Why the Hatred?

I have never entirely understood hatred. I've studied it because lackluster villains induce comas not excitement. And because it confounds me frequently; the kind of thinking behind the most common types of hatred escapes me, the kind of hatred that is focused on what one is, rather than who.

Let me be clear, when I talk about "what one is," I'm talking about immutable and choice-driven aspects of a person that frequently engender a reaction, a judgement, in people that has nothing to do with actual characteristic. Male. Female. Asian. Black. Latino. Blonde. Short. Jewish. Christian. Athiest. Muslim. Tattooed. Old. Young. Tall. Gay. Straight. Rich. Poor. Tax collector. If you think any of these aspects gives you insight into the personality, the nuances of a person when you know nothing more about them than one of these aspects, you are a fool.

Which brings up the second kind of "what one is" that I prefer to think of as "who one is." Those are those aspects of one's personality as indicated by your behavior, the way you act (when people are and aren't looking) that determine who you really are as a person. Some are qualities, like being kind or tolerant or irascible or short-tempered. Some are "what's" determined by key things someone's done like spree sniper, rapist, serial killer. I'm not saying I know enough about someone just because he's a serial killer, mind you, that I can explain all his nuances, but I know enough to feel comfortable taking whatever steps necessary to keep him off the streets. But it's a different kind of what, one he's earned, unlike the others, because taking the lives of others for your own pleasure makes a pretty strong statement about what kind of person you are. You've demonstrated who you are. Another quick example. Being sexually attracted to children doesn't make you a monster; using children sexually, including contributing to demand for child pornography, does.

I hope that's clear enough for my purposes. Although I'm not a big hater, I can see hating people for what they've done, the who they are. But I have never understood, never embraced, hating anyone for what he or she is.

And that includes people who happen to be gay. Historically, homosexual folks have certainly seen their share of hatred and then some. Even in the Bible, they're treated pretty harshly (presumably one of the reasons Sodom bought it back then, though I've always wondered about Lot, considered a "good man" enough to be saved who offered his two virgin daughters to the slavering crowd of would be buggerers, apparently, hanging about his stoop. He did so to protect his guests, but I have to say, the definition of "good man" is just a bit off my own. But I digress...)

Actually, a huge portion of that antipathy can be traced to Abrahamian religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) as many primitive and cultures with other religions accept or ignore homosexuality without issue or even considered it perfectly natural. And, why not, it happens in nature, too. In cultures where it's prohibited, homosexuals have been ostracized, branded, killed out of hand, exiled, castrated, executed in particularly heinous ways, imprisoned, excommunicated, called sinners and generally considered "scum." The fear and vitriole associated with this particular crime/sin is often extreme and certainly seems so (to me, at least) today when so many other prejudices are looking more and more foolish and outdated.

Why?

I think Shakespeare touched on one reason. People like to look down on people who are different. Studies have been done to see how readily children will ostracize a particular physical trait (eye color, in the case I read) and they responded with little prompting to single "different" people out. History certainly provides plenty of evidence of people mistreating other people based on color or religion or ancestry or geographical location, so I think it would be foolish to dismiss that explanation out of hand.

And it is easy to condemn someone for a trait one will never have oneself. Whites looking down on blacks. Nazis looking down on Jews. Conquistadors looking down on heathens. Etc. The part that's challenging for me on that, though, is that most of those big prejudices were deliberately set up by people wanting to control others with patriotism, hatred and fear. There was a perceived gain by doing so.

Beliefs about the superiority of different skin tone and having a "true" religion allowed people to justify displacing and/or enslaving "heathens." Natives on two continents were exterminated or pushed aside while natives of another continent were forcibly brought in as slaves. Religious and racial superiority were used to justify such actions. Human nature, where one thinks one will feel better about oneself by thinking another is "lesser," played into that nicely and is the crux, I think, for this kind of hatred. Ironically, it doesn't work and, frequently the hatred goes on an ever increasing spiral to find more to hate because hating others does actually make you feel good. Or, at least, I've never actually seen a happy hater.

With all of  the ME3 religions (I'm calling them that because I hate typing out Christianity, Judaism and Islam every time and they were all started in the Middle East) condemning sodomy, homosexuality is a convenient thing, especially if you consider sexual orientation strictly voluntary, to hate in someone else especially if you feel yourself completely innocent of that particular failing, with never a possibility of "falling" to it.

