the Thinker

I wonder whether any of you guys consider this as an X-rated topic. However, this is something that has become an area of core interest for page3 news, psychologists, socialists and almost all of us. Meaning?

A few months back, I and one of my colleagues were returning home together from office. On the railway station, we noticed two guys. One of them had his hand around his friend's waist. They were walking in a manner, which made my friend giggle.

Obviously, you people must have guessed the implications in this case. It was presumed that perhaps, the two guys were not 'straight.' I have no idea whether they were 'normal' or not. But it is apparent that we look at 'them' as alien species.

Homosexuality is not a new phenomenon. It was seen and heard of during the ancient times; not only in Greek and Italian society, but also in the Indian society. There are references to homosexuality even in the Bible. The only thing is that, with the overpowering presence of media and newspapers today, this topic is one of the most talked about issues.

But what does homosexuality mean in the first place? Many people consider it to be an abnormality and some think of it as a disease. I believe that it is an abnormality to a certain extent, but there is a scientific base to that. However, I am not sure whether it is a disease or not.

One might be amused to know the kind the definitions that some people come up with, while discussing this issue. I remember one of my friends narrating to me, a hilarious episode that happened during an engineering fest. She represented her college in one of the debates in the fest, the topic was-whether homosexuality is unnatural or not.

While listening to her, I realized how ludicrous people could be at times when they try to argue about an issue like this. My friend told me that many participants did not know what homosexuality is. One of them went on to discuss trees, flowers and other aspects of floral species. He was mainly stressing on the fact that plants are capable of asexual reproduction. He also spoke on how hermaphrodites reproduce (probably he was speaking in favour of homosexuality).

He went on speaking about vegetative reproduction, until he was told that he was discussing asexual reproduction and not homosexuality. Another participant, who was also speaking in favour of homosexuality, tried to apply laws of physics to exemplify his point.

He said,"My friends, like poles attract...." After starting with this line, he went on to give long sermons on how people should treat homosexuals. Finally when he ended his speech, the first question shot up to him was-"Do like poles attract? Are you sure that is what you have learnt in Physics?"

The speaker suddenly appeared embarrassed and started surfing nervously through his speech papers and muttered, "Oh..Did I say so?"

People who were speaking against homosexuality were more aggressive in demonstrating their argument. One of them made bombastic and melodramatic statements, cursing homosexuals for their orientation.

He utilized excessive doses of rhetoric to emphasize his point. He spoke,"People, homosexuality is a bane and a sin on the face of this earth. People indulging in these kinds of interactions are the most cursed and immoral beings living on this planet."

"Do you know what is the basic difference between man and animals? Man was created erect and animals were not. Therefore, man uses his brain in most of the matters and animals do not. Since man knows the difference between himself and animals, therefore he understands what is right and what is wrong. We as humans, know that homosexuality is unnatural; therefore, one should condemn homosexual practices at all costs," he added.

His excessive efforts paid off as a certain section of the crowd cheered him. However, there are a few points that many of us might have wanted to ask him. For example, how does an erect body structure lead to brains? Another important point-Was man actually created erect?

Maybe he should have looked at Darwin's,'Origin of Species' before coming up with such arguments. Anyways, when it was pointed out to him that man has his origin in apes, (who were not erect as he said), he replied,"Yes, maybe he was not created erect, but being intellectual, man learnt how to be erect. Therefore, he is different from animals and knows homosexuality is not right."

The query remains-"How does an erect physical structure lead to brains?"

If one chooses to call homosexuality unnatural, then there should proper scientific points to explain why it is so. There was only one participant, who spoke sense. She explained that homosexuality is unnatural due to certain chromosomal disorders.

Since I am not a science student, I do not remember the exact reasons that she brought up, but the main crux of her speech was that when a woman conceives, it is the man whose chromosomes lead to determine the sex of the child (as all of us know). However, due to certain chromosomal disorders, it is possible that at times a child will have inclinations that belong to the opposite sex.

