The Gay, the Gay & the Transsexual: 3 New Words Learnt, New Perspective Gained

Posted on April 9, 2007
Filed Under General Thoughts, Personal, Culture, Sex/Sexuality |

NOTE: Contained here within this post are my personal thoughts and opinions. I honestly don’t mean to offend anybody with what I’m about to say. I don’t have the intention to. This is Drima just being Drima. Enjoy! Your comments are welcome.

Sudanese Culture, Homosexuality & My Personal Opinion

In Sudanese culture, homosexuality is a big gigantic red no and is regarded as a pretty huge crime. It is not tolerated at all. If any man dared to walk down the streets of Khartoum advertising the fact that he’s gay or even slightly feminine, he would most certainly get beaten up. Yeah, I mean like literally beaten up, as in smacked in the face, punched in the nose, kicked in the stomach and thrown with a few bricks. He’ll probably get killed! (Hell, even the simple act of shaving your moustache in Sudan is considered something totally unmanly)!

I don’t regard homosexuality as something normal and I don’t think it should be “normalized”. As offensive as that statement may sound to some people, I don’t intend for it to be so. I really don’t. Vagina + Penis = Baby. That’s how it’s intended to be. The norm is attraction between male and female. Penis and penis aren’t the norm and while the naughty guy in me may fantasize about the idea of vagina and vagina, I also believe that it’s not the norm. The 2 purposes of sex are procreation and enjoyment. Homosexual sex can result in enjoyment but it won’t result in procreation. Maybe that’s why homosexuality is regarded as a major sin in many religions. If today we all turned homosexual, the existence of the human race will eventually come to an end.

Now I understand that some of you have trouble reading the above. It might seem too simplistic to you but it isn’t to me. Sure, homosexuality is something that exists in the animal kingdom but so what? We’re different from animals. We’re different because we were blessed with conscience, the freedom to do right or wrong and the freedom to think freely. I’m sure Darwin and Richard Dawkins would super disagree with me though.

There might be another reason some of you have trouble with my opinion. If I’m saying that homosexuality isn’t the norm, then wouldn’t that imply I think gays are abnormal? The answer is yes. Allow me to elaborate but before I do please keep in mind that I’m not using the word “abnormal” in a derogatory sense (at least not in most cases).

The Causes of Homosexuality: Nature, Nurture or Both?

There doesn’t seem to be a clear answer. Some researchers point towards nurture, some towards nature and others point towards both. Personally I don’t know. I’m not a scientist but I am open to arguments from the nature perspective. My stance is lenient towards people who have an odd sexuality that occured as a result of nature.

You can’t really blame them for being that way can you? I can’t. If they were born that way then it’s not their fault now is it? Some gay men claim that since they were little kids, they’ve always known that they didn’t like girls. Others claim that they’re women stuck inside men’s bodies. How can you explain that? Does it have to do with some kind of hormonal unbalance? I don’t really know and that’s why I remain very open to scientific arguments from the nature perspective. Not so long ago hermaphrodites were treated like outcasts in society. They were looked down upon and were considered abnormal (in a derogatory sense). I’m absolutely against that. Sure, their condition is an abnormality. A baby is supposed to be born with 10 fingers and 10 toes but it is simply wrong to outcast a baby born with 9 fingers and 23 toes. The analogy might not be completely accurate but I hope you get the idea.

According to research from the nurture perspective, some people turn gay due to unfortunate childhood experiences which include sexual abuse. I am quite open to such ideas but not as open as I am to arguments from the nature perspective. Sure, getting sexually harassed during childhood is a very nasty experience but it doesn’t mean it’s an excuse to turn gay. Not all men who get locked up in jail for many years turn gay. Only some do.

There are some cases however whereby nurture “arguments” will do nothing to change my mind. Example? I know a guy who turned gay about a year and a half ago. The reason? He got dumped for the third time in a row by a girl he was deeply and madly in love with. What a pathetic reason, absolutely pathetic. Now that’s what I’ll refer to as abnormal in a derogatory sense.

Some Essential Background

Amongst my close friends, making fun or being hateful towards other people’s religions is something unacceptable (Scientology is an exception). Racism is also something generally unacceptable although a minority of close friends could be classified as mild racists and a few others (2 actually) as unfortunately super racists (you know, the kind who believe that a good Jew, or at least a “media shaped” good Jew is a dead Jew). However there’s one thing that’s generally quite “acceptable” and that’s making fun of gay people and using terms like “faggots” to describe them. Yup, you read that right.

