What has caused the homosexual boom in our time?

[Kay_Cee]

What has caused the homosexual boom in our time?

I think it, and the lack of sexual morality among heterosexuals, can be attributed to this:

“Man cannot live without joy; therefore when he is deprived of true spiritual joys it is necessary that he become addicted to carnal pleasures.” St. Thomas Aquinas

 

[Abba]

This article is interesting:

Politics And
Scientific Logic:
The Issue Of
Homosexuality

Charles W. Socarides
The Journal of Psychohistory, 19(3), Winter 1992

A significant portion of society today is of the belief that homosexuality is a normal form of sexual behavior different from but equal to that of heterosexuality. Many religious leaders, public officials, educators., social and mental health agencies, including those at the highest level of government, departments of psychiatry, psychology, and mental health clinics, have been taken in by a widespread sexual egalitarianism, by accusations of being “undemocratic” or “prejudiced” if they do not accept certain scientific assertions thrust upon them, as if deprived of all intellectual capacity to judge and reason. It is my contention in this paper that this threat of revolutionary change in our sexual mores and customs has been ushered in by a singular act of considerable consequence: the removal of homosexuality from the category of aberrancy by the American Psychiatric Association (December 1973). It is furthermore a fateful consequence of our disregard for psychoanalytic knowledge of human sexual behavior.

In what follows, I shall present a detailed account of social and political forces both within and without our organization responsible for this act and critically examine the spurious and pseudoscientific reasons put forth for the removal of a diagnosis from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.

This act was naively perceived by many psychiatrists as the “simple” elimination of a scientific diagnosis in order to correct injustices. In reality, it created injustices for the homosexual as it belied the truth that prevented the homosexual from seeking and receiving psychoanalytic help. At the social, group, and community level, it proved to be the opening phase of a two-phase sexual radicalization; the second phase being the raising of homosexuality to the level of an alternate life style, an acceptable psycho-social institution alongside heterosexuality as the prevailing norm of behavior.

kidhistory.org/homopolo.html

 

[EasterJoy]

This article is interesting:

kidhistory.org/homopolo.html

Removal of all recognition that same-sex attraction is in any way a disordered attraction was huge. Once this happened, then all negative assessments of what had suddenly been deemed a normal and equal mode of sexual expression automatically became oppressive, bigoted, and so on. Homosexuals became not the victims of disordered biology or psychology, but the victims of oppressive social systems. Fighting these social systems became a heroic civil rights struggle.

 

[Norseman82]

I don’t think people are going to like the answer to that question, because ultimately it comes down to factors such as irresponsible leadership among the Churches, complacent parent and religious education and the big one—entitlements.

Usually, the conversation is over right there because people immediately become defensive and say things like “are you saying I’m a bad parent/my Church is somehow wrong?”.

That’s another reason why we are “losing” on the issue.

I say entitlements because the philosophy behind them is “I or we (even Churches) can control the government beast and it won’t possibly turn on me”. Just look at how “surprised” everyone in America was when Obama Administration forced the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for college students’ contraception.

So-called gay “marriage” isn’t about equality, it’s an entitlement, just like a farm or a wind subsidy or welfare if you are talking about America. And in reality, people who vehemently disagreed with so-called gay “marriage” voted people in over and over and over because of an entitlement or propaganda slogan they liked. And on top of that, if you live in America, you are surrounded by people who say they are “humble, homegrown and moral” who not only do this but make excuses for their family and friends who get an entitlement, even if it costs them.

The gay “marriage” movement used the same platform that everyone else who wanted an entitlement used—they made their cause cool and neat, demonized the opposition into silence, portrayed themselves as victims, and garnered enough support among this supposedly great and righteous “silent majority” we used to hear about to desperately want a progressive arrow or two in their social quiver so that someone could give them partial approval of coolness.

So, when we REALLY think about it, is it really any wonder why we are where we are?

You have a valid point - many Catholics/Christians have “fallen asleep at the switch”, or, as my mother used to yell at me if I let grades slip, “You’re sluffing off!”. Either people fall for “nonjudgmentalism” or are distracted by other issues that don’t carry the weight of mortal sin. Also, the institutional Church has been severely wounded by the abuse crisis, (as well as other protestant churches being hit by other scandals) so society does not take Christianity as seriously as it used to.

As was said in the parable of the wheat and the weeds, “I see an enemy’s hand in this”. I’m sure Satan must be very pleased with what society has become.

 

[Abba]

Removal of all recognition that same-sex attraction is in any way a disordered attraction was huge. Once this happened, then all negative assessments of what had suddenly been deemed a normal and equal mode of sexual expression automatically became oppressive, bigoted, and so on. Homosexuals became not the victims of disordered biology or psychology, but the victims of oppressive social systems. Fighting these social systems became a heroic civil rights struggle.

Yes.

