The process of development of adult sexual behavior from undifferentiated potentialities of an infant is a long and complex one. There is never a guarantee that the end result of the process will be a “normal” heterosexual one. The result is anything but uniform. Each society, however, approves or disapproves of certain sexual patterns and labels others are “deviant”. Aside from incest, some patterns are universally condemned. Sharply contrasting attitudes are found towards LGBT, Polygamy, and Prostitution. How these “deviant” sexual behaviors and also the attitude of the society towards them affect the mental health of the people is a relevant question!
The case for the Lesbian Wedding cake.
Much like Moses’ staff, the modern debate over LGBT issues has the power to part the world into two halves. People love to play judge, jury and executioners in the orientation debate. Statistics suggest that as many as seventy-four percent of LGBT youth are verbally harassed for their orientation while nearly sixteen percent are physically assaulted. You’ve got to express what is taboo in you… And share your freak with the rest of us. Cause it’s a beautiful thing… Is homosexuality a “sickness”? In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association dropped Homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. On the eve of December 14th, 1973, those who were homosexual were sick. The next morning, they were sick no more. As successful as the LGBT activism and their insistence that “LGBT is good!” got over time, it failed to answer some questions very crucial to its making a place in the world. And as hard-lined the religious response to it became with time, they failed to put to practice their own doctrine of “loving” disagreement. I personally argue that the LGBT activism is essentially a war against the institution of marriage. The fundamental idea of marriage – monogamous, self-sacrificial, and between the sexes – is biblical. LGBT “marriages” do not qualify for that category. So either a homosexual relationship or a marriage can be had, not both. The LGBT insistence on marriage (or the pretense of it!) is one of the leading reasons for the hostility of the other half of the world towards them. So, is LGBT good? Depression is said to be affecting LGBT people at rates higher than the heterosexual population, and LGBT youths are more likely than heterosexual students to indulge into high levels of drug use and feelings of depression. Suicide is the third leading cause of death among people aged 10 to 24 in the US. LGBT youths in grades 7-12 are twice as likely to attempt suicide as their heterosexual peers.
The “Right” to go to any bathroom one pleases.
What was earlier referred to as Gender Dysphoria is now hailed as Transgenderism. The “T” in the LGBT – Transgenderism – supposedly the next phase of gay rights revolution, is now a cool thing. In contrast with other movements, say feminism, for instance, the gay rights revolution was able to achieve far more than the rest in a considerably shorter time span. How were they able to do it? By claiming that not only is it normal, but also good. Is Transgenderism good? It is damaging and riddled with despairing contradictions. People, even children, are the gender they prefer to be – is the claim. No. You misunderstood me! They are the sex they are, but they are the gender they claim. Jibin was born a male but felt like a female, so sexually Jibin is a male, but her gender is female. Since Jibin is merely 5 years old, her parents have decided to put her on medication to delay puberty so both – Jibin and her parents can decide if Jibin is going to feel that way forever and then proceed with a sexual reassignment surgery. Damaging and mutilating body parts that were otherwise normal only to bring them in alignment with what one feels is now being celebrated as a victory. The absurdity of transgenderism lies in its biological interference. Scientist and TV presenter Lord Robert Winston warns that the implications of gender reassignment surgery are not properly understood, with many operations ending in complications and people’s fertility left permanently damaged. He says 40 percent of people who undergo vaginal reconstruction surgery experience complications as a result, and many need further surgery, and 23 percent of people who have their breasts removed “feel uncomfortable with what they’ve done”. The seeds of gender confusion are being sowed, entertained, and nurtured now more than they have ever been in history. Author of the book Women vs Feminism Dr. Joanna Williams claims that “time, effort and money” is being especially allocated to “monitoring” transgender policies that are “out of all proportion” to the number of children who identify as transgender. She makes a point that that feminists are attempting to restructure school policies on gender – that children were being forced to “unlearn” the difference between boys and girls. To support a transgender child would have been one thing, but to encourage other children to consider transgenderism by training them to question and negate their very built is ridiculous. What are we heading to? And where are we leading our children to? Sexual revolutionaries and Gender revisionists themselves don’t really know what they’re leading the world towards. Yet they invite us and our children in full confidence to follow them towards the cliff and jump. This post is purely opinionated and subject to criticism. Debating is highly encouraged and opposing views on the subject matter and the logic therein are warmly welcomed in the comments section below.
