Glad to be Gay!

[Camy]

You probably know Tom Robinson's seminal 70's song 'Glad to be Gay'. I was looking for the lyrics when I found the following on the the song's webpage. It shocked the hell out of me; it made me sit up and think!

Explanatory notes:

“This song is dedicated to the World Health Organization, it’s a medical song and it concerns a disease whose classification according to the International Classification of Diseases is 302.0”

It really is what it sounds like....

The UN body has a listing of diseases called the International Classification of Diseases, each given its own code number. Homosexuality was listed among the mental and behavioural disorders, given the code 302.0. In 1975, the definition was amended to ‘ego-dystonic homosexuality’ (ie being straight really but thinking you’re gay). It was not removed until the tenth edition of the ICD in May 1990.

The struggle’s not over. The current list of ‘disorders of sexual preference’ still retains fetishism (F65.0) and sado-masochism (F65.5), neatly sandwiching oh-so-similar paedophilia (F65.4). Molesters of children, corrupters of youth.

The widely used American Psychiatric Association’s equivalent to the ICD is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). Homosexuality was removed from the list of disorders in the seventh printing of the DSM-II, in 1974.

As with the ICD, it was not deleted entirely but amended to retain bigoted views of those whose sexuality is ‘not normal’. The DSM swapped homosexuality for ‘sexual orientation disturbance’ (latterly called ‘gender identity disorder’) which describes the attributes related to transsexuality, transgender identity, and transvestism.

Here's the web page - where you can read the lyrics and freely download the track as an mp3.

[Cole Parker]

Do they list 'bigotry' as a disease?

C

[Chris James]

http://www.dailymail...tudy-finds.html

I have to consider the Daily Mail a poor source for such scientific news, but there we are. Does anyone think the homophobic pundits will embrace the results? I doubt that will occur.

No one seemed to accept the news that "gay" is probably genetic..but wait, if they were homophobes would they believe anything is normal about gay people? According to the study, all the homophobe needs is a mirror. And yes, the reverse image would be most appropriate.

[DesDownunder]

Regardless of the advances being made, psychology students are still permitted to conclude from their lectures that homosexuality is due to an arrested development.

And yes, I have tried to take great care in how I phrased that sentence. They just don't get it.

Bigots are those humans who are afflicted with bigotry, the rest of us do the suffering.

Homophobia is by definition a phobic disorder; an anxiety disorder characterised by extreme and irrational fear of homosexuality.

The pre-liberation underground of the homosexual world has for at least 60 years considered that the anti-homosexual brigade suffers from self hatred in that they were unable to accept their attraction to their own sex. Psychologically, this means that they never accepted the reconciliation of their sexuality at or post puberty. This does not mean that they would have been homosexual, but in a delightful twist of the way these people think, it is they who have the arrested development and are stuck with an immaturity of their own (sexual) development, leaving them fearful that they might be homosexual. Thus, they exhibit bombastic aggression towards anyone who seems to have done what they have not done which is complete their own mature development

Need I say that any indoctrination, during the formative years, that impedes the natural physiological development of the individual, will render that person prone to self asserting their delusions of grandeur, and bigotry. Thus it should be obvious that a superiority complex is in fact nothing more than an inferiority complex with aggressive objectives to defend the undeveloped psyche of the immature individual. Not surprisingly, those of us who have accepted the challenge to examine our sexuality tend to have achieved a balanced and positive outcome for mature relationships including rational questioning of our religious beliefs.

[bi_janus]

Here's an interesting bit of research on the roots of homophobia conducted at one of the many fine institutions that I attended in a galaxy far, far away. Just read the abstract if the thought of penile plethysmography makes you queasy (although I suspect that Des evaluates volume changes without relying on laboratory instruments).

https://my.psychologytoday.com/files/u47/Henry_et_al.pdf

[DesDownunder]

Here's an interesting bit of research on the roots of homophobia conducted at one of the many fine institutions that I attended in a galaxy far, far away. Just read the abstract if the thought of penile plethysmography makes you queasy (although I suspect that Des evaluates volume changes without relying on laboratory instruments).

https://my.psycholog...Henry_et_al.pdf

You got that right bi-janus. The only reason I wasn't called in to be part of that study was because they were wanting someone who gagged easier than I do for the penile plethysmography testing of the subjects.

[Cole Parker]

Their finding that homophobes are aroused by homosexual imagery is something we've all intuited for years, isn't it?

C

[DesDownunder]

Yes Cole, their anger is really directed at the response of their own penile apparatus to their own homosexual thoughts.

If they have been taught as kids that that is wrong or a 'sin', then they may well develop homophobia towards others whom they think are gay.

What I find fascinating is that this means they are the ones who need the therapy to become a well adjusted person, not us.

That shouldn't surprise us as the religious rightwing is well known for getting things back to front...