And, I think the success of this movement, if you will, reveals the fragility of our governing and legal system. Not only in this matter but in others (and in one particular other) I have observed how serious changes and take overs are brought about and the majority of the people are lulled. Even though the changes affect their most important principles and the very foundation of their cultures (and on the other matters - even national security and existence - at least how they have known it). The masses seem to not think nor react as if being in some diabolical trance. The majority of people are as if in a passive mode - they just take it and take it. It’s quite an extraordinary phenomenon. if someone speaks up, the media venues gang up against the person to shut him or her up and attempt to ruin his/her credibility. I hope the internet will serve to counter act the controlled media.

I think we lack knowledge when it comes to having a good understanding of homosexuality and pedophilia. In these areas, the social sciences are in their infancy. I hope young intellectuals can see this and work to make contributions. Our lack of knowledge in these areas provide opportunities for people to leave their foot prints in history by devoting themselves and perhaps making contributions which will help our understanding.

Maybe we can exorcise the world and get some of those new laws repealed.

 

[oneofmany]

amazon.com/Gay-Marriage-Considerations-Review-After/dp/1878559060/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1436162517&sr=8-8&keywords=after+the+ball+how+america+will+conquer+its+fear+and+hatred+of+gays

This is a book on Amazon. It’s about the book, “After the Ball” How society is being forced to accept gays or brainwashed to do it.

I wonder now if these books will be allowed to be sold or will these companies be forced to ban them?

 

[Xantippe]

That’s very anecdotal, and as it turns out, quite incorrect in general. Yes, it existed, but it bears little resemblance to your summary.

**So, would you like to provide some alternate descriptions and cites?

You’ve said mine are wrong, but I’m not seeing yours.
**
You’ve cited one concrete example (which, incidentally, is very often embellished due to the current cultural climate).

**C.S. Lewis’s Surprised by Joy was written in 1955 by an author born in 1898. At the time he wrote, homosexual acts were a criminal offense in Britain and they would continue to be so until 1967. And that was not an idle threat–there were a number of prosecutions in 1954, including one that led to the suicide of Alan Turing the mathematician.

Again, skim through the school chapters. I would quote for you, but it goes on and on and I think the moderators would not approve.

C.S. Lewis is the great 20th century orthodox Anglican popular writer and a forceful advocate of chastity. (See his treatment of chastity in Mere Christianity (1952).)
**
Your use of Wikipedia is also quite telling. (Have you looked closely at the sources that are used? Are they balanced in a scholarly fashion? Are they reputable? Are they peer-reviewed?) I can pull out sources that will back up a claim that the Chinese were first to land in the Americas - that doesn’t mean it actually happened.

Do you have some alternate sources you’d like to share on Central Asian pederasty?

From your comment, it is quite evident that you’re parroting what you’ve been taught without having investigated it. Am I correct in assuming you’ve learned (“learned”) most of what you’ve repeated here in an American college?

As it happens, no I didn’t learn anything about culture and homosexuality in the undergraduate classroom, but I am the wife of a very Catholic college professor. One of his areas of interest is Ancient Greece. Over the years, I’ve heard quite a lot about Greek homosexuality. It is on the level of flat earth advocacy to argue against its existence.

I do not know Greek, but my husband tells me that in Ancient Greek discussions of love, “the lover” is grammatically masculine as is “the beloved.”

There’s a lot of other evidence. One rather famous example comes from Plato’s Symposium where Aristophanes, the Greek playwright, is telling a myth about the origin of love and the creation of the sexes and heterosexuality and homosexuality:

There’s a summary here of Aristophanes’ myth:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symposium_(Plato

If you don’t like that summary because it’s from (eek!) Wikipedia, feel free to find a summary elsewhere or to read the Symposium yourself.

And frankly, I don’t see why you are bothering. The point of my citations is:

1. Same sex relationships have had a long history in human civilization.
2. However, a lot of the most widespread historical examples of homosexual relationships having an established and quasi-traditional place in society involve a) opportunism rather than preference (same sex schools or prison) or b) involve inequitable relationships between established men and young boys (in the case of Ancient Greece, from approximately age 12-17).

I’m not seeing why that is controversial or why it is important to disprove those points.

 

[Xantippe]

Also, I’m not sure if this has been brought up in this thread, but heterosexuals have enthusiastically embraced sodomy for themselves over the last 20+ years.

Hence, there’s a very understandable feeling that if it is OK for a man and a woman to perform activity XYZ, then it must be OK for a man and a man to perform exactly (and I mean EXACTLY) the same activity.

The standard heterosexual menu of sexual activities is way different than it used to be (at least in the US).

 

[cjforJesus]

Also, I’m not sure if this has been brought up in this thread, but heterosexuals have enthusiastically embraced sodomy for themselves over the last 20+ years.

