terms could be dropped completely out of our vocabulary (Kinsey et al, 1948:617).
"Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual... Only the human mind invents categories and tries to force facts into pigeonholes. The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects..(Kinsey et al, 1948:639).
"It is amazing to observe how many psychologists and psychiatrists have accepted this sort of propaganda, and have come to believe that homosexual males and females are discretely different from persons who respond to natural stimuli. Instead of using these terms as substantives which stand for persons, or even as adjectives to describe persons, they may better be used to describe the nature of the overt sexual relations, or of the stimuli to which an individual erotically responds (Kinsey et al, 1948:616-617).
"In regard to sexual behavior, it has been possible to maintain this dichotomy only by placing all persons who are exclusively heterosexual in a heterosexual category and all persons who have any amount of experience with their own sex, even including those with the slightest experience, in a homosexual category... The attempt to maintain a simple dichotomy on these matters exposes the traditional biases which are likely to enter whenever the heterosexual or homosexual classification of an individual is involved" (Kinsey et al, 1953:468-469)
While emphasizing the continuity of gradations between exclusively homosexual and exclusively heterosexual histories, Kinsey proposed his heterosexual-homosexual rating scale, based on both overt and psychological experiences (Kinsey et al, 1948:638-41):
0. Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual
1. Predominantly heterosexual, only incidental homosexual
2. Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally
homosexual
3. Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4. Predominantly homosexual but more than incidentally
heterosexual
5. Predominantly homosexual, but incidentally heterosexual
6. Exclusively homosexual.
Kinsey summarized his findings (Kinsey et al, 1948:650-51) on the incidence of homosexual behavior among white males in the U.S. population in these words:
"37 per cent of the total male population has at least some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm between adolescence and old age. This accounts for nearly 2 males out of every 5 that one may meet.
"50 per cent of the males who remain single until age 35 have had overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm, since the onset of adolescence.
"58 per cent of the males who belong to the group that goes into high school but not beyond, 50 per cent of the grade school level, and 47 per cent of the college level have had homosexual experience to the point of orgasm if they remain single to the age of 35.
"63 per cent of all males never have overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm after the onset of adolescence.
"50 per cent of all males (approximately) have neither overt nor psychic experience in the homosexual after the onset of adolescence.
"13 per cent of the males (approximately) react erotically to other males without having overt homosexual contacts after the onset of adolescence.
"30 per cent of all males have at least incidental homosexual experience or reactions (i.e., rate 1-6) over at least a three-year period between the ages of 16 and 55. This accounts for one male out of every three in the population who is past the early years of adolescence.
"25 per cent of the male population has more than incidental homosexual experience or reaction (i.e., rates 2-6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. In terms of averages, one male out of approximately every four has had or will have such distinct and continued homosexual experience.
"18 per cent of the males have at least as much of the homosexual as the heterosexual in their histories (i.e. rate 3-6) for at least three years between the
ages of 16 and 55. This is more than one in six of the white male population.
"13 per cent of the population has more of the homosexual than the heterosexual (i.e., rates 4-6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. This is one in eight of the white male population.
"10 per cent of the males are more or less exclusively homosexual (i.e., rate 5 or 6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. This is one
male in ten in the white population.
"8 per cent of the males are exclusively homosexual (i.e. rate a 6) for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55. This is one male in every 13.
"4 per cent of the white males are exclusively homosexual throughout their lives, after the onset of adolescence."
The findings on homosexual behaviors of females are slightly lower but equally impressive.
Kinsey drew our attention to the common practice of labelling "heterosexual" only those who are exclusively homosexual, but labelling "homosexual" anyone who has had even minimal homosexual experience. "The persons who are identified as 'homosexuals'in much of the legal and social practice," he wrote, "have rated ing between 1 and 6 on the above scale" (Kinsey et al, 1948:651).
Investigators of Kinsey's Institute for Sex Research confirmed this important observation (Bell et al, 1981:9). They found that the sexual behaviors of 1000 gay-identified persons in the San Francisco area ranged from 2 to 5 on the Kinsey scale, a range so broad as to include a full third of the population of this country. Whatever gay-identified persons have in common with one another, it is clearly not their sexual behavior but their adoption of the homosexual role.
Kinsey felt that the high incidence of homosexual activity among males of high school education was of particular importance:
"These are the males who most often condemn the homosexual, most often ridicule and express disgust for such activity, and most often punish other males for their homosexuality. And yet, this is the group which has the largest amount of homosexual activity... As a group these males may strenuously deny that their sexual contacts have anything to do with homosexuality; but the full and complete record indicates that many of them have stronger psychic reactions to other males o admit. When they no longer find themselves being paid for such contacts, many of them begin paying other males for the privilege of sexual relations" (Kinsey et al, 1948:384).
