Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

Some of my thoughts about the "Growing Up Gay" video

Posted November 12th, 2009 by Don Harris in Integral culture and politics
In Reference to:
Growing Up Gay

First of all, an introduction:  I'm a 59 year old gay man, U.S. citizen and resident, who grew up in the closeted modern 50s and early 60s, and came out at age 20, one year after Stonewall.  I've lived in big cities around the country my whole life.

Jeff said (to paraphrase) "There's nothing wrong with people who want to deny their homosexuality, because their religion is more important to them.  As Integralists, I say there's nothing wrong with that - we want to see the poignancy and beauty of their positions in their lives."

I find that frankly precious and disturbing; I can't agree at all, since those people are living lies, the lies being: homosexuality is not innate, that it's not equally valid and valued (that in fact it is "wrong" in many ways, and that it is an unnatural "lifestyle" choice, against mythic Daddy God's plan).  I don't see beauty in un-truth.  I see needless suffering.  

Another point is he jumps from the "civilizing" influence of monotheism (The Ten Commandments) on early mythic-rational societies to the sex-hating(averting) and repressing of the Victorian mid-to-late modern period, and, although the European church (both Catholic and Protestant) was anti-sex, the life of so many cultures post-early Hebrew through pre-Victorian was one of enjoyment of sex, sometimes healthily, sometimes in a hedonistic-escapist manner, but certainly that whole period is not one of hatred of/aversion to sex by the general populations, although come industrialization and the Victorian period in the West, it became so here.  (The pathological mind-body dissociation of the European Enlightenment perhaps caught up to culture in the 19th century).  Of course, that depends on the part of the world we're talking about; I'm referring to the West here, not the Islamic middle east, much of which he correctly points out is in a red-amber cloud (and I liked his metaphor of cloud probability levels).

Obama has been a big disappointment (especially in his in-bed-with-Wall St. economic appointments, but that's another topic).   Recently he could have supported the vote no on repealing the legitimization of gay marriage in Maine, but he chose to remain silent, and not even activate his base in the state to go out and vote, which he could have had his staff do, without becoming "visible" around the issue.  He has had plenty of time to revoke "don't ask, don't tell," which polls show the majority of Americans are for, but he has done nothing.  Jeff persuaded me somewhat by his remarks at the end, and I certainly consider Obama a major step up from Bush II, but not necessarily from Clinton.

Please Log in to Vote.

2 out of 2 members found this useful.

Hi Don!

Posted November 13th, 2009 by Brendan LaChance

I'm enjoying reading your perspective here. 

I have a couple thoughts on the first part of your post just from another angle. 

Jeff said (to paraphrase) "There's nothing wrong with people who want to deny their homosexuality, because their religion is more important to them.  As Integralists, I say there's nothing wrong with that - we want to see the poignancy and beauty of their positions in their lives."

I find that frankly precious and disturbing; I can't agree at all, since those people are living lies, the lies being: homosexuality is not innate, that it's not equally valid and valued (that in fact it is "wrong" in many ways, and that it is an unnatural "lifestyle" choice, against mythic Daddy God's plan).  I don't see beauty in un-truth.  I see needless suffering. 

I agree that in many ways they can be said to be living a lie.  And certainly this might cause some suffering.  But don't people have a right to lie to themselves?  I also imagine it must be very complicated when you hold conflicting characteristics in your identity.  I think it is sad that many are forced to make that choice between faith and sexuality in the first place.  But I am not their UL "I" and the way they choose to make sense of the world is largely "up to them" (in quotes because people are limited by their own developmental structure as well).  All we can do as a society is try to work to make an environment (cultural and social) where they have options where they don't have to hold these aspects of themselves in contradiction.  And while I agree about sexuality's "innateness" and that it should be equally valid and valued, those are truths (and values) corresponding to modern and post-modern consciousness I believe.  "Innateness" can basically be proven by modern science and equality of values is demonstrated by a post-modern ethic.  But until these truths have unfolded in an individual, what came before can not really be said to be a lie.  To someone who truly believes in the mythic Daddy God, it might appear honorable and "true" to make the choice that at modern and post-modern levels we see as "living a lie."  Certainly, I agree that this is a sad thing and we should do everything possible to give people the opportunity to interpret their faith and sexuality in different ways.  This can be done by providing opportunities as such, but I guess I just think telling someone that they are living a lie is sort of an unfair breach of another individual's autonomy. 

I hope it doesn't sound like I am accusing you because I think I understand the perspective you are coming from and I sympathize with it greatly.  I'm just offering my own take on this.

Takeee careeee!

Beee