In Defense of Homophobia I
by Edgar Steele
30 April 2004
"Don't ask. Don't tell."
--- Bill Clinton
"Do what you will, just not in the streets and don't frighten the horses."
--- British Folk Saying, circa Victorian era
(Number 1 of 3 parts)
I couldn't decide whether to entitle this "In Defense of Homosexuality" or "In Defense of Homophobia." I knew what I wanted to say and, frankly, it seemed to me that either title would be appropriate. Naturally, I chose the most politically incorrect. As a small boy, I loved stomping in mud puddles after a storm, just for effect. I think there must be a connection, somehow.
I knew that if I chose "In Defense of Homosexuality" I would get scores of nasty emails from those in what we laughingly call "The Movement."
Then I considered that if I entitled it "In Defense of Homophobia" this piece would get wider play and elicit more outrage (and, therefore, more thinking) among my target audience: those with at least somewhat open minds but still possessed of mainstream thinking. Mind you, I don't mean to imply that those in The Movement are closed minded, but we are all human, after all.
Mind Like a Steele Trap
Then a little worm of a thought started wriggling through the mossy undergrowth in the back of my mind. "Is the title a copout?" Automatically, I started to push it down amongst the endless clutter and wall-to-wall sub-vocal noise that exists just below my focused awareness (I hope I'm not the only one with this mental disarray, incidentally, but I have noticed that I am the only one in my house whom it seems to awaken in the middle of the night to keep it company). Ever alert for a new way to torture myself, I grabbed hold of the wriggling thought and pulled it to the top, which also is cluttered and rather noisy.
Aha! A totally new concept for me. I've dubbed it PCPI, short for politically-correct political incorrectness. Just like PC (politically correct), but with a whole different pressure group to please. "So, if I go too much against the politically-incorrect grain, the skinheads will start accusing me of wearing my wife's nylons and won't invite me to the next cross burning?" I wondered. Maybe, came the response. Maybe then you can call yourself the attorney for the double damned followed close behind. I thought about mud puddle stomping some more. Then, I double dare you...I was already in the neighborhood because of the mud-puddle-stomping images, you see. Sigh. I knew I was lost. The title stands.
I hate to admit this is the way my mind works. I'd like you to think it's like a steel trap, with logically-ordered thoughts issuing forth like soldiers into the fray. Nothing but heroes and medal-of-honor-worthy impulses. Sadly, I must admit it's more akin to the surgical tent from MASH.
Where was I?
Oh, yes. Homosexuals. Fags. Queers. Queens. Fudge packers. You know. I just heard a cheer go up from that politically-incorrect pressure group, but don't go away because they will be throwing tomatoes in a minute. Before I am done, 99% of the people reading this will hate me. My wife read the first draft and tried to talk me into deleting it altogether. So did a couple of other people whose opinions I value highly. No. This needs to be said.
Mud Puddle Writing
This is one of a handful of topics about which I have avoided writing until now. Some, because my thinking is not yet finalized (as is true for the issue of abortion, which my gut instinct is to be totally against, but I just haven't yet found a purely logical way to get there) or religion (which is incapable of logical resolution and is part of my problem with abortion, of course). However, though my thinking on homosexuality has been pretty well settled for a while (years, in fact), it is a hot subject, sure to annoy somebody. Put that way, I then wondered why I avoided it at all. More images of mud puddles erupting flashed through my mind.
Then, suddenly I realized why I've avoided talking about homosexuality. It's not just a case of PCPI - I'm going to annoy everybody with this one. This is a guaranteed case of I Lose, except for a couple of oddballs here and there whose minds are deranged in precisely the same manner as mine, if that is possible.
My time almost is up, you say, and I have yet to say anything meaningful? I disagree. About the meaningful part, I mean. Besides, I've heard that before. Maybe I'm just delaying. Maybe up to now has been the most important part. It's hard to tell from inside here, you know.
Am I the Only One Who Misses Bill These Days?
I can't believe I am going to commend Bill Clinton, but he really did say it best: "Don't ask. Don't tell." That's it in a nutshell for me. Besides, if they don't tell, just how are you going to know, anyway? Maybe it's a holdover from my Libertarian days, when I walked precincts for John Anderson. Maybe it's because those precincts were in San Francisco. Or, maybe because it logically is the only workable approach. (Here's where the PI crowd starts throwing those tomatoes.)
Wait! Stop right there! I've only just begun to be annoying on this. I can make it much worse, believe me. Just wait. You'll see. It'll be like watching a slow-motion car wreck in progress. More like the circus clown car wreck from the movie, "Dumbo," actually.
You see, while I believe that some homosexuals are pushed (almost said "prodded," but I caught myself) into their predilection and others are led into it, I firmly believe that the vast majority are born into it. You say you would abandon your child if born with a club foot? I don't believe you.
