The Straight/Not Straight Trap

I’ve been writing for a while now about how I find the notions of “straight” or “something not straight” opposed to man’s dignity. I find the separation of sexuality into those two camps to be a rather insidious trap that’s been foisted on society, especially for young people.

If, for example, a boy finds some sort of attraction for a guy in his gym class that stirs within him during adolescence, or he finds himself aroused by a movie star oozing masculinity on the big screen, it means that whatever he are, he is something other than “straight.”

I’ve never seen it put that way in any sort of publication until just today.

The Pew Research Center put out a study a few years back on LGBT issues and this line I found intriguing:

The survey finds that 12 is the median age at which lesbian, gay and bisexual adults first felt they might be something other than heterosexual or straight.

The bifurcation of mankind into “straight” or “something other than heterosexual or straight” is something towards which the Church needs to be a sign of contradiction.

As the Compendium on the Social Doctrine of the Church says,

Faced with theories that consider gender identity as merely the cultural and social product of the interaction between the community and the individual, independent of personal sexual identity without any reference to the true meaning of sexuality, the Church does not tire of repeating her teaching: “Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.”

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “The Straight/Not Straight Trap

  1. It is a perfectly normal feeling to have an attraction to one’s own gender at ANY age, and be perfectly straight. It’s the lie that is hissed at us, again, at any age, that tries to convince us that if we have those feelings then we must be something other than straight. It’s also completely natural for men to eyeball men, size them up, it’s our natural instinct to check out the competition, especially if there are females in the room. Boys, Men generally prefer to be with their own gender. It’s going beyond our limitations in which God has ordained that if a man lays with another man, it is an abomination. Laying down with another man has no sin in itself. The passage denotes “knowing” in the same knowledge as a man having intercourse with a woman. The impressionable years are between 9-12 years of age. If the boy or girl hasn’t had any type of affection from either parent, he is already been set up to receive anyone who is willing to offer it to him, even at the cost of losing his virginity. I am attracted to my male gender, not for sexual pleasure, but I prefer to be with a man over a woman. Women for some odd reason scare me. I think it’s because I don’t like the idea of being controlled. I digress

    • I heard a study a while ago that said that men look at men’s chests more than women do. To your point that men are always sizing up men. I think you’re exactly right there. And, to your digression, I get the fear of women controlling me. It’s a big reason why I’m not keen on a relationship with a woman either. I can be, and am attracted to some women, from an aesthetic sense: I recognize that particular woman as a beautiful woman, but wishing to have a relationship with one is a very different thing altogether.

      • I agree that men are always sizing up other men, but I think with men who are other-sex oriented, it is instinctual, split-second, and probably barely registers on a conscious level. For me, checking out another man’s chest is not an exercise in “who’s the Alpha here,” but something different entirely. Nothing can reduce me back to feeling like a 12 year old boy quite like the presence of a strong, confident male. And oddly enough, I desire and fantasize quite strongly about a long term relationship with a woman. But when the rubber hits the road and I am faced with a potential sexual situation with a woman, I freeze, panic, and am reduced to feeling like a 12 year old boy again. I think for me, both these scenarios, checking out men and fantasizing about women, are desires of reparation.

        Congrats on the book and I look forward to your solo effort. Good to see you blogging again also: I think Courage Online has really gone down hill so my opportunities of finding like-minded are getting slim.

      • There is a Courage Facebook page–I think since the advent of Facebook, a lot of online messaging forums have gone down hill, just because FB seems a better interface. Look for Courage On Call.

        Thanks for the comments and your thoughts. I suppose I don’t really think in terms of “reparation” generally, speaking personally anyway. But I get what you’re saying.

  2. Your quote from the Compendium of Social Doctrine of the Church can be interpreted quite differently depending on the meaning of the term “one’s sexual identity.” Is “one’s sexual identity” self-created? Created by interacton with others? Or is it God-given, dependent on which physical body one has been assigned?

    • It can’t be interpreted as something that is “self-created,” since that is not a part of Catholic thinking. It is the God-given physical body that one has that is what is meant by one’s “sexual identity.” Notice this quote from Benedict that uses the phrase “self-created”:

      ” If something is wrong in our relationship with reality, then we must all reflect seriously on the whole situation and we are all prompted to question the very foundations of our culture. Allow me to dwell a little longer on this point. The importance of ecology is no longer disputed. We must listen to the language of nature and we must answer accordingly. Yet I would like to underline a point that seems to me to be neglected, today as in the past: there is also an ecology of man. Man too has a nature that he must respect and that he cannot manipulate at will. Man is not merely self-creating freedom. Man does not create himself. He is intellect and will, but he is also nature, and his will is rightly ordered if he respects his nature, listens to it and accepts himself for who he is, as one who did not create himself. In this way, and in no other, is true human freedom fulfilled.”

      We don’t have the freedom to “self-create” sexual identities. We are given them by God, and are called to accept and acknowledge them.

  3. This is a comment on the posts by the two men above my previous post. Being a woman, I recognize those two comments as being extremely “manly,” because almost all women with whom I have been acquainted are much more submissive than that. Very few of us go into a relationship with a man fearing that he might control us. We usually (or at least, the women of my day,) realize that the man will want to be the boss, and so we expect him to exercise biblical “headship,” if he is a Christian man. My two cents worth.

    • My Mother was quite submissive to dad only because he demanded it. If I was to marry any woman, it would be my Mother. She, under such hardship and cruelty of my father, was filled with grace and tenderness. After years of separation that my dad had created between us, we have now been reconciled since his death and she is my dearest and closest friend. If I were to desire the female sex, my Mother has set the standards so high that it’s impossible for any future bride to measure up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s