Kinsey himself was surprised at the high incidence of homosexual behaviors in our society and continually challenged his own data. He finally concluded:
"Over a period of several years we were repeatedly assailed with doubts as to whether we were getting a fair cross section of the total population or whether a selection of cases was biasing the results. It has been our experience, however, that each new group into which we have gone has provided substantially the same data.
Whether the histories were taken in one large city or another, whether they were taken in large cities or small towns, or in rural areas, whether they came from one college or from another, a church school or a state university or some private institution, whether they came from one part of the country or from another, the incidence data on the homosexual have been ore or less the same.
While the validity of the data on all of the sexual outlets has been tested and retested throughout the study, especial attention has been given to testing the material on the homosexual" (Kinsey et al, 1948:625).
As to the origins of homosexual behaviors, Kinsey, like Freud, felt that all persons are born bisexual and one's sexual activities and pleasures depend on a wide variety of causes. Countless studies convinced him that any strong emotion can trigger sexual arousal. He wrote,
"The picture is that of the psychosexual emerging from a much more generalized and basic physiologic capacity which becomes sexual as the adult knows it, through experience and conditioning (Kinsey et al, 1953:165).
"Considering the physiology of sexual response and the mammalian backgrounds of human behavior, it is not so difficult to explain why a human animal does a particular thing sexually. It is more difficult to explain why each and every individual is not in every type of sexual activity...(Kinsey et al, 1953:451)
"I think that much of human sexual behavior is no more complicated than a person's likes or dislikes for particular foods, books, amusements, or anything else. Through it all, association is a very important factor. This means that what a person happens to do one time is avoided or repeated another time, depending upon the pleasure derived from the first experience (in Pomeroy, 1972:324).
"This problem, is after all, part of the broader problem of choices in general: the choice of the road that one takes, of the clothes that one wears, of the food that one eats, of the place in which one sleeps, and of the endless other things that one is constantly choosing. A choice of a partner in a sexual relation becomes more significant only because society demands that there be a particular choice in this matter, and does not so often dictate one's choice of food or of clothing" (Kinsey et al, 1948:661).
In a 1983 review of 228 major studies on sexual orientation published in 48 different journals, Psychologist John DeCecco and his colleagues at San Francisco State University found that the investigators were unable to define the term, much less come up with any evidence for its existence (Shively et al, 1983/84). This paper and others reinforced Kinsey's position that what makes an act homosexual is the object of the desire and not the subject. As Kinsey insisted, "If the term homosexual is restricted as it should be, the homosexuality or heterosexuality of any activity becomes apparent by determining the sexes of the two individuals in the relationship (Kinsey et al,
1948:615)."
In short, Kinsey gave us a picture of human sexuality quite different than the rigid categories of gay and straight propagated in the media. Instead, he gave us a picture of an astounding variety in human sexual experience, a variety, he insisted, that is quite unlike anything else in nature, a variety that physiological differences alone cannot explain.
Kinsey concluded his chapter on homosexuality in the "Male" volume with this paragraph:
"If all persons with any trace of homosexual history, or those who were predominantly homosexual, were eliminated from the population today, there is no reason for believing that the incidence of the homosexual in the next generation would be materially reduced. The homosexual has been a significant part of human sexual activity since the dawn of history, primarily because it is an expression of capacities that are basic in the human animal" (Kinsey et al, 1948:666).
William H. DuBay is a writer living in Costa Mesa, California. His books include Gay Identity: The Self Under Ban, McFarland, 1987.
Bibliography
Bell, A.P., Weinberg, M.S., and Hammersmith, S.K. Sexual Preference: Its Development in Men and Women. Bloomington, Indiana: University of Indiana Press, 1981.
Kinsey, A.C., Pomeroy, W.P., and Martin, C.E. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1948.and Gebhard, P.H. Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1953.
Pomeroy, W.B. Dr Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Resarch. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.
Shively, M.G., Jones, C., and De Cecco, J.P. "Research on Sexual Orientation." Journal of Homosexuality 9(2/3), Winter/Spring 1983/84:127-36.
HOMOSEXUALITY: WHAT KINSEY REALLY SAID William H. DuBay - 11
(Source: HOMOSEXUALITY: WHAT KINSEY REALLY SAID)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)