But I don't think that's all. Part of the mechanism for instilling hatred against those that are different is instilling fear. Nazis called out that Jews were hoarding money while the regular Germans suffered with war reparations. Others insist letting black people into your neighborhood will contribute to crime and send property values spiraling down. With gays, there are several fears: fears that accepting homosexuality will pressure children into adopting it against their will and the fear, particularly with gay men, that gays are a rape risk for straight men and children.

The first fear seems demonstrably untrue, given that heterosexuals (many of them, not all) have been force-feeding that the only healthy romantic relationship is a heterosexual relationship for generations - and we still have gay people. Some of them might be in heterosexual relationship and subsequently unhappy, but we haven't fundamentally changed them.

As for the latter, I'm sure there have been gay rapists and pedophiles, but being gay makes you one no more than being a priest does. Rapists are about imposing power and domination over someone else which means gender is probably not an issue other than a woman is frequently perceived to be an easier target. If serial killers are any indication, the same goes for pedophiles (When reading about serial killers over the past century, I noticed that those that were picky about gender either went for (a) prostitutes - female or (b) vagrants - male. Those that wanted an easy target and didn't care about gender went for children. Sad but consistent). But reality isn't what we're talking about here; it's perception and that perception of gays being more dangerous to children, to "normal" people feeds the hatred, in my opinion.

In my opinion, it's the fear factor that make people who ordinarily would never treat another person poorly turn a blind eye to much of the discrimination that goes against gays and lesbians now.

But, I speculate that the worst, the most vocal and unyielding in their hatred, the ones who seem driven to share and spread the poisonous litany against homosexuality with a rabid fervor are those who aren't so secure, are the ones who have perhaps struggled against their own inclinations. Such individuals might be so vehement either because they need their hatred to make themselves "feel better" despite their embarrassing urges (since they aren't acting on them) or they scream the loudest in the hopes to makes sure no one ever suspects them of being gay. I don't think it's a coincidence many of the most vehement politicians, when it comes to slamming the doors on gays, often get caught up in homosexual scandals.

Those were the thoughts that crossed my mind when it came to explaining it, but I doubt they're exhaustive. Feel free to contribute your own thoughts including refutations of my own cogitation. The better I understand hate, the better I can fight it, in fiction and in real life.

Read more...

Ain't Nobody's Business

On the last post I pointed out one way (of many) that failing to legally recognize same-sex marriage hurts the people in question. I have, to date, never heard anything approaching a compelling argument on the harm caused by recognizing same sex marriage. Feel free to include your compelling reason in a comment if you'd like, but note that I'm apt to rebut and the level of sarcasm is inversely proportional to the intelligence of your reason. If you have a thoughtful well-reasoned reason, my answer, though likely counter, will be similarly thoughtful. (Note that anything religious as a reason is a null answer for legality as far as I'm concerned.)

If it's asinine, expect no gentleness. Consider yourself duly warned. I believe everyone is entitled to express his/her opinion and to live with the consequences of that expression, including ridicule if it's stupid enough. Just because everyone can state an opinion does not make those opinions of equal worth or veracity. I'm sick to death of readily disproved nonsense being trotted forward and given credence no matter how idiotic because we are all afraid of calling nonsense what it is in this world of free speech. I am willing to back my opinions with data and examples and logic. If you can't do the same, you might want to rethink airing it in this forum.

Note also that the subject at hand is "right to marry and legal sanctions against gays." People can find same-sex sex as personally distasteful as they like as long as they don't express said opinions by force or use them to discriminate. As soon as you use your opinion to cause harm, I lose all sympathy with your free speech. I'm sure that snuggling up to a big-breasted woman or a beefy hunk o' man turns the stomach of various members of the gay and lesbian community, but I've never heard of any pushing to make it illegal. Or even trying to convert anyone.

It would certainly be easier on most of them if they were straight; they're not because, well, they're not. And I think most of them consider their state immutable, a part of who they are. They don't want to deny themselves who they are; I don't think they should have to.

Anyway, I've digressed mightily from my original point (stupid soapbox!), which was examining what Shakespeare commented on the last post and my reply to her. There were two aspects. One was that people are born gay/straight. I've read some compelling evidence, genetically, that argues that can be true. I don't know if it's true for everyone who considers themselves gay, if people are always born one way or the other or if some aren't hardwired and can change direction over time. I don't see why it matters. People are individuals and genetics are pretty complicated; maybe there's more than one right answer. I can tell you one thing; far more people have experimented with the notion at one time in their life than will readily admit it. I did, and, though I'm quite firmly in the heterosexual camp, I don't regret it. And that's all I'm going to say on the matter for me personally.

