this letter may be regarded as a letter to the editor, a letter to the campus, a letter to the diversity department, and/or a letter to lawmakers. i have had plenty of experience with homosexuality in my lifetime, and i am now formally suggesting to newspapers and colleges and lawmakers, the repeal of the public endorsement of homosexuality - be it seen on tv or taught in schools or condoned on the lawbooks. i believe that until pupils and politicians and publishers make an effort for homosexuality to once again be cause for public ridicule, until people feel compromised and embarrassed by seeing a "discovery zone" in naked members of their own gender, they are going to follow in chastity bono's sexually-dysfunctional footsteps and they'll be apt to treat their gender like its presence on their body is some big mistake. unless people find self-compromise in praising naked members of their own gender, they are not going to fully respect themselves and that lack of self-respect will eventually lead to a lack of respect for anything...which will, in time, lead to a societal downfall.
i went to the woods because i wanted to live deliberately. i came out of the woods because i didn't want to come out of the closet singing lady gaga without any comprehension of myself. let me begin my letter by mentioning two lesbians who were shot in texas.
mollie judith olgin and mary christine chapa - these two are all over the internet. they are the two lesbians who were shot in texas. okay, i'm sure that the one who died was put out of the misery that reeked of gender-disorientation, and i hope the one who didn't die realizes the injustice she is committing against herself with the self-compromise that is always the mark of homosexuality. i think a line from my screenplay puts that self-compromise best, "How can you expect to be man enough to satisfy my hunger for a man...or anyone else's hunger, for that matter...if YOU hunger".
to put the err of homosexuality in another way, "if you're not man enough to be your man, good luck filling anyone else's void".
back to mollie and mary. now, with females being of the lesser gender, monthly egg-leaks and booby milk-leaks not withstanding, one might think that it's okay for a woman not to be all the woman she needs if women are not meant to be strong. getting right down to it, the egg-leak and milk-leaks alone tell us that females are tools to be used by men for egg-fertilization and by babies for nourishment. so, given that women were meant to be used as tools, it's still a fallacy to say that it's okay for the weaker gender to be gay. it's a fallacy because it doesn't take manly physical strength to be true to oneself. all it takes is a little self-love, self-respect and self-devotion to feel compromised by the notion of homosexuality, all it takes is for one to take their own gender seriously. taking another line from one of my screenplays online at www.anti-gay.com, i will state that the line was written BEFORE chastity bono's gender-dysfunction led her to a sex-change operation: "It works for you, huh, treating your gender like its presence on your body is some big mistake?"
mollie judith olgin and mary christine chapa seemed like unabashed lesbians in the close-up picture of a kiss i saw online. lesbians are females whose own gender-disorientation leads them to feel a pressing curiosity of the female gender. now, we are all born with no knowledge of anything, we are all born disoriented and "in the dark" about everything, and if olgin and chapa were still in grade-school then i could probably dismiss their gender-naivete with the words "it will pass". these little feminivoids were not in grade-school, they were almost in their 20s and, being lesbian-lovers, i can assume that they were still clueless enough about femininity to treat the female body as a "discovery zone" and spend hours and hours playing with it like it was bought at some kind of curiosity-shop.
that is what the word GENDERIVOID means. one can be a masculivoid or a feminivoid, but a genderivoid is one who is cluelessly curious about either gender. this curiosity (or lack of real gender-knowledge) comes about from a lack of gender-identity, which comes about through experience living and not through an inexplicable "born this way" panacea. desire for another person can't come into existence without reason, nobody actively wants anything for no reason. if two gay "men" say that they are only inspecting each others' bodies for something to do, what's stopping them from inspecting females? a lack of curiosity is stopping them from inspecting females, that's what's stopping them. why inspect her gadget if it doesn't satisfy the curiosity of gay "men"?
mollie judith olgin and mary christine chapa were naive genderivoids to be using homosexuality as a crutch for their gender-dysfunctions and gender-curiosities. now, i understand the need for sexual gratification, but unless one gets their homosexual gratification with porn and masturbation, there is an element of self-compromise involved in being gay with another person more than there is with porn - just like there is an element of wife-compromise involved in hiring a hooker more than there is with buying playboy. i guess the army got rid of their "be all that you can be" slogan once they started recruiting fags - "be all that you can be" is offensive to gays because it brings to mind the words "be all the man you need". and anyone promoting that much self-respect is regarded by gays as a gay-basher.
don henley had an lp in 1985 called "building the perfect beast," dr. frank-n-furter marveled at brad majors and called him "such a perfect specimen of manhood," yet i'm sure gays (who shout about their self-love to anyone who is apt to believe them) would regard as pathetic or conceited or not based in reality, any man building himself up to be his own "perfect specimen of manhood". still, that is the cure for homosexuality, just a sense of self and a sense of self-respect and a sense of self-devotion.
wrapping up, i IMPLORE pupils, politicians and publishers - and producers of primetime - to start introducing people to the ways that self-negligence helps a man to find the man of his dreams in someone else. "don't take yourself too seriously," i've heard it many times, but unless a man takes his own gender seriously then he is apt to become a genderivoid who cannot answer the question "what are you looking for in a man" with one word. instead of being confident enough to provide the one-word answer of "me," he's "building the perfect beast" and offering a litany of masculine attributes like he's conjuring up jack nicholson with cher, susan sarandon and michelle pfiffer.
i'll put paula abdul's "opposites attract" up to lady gaga's "born this way" anyday. to take another line from one of my screenplays online, i will say that "opposites" is what you feel inside about yourself, it's not strictly male or female on the outside! i'm jealous, therefore i lust! i'm jealous of your body like you're jealous of saxy's! i need a man in my life for the same reason you need a woman, i feel left out!"
dylan terreri, i
"When I'm hungry, I eat. When I'm thirsty, I drink. When I feel like saying something, I say it." - Madonna
Missoula News/Independent Publishing |
Powered by Foundation