For example, under such conditions, a male child might think more like a female and tend to behave like one as well. We call such men 'feminine men.' Since they have an attitude and behavioral traits of a woman, they tend to feel attraction for men. This is unnatural.

Besides, people also think of homosexuality as a disease. I am not very sure whether that is the case. A few months back, I was surfing through the personal problems column in some magazine. There, a young boy wanted advice. He said that he was a young student living in a boys hostel. He was normal in all aspects except for one thing. He was infatuated with his roommate. According to the boy, his roommate had everything that he desired in his life partner. He had not met any girl who was so perfect. However, he did not have the courage to admit his obsession to his roommate, because of obvious reasons. Another strange thing is that the boy did not feel like this for any other guy.

I will not label such a case as a disease or an abnormality. This is far more complex. Now, having completed my analysis on the topic, all your views are welcome.

Hola Amrita!

Wow! this post is a bit surprising for me... not so much because of the subject or your point of view, but because it's been a long time since (luckily, in my opinion)I've had to deal with what homosexuals are or are not...

First, you must consider that I currently live in one of the few countries (Spain, for anyone reading comments) where homosexual marriage is already legal; second, I've always been a very liberal guy in terms of whatever anyone chooses as a sexual orientation; and last, but not least, I've got so many friends who are either gays or lesbians that I hardly ever think about that "normality" or "unnatural" issue you mention in your posts...

I know that in conservative societies (I know, I grew up in one), homosexuality is always a topic that will lead to discussion, but believe me, if you ever become friend of an homosexual you will see there is absolutely nothing different from the way a friendship with an heterosexual would be... and you'll conclude what's logical: (aside from their sexual preferences) homosexuals can be just as normal or weird as anyone else can be.

Based on my personal experience, what can I tell you about why they are gays or why they are lesbians?... Not much really that makes "scientific" sense really... And I know my "homo" friends don't worry much about that either... It's something that just happens... They just feel attracted to people of the same sex; or sometimes they are even bisexual.

As an heterosexual, should I feel threatened if a gay guy approaches me? I don't think so. For me it's ridiculous, even if I detect a flirting intention... Because if that were the case, and I got annoyed by that action, shouldn't I just feel as threatened when a girl tries to flirt with me?

Put cultural, religious and social factors aside, leaving only the sexual (attraction, pleasure or desire) part on the discussion, and I don't think there really is one single reason why anyone could not enjoy a pleasant sexual relation with someone of the same gender.  

_____________________

something abnormal.  

_____________________

Hi! You have a very good-looking blog. Wish I had a template like this: it is in sync with the freedom of expression. Haven't read the contents yet, but will do that soon and come back often.  

_____________________

A friend of mine was once put with a question by lecturer, which briefly put relating to this discussion of yours was: "Do you condone or condemn this kind of behaviour?"

Fortunately (hehe, for his own sake I must add), he couldn't answer that question.

But if I were to have been put with that very inquiry, I'd have said: neither - it's a matter of freedom, and freedom of choice, that, we as onlookers, haven't any right to either condemn or condone. To me, it's unlawful to condemn something that doesn't bring me, or others around me - be it in a little circle, or the world alike - any hurt of any kind.  

_____________________

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.  

_____________________

PS: on a side note: your post certainly did make me laugh out loud!  

_____________________

hey amrita, good to see u back at blogging! :)..btw, sent u the latest alvibest issue to your yahoo id! do check it out! :)  

_____________________

very interesting writeup...  

_____________________

very interesting writeup...  

_____________________

couldn't agree more with mrgonsings...ours is a conservative society but i am sure that it'll take only a few more years when we'll find people accepting homosexuality as a normal thing...ur blog and various such platforms discuss this issue and in my opinion this is a real good sign...btw gud to see u blogging after more than a month...  

