To Be or Not To Be - Part 1

This is the first part of a two part post. I am taking on the oh so controversial question of whether people are born gay or if they choose to be gay. Many people believe being gay is a choice. While these people fail to recognize the fact they did not choose their own sexuality, they think all gay people make a conscience effort to decide whether to be gay or straight.

I am a gay man. Ok, so no surprise there. But, I have KNOWN I was gay ever since I could remember. I can literally remember at around the age of five that I knew I was different. I knew I was attracted to boys. Now before you say ew or gross or any other vomit inducing sound, I thought this strange myself to know this from such an early age. That was before I had a nephew. My nephew is six years old. A few months into kindergarten, my nephew comes home and states he has a girlfriend. A little brunette in his class has caught his eye and he proclaims this is the girl he will marry. Now my sister and her husband of course paid no attention to this declaration of love and instead thought it cute. I finally understood the workings of sexuality. I could have been that boy at six proclaiming my love for a fellow classmate who happened to be a boy. When I was little and realized I was different, I had no understanding of straight, gay, homosexual or heterosexual. I just knew that I couldn’t really make it known that I liked boys. I understood this as well in looking at my nephew. When my sister and her family came down to Dallas for their annual visit, they live in Wisconsin, I went to hug my nephew. He promptly held his hand out and told me, “Boys don’t hug boys.” I looked at my sister and she just shrugged her shoulders. I know for a fact my sister or her husband did not teach my nephew this. It made me realize how I KNEW at such a young age to keep my own attractions a secret because just like my nephew said, “Boys don’t hug boys.”

In reading studies regarding the childhoods of gay adults, I learned of many perceived characteristics which were thought to have contributed to their orientation. I fit almost all these characteristics. I had a dominating mother, I was sexually abused as a kid, I came from a broken home and the list just keeps getting longer and longer. I wondered about the duality of a genetic disposition to a specific sexuality and the impact of environmental influences. In asking myself if I was genetically predisposed or if my environment surrounding me in my formative years determined whether I was gay or not, I wondered about the lives of several gay people I knew. What I found was that environmental influences could not have had much of an impact in determining my sexuality. Sure it might have played a role as to when I finally accepted my sexuality but not in making me straight or gay. So I have to believe that something happened either at the moment of conception or something else en utero. Otherwise, why would children with parents still married and with no history of any kind of abuse who also were raised in a so called upright religious setting, turn out to be gay? They certainly did not fit any stereotype.

Years ago, when I came out to my younger brother, the first thing he asked me was why I had to “live” gay. Why couldn’t I just bottle up all those feelings and find a nice girl to marry and settle down with kids? I asked him if he wanted me to be happy. He responded that he did want me to be happy and I told him that is why I would never do those things. I would not be happy!
Now, when talking about choice, I will concede that yes, I do CHOOSE to live as an openly gay man. I associate myself with others like me and I find entertainment as well as comfort in participating in many things gay. Going to gay bars, attending drag shows and having sex with men will always be my choice. And I make that choice because that is who I am. To even consider living a double life where I imprison myself in a fake marriage so as to appease those who are “uncomfortable” with my lifestyle is simply out of the question. Not only would it be unfair and unjust to me, it would not be fair to the woman who thinks she knows me and is in love with an illusion.

I had a friend once who commented that being gay was not “who” he was. Being gay was like 10% of who he was as a person. I told him no, that’s 10% of the population…badabum…but I digress. I started thinking about how we “identify” ourselves. We first identify ourselves as male or female. Then I think we identify ourselves as single, dating, partnered, married or something of that nature. Next, we might think of ourselves in relation to what we do for a living; such as a waiter, engineer, doctor or some other profession. Another identifier could be our age; are we old, young, an old youth or a youthful old person? There are infinite possibilities that tell people who we are. Sexuality is a minute part of that image but it certainly creates an impasse when you throw homosexuality in the mix. Suddenly we are the “gay person” instead of the single forty-something man who is a respected lawyer.

