When Butterflies Attack The World!

When Butterflies Attack the World — the horrors that ensue!

Welcome any www.floppingaces.net readers – sent here from my post – where in which I contend we’re as natural as mom and apple pie.

Gay folks say we’re born this way – again: www.borngaybornthisway.blogspot.com – which is but one of half a dozen websites which give testimony from us. We have begged for heterosexuals to face this reality; you’re all still “debating” the reality which stares you in the face. Occam’s Razor – which says the simplest explanation of a thing is correct – is on our side. But let’s not worry about what we say, for what could we “know” about whom we are, eh? Besides, that’s just “promoting” an “agenda.” You say.

No, you heterosexuals got yourselves some talking points! Dozens of ’em. You heterosexuals got yourselves some opinions! Plenty of them, too. Not a blessed fact in your hands, but we’re wrong. More amazingly, your opinions, your talking points, your accusations, your conclusions, your beliefs contradict themselves and each other. When you come to a conclusion let us know – but one thing must be true > you all cannot be right. Vast numbers of you heterosexuals must be wrong about us gay folks. Why don’t you all sit down somewhere and figure out your final answer, so we might defend against that – instead of us trying to “defend” ourselves against dozens of different lines of “thought.” Yes, it’s time you heterosexuals defended your plethora of reasons we’re gay.

Let us take a brief stroll through the miasma of heterosexual “beliefs” about us butterflies, we pink sheep:

The Catholic Archbishop of the Armed Forces during the DADT repeal debate opined that we are gay for “largely unexplained” reasons. Sir, can you can any clearer than that? I mean, surely, after decades of study he might be able to point to something, say, “largely explained”? Or “mostly explained”? Or even “partially explained”? Nope, all he can say in 2011 is “largely unexplained.” And this is why we’re the bad guys! Nothing says solid conclusion more than “largely unexplained.” This surety is surely something to base publicly policy on, no? And against this argument of mush we gay folks are supposed to present a defense? So we say: we’re born this gay. And his eminence says this cannot be true. Why? I submit: he’s absolutely clueless about what he’s talking about. Indeed, he admits it: for when all you can say is “unexplained” I dare say you are clueless.

The Catholic Encyclopedia, surely a well researched tome, as early as the early 1990s edition (the earliest I consulted so that I might learn what might be taught about me,) stated rather forthrightly as a completely explained situation – at odds with the Archbishop – is that we gay people are “predisposed” to be gay in the womb. It says “predisposed prenatally.” But the encyclopedia did state at which month, in which trimester, at which point in the gestation period we got the “predisposition.” So I ask: was it at the moment of conception? Or twenty minutes before we popped our heads out into the world? Nor does it state by what manner this predisposition came about – it offers not one hint of a reason or logic or conclusion. It merely “states” the belief, and leaves it that.

The Pope himself has stated this: we’re predisposed prenatally. But then he goes further – it’s our fault, it’s not natural and it’s an evil sin against God. And my head reels. What on earth could a fetus have done to predispose himself? How could a fetus, at any point in the gestation period be at fault for anything? At most a few belly kicks, but what else? And if it happens within the womb how could it not be natural? Where else could the thing come from? Are gay people that strong that we choose to fight the world from the womb itself? Are we that against God that we predispose ourselves against him before we ever see the light of day? And this all powerful God can’t see us fighting him and decide to do us in before we destroy the rest of his creation? The whole logic is so convoluted and stands against itself that’s it’s a wonder that any sane man would utter it. He accedes we’re natural and then says we’re not. And we’re the crazy ones?

Our mothers did this to us! Oh yes, this is a famous one indeed. For decades it was said that our mothers were too clingy – or not clingy enough. They smothered us or ignored us. By being too close they made us momma’s boys who hate women – and by being too distant they made us sissies who hate women. Beats me. Either we’re gay for the clinging – or the no clinging. But surely we can’t be gay for both reasons. Pick one please, is that too hard to ask? And if our mothers made us gay – why are we the afflicted the guilty party? It would seem we’re the victim. It would seem we might sue our mothers for having done the damage. And yet I can’t seem to come up with one instance of a gay man suing his mother for making him gay. Or even attacking her. We seem quite willing to beg the lady to just grasp reality. And we’re the ones who always say “It’s not your fault mom!”

The Family Research Council is of the “mother did it to us” school, though they also seem to accuse us of making our mothers do this to us! They further point out, in other parts of their copious literature on us – that it’s for “a mix of unknown developmental factors.” Once again, a surety of conviction based on “beats us” is to be marveled at. Yet, they’re in the halls of power preaching their views, and we’re barely allowed into the proceedings lest we taint them by “promoting” our gayness for some nefarious purpose loosely defined as “against civilization.” At further point they then say we “choose” to be gay for some political purpose known only to them. I would suggest that they cut and paste all their claims for the reason we are gay from all their documentation, put them into one document and take a gander at the sheer plenitude of contradictions. Then throw a dart and see which would it sticks in.

Then a group called NARTH – something like the North Americans for the Research and Therapy for Homosexuals – is quite sure that we’re gay because somewhere between the ages of 2 and 4 we had some bad experiences with our fathers. Though they accede that not all gay men are gay for this reason, and some gay men are gay for other reasons, and that some gay men had fine relationships with our fathers. And still, they say our fathers did it between those ages – and yet they also claim we have some inborn “temperment” – a word that’s not really even a word, but sure sounds good. So, we’re born with this temperment, and we did or did not have good relationships with our fathers, and something happened that they’re not quite sure about. More amazingly, they also claim that while it’s true that gay men are less athletic, and more artistic, this is really because of what did or did not happen between the temperment and the ages of 2 and 4. Uh huh. With such clarity of thought they have concluded they are able to “cure” us of what ails us without realizing that what ails us is having to listen to such mind numbing inconclusive mush. That NARTH and FRC are good buddies does present the further problem that these two very sure organizations are quite at odds with each other. The rest of the “ex-gay” groups have their own theories, so bereft of logic a sane man cannot make sense of them.