_____________________

They should be left to do their own thing just as we do when we choose a career. Let them do what they want as long as they don't force anyone to join them and these things cannot be done by force anyway.  

_____________________

Thanks for visiting my blog Amrita.

Third Eye - Its not something Investigative(!) but its just for seeing things creatively.
As for 1.618, I'll have to change the template I guess, 'coz lots have told me that it takes a lot of time to load. I'll try to optimize it.  

_____________________

hi guys,

i really could not detect that this post has received so many comments, because my front page is showing no comments for thispost. thanks for all those views, and sorry for the delay in replying to all your views.

Gonsings,

that was a really cool analysis of topic. since u have had a first hand experience of meeting people who are homosexuals, u must be a havinga very transparent view about this entire matter.

i completely agree on your point about homosexuals not being any different from heterosexuals, though sometimes they are steroetyped as feminine. but i guess i have already suggested one reason behind a 'feminine' man's behaviour.

the scientific reason behind homosexual behaviour is just one view point that was put up by one person. i am sure, that should not be a reason for homosexuals to bother about. on the whole, if u ask me, i also believe that it is matter of personal preferences.

hi reflex, nice to see ur comment, but i have a small doubt-which one is abnormal-the post or the people it concerns?

hi bishwanath, welcome to my blog. ur's too wasa very smart blog, keep it up!

hi shankar, that was an interesting piece about ur friend. i agree, it is indeed a matter of personal preferences. freedom of choice. and i completely agree that as onlookers, we should not act as deciders upon what should a certain group of people do.

hi anu, whats up? having a good time, i suppose....

thanks a lot ashok.

hi sumit,

yes, it is a conservative society till now and maybe ti will take some more time for people to accept it. you might be amused that some ppl consider homosexuality as a solution for the growing population problem in india, if (God forbids) ppl accept it to be normal because of such reasons, it will be the most incredulous reason for which u accept this. any new phenomenon, if found acceptable at a certain point, should be for the right reasons, and not for lame excuses-thats what i believe.

hi hiren, u are right, these things cannot be imposed on someone.

hi 1.618, glad to have u back, so ur a bitsian? well, that was certainly an curious name for a blog.  

_____________________

HELLO AMRITA!!!!
Yesterday was your blogiversary and I see no cake around here!!!
;)
When it's the celebration???

Feliz aniversario!!
:)  

_____________________

opps!!! missed out that one Gonsings, thanks for reminding, i am so sorry my dear blog. it will be a belated b-day celebration, i promise.  

_____________________

hi gonsings, hope u enjoyed the cake. same for all my other fellow bloggers!!  

_____________________

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.  

_____________________

Righto..Amrita..!

I finally step into your personal fiefdom to give you the views that you’ve been demanding of me for so long..I beg your pardon m’mselle..I know I’m late..but I see you have the good heart to forgive this lapse..So here’s the promised contribution..

Aww..rrrr..rite..u cn sense th jitters awready! On a more serious note, I really like the way you’ve framed the entire post so logically..n yes, I did miss a beat..when I noticed that you’ve missed no point from that debate. You get a mental handshake for that..!

Yes, the issue merits a post..especially, since quite a few of us simply tend to view people with same-gender leanings as ‘the other,’ n automatically attribute the same to flawed mental make-up. I agree with you in that what we see as behavioural flaws could be dictated by irregular gene inheritance and therefore, one needs a greater understanding of them to avoid branding them as ‘unnatural.’

You said you needed clarification on the genetic aspect – let me undertake this task for your benefit. In a few points, this should be clear.

