The first narrative...liberal, gay-friendly, now dominant...is stunning in its simplicity: one is born that way. Or, more accurately, conceived that way. This assumes a hard, defining binary: "...straight and gay He created them, in God's own image He created them." There is little or no fluidity in human sexual attraction, it is hard-wired from inception. Like the instincts of an animal: some are carnivores, some are not. So, some are heterosexual, some are not. Like your height or the color of your hair, Nature; not Nurture.
This belief is held with absolute certainty by the gay and gay-friendly. It is as simple as the smile on your face. Of course it is equally incoherent to one from any traditional culture. It is intelligible only to a post-contraceptive culture which has severed sex from marriage/family/children. So it is a cultural conviction, self-evident to anyone fully socialized into the assumptions and perceptions of that culture. It is similar to: the inferiority of Africans to Europeans to a white in Alabama in 1830; the vile imperialism of the Israeli state to Palestinian youth today; the decadence of Jews to Nazi youth in 1933; the collusion of Trump with Russia to liberals in 2016; the theft of the 2020 election to conservatives; the Real Presence for Catholics.
From science we have hard chromosomal evidence of the male/female binary of human gender. Biologically there is no third or fourth gender; there is no in-between; although there are endless permutations, deprivations and elaborations on that duality. For Catholics we have certainty, from Revelation (more Tradition and magisterium than Scripture), that Mary was conceived immaculate while the rest of us were conceived in the state of sin. That is a hard binary that we hold with serene certainty from Faith. The gay/straight binary has no evidence from science: go gay gene, or hormonal combination or neurological pattern. It is more like a religious conviction, central to the entire way of life of cultural liberalism. It is an unquestioned, "intuitive" but really socialized dogma.
Interestingly, the emergent transgender ideology is contradictory of this gay belief. The later is premised upon both the sexual and the gender binary: a gay man is a man attracted to men; he is not a woman; not a third gender. But the transgender critique deconstructs gender itself so that it becomes fluid and masculinity/femininity become themselves fungible and self-constructed. Transgenderism is a contradiction of gay and feminist viewpoints.
So, by this narrative one is essentially, constitutively, inherently, naturally, innocently gay or straight. A homophobic society and Church, however, shame you as perverted so you repress your true self and your deepest longings for intimacy and sexual satisfaction. This is toxic and pathological. Liberation comes when you acknowledge your true identity; you renounce homophobia; you publicly declare your true identity; you renounce shame; you move out of loneliness; you declare the liberation of sex from marriage and the moral equivalence of homo and hetero practice; and you join a community of value/ belief in which you find dignity.
In this view, the greatest, most powerful and enduring homophobe is the Catholic Church which insists on anchoring sex in fruitful marriage. And the worst of the worst is John Paul II with his Theology of the Body. Pope Francis is appreciated as gay-friendly in his elevation of James Martin and a series of similar thinking cardinals and bishops; but he is a huge disappointment in that he has left unchanged the Church's teaching.
The second narrative, more congenial to the traditional mind, is less simple, more dense, obscure, mysterious and psychological. It sees human sexuality, (in contrast to the fixed instincts of animals) emerging in puberty after a dozen years of life experience, as fluid, malleable and influenced by nurture, personal history, formation and culture.
The Catholic Catechism is properly agnostic and humble on the origins of homosexuality: "its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained." But it is not like we know nothing of the environmental factors that contribute to it. A significant survey of research published a few years ago made a big impact because it was headed by a gay activist but concluded that nature accounts for about 30% and nurture the other 70% of homosexuality. This troubled the gay community and damaged the "born that way" doctrine.
In this view sexuality, like so many human activities and propensities, is rooted in a biological tendency but elaborated by experience, formation, and habit. For example, addictions (such as alcohol) have a biological base but must be triggered and then developed by environmental factors. One is not "born a drunk" but clearly a prior natural tendency is there. Furthermore, in the human, sex is not a stand alone impulse but intrinsically enmeshed with emotional, social, intellectual, moral, and spiritual dynamics. Sex can be infused by anger, fear, detachment, loneliness, affection, reverence, and an entire universe of cognitive, moral and religious values.