Hence, there’s a very understandable feeling that if it is OK for a man and a woman to perform activity XYZ, then it must be OK for a man and a man to perform exactly (and I mean EXACTLY) the same activity.

The standard heterosexual menu of sexual activities is way different than it used to be (at least in the US).

Hehe , “standard menu” Would you like fries with that buggery?

In another thread I brought up that same point.The Catechism was woefully inadequate to claim homosexual attraction is alright but homosexual acts are intrinsically morally evil without defining the acts…

Well the only acts I know in regards to homosexual sex is sodomy. Sodomy generally refers to anal copulation,but I believe the legal term regards copulation with any orifice except the vagina.

 

[cjforJesus]

As it happens, no I didn’t learn anything about culture and homosexuality in the undergraduate classroom, but I am the wife of a very Catholic college professor. One of his areas of interest is Ancient Greece. Over the years, I’ve heard quite a lot about Greek homosexuality. It is on the level of flat earth advocacy to argue against its existence.

I do not know Greek, but my husband tells me that in Ancient Greek discussions of love, “the lover” is grammatically masculine as is “the beloved.”

There’s a lot of other evidence. One rather famous example comes from Plato’s Symposium where Aristophanes, the Greek playwright, is telling a myth about the origin of love and the creation of the sexes and heterosexuality and homosexuality:

There’s a summary here of Aristophanes’ myth:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symposium_(Plato

If you don’t like that summary because it’s from (eek!) Wikipedia, feel free to find a summary elsewhere or to read the Symposium yourself.

And frankly, I don’t see why you are bothering. The point of my citations is:

1. Same sex relationships have had a long history in human civilization.
2. However, a lot of the most widespread historical examples of homosexual relationships having an established and quasi-traditional place in society involve a) opportunism rather than preference (same sex schools or prison) or b) involve inequitable relationships between established men and young boys (in the case of Ancient Greece, from approximately age 12-17).

I’m not seeing why that is controversial or why it is important to disprove those points.

As far as the Greeks and pederasty,yeah,they loved it. They targeted young boys between 12 and 17 and “mentored” them including sexual acts.As far as I know it was mostly the aristocracy who engaged in this odd behavior.Elitism was the norm in that class of people and it was all about power and submission.It is hilarious to think though that they were actually striving to be virtuous!

From what I have noticed regarding the sexual abuse scandal in the Church,it was primarily pederasty,though I am sure some of it may have involved rape too. Most of the accounts were young males and not small children.

 

[Xantippe]

As far as the Greeks and pederasty,yeah,they loved it. They targeted young boys between 12 and 17 and “mentored” them including sexual acts.As far as I know it was mostly the aristocracy who engaged in this odd behavior.Elitism was the norm in that class of people and it was all about power and submission.It is hilarious to think though that they were actually striving to be virtuous!

I was doing a little reading and it looks like it was definitely very pronounced as a behavior among the ancient Greek upper classes, but it’s apparently controversial whether people lower down the social ladder had the same customs. There’s a much better historical record available of upper class behavior. So, who knows?

 

[Xantippe]

Also, as I recall, the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (or some similar title) has a huge article allotted to ancient Greek homosexuality. I remember skimming it about 14 years ago, in whatever the current edition of the Dictionary was at the time.

So, not just Wikipedia!

 

[cjforJesus]

I was doing a little reading and it looks like it was definitely very pronounced as a behavior among the ancient Greek upper classes, but it’s apparently controversial whether people lower down the social ladder had the same customs. There’s a much better historical record available of upper class behavior. So, who knows?

I am sure the lower class was much more worried about feeding and clothing themselves. I doubt any of them were literate.

 

[Peebo]

There may be many reasons in our society today that homosexuality is such an issue…but I think the root cause has been overlooked to some degree…Satan…he knows more about us than we do…and he is influencing and manipulating people even more so as his time draws near…first it was the sexual revolution of the sixties where many of the norms and morals were rejected for a more “enlightened” society…out of that came the feminist movement and sexual equality…the right to choose which led to abortion…an abomination to God…the creator of life…now we have the “right” to destroy what God gave to us…the gift of life…now we are taking from God the very act of giving life through procreation as he ordained it…by a man and a woman…and allowing SSM…like abortion it is destroying the purpose of why we were created by God out of his infinite love…to be fruitful and multiply…the next step by Satan will be to try and destroy Christianity and the church founded by Jesus Christ…this has already begun because homosexuals and those who support their cause are already claiming the church discriminates against them in employment…that some Christians refuse them service because of their lifestyle…the Episcopalian church has already fallen under the spell of Satan by allowing SSM…some polls show that even a majority of Christians…including Catholics support SSM…as I said at the beginning of this post Satan is the root cause of all that is happening…society has fallen under the spell of the great deceiver…it will get worse…possibly much worse for those Christians whose faith is strong…he will attack them now with a vengeance hoping he can claim more souls from God…he knows he won’t win…he doesn’t care about that I think…just as long as he can destroy the human race…Gods creation…his ultimate goal…but if we Christians stand firm in our faith then he will not win our souls…and we know that God will prevail in the end.