Our science text-book said - The fundamental basis of all creation is the cell – incorrect. It’s the gene, as we learnt later..of course as kids we wouldn’t have understood advanced aspects as the ‘anatomy’ of the gene.
- A gene is basically protein. This protein has a structure (helix).
- There is a gene responsible for every single aspect of you – including one for eye colour.
- Similarly, there’s (u guessed it..) a gene for procreation. 2 units (chromosomes) make one reproductive gene.
- Necessarily, this would have to vary in the male n female species.
- The offspring would have to have all common human characteristics – the x unit – which is the common unit in both genders determines this. The 2nd unit – to determine gender would have to differ. The y unit in the male – takes care of that (ensures the kid that inherits the unit is a son). The 2nd unit in the feminine gender is another x unit.
- Therefore, what do we have – an x x and an x y.
- The offspring – a son would necessarily inherit the y unit from the father n an x unit from either parent. A daughter would have to inherit 2 xs, which again can be solely from the mother or an x from each parent.
- The malfunction happens when the units fail to split n the offspring ends up with an extra unit – possible combinations – xxy, xyx, xxx, xxxy instead of a plain xx or xy.
- The x unit determines feminine characteristics (as u guessed), n an extra x would be an overdose. This overdose can induce the person’s mind to respond to events the way a woman would, though the y unit ensures the physical appearance of a male. If such a person finds his soulmate in a man, like a lady would, nothing could be more natural than that!

This post is a very thoughtful effort on your part to highlight a very little known aspect of life..that genetic malfunction can happen to anyone..! It could be your kid tomorrow, making difficult choices because he doesn’t know what went wrong with him. Medical science has no theory to prevent such an occurrence. As a previous comment says, we need not place illogical ‘condone’ or ‘condemn’ choices before folks who’re not in a position to even begin to appreciate the difficult choices other people are forced to make.  

_____________________

hi varshu,

I was really happy to see ur comment on one of my posts after such a long period...yes, ur right, ur always pardoned, u know that. and i must thank u profusely for taking the pains to explain the matter in so much details. i am sure, all of us have a far clearer picture about this entire topic now. byways, everyone must have guessed that who topped that debate now.:)

BTW:do check ur blog...the post was really cute...:)  

_____________________

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.  

_____________________

Hi TJ..

Very nice of you to pay me such a sweet compliment..Dear frnz, Amrita doesn't mean to say I won the debate..she's referrin to the compliment I received from the one adjudged '1st.' Amrita knows what I was occupied with at the debate..Waited until 40 2-member teams had spoken to find even one team I could address as a competitor..Truly n very candidly..the room full of hard-core engineering grads had forgotten or had 'chosen to forget' their science..for nothin but a petty debate..The most glaring scientific mis-interpretations:
1. Like poles attract - The foundation of a pro-motion speaker.
2. Unisexuality (the asexual reproduction in flora)(As in if the phenomena can exist in plants, then why not in humans..had to be reminded that unisexuality isn't homosexuality) - Another foundation of a pro-motion speaker.
3. God created man vertical, in descending order of importance of vital organs - The brain vs the reproductive system (making HS a phenomenon linked to the latter n delinked from the intelligent reasoning of the brain(?)(N thought man was created horizontal much like other species))- Conclusion: Therefore, HS is a bane, the height of profanity: This takes the cake - The foundation of the person who took the cake n the crown!
But Amrita, to give him credit, he had the courage..to come up n admit he'd taken it too far n a very simple but genuine 'You were good'.Thought that was very respectable n brave! Takes real strength of character to admit you strayed from facts in public! I believe I'd have done it in his place..n I know so would you!
Nice post!  

_____________________

hey varshu,

now, now...to me ur are the oly winner in the debate...the fact that u had all ur heart, mind and science in the right place when everyone else had lost one or the other, is a very significant thing...whether u call that winner brave or not...i know there was only one brave and true winner in that debate, and i know its YOU!!!:)  

_____________________

Amrita, hey!

That was quite a statement of solidarity..am grateful for it ma'm..but as your latest post goes..praise can be embarassing..! Would like to put in a bit of correction - just remembered the units of a gene are alleles (chromosomes constitute genes..not the other way round)..takes time to recollect my Bio..There..just added a line dedicated to ur latest post..does that make me up-to-date?? :)  

_____________________

Post a Comment