All of us haven’t really had any “pleasant” encounters with gay people or transsexuals. In fact the only gay/transsexual people we bumped into, or that bumped into us, have always been the really loud obnoxious annoying type, that love to make freaky comments such as pointing at me or one of my friends and shouting in their “feminine wannabe” voices “oh my God, you’re so cute”. My immediate reaction would always be “yuck! Damn you, stop harassing us, you freaky abnormal weirdoes”. What’s worse is when the transsexuals try to approach. Good thing they back off. Oh thank the Lord they always do, otherwise I swear I’ll end up beating one of them in these coming days and I might actually break his (her?) neck. Okay maybe I won’t but you get the idea.

As you can imagine, we developed a wonderful hostility towards gay and transsexual people. Or to be more accurate, most of us didn’t develop any hostility at all, we simply enhanced it further (way further), given the fact that we came from cultural backgrounds which regard homosexuality as something absolutely unacceptable and forbidden.

The Incident

Last week’s Sunday night was pretty unique for one main reason. (No, I didn’t get drunk and find myself in the morning in bed with a gay dude. Oh no, thanks but no thanks. Drima is straight, very straight. In fact he’s as straight as an arrow. He also doesn’t drink). Here’s what happened. Last week’s Sunday night K, a new friend of mine brought me along to his friend’s party where I ended up having an interesting conversation with 2 gay dudes and one transsexual. All three are fashion designers.

I was extremely uncomfortable in the beginning and felt like cursing my friend but I convinced myself to remain respectful since I was a guest. At first, I conversed with everyone except the transsexual. After a while, the party got going when the host started blasting some really good old school hip hop music. Eventually we all conversed, laughed and joked around until I completely forgot the fact that 2 of the guys were gay and one was a transsexual. It didn’t bother me much anymore. Unlike previous cases, they didn’t try to hit on me and they didn’t make any flirtatious moves which was obviously a very good thing. As a result, I learned three new fashion words. Cetour, retro and bohemian (did I spell them right?). Moreover I started thinking and I gained a new perspective.

You’ve got 2 persons:

a) A guy who’s straight but steals money from friends, doesn’t give to charity and is racist.

And

b) A guy who’s gay, is loyal to his friends, gives to a lot to charity and vehemently opposes racism.

As much as you may disagree with it, you can’t simply discredit (b) as immoral simply based on his homosexuality.

Having spent some of my childhood in conservative Qatar, I never one day thought I would have atheist friends. Some of the coolest and nicest people I’ve gotten to know since then are atheists. I remain in contact with most of them.

Having been exposed to only crazy annoying gays and transsexuals, I never thought that one day I’d actually have a decent and enjoyable conversation with any of them.

PS: Which public toilets do transsexuals use? I’ve always wondered. Women’s or men’s? Oh ya and strangely I have 2 friends who are bisexual. They’re both girls!

Comments

16 Responses to “The Gay, the Gay & the Transsexual: 3 New Words Learnt, New Perspective Gained”

  1. Roman Kalik on April 9th, 2007 5:44 pm

    Heh, good post, but first thing’s first. Scientology does not even deserve the honor of being an exception to your rule, as it’s not a religion. Fanatical cult and pyramid scheme, yes, but NOT a religion.

    Now, back to the topic at hand. While I’m hardly a fan of homosexuality, gay people are first and foremost PEOPLE. That’s an important thing to realize.

    Oh, and as for your friend who decided he’s gay, pity the fool. He’s a little amusing, mind.

  2. Andrew Brehm on April 9th, 2007 10:30 pm

    “Heh, good post, but first thing’s first. Scientology does not even deserve the honor of being an exception to your rule, as it’s not a religion. Fanatical cult and pyramid scheme, yes, but NOT a religion.”

    That is something Judaism, Christianity, and Islam can agree on. And I agree too. When I read about the birth of Cruise’s baby some news paper said that the couple were following the “traditions of Scientology” regarding the birth. What traditions? The organisation is 50 years old. They don’t have “traditions”. Their “traditions” are being followed by the first or second generation of their members now.

    “Now, back to the topic at hand. While I’m hardly a fan of homosexuality, gay people are first and foremost PEOPLE. That’s an important thing to realize.”

    Gay Jews are Jews who violate one of the laws (if they are active). They are like Jews who eat pork or Jews who eat meat and milk products together. Since their crime is one against G-d and not other people, we have no business in doing anything about them, unless we doubt G-d’s ability to act against them should He feel the need.