Being gay does not define who someone IS! Just like being straight does not pigeonhole someone into a specific set of characteristics, being gay does not accomplish this as well. So if anyone still believes that a person can choose their sexuality, let me ask a few questions. Why would someone choose not only to sleep with someone of the same sex but then to choose to openly live a lifestyle such as that of a gay person? Why would someone purposefully choose a life or lifestyle that automatically comes with scorn, hate, rejection and a basic overall feeling of loneliness and despair? The answer is that no one would. If anything, some would try to reject that lifestyle and choose instead to live a life of lies, deceit and unhappiness; and that just isn’t fair to ask of anyone.

To Speak or Not To Speak

What does it mean to have Freedom of Speech? In researching for this post, I found out that Freedom of Speech has been broadened to cover a wide variety of different forms of speech. However, there are exceptions to what is protected and what is not. The jurisdiction of Congress or the courts over the protection of speech or the outlawing of speech is not totally clear. Someone speaking falsely or deliberately misleading in their words could be sued for libel or defamation. Also, words which incite violence or criminal behavior could fall under restricted speech. In determining whether said speech does indeed incite violence or criminal acts relies heavily on the intent of the speaker. For years, the lyrics of rap songs have come under fire for explicit wording involving cop killing and the raping of women. After strong debate from both sides, it is now common for such lyrics to not be aired, however, there have been cases where the courts have stepped in and punished those for going too far. The wife of a Vice President even mounted a campaign to urge production companies to voluntarily label their product with a rating system which warned the consumer about the products content.

My quandary for this post stems from politicians, journalists, or any person in the public eye exorcising their right to Free Speech in a reckless manner. How and when do we determine which words spoken in the public arena could be defined as those which could incite violence or worse, criminal behavior? Specifically, my bone of contention lies with politicians who passionately convey their message through scripture or other forms of religious diatribe. To keep this post on track, matters of religion will be addressed in a later post. For now, I want to concentrate on two examples of reckless speech, both espoused by politicians.

The first comes from Sally Kern. Sally Kern is a State Representative from Oklahoma. In a dialogue caught on tape unbeknownst to Sally, she expresses her views of homosexuality as the biggest threat to our National security. In fact, she states terrorism and Islam, while also threats, are not as great as Homosexuality. To show the outrageousness of this claim, she first states that any nation that totally embraced homosexuality lasted no more than a few decades. A few DECADES? I would really like to see the historical data backing up this claim.

The second example of reckless speech by a politician comes from Scott Renfroe, a Colorado State Senator. Here we have a very passionate and God fearing man extolling the dangers of Homosexuality while acting in his role as an elected official. He quotes the oft recited verses from the Bible which condemns the practice of Homosexuality. He then proceeds to liken Homosexuality as a sin on par with murder. His analogy of course brings him to the conclusion that since murder is illegal, then so should homosexuality be illegal. In keeping with the Bible theme, he recites a verse which calls for the revealing of the wrath of God including putting to death homosexuals.

Both of these examples illustrate, in my opinion, words which could incite violence or criminal behavior. I think it grossly irresponsible for these politicians to use such inflammatory language while operating in the role of an elected official. While Sally Kerns was speaking technically off the record, her carelessness in making sure her words be kept private were negligent. Furthermore, she not only confirmed the fact she said these things; she offered no remorse or retraction from her message. Religious arguments aside, Scott Renfroe acted irresponsible as well. To use religion on top of comparing homosexuality to murder and calling for the wrath of God to be carried out on Homosexuals is horrific and inexcusable. It would stand to reason, that any mentally stable person would not take these words as an invitation to seek out and kill anyone who is gay. But how can we be sure that this message was not mistakenly conveyed to someone who is not mentally stable? I am sure Sally and Scott did not intend to promote a message authorizing the killing of innocent people. However, can we be sure that these words, in their basic definition, are not misconstrued? I say we cannot.

In furthering my point, I want to tell you about two individuals who died because someone thought homosexuality was wrong. They are Matthew Shepard and Lawrence King.

