So I ran across this article at Jezebel.com and began to think. It's a thought I've had before, but I figured maybe some of you would appreciate it and maybe give feedback.
This whole gay thing, yeah? Teh gays. Ruining everything. Trying to even take our marriage. And not even that! What about their deal with bending God-given GENDER ROLES.
I mean, haven't they read the Proclamation on the Family?
Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose...By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.HEL-LO.
Like someone I know said recently, "It's okay to be a boy."
You know, boy. Rough-housing, pants-wearing, rambunctious, sports-playing boy. No sissy stuff. It's okay, just in case you were concerned it wasn't. Because apparently society at large is beginning to say it isn't.
So we had this whole discussion one day in the kitchen of a loved one's home about gender and that was said. Among some other, similar things. Boys are boys and girls are girls. Blue and pink. Guns and dolls. Pants and dresses. Barbies and Spiderman.
It's so easy. But our "progressive" (socialist!) society wants to make it so weird and complicated.
Anyway, I almost--I was a good girl, this was family, they think I'm weird enough--said "There are theories that state gender is fluid."
Oh god, could you imagine?
Anyway, so I'm thinking about this whole gender role thing and how the church applies it to homosexuality (sorry, "SSA").
First, it's two people of the same gender, which is so not what the (current) definition of marriage is.
Second, gay people can't procreate, so obvs they shouldn't get married. But they are having sex. Which is wrong. Obvs. It's not even real sex.
Third, uhm, Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
Something about Sodom and Gomorrah (so convenient when you don't actually read the story critically)
Paul--Paul said something didn't he? Lovers of themselves? Men lying with other men? I dunno. I thought that was supposed to be about masturbation. Or selfishness. Or something. Whatever interpretation works for the current argument.
And something in Leviticus among stoning women and other such Biblical things.
So it's much easier to just say "boys" and "girls," yeah? Girls get their own bathroom/locker rooms, boys get their own. You have dorms--BYU notably--where co-ed living is forbidden. In the mission field, boys stick with boys and girls with girls. Elders are not permitted to proselytize with Sisters and Sisters with Elders. Elders are not permitted to visit with a single sister. Same with home teachers. Hell--married people are strongly discouraged from even having friends of the opposite sex.
Because we don't want any sexy shit going down before marriage. Or outside of marriage.
And here's where teh gays come in (and even more sneakily, teh bisexuals):
Many people, at least in my experience, seem to think homosexuals cannot control themselves. They must have teh sex with anyone warm and breathing, straight or not. This can include children and your little dog, too! So desperate and backwards and evil, teh gays are.
Straight men and women dress in their specified rooms with those of their same gender because nothing weird is going to happen. Other guys won't check out other guys. Women too. There is less of a chance for sexy shit to go down. Less of a chance for sexual harassment.
Clean and simple. Safe. Neat. And celibate. Pure. You know. I mean, it's bad enough to get nekkid around anyone, but sometimes you just gotta. I mean, even back in the day the MTC had open showers. But who's to worry, you know? Just a bunch of guys or just a bunch of girls. Nothing's gonna happen.
Slumber parties, too. Keep 'em contained to girls or boys only and no sexy shit will go down. Probably.
Teh gays ruin all of this. And people would prefer, as illustrated by "don't ask don't tell," to remain ignorant. Because obvs once someone outs themselves, it opens the floodgates for sexy shit to go down.
"Oh, you're a lesbian? I've always wanted to try that, you know. Experiment."
"You're gay? So am I. Wanna visit my bunk tonight?"
Nobody wants that.
It goes beyond people being "uncomfortable," which is crap anyway. Heaven forbid somebody's sexuality make you uncomfortable. Heaven forbid you be uncomfortable period!
It's in the Constitution!...somewhere, I'm sure of it.
But is it any different than when a man catcalls a woman and makes her uncomfortable? Not so much. Boys will be boys after all.
Being of African, Native American or of Japanese descent used to make people uncomfortable, too, but most of us have gotten over that. Or so we like to think. You can add Mexican and Muslim (also those of Middle Eastern and East Indian descent) to the list. Anything other than Christian, too, but that's not race. Still, uncomfortable.
If they're not white, they're not right. If they're gay, stay the fuck away.
It's not just the LDS church that enjoys a black and white view of the world. Much of society likes things in their little, pretty, predictable boxes. We don't like to think of girls who like boy things (I was a HUGE tomboy as a kid and still remember an Oprah show where she thought tomboy indicated a future lesbian--from the tone of the show, I thought that might be a bad thing, generalization aside). But even that is ok-ay. As long as they grow out of it.
We REALLY don't like to think of boys who like girl things. Heaven. Fucking. Forbid.
So when we speak of things such as gender fluidity, sexual fluidity, it threatens those who are afraid and don't know any better. Insecure people.
While watching the movie Milk, I was struck by Harvey Milk's idea to encourage every queer boy and girl to come out to his or her family as to destigmatize the gay community. To show straight people that they're not animals. But that is asking a hell of a lot for a hell of a lot of people.
My step-FIL was part of the gay police at BYU back in the day, charged with keeping an eye out for any suspected gay people. Thankfully that doesn't go on anymore (?).
Anyway, once we make gays as regular as anybody else, as accepted, then we have to worry about sex more. What if Susie's best friend is a lesbian and they "experiment" while alone in Susie's room? I mean it's one thing to have a rule to keep a boy out of Susie's room, but what about her female best friend? CAN WE TRUST NOBODY ANYMORE?
What if Elder-so-and-so is gay and gets hard over his companion?
If we can't keep them away (and we can't, they're so goddamn stubborn with their Pride parade and all), we ought to at least silence them. Shame them. Guilt them. Tell them they're bad and their attractions are, if not sinful, potentially sinful. They are defected. It's a cross to bear. We'll kick them out from our families, our homes. We won't recognize their partners. We'll use sanitized terms such as SSA (Same Sex Attracted) instead of gay, lesbian, bisexual. HUMAN BEINGS equal in worth to straight people. We don't define straight people by their orientation (they're normal, after all), but we sure as hell define gay people by their orientation. We don't understand them and we sure as hell don't want to.
If anything else, let's just keep them quiet. Don't ask, don't tell. Ignorance is bliss.
Or, in the case of the Jezebel article I mentioned, make them out themselves to their roomies just in case somebody else might think they'll be jumped in the middle of the night.
Because straight people are never aggressive.
Besides, even if they are, it's okay. Especially if its a boy. They can't help themselves, either. But since they're straight, it's totes okay.
And if not okay, at least understood.