    If a non-Jew is gay, he might be violating a Noahide commandment, depending on how you read them. But who cares as long as there is no victim?

    Judaism has traditionally had a string position against homosexuality because the Pagan Greeks practised it. But at the end homosexuals are simply people that do something that some people believe is forbidden. Heck, I know Christians who eat meat on Fridays. Who cares?

    “Oh, and as for your friend who decided he’s gay, pity the fool. He’s a little amusing, mind.”

    I don’t know if homosexuality is something one is born with or not. I assume it’s like liking pork and shell fish. I cannot say that I like shell fish, hence not eating shell fish is, for me, an easy rule to follow.

  3. Mark on April 10th, 2007 1:40 am

    Yeah I agree with Andrew. I cannot think of a way in which a person’s homosexuality can hurt someone else. For that reason leave it up to God to judge whether they are wicked or not.

  4. Roman Kalik on April 10th, 2007 6:45 am

    By the way, Scientology focuses on celebreties for a reason. It’s all about creating role models for the dumb masses, which means more money for the crazy biddies who used to serve Hubbard when he was alive. Hell, enlightenment is a commodity in the Church of Scientology, or rather removing your mental blocks to make you super-human.

    Hubbard should’ve stayed a science-fiction writer, instead of turning his science-fiction and drug-hallucinations into a religion. But he wanted yet more money.

  5. Roman Kalik on April 10th, 2007 7:12 am

    Make that ‘into a “religion”. I must stay consistent in my ridicule, after all.

    And like with any cult, Scientology doesn’t really have a second-generation, more like an ever-shifting first generation.

  6. Andrew Brehm on April 10th, 2007 11:30 am

    A country’s position on homosexuality is usually a good sign for how civilised a country is.

    To get a very quick idea of whether a country is a good place to live or not, I often check on the status of homosexuals in it in Wikipedia.

    Death penalty for homosexuality: country is completely uncivilised.

    Prison terms for homosexuality: country is unreformed but hopeful, doesn’t appreciate irony.

    Homosexuality technically illegal but no real penalty: country became more liberal but something stopped them.

    Legal but not understood as something one openly admits to: civilised but conservative country.

    Legal and open: civilised and moderate country.

    Partnerships registered with similar rights to marriage: civilised and efficient country. (This level can also be between “legal and open” and “legal but not…” above.)

    Registered with equal rights to marriage: civilised but liberal.

    Gay marriage: country went overboard to prove how progressive it has become.

    I would travel to any country but “death penalty” ones. (Those countries tend to have the death penalty for Judaism or an apartheid system in place too.)

    I would live in any country below technical illegal level.

    And I prefer a country between moderate and conservative, possibly with civil unions that are not a marriage.

    (In fact I think government should only register civil unions and have people marry each other according to their religion once the civil union is licensed.)

  7. The Raccoon on April 10th, 2007 11:46 am

    You know, I can’t see what the whole issue is about. Why should you care what consensual acts people do in their bedrooms? It’s not like we’re talking cannibals or something - it’s just people fucking. A question of harmless personal preferences, like choice of favorite food.

    Would you invest so much thought in people who like a dish you would never eat?

  8. Andrew Brehm on April 10th, 2007 12:49 pm

    “Would you invest so much thought in people who like a dish you would never eat?”

    If they eat it at home? No.

    But I would be worried if it was illegal to eat it and annoyed if that particular dish would be promoted too much.

  9. aaron on April 10th, 2007 4:55 pm

    Drima - I can’t help but shake the feeling that I get from your last sentence though. It’s like when someone in my country says,” I’m not racist, I have a friend who’s black.”

    ;) More kidding than anything, good thoughts though.

  10. halalhippie on April 10th, 2007 9:55 pm

    Tip my hat to ya Drima, you’re trying your best to expand.
    Now, you” don’t regard homosexuality as something normal and don’t think it should be “normalized”.
    Normal is as “normal” people do. In that respect homosexuality is not normal. But neither are freckles. Both are a fact of Creation. Apart from your disillusioned friend, ppl don’t choose to be gay. It’s a fact, might as well accept it.

    (And it’s not a Muslim thing: in Jamaica being gay is deadly “Boom bye bye in a batty man ‘ead - Buju nuh promote no nasty man ‘ im a fe dead”)

    I’m afraid in DK we “went overboard to prove how progressive” we are. Gays can marry - even in a church if they can find a cleric who’ll perform the wedding.