 

[jtauke]

The breakdown of the family unit. Specifically, the decline of paternal role models. Too many young men are growing up in homes without a father present.

How exactly does not having a father around make someone more likely to be gay? It seems you’re ignoring the simplest solution to the question…They were always there, but until very recently coming out could mean being kicked out of your home by one’s parents or worse beat to death in an alley.

 

[cjforJesus]

How exactly does not having a father around make someone more likely to be gay? It seems you’re ignoring the simplest solution to the question…They were always there, but until very recently coming out could mean being kicked out of your home by one’s parents or worse beat to death in an alley.

Or have fire and brimstone rained down on you

Until 1973 homosexuality was viewed as a psychological illness.
Interestingly, that is the same year the supreme court ruled that unborn babies were not yet legally “persons” and could be dismembered in utero.
I seriously wonder what is coming next.:forced euthanasia?

 

[Luvz2travel]

It’s considered cool in the media to be gay.

 

[PLinz]

So, would you like to provide some alternate descriptions and cites?

You’ve said mine are wrong, but I’m not seeing yours.

Do you know the definition of ‘anecdotal’? Also, you seem to have read my comments in a rush (or without adequate attention, at least); please re-read them.

C.S. Lewis’s Surprised by Joy was written in 1955 by an author born in 1898. At the time he wrote, homosexual acts were a criminal offense in Britain and they would continue to be so until 1967. And that was not an idle threat–there were a number of prosecutions in 1954, including one that led to the suicide of Alan Turing the mathematician.

Again, skim through the school chapters. I would quote for you, but it goes on and on and I think the moderators would not approve.

C.S. Lewis is the great 20th century orthodox Anglican popular writer and a forceful advocate of chastity. (See his treatment of chastity in Mere Christianity (1952).)

And you go back to leaning on that one area. Is verbosity meant to cloak an inadequacy in your claim?

Do you have some alternate sources you’d like to share on Central Asian pederasty?

It’s your claim. The sources you (apparently) rely on (given your linking to Wikipedia) are made up of anonymous blogs (which don’t cite sources), cheerleaders of homosexual activity, and in general, non-scholarly writings. You don’t seem to understand how to make a claim; you have to use good sources before anyone is to take you seriously.

As it happens, no I didn’t learn anything about culture and homosexuality in the undergraduate classroom,

So instead you’ve encountered this information in an unstructured manner, which does not provided the proper context and background for it (not that a typical college education does either, deliberately or not).

but I am the wife of a very Catholic college professor.

Is that an attempted appeal to authority I see?

One of his areas of interest is Ancient Greece. Over the years, I’ve heard quite a lot about Greek homosexuality.

And you’re trying to pass this off as what exactly?

It is on the level of flat earth advocacy to argue against its existence.

Nice diversionary fallacy

I do not know Greek, but my husband tells me that in Ancient Greek discussions of love, “the lover” is grammatically masculine as is “the beloved.”

There’s a lot of other evidence. One rather famous example comes from Plato’s Symposium where Aristophanes, the Greek playwright, is telling a myth about the origin of love and the creation of the sexes and heterosexuality and homosexuality:

There’s a summary here of Aristophanes’ myth:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symposium_(Plato

If you don’t like that summary because it’s from (eek!) Wikipedia, feel free to find a summary elsewhere or to read the Symposium yourself.

You have backpedaled considerably from your original comment, I see. What I find interesting is how little your wide-ranging belief is based on. It’s not that you have a desire to believe what LGBT activists want you to believe (and they care even less about scholarly methods), but that you’re realizing cognitive biases are at work here. For example, the illusory truth effect and the anchoring bias. The media definitely plays a role in leading people to believe things without even having to lie about it (per se). There are many millennials who believe that homosexuals make up 30% of the US population - they haven’t been explicitly lied to, but the media has led (or allowed) them to believe false things (cognitive biases at work, again).

The point of my citations is:

You mean the point you’re trying to make by engaging in the act of citation.

In the future, please quote my comments correctly. Thanks.

 

[Peter_Plato]

or have fire and brimstone rained down on you

Until 1973 homosexuality was viewed as a psychological illness.
Interestingly, that is the same year the supreme court ruled that unborn babies were not yet legally “persons” and could be dismembered in utero.
I seriously wonder what is coming next.:forced euthanasia?

Spoiler alert!!!

 

[Abba]

Spoiler alert!!!

Hate to break it to you guys, but, the tragic truth is that euthanasia is one of the best kept secrets of America. It has been here for a long time and is practiced every day in America - as for the victim - willingly, unknowingly or by force. :sad_yes: