Oscar Wilde was sent to jail. Not for all the insults and caustic remarks he threw about willy-nilly, but for where he put his willy. In those days, gay sex was illegal in the UK and it still was until really quite recently.
If he was alive now he would no doubt be delighted to find that his private preferences for parking his privates are nobody’s concern. However, he would no doubt join Twitter and soon end up back in jail anyway. Some people were always destined to be the ones who just can’t win.
The Nazis hated gays so much that they gassed them to death – along with everyone else they didn’t like who happened to be within reach. For those further away, they invented railway guns and rockets so they could kill them from afar. Basically, they didn’t like anyone. In context then, the Nazi anti-gay campaign probably wasn’t personal, it was just that the gays were in the group known as ‘Someone Else’ which was to be utterly eradicated.
Britain furrowed its brow at the death camps and said ‘Oooh, no, dashed poor show, old chaps’ and then shot all the Nazis to deter them from doing it again. Much was made of the large Jewish component of the death camps and yes, they were by far the biggest group but they were not the only ones. Gay people died too. And others.
In the UK at that time, it was still illegal. Gays were still going to jail for being gay. A chap you might have heard of, by the name of Turing, was chemically castrated for being gay after the war – even though he was instrumental in winning it. Maybe that’s why the non-Jewish component of those camps was quietly brushed aside. The fate of gays in the rest of the world was perhaps less brutally final, but not really all that much better.
Anyway, eventually most of the civilised world realised that, while they might not approve of what consenting adults get up to in private, as long as they are consenting and keep it private, why should anyone care? I read recently about men who like to dress up in latex woman-suits complete with painted eyes. There were pictures. Damn, it’s creepy! But then, if that’s what floats their boat, it’s not really harming anyone else, is it? Not unless an unsuspecting window cleaner falls off his ladder.
If that gay agenda had stopped there it should have been okay. It didn’t. Rainbow flags appeared. ‘Gay rights’ which are somehow over and above the rights of anyone else also appeared. If I go to a guest house with a loose floozy and ask for a double room (nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more) and they tell me to begone and never again sully their premises with my amoral presence, well, I’d just have to take loose floozy elsewhere. Round the back of the gasworks again. Yet when the same happens to two gay men, they get compensation and the guest house gets a hate campaign. Is that equality?
Now, I know this is not the fault of gay people in general, any more than the moves to make Christian festivals vanish has anything to do with most Muslims. There was a case in Aberdeen where a bunch of Righteous tried to rename Easter in case it offended Muslims. The local mosques publicly stated that this was a ridiculous idea and had nothing to do with them. In this case at least, the Muslims stood up at once and said ‘Oh no, you are not pinning this one on us. It’s your own idiots who are behind this, not ours’.
Of course, all this ‘offends the Muslims’ crap has nothing to do with Muslims. It’s all about control. Petty little controls. Using the ‘do you dare risk being called Islamophobic’ lever to get that first notch into the ratchet.
As with the smoking and drinking and overweight and climate change and all the rest of it. None are about what they appear to be about. It’s all about incremental control. So is the gay agenda – which has nothing to do with gays.
It’ll come as a surprise to some but, just like smokers, gay people are human like you and me. They just like to live their lives differently. Personally I can see nothing attractive in the male body at all, it looks like a flat slab with a saggy bit between its legs that resembles some gristle a shark threw up. No curves or soft bits. Guys who want some favour done for free can do the ‘big eyes’ at me all day long and all they’ll get are more imaginative insults and maybe a poke in the eye. Girls… I can hold out for at least 30 seconds on a good day.
India ‘decriminalised’ gays in 2009. Their law against it dated back to the British occupation, apparently, because back then it was deemed to frighten the horses. I find that hard to believe. A horse frightened by the sight of a human man’s whacker? I rather suspect the average horse would, if confronted by such a sight, give out a pitying whinny and maybe a hearty laugh.
No mention of whether India’s pre-British culture allowed, penalised or stoned to death their gay members. I’m not getting into that one here, it’ll turn this post into another bloody book.
Anyway, in 2009, India decided not to prosecute people for something that wasn’t a crime and just let adults get on with poking their whatevers whereever.
Now they have decided to go back to insisting on the one true insertion method. The one that has resulted in a disastrous overpopulation problem. Why? Why does anyone care what the folk next door do when the lights go out? Hell, I have neighbours I have not set eyes on for many months and who might be dead for all I know or care (in one case, hope) and I honestly don’t care if they dress up as Teletubbies and have sex with every appliance in their kitchen while chanting Gregorian monk chants and slapping a melon with a haddock.
Although… if I could get film of that I could make a fortune on YouTube…
The punishment in India for a guy who likes to have sex with guys is to be locked up for ten years in… a building full of locked-in guys. Maybe it’s just me, but I have to wonder if that’s a punishment. Is it a stick or a carrot? I suppose, at a pinch, either will do.
But is it really about the gays? A clue –
UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay, told media the decision violated international law and was ‘significant step backwards for India’.
Hmm… doesn’t India have the right to decide for itself which way is forwards and which is back?
Meanwhile, in Uganda, they have come up with a crime called ‘aggravated homosexuality’ which is difficult to picture. It’s a bit like arresting someone for being black, letting them off with a warning not to do it again and then re-arresting them and jailing them for being a persistent offender. If you are a gay man in Uganda you face being locked up for life in a big house full of locked-in sex-starved men. It must be terrifying. (Yes I am being flippant. It’s what I do).
Why? What difference does it make to Uganda if a few blokes prefer the tradesmen’s entrance? It makes no difference to me. Well, it does, a bit. Those gay men tend to be well groomed and stylish and good looking. I am happy that they are not my competition and will be on hand to comfort all the poor wee lassies who they reject.
On the face of it, it’s all stupid. But there is a much bigger hint as to the ‘why’ in the Uganda story.
President Museveni said in a statement released on Friday that countries ‘should relate with each other on the basis of mutual respect and independence.’
‘Africans do not seek to impose their views on anybody,’ Museveni said in the statement, which was published in the government-controlled New Vision as a response to U.S. criticism of the bill.
‘We do not want anybody to impose their views on us. This very debate was provoked by Western groups who come to our schools and try to recruit children into homosexuality. It is better to limit the damage rather than exacerbate it.’
The gay agenda went too far for these countries. They were fine with ‘they aren’t bothering you, leave them alone’ but that is never enough for any of these groups. Not for antismokers or antidrink or antisalt or antisugar or anything else. They had to push and push and push and this is the result. A severe retaliation.
Again, I say this has nothing to do with gay people. Like Muslims, they are being used as an excuse to impose an incremental control system.
If it could have stopped at ‘Look, these people aren’t hurting anyone, stop persecuting them’ then there would have been progress.
It could not have stopped there. It was never intended to. All it ever was, was another notch on the ratchet. The cause was irrelevant, as it is every time. It’s only ever been about control.
India and Uganda are not doing this because they hate gays (okay, maybe not just because) but because they see the ratchet being notched again. It’s control from outside being imposed on their countries and they are fighting back. Yes, it means some of their own people will suffer (assuming they actually enforce these laws – they don’t need to, their point is made) but if they let the outside control keep clicking the ratchet then all their people will suffer. Including the gay ones.
Interesting times ahead, I think.