Something happens during fetal development that causes male and female brains to be different. I'm not going to go into it much - there are far better written treatments than I could provide. "Brain Sex" leaps to mind, by Moir and Jessel. Believe it or not, David Duke wrote very persuasively on this subject in "My Awakening," too. I commend both to you, particularly Mr. Duke's book because of all the topics he covers; often, in a most surprising manner - surprising to both sides of the aisle, too.
During fetal development, sometimes a wire gets crossed and you end up with...just what they say, not surprisingly: something like a woman trapped in a man's body. Read "Brain Sex" for the very conclusive rationale, rooted in physical anatomy and chemistry, as to why it happens overwhelmingly to males, versus females.
Here's my take on the difference: It's a chicken and egg question. Which came first, the man or the DNA? Answer: Human beings are DNA's way of reproducing. It takes nine months for DNA to reproduce via a woman. A man requires...what...two minutes? From that fundamental difference arise all male/female differences. Bear with me because I am not joking, despite how it sounds.
Women choose constancy over sexual satisfaction. The woman requires protection through the winter as her pregnancy evolves - a strong man at the mouth of the cave. That's why women crave "real men," men stronger than others and capable of protecting them - men able to bring back something to eat. It's genetic and we're not that far out of the caves just yet.
However, men whose minds don't focus on sex every three minutes simply aren't paying attention, as the joke goes. Ladies, you need to understand this: the male mind obsesses about sex a lot, meaning most of the time (maybe not every three minutes, exactly)...at virtually any age beyond puberty. It's a chemical thing, in large part, due to testosterone, a chemical which also accounts for so much of the male aggressiveness that women deplore in little boys but secretly love in big boys.
Women value commitment and support - that's how they get to advance their DNA. Men stand at the mouth of the cave, on the lookout for both their next meal and their next mating. White men have learned to stick around because, in the northern climes where the White race evolved, their DNA died during the winter with their child, otherwise. Therefore, only those who actually did stick around and protected their DNA had children that survived to pass along that particular genetic trait. It works differently in the African veldt, of course, but that is another topic altogether.
Women are monogamous, while men fundamentally are polygamous. Men have to work harder than women in order to make a go of monogamy. Ugly, fat men have the easiest time of it. Advancing age helps, too. As usual, beauty and youth carry their own curses. Modern divorce rates show how much more difficult monogamy has been made by the modern militancy of women and resultant feminization of men.
This stuff is obvious. You don't need citations in order to agree with it, if you are honest. All this Venus/Mars crap is just Oprah BS, other than the fact that it recognizes that sex differences even exist, which so many like to pretend don't exist.
From the fundamental difference in DNA reproduction arise all other sex differences. Boys play with guns, girls with dolls. Boys are aggressive, hostile and loners; girls are catty and collective. Boys shout, girls pout. Women manipulate, men take. Women plot, men act. Women nurture, men kill. This is why women should not fly jets, drive tanks or share a foxhole with men.
Women claim they want an honest, sensitive man, then remain true to a crazed biker who slaps them around. Men try to have sex with every girl they meet, but demand that they marry a virgin. As always, people are judged best on the results they produce, not on what they say.
The homosexual is trapped in a literal no-man's land: cross-wired and a dysfunctional mixture of at-odds inclinations. Like the result of the fruit fly trapped in the transporter pod in the movie, "The Fly."
It's not their fault, if it must be characterized as a fault. Honestly, I view it as a fault, because it simply isn't the way things were meant to be. But we must deal with reality, not how we wish things to be, after all. And they deserve a life just as much as anybody else. Unfortunately, the rules become different for them because they are square pegs jammed into round holes. That's too bad, but that's democracy in action. Majority rule. Because they are so key to this discussion, let's digress into majorities in America for a moment.
(Continued in Part 2)
New America. An idea whose time has come.
Those who missed the California Revisionist Conference this past weekend, but would like to hear some or all of the speeches, including my own, can download them here: http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.com/
To those whom I told a particular time, I apologize - I was led to believe it would be broadcast live, then with a 1-hour tape delay. Finally, it turned out that we all labored under that delusion. The reality is that the talks were posted as audio files later that night. Makes it easier for you, as you can pick and choose, if you like - you don't have to wade through the whole conference.
Noticeably, the JDL was absent, despite their forcing cancellation of the original conference and despite the threat they leveled at me. I suspect someone told them to shut up, that their posturing actually was backfiring, much as the Jewish whining about "The Passion of the Christ" backfired so badly. It was. I love making hay with their stupid overreaching in precisely the manner that they afforded me with "For Freedom http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/ihr.htm " and "Them vs. Us http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/tomorrow.htm ." And that was just me. A lot of mileage was made at the JDL's expense in exposing Jews for what they are in today's America by a lot of people, many of them in the mainstream media who inadvertently contributed to the cause.
I had a great time and you can tell I did so just by listening to my talk. We all did. More than anything, I was delighted by all those who responded to my clarion call and journeyed to the conference, some from as far away as Arkansas, New York and British Columbia. I loved meeting you in person. Wish I could do the same with every single person on this list.