Matthieu’s Thinklog

Here’s a little set of quotes to give you an idea of the general stuff I’m analysing:

Someone : ” So what do you think of the new teacher ?”

Me : “He’s ok”

Someone : “He’s definitely gay. He’s got a gay voice.”

Youtube comment : “Men and women cannot be equal because they are different physically. Give a boy some toys, he’ll make them wage war while a girl will organize a tea party.”

youtube comment : “…Feminist movements (Lesbian movements ?)”

Obviously, as you can anticipate, I find those kind of remarks appalling. But lets have a closer look at why people think they recognise gay people (and as a consequence may cause prejudice) through certain recurrent patterns or why men see such a biological divide between them and women. Now before you embark in the reading of my opinionated blog, take in account that I am heterosexual and I am a guy, so I am hardly defending my own interests here.

Let’s start with homosexuality. Homosexuals like men (or in the case of lesbians, they like women). To me that pretty much sums up the difference between a heterosexual and a homosexual. But a lot of people go much further than that. According to the stereotype, gay men have a peculiar voice and dress in unusual outfits and put make-up on. While this is a gross generalisation, it must be conceded that indeed there are gay people who fit that depiction. But, is it really because they are gay that they dress in that fashion ? Personally, I would be more inclined to see these characteristics as walking hand in hand rather than one being the result of the other. As I see it, a gay person, by his acceptance of his own different sexuality, already shows the courage of going against our society in which one is only really considered normal if he/she is a heterosexual (a feeling strengthened by opinion controllers such as politics and religion). I have to stress that I loath the word “normal” and that I’m a using it in a very sarcastic sense. It means nothing to me (especially in this context). Now, if this person has had the courage to drift away from society’s ’superficial’ ideal about sexuality, this person, with his new-found freedom might tune other aspects of his life accordingly. So he’ll dress exactly the way he wants, talk the way he wants and really do his own thing. Of course, he may choose to dress like you would expect him too if that is what he enjoys. Conversely, people who have extravagant personalities are not all gay, they show enough awareness of society to take their distance from it, but naturally show an interest in the opposite sex. But because gay people have a tendency for being free thinkers, both concepts seemed to be mutually attractive, that is why sometimes both will emerge quite cohesively in one individual and why other more rigid individuals will start pointing fingers. And that much liberty should not be condemned but instead admired. They are truly being themselves.  And we should all truly be ourselves. I, for one, am very faithful to my ideals and needless to say that it has attracted me a bit of hostility from others who keep themselves on the path society has laid for them. Lets put it that way, if society put both sexual tendencies on the same equal grounds (especially in the Law), there would be nothing to differentiate homosexuals from heterosexuals because a homosexual’s behaviour would not be surprisingly different from one of a heterosexual (except maybe when it would come to flirting). Another important point, homosexuality is by no means genetic like some people seem to think. Evolution-wise, homosexuality has no obvious advantage as it prevents genes being passed on to a next generation (obviously, a member of the opposite sex is needed for that). That sole sentence is enough to justify why homosexuality is not genetic. If there truly were genes for homosexuality, they would dissapear with their owner. It is often an easy way out for people to say that things are genetic. You can have enhancing factors in your genes but these can express themselves in many different ways. The interaction environment-genes is really the answer. I probably have genes that expose me to alcoholism as it runs in my family and yet I don’t even drink (at all) (and my parents hardly drink). So one person can have genes that are favourable (or deterrent) to a certain way of being, but it really is up to the developing person to become what he wants to be. The title of one of the TED talks I recently watched was “Your genes are not your fate”. I think this fits perfectly with what I’m saying here.

I run out of time each time (look at the time !)…I shall therefore post the end of this chain of though in the next article I write. So misogynists beware…because I’m extremely pro-Feminist !!!