I was directed to this website by someone I care deeply about and respect highly. I came with an open mind but seem to have encountered a Christian group who want to invite discussion and present unbiased journalism. This article was very disappointing, in that sense. Gender identity issues are highly complicated, and someone who is NOT an expert should not be spreading personal opinions on the subject. Words like “cliff”, “ridiculous”, and other terms shows a clearly disparaging and judgemental tone without any effort to present the ‘other’ side of the coin with any objectivity. No one will engage in these debates and discussions if they feel, right off the bat, that they are speaking to morally conservative and, by extension, morally superior and judgemental people. I highly endorse the establishment of a forum where everyone can express views and engage in healthy debates about these important issues. However, the way that people are invited to do so needs to be much much more sensitive, objective, and respectful of different views and backgrounds.
1. Let me begin by requesting you to not view the post from an angle of “morally conservative” “morally superior” “Christian” criticism because that makes not even two percent of it. The conjectures are essentially psychological – social, and loaded with statistics!
2. “Someone who is NOT an expert should not be spreading personal opinions on the subject.” – I rather say the post is opinionated not so personally but is a collective outlook of several experts on the subject who you may find mentioned therein.
3. As for the post, a commentary offers one (and usually shared!) frame of mind. It was intended to be highly expository on purpose, and in no way persuasive. To present the other side of the coin “objectively”, especially while, like you said “gender identity issues are highly complicated” and there’s little objectivity to it, would make it more of an essay.
In case, you do see an objective angle, please go ahead posting it here. As I see it, healthy arguments offer great antithetical perspectives and have offered greatly to turning tables in history.
Shikha Phillips
November 29, 2018 @ 01:05
Eloquently written! I’m in total agreement to this.
Ashmita Rai
December 4, 2018 @ 16:19
Thanks, Shikha! 🙂
Ayesha Prasad
July 3, 2019 @ 20:58
I was directed to this website by someone I care deeply about and respect highly. I came with an open mind but seem to have encountered a Christian group who want to invite discussion and present unbiased journalism. This article was very disappointing, in that sense. Gender identity issues are highly complicated, and someone who is NOT an expert should not be spreading personal opinions on the subject. Words like “cliff”, “ridiculous”, and other terms shows a clearly disparaging and judgemental tone without any effort to present the ‘other’ side of the coin with any objectivity. No one will engage in these debates and discussions if they feel, right off the bat, that they are speaking to morally conservative and, by extension, morally superior and judgemental people. I highly endorse the establishment of a forum where everyone can express views and engage in healthy debates about these important issues. However, the way that people are invited to do so needs to be much much more sensitive, objective, and respectful of different views and backgrounds.
Ashmita Rai
December 7, 2019 @ 21:53
Hello Ayesha, and welcome to Sowers!
1. Let me begin by requesting you to not view the post from an angle of “morally conservative” “morally superior” “Christian” criticism because that makes not even two percent of it. The conjectures are essentially psychological – social, and loaded with statistics!
2. “Someone who is NOT an expert should not be spreading personal opinions on the subject.” – I rather say the post is opinionated not so personally but is a collective outlook of several experts on the subject who you may find mentioned therein.
3. As for the post, a commentary offers one (and usually shared!) frame of mind. It was intended to be highly expository on purpose, and in no way persuasive. To present the other side of the coin “objectively”, especially while, like you said “gender identity issues are highly complicated” and there’s little objectivity to it, would make it more of an essay.
In case, you do see an objective angle, please go ahead posting it here. As I see it, healthy arguments offer great antithetical perspectives and have offered greatly to turning tables in history.