    Ironically in DK there are more lesbian women than observant/hijab-clad Muslim women. :-)

  11. nominally challenged on April 11th, 2007 11:59 am

    Hmm. So long as rights equivalent to those of married couples are granted, I agree that there’s not necessarily any need for gay or lesbian couples to marry in religious ceremonies, but they might want to. There’s no accounting for what people might want to do. And if they want to, then why shouldn’t they? For my part, I don’t think that gays ought to legitimize religion - so often our oppressor - by voluntarily undertaking religious ceremonies. I personally will never afford any religion that endorsement. In my view, the religions don’t deserve it.

    But some people want the whole ceremony thing. Tacky as it is.

    As for the rest of the post, Drima knows my opinion and for the moment, I’m content to just sit back and read the comments :)

  12. Mekah Gordon, PhD, L. E. on April 12th, 2007 4:39 am

    It’s not even a debate anymore.

    The biological factors, all point to a variable distribution of hormones to the brain, while the fetus is still in utero.
    Hence, the amount of a Female/Male ratio of the hormonal wash over the brain, attributes to the child growing up with either a “Male,”
    “Female,” or brain, regardless of visual gender at birth.

    The only acceptance to this biological circumstance, is that of the Intersexed child.
    A child born with the characteristic genitalia of both Male & Female, needs to grow into maturity, before any decisions are made to alter the genitalia,
    one way or another.
    The child, will eventually determine themselves, how they gender identify.

    Under NO circumstances, should a Doctor, or Surgeon, make a decision for the parents, nor try to convince either of them, that “It be best for the child!”
    Doing so, is completely unethical, and extremely dangerous, for the health, & well being of any Intersexed infant.

  13. Mekah Gordon, PhD, L. E. on April 12th, 2007 5:02 am

    Hence, the amount of a Female/Male ratio of the hormonal wash over the brain, attributes to the child growing up with either a “Male,”
    “Female,” or brain, regardless of visual gender at birth.

    Should have read as:

    Hence, the amount of a Female/Male ratio of the hormonal wash over the brain, in effect, “Hard Wires” the human brain as either “Male,”
    “Female,” or Gender Variant.

    The Gender Variance, is usually characterized by being born Gay, Lesbian, BiSexual, or identifiable, under the Transgender umbrella.

    No one “Chooses” to be either/or, it’s a matter of the numerous anomalies in Humans, & Nature, due to the mysteries of the brain.

  14. Rihab on April 14th, 2007 10:02 pm

    We regard things as normal depending on how accustomed we have become to them, for example, in a Muslim country the notion of a man having more than one wife is regarded as normal, whereas in a non-Muslim country it is regarded as abnormal. Straight men holding hands is normal in many Arab countries, in many non-Arab countries it would be odd if they aren’t gay. So “normality” is simply whatever you got used to over time in which case “normal” is a very relative term.

    As far as the issue of procreation, true, gays can’t reproduce but realistically the world never was and never will be 100% homosexual, and in the same way, the world never was and never will be 100% heterosexual - so humanity disappearing never was and never will be threatened by homosexuality. I’m not sure that the purpose of every relationship is procreation, nor do all heterosexual couples necessarily have the ability to procreate so logically that can’t be a reason to state that homosexuality goes against nature, otherwise that would make heterosexual couples who can’t procreate unnatural too. Perhaps both are natures way of maintaining some form of population control.

    I don’t regard gays any more unnatural/immoral/weirder than anyone else, and I wouldn’t judge them any differently than I would someone straight because ultimately, as Raccoon said, what goes on between two consenting adults in their bedroom is their business.

  15. sokari on April 20th, 2007 5:55 am

    Last weeks Pambazuka Review of African Blogs:

    http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/blog/40723

  16. The Sudanese Thinker » Reactions To The Gay Post on April 21st, 2007 12:25 pm

    […] I’m talking about this one. The comments were interesting to read. I especially liked this one by Rihab: We regard things as normal depending on how accustomed we have become to them, for example, in a Muslim country the notion of a man having more than one wife is regarded as normal, whereas in a non-Muslim country it is regarded as abnormal. Straight men holding hands is normal in many Arab countries, in many non-Arab countries it would be odd if they aren’t gay. So “normality” is simply whatever you got used to over time in which case “normal” is a very relative term. […]

Leave a Reply