Unresolved Conflict: Homosexuality and Society, Research Paper Example

Introduction

In what can only be termed a very brief period of time, gay men and women have come to occupy a position in society completely different than that which was long in place. States are increasingly, if slowly, legalizing same-sex marriage. Laws prohibit any form of discrimination in housing and employment because of sexual orientation. Then, gay characters are seen frequently in the media, and no longer as stereotypes. In a few short decades, it seems that what was an “invisible” and largely despised minority has taken on a proud and fully accepted presence in society. Even as these radical changes have occurred, however, controversy exists. Issues with military bans on permitting gays to serve remain points of extreme debate and shifting policies. For each state that legalizes gay marriage, more strident opposition is voiced, more anti-gay violence occurs, and the politicians today seeking presidential endorsements are loudly proclaiming either support or disapproval of gay rights, depending upon the constituents to whom they wish to appeal. What lies beneath all the advances and all of the controversy, however, is a simple reality many people choose to ignore. Namely, homosexuality is an orientation that has always existed, and it no more represents “morality” than does heterosexuality. Equally importantly, and no matter personal feelings about homosexuality, the unalterable fact remains that gay men and women are citizens, and are therefore entitled to the civil rights extended to all citizens.

Reasons for Bias

The mistrust and fear many people maintain about homosexuality is easily traced to Judeo-Christian ideologies, which emphasize the duty of men and women to procreate. In the Middle Ages in particular, this belief took hold in Western society simply because the survival of humanity was often seen to be in jeopardy. The “natural” course was for men and women to marry and produce children, and this translated into an outright condemning of homosexuality as unnatural (Selfe, Burke 2-3). Then, societies typically reflect needs to embrace common belief systems, religious backgrounds aside. Western cultures, for example, are famous for assigning very specific roles according to gender; men are supposed to be strong and dominant, and women are expected, even today, to assume a more compliant role, certainly in arenas of personal interactions. As these interactions are predominantly heterosexual in nature, the homosexual element is then a “wild card.” It creates apprehension because it does not conform to the societal norms, and anything doing this is usually perceived as a threat. A threat, then, is translated by the society into a thing to be reviled, insulted, and always kept at a distance.

It is important to recognize just how deep this bias runs, and this may be ascertained by the unique way in which homosexuality has been viewed. More exactly, the fear behind the perceived threat is similar to a fear of contagion, and this has long been evident in how society has emphasized “watching out” for signs of a homosexual nature: “What is stigmatized is not only homosexual activity, but homosexual desire” (Koppelman 23). The implication is that no one is “safe”, if homosexuality is accepted. Even as gay men and women have made enormous progress in achieving recognition as individuals, the stigma persists because society’s ideas regarding gender are profoundly fixed. As with any societal ideology, children are reared to follow the lead. In today’s slang, and especially among adolescents, it is considered perfectly acceptable to refer to someone as “gay” in a derogatory way. The references are usually not about sexuality, but about incompetence or some form of social inappropriateness (Crooks, Baur 253). Ironically, “gay” has become, not merely a more accepted definition of sexual orientation, but also a different kind of slur, and one reflecting that society still perceives homosexuality as a strange and undesirable thing.

No examination of how society views gay men and women can be made without an understanding of the support authority figures have given to the bias. Essentially, fear and even hatred of homosexuality were long fueled by the medical community. As recently as 1951, lobotomies were legally performed to “cure” people of what was perceived as a genuine illness (Crooks, Baur 260). If society at least partially enabled these perceptions, it is equally reasonable to then assume that people ambivalent about homosexuality were strongly influenced to then view it in a negative light. Until 1973, in fact, homosexuality was designated a mental disorder by the American Psychiatric Association (Crooks, Baur 261). The person, then, with no religious or moral issues with homosexuality was nonetheless being informed by experts that it was a sickness.

Modern Scenarios, Violence, and Rationales

As noted, gays are achieving great strides in regard to civil liberties. Many who now oppose legal gay marriage firmly believe that their feelings, based on traditions of a longstanding morality in place, will not change. Nonetheless, it is interesting to note that often such people have “come around” to accepting situations equally not in keeping with their belief systems. For instance, the same traditionalists who maintain that marriage is only proper between a man and a woman have greatly relaxed similarly strong ideas about men and women living together before marriage (Rimmerman, Wilcox 238). That tides of opinion do change may be best noted in President Obama’s recent reversal of his former stance, in that he now supports gay marriage. This blatantly demonstrates, beyond the President’s own ideologies, the pragmatic need to appeal to a multitude of voters (Shear, Steinhauer). It is doubtful that the President would assert this opinion if it would harm him in an election year, and this seems to reflect that steady adoption of legal gay marriage as occurring in the United States.