But I think "the cause" is beside the  point. Whether you're gay because your physiology gives you little choice or whether you just like it like that, who should care? Some do, I know, because they want to "cure" it, but, since I don't have any interest in doing so, I don't care if you were born to be gay, if you were traumatized by someone of the opposite sex (or even your own) and that triggered your preference, if you happened across your same-sex soulmate and switched, or if you chose your sexual orientation with a drunken bout of darts.

Ain't none of my business, who someone else finds sexually attractive. Ain't none of yours either. Which leads to the second point. Why the hate?

Well, undoubtedly some are as Shakespeare noted, disgusted by the notion, convinced it is sinful or otherwise unnatural. However, the stigma attached to this particular "sin" is given a disproportionate amount of importance and reaction. I mean, Muslims and Jews both eschew pork and have for centuries (and for a far better reason), but when was the last time you heard of a pork farmer dragged behind the truck of irate rabbis?

I'm skeptical that the notion that someone is sinning (in ways that affect no one else in their daily lives, other than their lovers) would really engender this level of hatred and condemnation in most normal people given that few of us have gone through our lives without impinging on some of the commandments or sins of whatever religion we favor ourselves. I mean, shouldn't we be sin-free before we start gathering rocks? I know I'm not (sin-free or rock gathering).

I have my own ideas on why there's so much hatred here, theories, speculation and observations. But I'll save those for next time.

Read more...

Unequal Treatment

There are a number of people out there who have a considerable issue with homosexuality, often to the point of rabid ranting and even violence. I won't pretend to understand such vehement hatred, particularly given that whether or not someone loves (or is sexually attracted to) individual(s) of the same gender is unlikely to have the slightest effect on anyone other than the parties in question and, notably, is unlikely to have the tiniest effect on those same rabid haters.

Personally, I think this world never has too much love and don't see any reason why people can't go about finding it however they choose, as long as everyone involved is a responsible party and consenting. But that's just how I see it. I don't care if someone wants to see it differently, but that opinion (no matter how extreme) should not have an effect on the parties in question given that who people love in the gay/lesbian community has pretty much no effect on us.

I think most people think much more moderately than the vocal anti-gay community, whether it personally gives people the willies or not. Most people are not so ungenerous as to wish ill on others, even if they don't understand their sexual preferences. Or, I certainly hope that's the case. However, that laissez faire attitude is currently allowing real and appreciable harm to these same individuals.

In good conscience, I think it's important to be aware that, as long as our federal government refuses to acknowledge gay marriage, a sizable portion of our populace suffers real and appreciable damage, measurable damage, that effectively make them second-class citizens. People, who have done us no ill are suffering unnecessarily and to no benefit for the rest of us. I don't see why this should continue and thought I'd point out some of it, for those of you who might have thought this was a non-issue, one of semantics only.

Even if it were semantics only, of course, I'd be against it. Our government is expressly forbidden from making laws based on religion: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." And there is no legal reason adults couldn't choose any other consenting adult as a lifetime companion to marry. Ironically, it's the same yahoos yelling for smaller government that demand the government dictate who we are and aren't allowed to love (as well as wanting the government to dictate what pregnant women can do to their bodies, but I digress). So I'm against precluding gay marriage on principle.

But, given the real damage it does, the harm and pain it causes, I can't see how people in good conscience can let those restrictions continue. Or how, with our constitution, they could be legal.
Let's start with taxes, since I played with these numbers while I did the other tax problems:

Think marriage doesn't make a difference? Here's a gay couple, with each partner netting:
1/2 income	Joint income	Tax	Married Tax	Difference
8500	17000	2125	1700	425
34500	69000	13375	9500	3875
83600	167200	40433	34885.5	5547.5
174400	348800	100001	92558.5	7442.5
379150	758300	244381.5	235920.5	8461

Any gay couple making professional level salaries can expect to pay thousands more in taxes every year because they aren't "married." They will not get social security survivor benefits. Insurance companies do not have to include them on policies as "family" (though this and some of the other aspects might not be true in states that permit or acknowledge same sex marriage). They may not be permitted to make end-of-life choices (despite written requests) or even visit their loved ones in the hospital as they aren't acknowledged "family."

When people wed, they put their lives in the hands of another. They agree to share their lives with another, their worldly wealth, their trust, their world with the person they love.

Shouldn't every citizen have the right to decide for him/herself who it is they are willing to trust with so much? Don't they have the right to have those choices respected by the rest of us? Right now we respect those rights for knocked-up teenagers and drunken strangers who meet for the first time the morning after in Las Vegas.

Why can't we do it for people who truly choose with their hearts?

Read more...