Matthew Shepard was 21 when he was robbed, pistol whipped, tied to a post and left to die. His attackers would claim many motives throughout the course of their trial. These motives included: robbing a gay man, for what, is still unclear, although drugs entered the equation at one point then denied later on, as well as teaching Matthew Shepard a lesson. That lesson was for Matthew Shepard not to hit on a straight guy. We will never know the true motive because Matthew Shepard is dead and cannot give any incite as to what actually happened that night. The convicted killers have changed their story so many times; they can no longer be trusted in telling the truth. Because of the national coverage of Matthew’s death, Hate Crime laws with the inclusion of sexual orientation have been enacted in several states. Just recently, a bill was introduced in Congress which would define a crime motivated by a person’s sexual orientation as a hate crime. It is expected to be signed into law on a national level by President Obama. Sad to say, the killers could not be tried as committing a hate crime because sexual orientation was not included as part of the definition yet.

Lawrence King, a fifteen year old boy, came out to his family and schoolmates as being gay. He had no problem with who he was or expressing himself through fashion or other avenues. Typical eighth grade classmates teased him and even harassed him, but this was thought to be just normal. On February 12, 2008, Lawrence King was in the computer lab at school when Brandon McInerney, a classmate, walked in with a gun, pointed it at Lawrence Kings head and pulled the trigger. The motive behind this shooting is still unclear but many think it stems from a crush King had for Brandon. Feeling humiliated by King’s crush, Brandon executed him. Fortunately, this time, the killer has been charged as committing a hate crime.

While these sad and horrific acts were not directly linked to the words spoken by Sally Kerns or Scott Renfroe, it is logical to think that their words could provoke similar acts of violence and criminal behavior. For a person to be killed simply because they came on to another person or developed a crush on someone is beyond my comprehension. For a fifteen year old child to harbor such hatred and humiliation towards an innocent school yard crush begs society to examine more closely how this cold blooded and calculated murder came about.

In closing, I want to highlight another murder motivated by a humiliating crush; a same sex crush, only this time, the crush was revealed not in a school yard but on national television. In 1999, The Jenny Jones show taped an episode with the topic “Revealing Secrets.” A young man was flown out and told he had a secret admirer. He was also told the admirer could be either male or female. The identity of the admirer was revealed to be a man the guest already knew. After the show, they flew home together and even went shopping together. Later, the humiliated guest shot his admirer and killed him. The parents and family of the slain man sued The Jenny Jones show saying the producers and the host herself should have anticipated the outcome. I mean seriously, how can you not see that by revealing a same sex admirer to a straight man that it would result in murder? Imagine the humiliation, the shame. Imagine that EVERYONE knowing about a gay man’s crush on YOU. Sends chills up your spine doesn’t it? Incredulously, the jury awarded the plaintiff a twenty five million dollar settlement. Jenny Jones practically shot the man herself it seemed by the overwhelming victory. Finally, sanity prevailed and the judgment was thrown out.

To speak or not to speak. When do we start taking responsibility for the actions caused by the words we say? When do we start taking responsibility for the acts committed in response to messages condoning violence? When do we stop preaching hate and humility and start preaching love and acceptance? I am not saying that anyone who kills someone under the excuse well so and so said is not responsible, but I am saying you should be a little more careful in the words you choose to express yourself. I understand the argument of Free Speech, but with that freedom comes accountability. Certainly, you have the right to say whatever you like, just expect that maybe someone, somewhere will actually believe you.

To "Out" or Not to "Out"

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

To Blog or Not to Blog

Welcome to my home in the Blogosphere

In answering the title question, I examined why I would want to create a blog. For years now, I have asked myself questions in regards to my homosexuality. These questions ranged from whether I was born this way to should I force others to accept my sexuality. I also questioned the validity of societies judgments towards homosexuals and the effects these judgments had on my life as well as others. In the end, I decided I wanted an outlet where I could put these questions out there and offer my opinions for anyone to read. In return, I want my readers to comment and offer their own take on my views whether they agree or disagree. I welcome everyone's opinion and while I acknowledge that this blog will expose my own point of view, I hope you respect it for what it is and I will return the favor.

Again, thanks for stopping by. Feel free to comment anytime you like. I hope to open an honest and intelligent discussion on all things Queer!!