Then there are the lesser ideas, if anything could be less than the above:

We’re gay because of our birth order. That is – the more older brothers there are, the more likely there will be gay younger brother – but those people are still of the theory that something else outside of us did push us over the edge. Some go the mother’s fault route, some got the father’s fault route, some go the we’re molested route, and a few go even more afield – so long as we’re in the right birth order. Alas, Cardinal George of Chicago’s own gay nephew seems to be the oldest boy in the family. So much for this theory.

We’re gay because we have a castration fear. Always a good one – because it would seem to fly in the face that we’re putting you know what you know where with absolutely no fear of castration whatsoever, but we fear this unfortunate outcome if we put it where it supposedly belongs. Sure, it sounds good, I think, well, no. It’s nuts.

“Gender Identity Disorder” is one of my favorites. After removing gayness from both the psychology and psychiatry manuals back in the 1970s – these fine folks did rush for the GID! So now it’s not because of our mothers, or fathers, or poor toilet training, or molesting, or some other thing, it’s because we don’t know if we’re men or not. To which I give a hearty good laugh. Boy do we know we’re men! We positively luxuriate in our manliness. Not to mention, in the entwining of our two manhoods whom is the more confused? And if we switch positions does our relative amount of GID switch too? They do not say, for I dare say the theory is so brain dead as to be beyond belief.

And having read some 500 books on the subject I find other reasons set forth – almost too numerous to put forth other than in a book – we had too much fun in wrestling in high school gym. Beats me; I’m sure the author was learned indeed. Or there’s the theory that the first time we ejaculated as a boy we saw the semen and did become transfixed. Or the theory that we never quite cleared the breast feeding hurdle and so became orally fixated. In all I encountered some 27 major reasons we’re gay in the books available in the Palm Beach County Florida library where I spent a year and a half diligently searching out each and every reason put forth.

And in the testimony before the Armed Services Committee in Congress back when DADT was enshrined in the law – over 100 different theories were put forth of why we were simply not to be allowed in polite company. And each and every one was given with great solemnity. Each and every theory and idea was given equal weight, and discussed by the Representatives and Senators with surety that, yes, this then was the true reason for our gayness. You know, I still have my copy of that testimony. I wrote to Senator Lott of Mississippi and asked for it. One wonders if he would have sent it to me if he knew I was gay. It’s over 1200 pages of densely packed text. I read it – it’s sore amazing to encounter postulation after postulation – wholly at odds with each other, each undermining the next or previous, each speaker giving opposite and contradictory conclusions to their learned colleagues who spoke but minutes before to present their favorite theory. And each given equal credence, for it must be true, for these folks did “study homosexuals” by not talking to a single blessed one of us.

On and on, today, yesterday, yesteryear, and I’m sure tomorrow, there has been a parade of supposed scholarship of why we gay folks are gay – and you are not! And the one theory, the one idea postulated that is not included anywhere in these myriad of sources is the one we say: we’re born this way by the Grace of God.

Indeed, our theory – the one we might know a bit about since we’re living the thing – was always dismissed out of hand right up front. Over and over again, in book after book, in testimony after testimony – every single one of the authors and speakers was sure of but one thing: Gayness Is NOT Natural. Other than that, they’re as clear as a bayou filled with the debris of an hurricane.

And when we have tried to present our conclusion, that GOD did make us this way for His own purposes we are simply dismissed as promoting “homosexuality” for some nefarious plan to destroy civilization.

And then there’s the “sin” or “choice” argument. For if everyone is oh so sure it happened to us – if everyone is so sure we were made gay by some outside but unknown source – it simply could not have been our “choice” to be gay – you made us gay – that’s what you say. So OK, I believe you. But stop blaming me then for what someone did to me. I’m the victim, no? If gay people are such poor pitiful excuses for humankind, destroyed by some outside force whilst we were somewhere between the moment of conception and the end of high school, then it could not be a “choice.” It could not be our fault. We are innocents in this matter. But no – not only do you screaming heterosexuals claim this was done to us – but that we brought it upon ourselves – and that we choose to bring it upon ourselves – and that we then choose to be “sinners” magically beginning, one presumes, at the age of consent.

For before 21 years of age, it’s a mix of largely unexplained, unknown developmental factors caused by our birth order, our mothers, our fathers, and who knows, maybe the guy next door – that can be stopped in its tracks by some crisis intervention – and then magically, just as we blow out the candles on our 21st birthday cakes — now all of a sudden we choose to be evil debased sinners intent on destroying the world. The transformation is complete from victims of heterosexual’s actions to “militants” out to destroy the world.

Other than that, you all do know what your talking about.

And I do submit – what is far more sinful than any gay guy could ever be is the presentation of dozens of illogical, contradictory, unfounded, unresearched suppositions based on a blind fury against something you don’t understand, and don’t want to understand, as “truth” and “fact.”

You people are delusional.

Now, if you go by our Occam’s Razor theory – gayness is some natural thing, almost certainly based on brain wiring, like autism in a way – then the whole thing would be solved and the debate ended. And then we can all get back to the more important things in life. Give it a whirl folks. But cut the nonsense until you all can come up with a conclusion.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: