HOMOPHOBES!

I was really disappointed, although not surprised, by the recent campaign against homosexuality launched by a number of Syrian bloggers.

Seriously?! I see this only as generating from  plain xenophobia. As humans we’re genetically coded to be afraid of those who are different from us, and the herd mentality is hard wired into our brains that we don’t even want to acknowledge it. We, as humans, are instinctively to feel safety in numbers, numbers of those who are similar to ourselves and we label those who are different as dangerous, outsiders, abnormal, or even immoral as our consciousness advanced.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when that freedom is stretched to the extent of demoralizing groups of people based on grounds of religious or racial, or in this case sexual preference, differences that’s freedom gone too far.

Bloggers who participated in this campaign recycled the same old rhetoric eternally used by homophobes. Although I genuinely don’t believe in the efficiency of ‘dialogue’ with people entrenched behind a certain belief I will respond to the arguments that are most irritating to me personally:

  • “Homosexuality is immoral”: homosexuality is in no way synonymous with promiscuity or lack of morals in any sense PERIOD.
  • “Homosexuality is a sickness requiring treatment”: a sickness is defined as a disorder hampering the being’s ability to function properly. and that’s in no way the case with homosexuality; it doesn’t affect a person’s well being or their ability to be an active contributor to any given society.
  • “Homosexuality is a sin: hmm, all I can say is this, if everyone stopped trying to impose their religious belief, which of course they are entitled to have, the world would be a better place. All religions are creeds of love not hate, yet people always find a way to utilize religion to their own purposes.
  • “Homosexuality is abnormal/against nature”: who defines what’s normal and what’s not? deviation from a majority doesn’t make those who are different as abnormal based on this difference. As for it being against nature? seriously? if the sole purpose of human sexual intercourse is reproduction would someone explain to me the abundance of birth control practices and products. Over more, I don’t think any one should fear that homosexuality could endanger our species survival, Earth already harbors 30% more humans than it can provide for.
  • “Studies showed that Homosexuality is not normal”: such studies were conducted with no intent of original research, but for the sole purpose of finding a scientific looking ‘proof’ to support a false claim, such studies are best described as “junk science.”

Is it that hard to live and let live? And were there no more worthy issues to be addressed under the third Syrian blogging week? I ask rhetorically.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]



  1. [...] UNEXPLAINED PHENOMENA added an interesting post today on HOMOPHOBES!Here’s a small readingAll religions are creeds of love not hate, yet people always find a way to utilize religion to their own purposes. [...]

  2. Jabi says:

    I was about to start a discussion but thought it is not worth it since i have already been in many :)

    I just don’t think that your claim in regards to scientific studies that have been done that prove that “homosexuality is not normal” should be described as junk science without you actually reading it and then determining if the theory or proof is feasible or not, this is just a ludicrous thing to say.
    In the same why that you are attacking people that exert their beliefs on others, you are saying that studies are “junk science” just because they go against your belief, without even considering those studies.

    • Anas says:

      @Jabi
      I didn’t call them junk science because they’re against my belief… I’m questioning the method and the motive behind such studies, not the supposed outcome.
      I hope I made myself clear now.

      • butterfly86 says:

        Jabi,
        how arrogant can someone get? Maybe we should study the motives of rude, arrogant people who are too “abnormal” to even show some human understanding before arguing about something that is irrelevant to the point?

        tsk tsk.

  3. excellent post, Anas. man you should write more often.
    You have great potentials and I have a feeling that you’ll break a LONG leg in the US :)

  4. Jabi says:

    may I just add that you should differentiate between homosexuality which is a behavior, and gender and race. People are not born homosexual, it is a behavior a something that people choose to do or not do. Human Behavior is the domain of morality (unlike race and gender) and is therefore bound to the laws of morality in a society.

    • Anas says:

      I don’t see how you can link homosexuality with morality, and might I add that I’ve never heard of a homosexual committing rape or sex related violence.. it’s ‘us’, the moral heterosexuals who do that. explain that if you please

  5. Bill Day says:

    Very thoughtful piece. I only wish to add that while there may not be much efficacy in dialogue with people entrenched behind a certain belief, it is necessary and important to challenge their public arguments for the sake of the rest of the undecided or uncommitted population. For that reason, speaking out in posts like this is very valuable. Thank you.

  6. @Jabi

    Homosexuality is, as is the state of the science, nothing you choose. Period.

  7. jilliancyork says:

    Fucking right on, Anas.

  8. Jabi says:

    @ simon, i have decided to post a response on my blog, because it ended up being quite a long response.

    Anas
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/homosexual-rapists-could-kill-police-say-the-victim-of-a-violent-sex-attack-tells-john-arlidge-how-he-was-tricked-beaten-and-abused-then-threatened-with-blackmail-1508156.html

    and now you have :)

    I don’t understand something though, your saying that homosexuals are better people than those who aren’t? doesn’t really make sense..

    • Anas says:

      I didn’t mean homosexuals were better (or worse) I just meant that self righteous people should stop being such assholes and judging people who don’t conform with what they deem appropriate or moral!

  9. Grant says:

    Hello, I’m a student in the United States, and I found your writing both positive and informative. I do have a question for you though. Do you believe that the anti-homosexual rhetoric of the Syrian bloggers you mentioned is based primarily off religious views? I know that here in the US, its common to hear someone argue against homosexuality with religious views as ammunition and I’m curious about the roots of this conflict within Syrian society.

  10. jilliancyork says:

    Jabi, are you kidding me? First of all, to counter any argument you might make, there are 100 more which demonstrate that sexual orientation is fixed at birth.

    And what on earth does that article you just posted have anything to do with it? Sure, homosexuals can be just as horrible and disgusting as straight men…Look at Josef Fritzl:

    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23480767-details/Pictured:+Inside+the+cellar+where+father+locked+daughter+for+24+years+and+repeatedly+raped+her/article.do

    Regardless, the point here is that sexual preference is not learned. It’s not influenced by any factors, nor is it a behavior. Yes, SEX is a behavior, and if your morals involve things such as virginity until marriage, then you can certainly argue any point. But based on a neutral system of morals, there is no way you can argue homosexuality as immoral. You are basing your arguments on Islam (or Christianity, or whatever?), right? Guess what? I don’t believe in your imaginary magical man in the sky, therefore I base my values of doing no harm to others…and by that definition, homosexuality is okay by me.

  11. Jabi says:

    jillian,
    Im not making arguments I stating scientific facts.

    That article was a responses to Anas who has never heard of a homosexual that has raped or committed sexual assault.

    I am not arguing from a religious perspective because I know that most people who support such preposterous immoral acts will not acknowledge religion and therefore science is the logical common ground to base an argument.

    God almighty is not a man in the sky.. are you trying to be sarcastic?

    If you have read my post and this is your reply, then let me just say that my post was from research done by Dr Francis collins and others, provide me with evidence that behavior is not a factor, show me research that has been done.
    I don’t understand though the apologetic approach to such topic by most people.

    • butterfly86 says:

      jabi jerk,

      give it upppppppppppppp. get a life. if u have nothing nice to say don’t say anything at all?

      go talk to your rude, homophobic, (i bet very MANLY) friends. i m cracking up so much by ur ridiculously insensitive and ill-informed comments that i might just hurt myself.

  12. @Jabi

    I don’t see how you argue scientifically for the immorality of homosexuality. Mostly, because I am quite sure that moral cannot be decided by science.

    What you stated is that “Human Behavior is the domain of morality (unlike race and gender) and is therefore bound to the laws of morality in a society.”

    So you are a cultural relativist, if I get you right? Please tell me then, how do you define what are the “laws of morality in a society”?

  13. Jabi says:

    Dudes comon,
    Stop mixing up my replies. That was a reply to anas not you.

    my reply to you simon was based on scientific facts in regards to genetics.

  14. @Jabi

    Don’t think I’m mixing up your replies. If I got you right, you first posted scientific statements that support your position that homosexuality is something people choose. You then state:

    “I am not arguing from a religious perspective because I know that most people who support such preposterous immoral acts will not acknowledge religion and therefore science is the logical common ground to base an argument.”

    I understand this in the way that you 1) see homosexuality as immoral, and 2) argue that this can be evidenced by science.

    I’m questioning this position, and I’m especially interested in the answer you didn’t give on my last comment – how do you define the “laws of morality in a society”?

  15. Anas says:

    @Jabi
    I read your blog post and did a little reading about Dr. Collins, the guy is an Evangelical Christian which doesn’t necessarily mean he was unbiased doing his reasearch. And second, what you qutoed from him shows that he was unable to find hard evidence of sexuality being genetic or not; genetics is still full of mysteries and even cancer research which is definitely genetic barely has answers or cures gene wise. Just because someone was unable to find evidence to something doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist.. and that certainly applies to a field such as genetics.

    You would judge someone’s morality based on their tendency to share their bed with someone of the same or the opposite sex, I don’t. what someone does in the privacy of their own bedroom is none of my business, and certainly none of yours!

    My argument which you responded without getting the point of was based on “من كان منكم بلا خطيئة فليرمها بحجر”. No hetero (normal by your definition) has the moral authority whatsoever to judge someone on the soul grounds of being homosexual (different or abnormal and immoral by your definition) because morals have nothing to do with that so give me a break!

    I hope I hear back from you Jabi.

  16. jilliancyork says:

    Jabi,

    Apologies on the first point – I do recognize of course that there are bad homosexuals and bad heterosexuals, just as there are good in both. But that’s beside the point.

    You said that you will argue scientifically because there’s no point in bringing up religion with this group of people – and yet, you continue to refer to homosexuality as “immoral acts.” Therefore, you are clearly biased, and not able to separate science from morals and religion.

    But that said, let’s have a scientific discussion. Interestingly, Dr. Francis Collins himself believes that homosexuality is genetically influenced but not necessarily DNA-hardwired (see this article: http://www.narth.com/docs/nothardwired.html). Again, you’re just flat-out wrong. The source YOU cited disagrees with you, too!

    Do I believe that homosexuality is 100% genetic? No. I believe there are a number of factors, nature and nurture, but not one of them makes homosexuality deviant or wrong. Just as I, a heterosexual female, may grow up with a preference for tall men or black men or S&M, a homosexual grows up to realize their preferences – whatever they may be – as well.

    And frankly, enough with the black and white. I don’t believe homosexuality and heterosexuality are cut-and-dry nor hardwired. There are plenty of people who have explored their sexuality to the brink and have discovered they enjoy a wide array of options. There are others who are 100% secure in their sexual preference. Neither is superior.

    You will not find science to back up your bigoted ideas, Jabi.

    -Jillian

  17. فاقد حنان says:

    معجب بردكم على الموقع وأناتكم في الرد و أود المراسلة إن لم يزعجكم ذلك
    لبناني فاقد حنان

  18. Khaldoun Jarbou says:

    Good piece Anas ……………
    From now you should send all your posts.

  19. Pirsey says:

    After reading through the article, I just feel that I really need more information on the topic. Can you share some resources please?

Leave a Reply