[bi_janus]

I always took delight in the fact that the good Professor Henry, who was a bit of a provocateur, published an article on homophobia in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

[blue]

Plethy... what? -- I have to look that one up. I suspect I know by context. Yikes.

Um, and just saying: I like wieners. Viennese or otherwise.... In fact, I prefer 'em.

Kidding aside, I have come round to the idea that people (all people) are probably born with the potential to love both sexes, bisexual, if we truly admitted it. As we get older, we may go more toward one sex or the other, or we might stay more middle of the road (both). The trouble arises (pun not quite intended) when someone (or someone else) gets anxious and embarrassed over the idea of liking (and physically responding and acting on that desire) for someone of the same sex.

Everyone, straight or otherwise, likes to have time with "just the guys" or "just the girls." We all have good friends or best friends of the same sex. We have a degree of affection for them. We may not have sexual feelings for them, and in fact, some may feel "safe" in that friendship because there aren't sexual feelings there. There may be other friends for whom we do feel some degree of sexual feelings, or at least there's the potential there. That's one way, after all, of showing how much, how strongly or intensely, we like someone. Sexual expression doesn't always get in there and doesn't have to, but some potential to some degree, isn't necessarily impossible either. That does not have to be a bad or abnormal thing. No, I don't at all mean that everyone goes around feeling sexual attraction to every person, male or female, they meet. Not at all. Why would they? Sexual feelings are more selective and special than that, after all. It is just as true that yes, we may have close friends of the opposite sex, without having any particularly sexual feelings for them. Again, they may be close friends because they and we are "safe" from that, meaning, those feelings are never going to apply, or not to a degree we'd act on them; at least, not unless it was wanted, asked for.

I've had a few friends who seemed to be worried I'd "have feelings" for them or act on them. But the thing was, those friends, I did not have any sexual feelings for. They might as well have been brothers or sisters. It was never gonna happen. In one of those, I later wondered, after the friendship was over, if that person was somehow hoping for some sign of that, whether to act on it or to use it as a reason against the friendship.

It's very strange. As a teen, I was at times very confused about what to make of my feelings (same-sex) and at times, I was pretty dang sure and just wished there was someone else around who felt the same and wanted to be with me. Add in an upbringing plus a society that all seemed to say you couldn't do that, along with rebuffs nearly any time I got brave enough to work around to the topic, and...well, it's no wonder I had a tough time with my sexuality as a teen. Besides which, I seemed to miss a lot of the cues and not know what to do about them, and that was just the girls. The guys? I mostly assumed every guy was straight. The few guys who "everyone knows he's gay"...either weren't or were in the same limbo land I was in, I suppose. Hah, it's probably a wonder I had any sexual experiences at all (er, with anyone else, that is, hahaha).

Homophobia? All too familiar with seeing that throughout the culture, back then and still too often now.

Internalized homophobia? Ouch, that one affects too many of us anyway.

Uh...looking at that article and looking up the word. (Good grief, and if it means what I think it means...maaaaannn....)

[blue]

Oh, OK, "penile plethysmography". Well, there could be a simpler word there. (Look it up and read the reference. It's odd but not queasy, IMHO.)

Uh, my first question might be, if you put anything on/around a penis to try to measure changes (arousal) isn't it at least a little likely that the mere presence of that item on/around it will lead to a little reaction in itself? You'd need some time to "get used to it," I'd think, before commencing tests.

For some, homophobia may be from bad prior experiences of some kind, or the threat/potential of bad experiences. For others, it may be that they believe they'll be somehow less masculine (manly!) if they like other guys. Or they may think it's sinful or unnatural. Or they may associate it with other (sexual) things it's not.

If they could come to terms (grips?) with their fears and see they didn't have to fear attraction or affection (or sexual expression) with another guy, then they'd be better off and so would the people who have to put up with (or be around) their phobias.

I wish I'd been more comfortable with, and more aware of and understanding of, my own feelings sooner in life. It sure would've saved a lot of confusion and angst as a pre-teen and teen. More to the point, I wish there'd been more guys around who might've been comfortable enough with themselves and with me to try things out more. That would've done a great deal towards my understanding and self-acceptance. Being any of shy, geeky, or handicapped, or a "good boy" or church-going type probably didn't help much in that regard.

While it is useful to know that overt homophobia may indicate hidden homosexual feelings, the fear of expressing them, I think a different question is also needed. Our cultures socialize boys (and girls) *very* early on in what is proper "manly" behavior and what is "sissy" or even "homo" behavior, what is allowed and not allowed in emotions and displays of affection, friendship, love, anger, all sorts of things. So maybe the question is more about, how do we raise kids so they get the right messages about what it is to be a real man, what love and friendship and all those really are, and what's OK about your (and another person's) body, nudity, sexuality, expression of feelings, and so on.