Consider the range of human sexuality, from the sublime to the ridiculous: faithful monogamy, sadism/masochism, pedophilia, bestiality, polygamy/polyandry, consecrated virginity, priestly celibacy, pornography/masturbation. To say one is born with these conditions is ridiculous on the face of it. Clearly nurture contributes to all of them. It is remarkable that only "gay" is posited as a fixed "orientation" (a word appropriate for the first, not the second narrative). A number of circumstances contribute to same-sex attraction: smothering or distant parent, troubled peer relations, abuse, poor body image, sexual abuse, and low gender self-esteem. Some or all of these can be present as there is great diversity and no rigid model.
And so there are two stages in this journey: first into homosexuality and later into gay identity. At adolescence the youth discovers (does not chose) sexual attractions. These are obscure to him but are clearly influenced by his unique personal history. These attractions vary in depth and intensity. They are part of a vastly complex, dense personality of emotions, beliefs, values, habits, longings, needs and aspirations. They operate also within a complex web of communal/social relationships. The reception of ones sexual inclinations is just that: receptive. But then they find a place in the unique and symphonic life pattern of the individual.
The attainment of a gay identity, however, is an entirely separate operation. This is a choice: an intellectual and moral judgment, a determination of personal identity, an event, and a participation in a community of meaning and value (actually, a religion.)
There being a broad variety of ways of expressing/restraining homosexuality, the "gay" option is quite specific and entirely distinctive as an aspect of post-contraceptive cultural liberalism. To become gay the homosexual: asserts the moral goodness of sterile, non-unitive sex and the separation of sexuality from fruitfulness; decides to deeply, personally identify with gay actions, relationships and culture; renounce shame associated with it; publicly proclaim this view to renounce the homosexuality of society and the Catholic Church; and join a community of value and a moral/social crusade.
The attainment of gay identity is not an indeliberate unfolding of sexual feelings as occurs in adolescence; nor is it the final liberation of the always-gay victim from homophobic repression. No! It is an event; a decision; a choice of identity, purpose, and community.
Case Study
Bud, 50 years old, modestly successful, comfortable financially, practicing Catholic, father of four grown children is apparently happy in a marriage of 25 years. He comes out as gay, leaves his wife, and takes an amorous partner. What happened?
By the first narrative he finally accepted who he really was all along; he broke free from the repression of internalized homophobia; freed himself from guilt; and was liberated to be himself at last.
By the second narrative, it is less clear, more mysterious, quite dramatic. Prior to this he was homosexual but not gay. He may have been chaste, or indulged in periodic encounters, or lived a double life. He may have suffered a sexual addiction as a result of habitual pornography or anonymous sex or ongoing relationships. The thing is this: at the age of 50 the "interior form" of his life, in all its complexity (family, sex, career, friends, hobbies, faith, solitude) has fallen apart. He has "converted" to another pattern of life.
This move is not a final liberation of what has been repressed all these years; it is not an inevitable and conclusive culmination. Rather, it is a drastic change of life. Clearly he has suffered a crisis, possibly in this case the famed midlife crisis. The meanings, habits, intentions and comforts that held him together have fallen apart. This may have been building incrementally for many years: loss of interest in career, dryness in marriage, monotony in prayer, distant friendship, and an empty nest that diminishes his paternal mission. It is not just the inexorability of his sexual impulses; it is much more and much deeper. It is a pervasive loneliness that nothing seems to touch. It is an internal unrest, an agitation, a perpetual and inexpressible sadness.
To make this conversion he needs the availability of a gay community, if only virtually by the internet. By participating in this group he feels a sense of belonging he has long lacked; he anticipates an intimacy, physical but mostly emotional, that he has long craved; he expects a sense of honor to replace the shame and guilt that has plagued him quietly.
His becoming gay, at the age of 50 or 15, is like when someone becomes a gang member, or monk, or communist, or Islamic terrorist. It is a move into identity, intimacy, purpose, meaning and community. It is a desperate surge into a new life to relieve the shame and loneliness and find belonging, meaning and intimacy.
Conclusion
Homosexuality flows from emotional agony. It is an unwelcome affliction, a severe cross, and if endured patiently and generously is an occasion of holiness. The gay posture is a rejection of shame and loneliness; it is a desperate, but sadly futile, grasping for intimacy, belonging and meaning.
No comments:
Post a Comment