At the same time, and alarmingly, there are severe issues in terms of attacks on homosexuals. The contrast, in fact, is extraordinary; as gays gain rights in the courts, they seem to be more the victims of crime enraged by the progress. Fortunately, those who commit acts of violence on gay people are a minority, but the reality remains that this form of criminality reflects deep societal concerns. To begin with, gay-bashing occurs at high rates today, and is most frequently committed by young males, who are noted as having fewer checks on their impulses. As recently as 2002, a survey of eight major cities reveals that over 86 percent of all gay men and women questioned reported having been verbally attacked because of their orientation. Over 35 percent reported some form of physical assault, from being spit at to being chased, and a study from the U.S. Department of Justice concluded that gays are the most likely victims of hatred today (Koppelman 21). Later years accelerated the violence; in 2008, the Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that incidents of violent gay-bashing were “soaring” (Kimball). Then, if most gay men and women are not physically attacked, they are frequently disliked, even if this dislike is expressed behind their backs (Koppelman 22). It very much appears that, despite immense strides made in attaining civil rights and societal respect, society is still deeply conflicted in regard to homosexuality.

Meanwhile, another controversy of sorts rages beneath that of gay rights, as the public seeks to know exactly what “causes” homosexuality. The reality is that, while there is strong evidence to support homosexuality as stemming from biological causes, there is no definitive “explanation” for it. Environment, family, childhood experience, and virtually every other factor going into shaping a person’s identity have been identified as being at least partially responsible for homosexuality. Simply, as many variables go into creating the orientation as there are reasons why people are heterosexual (Crooks, Baur 257). That people are so determined to isolate some reason for homosexuality clearly indicates how unresolved the subject is in the public mind. Somewhere in all of this, as politicians, religious figures, gay activists and gay bashers go about their business, the essential fact is that homosexuality has been in existence since the beginnings of recorded history. Certainly, it is recorded as far back as the 16^th century B.C.E., in the official records of China’s Shang Dynasty. It is interesting to note as well that, in this ancient era, no stigma was attached to it (West, Green 57). Perhaps no other aspect of human life, then, has generated such an ongoing and controversial presence, varying from era to era and society to society.

Conclusion

It is impossible for any one person to assert that homosexuality is “right” or “wrong”, simply because people are entitled to hold views that express their backgrounds, religions, and/or personal perceptions. Moreover, sexuality itself typically creates strong responses, no matter the specific subject. What can be asserted, however, is that gay men and women have undergone vast changes in treatment in modern society. Viewed as mentally ill only decades ago, homosexuals may now legally marry in seven states, as other laws are in place to protect their civil rights. At the same time, conflicting tides of feeling compete. Presidential candidates endorse gay rights to appeal to more liberal voters, or oppose them to generate support from conservative, and typically religiously-inspired, voters. The military tried an unquestioning approach, then abandoned it as self-defeating. Meanwhile, the media increasingly portrays gay men and women as agreeable, ordinary characters, even as violence against gays reaches new heights of savagery. This is a controversy so deeply embedded in the societal consciousness, it may never be resolved. Then, as noted, freedom of thought translates to all having the right to feel about homosexuality as they choose. Nonetheless, a potent reality remains, and cannot be ignored. Whatever anyone’s personal feelings regarding homosexuality, the inescapable fact is that gay men and women are citizens, and are therefore entitled to the civil rights granted to all citizens.

Works Cited

Crooks, Robert, & Baur, Karla. Our Sexuality. Belmont: Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.

Kimball, Harry. “Hate Crimes Up Just 2%, But Gay-Bashing Soars: FBI.” Newser.com. Web, 2009. Retrieved 10 May, 2012, from http://www.newser.com/story/74643/hate-crimes-up-just-2-but-gay-bashing-soars-fbi.html

Koppelman, Andrew. The Gay Rights Question in Contemporary American Law. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Print.

Rimmerman, Craig A., & Wilcox, Clyde. The Politics of Same-Sex Marriage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007. Print.

Selfe, David W., & Burke, Vincent. Perspectives on Sex, Crime, and Society. New York: Psychology Press, 2001. Print.

Shear, Michael D., & Steinhauer, Jennifer. “While Obama Trumpets Gay Marriage, Foes Seek New Topic.” The New York Times. Web, 10 May, 2012. Retrieved 10 May, 2012, from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/11/us/politics/obama-campaign-tries-to-capitalize-on-marriage-issue.html

West, Donald James, & Green, Richard. Sociolegal Control of Homosexuality: A Multi-Nation Comparison. New York: Springer, 1997. Print.