Reading a few articles around, I noticed that some psychologist or educator is concerned about the “new” sexual orientation of some today’s youth.
Beyond the tendencies poles apart (heterosexuality and homosexuality,) in the middle there are others that are often defined by the term Pansexuality. Omnisexuality or pansexuality is sexual attraction, sexual desire, romantic love, or emotional attraction toward people of any sex or gender identity. Young people who self-identify as pansexual assert that gender and sex are insignificant or irrelevant in determining whether they will be sexually attracted to others.
For many, this “post-gay” trend is related to the use-abuse of stimulants and antidepressants, a sexual utopia that would hide the discomfort of the “Cuddle Puddle’s proponents.” Insecure teens or heavily marked by the failure of other relationships…. maybe!
For some “pundits” of these days the search for identity begins among school’s desks, where our teenagers, between a class and another, engage in sexual relations with peers – and this would seem fine to them – and according to their opinion, the trouble would start when teenagers do not make any difference in dealing with male or female. What? Why?
Perhaps in some cases it is a challenge in themselves, but as always we cannot be so generalist.
Honestly, I cannot understand why, like many other things, sexuality has to be identified, labelled, categorized, and criticized unless it complies with what society presumes must be its “appropriate” course.
Who of us established or decides what is the correct sexuality for human beings?
Unluckily, whatever is human is uncertain and not absolute, including some rules. For certain complicated things, like sexuality, who are we to judge and criticize?
Like other mental affairs, sexuality is a very complicated issue that can’t be governed, beyond not being in some cases a choice.
Pansexuality rejects the gender binary, the “notion of two genders and indeed of specific sexual orientations”, as pansexual people are open to relationships with people who do not identify as strictly men or women. We can assume that it is an evolution of bisexuality prevalent among young people in the late 60’s and that until recently was considered cutting-edge and quite common among aristocrats.
Camille Paglia promoted bisexuality as an ideal. Harvard Shakespeare professor Marjorie Garber made an academic case for bisexuality with her 1995 book “Vice Versa: Bisexuality and the Eroticism of Everyday Life,” arguing that most people would be bisexual if not for repression and other factors such as lack of sexual opportunity. In “Scientific American Mind”, scientist Emily V. Driscoll stated that homosexual and bisexual behavior is quite common in several species and that it fosters bonding: “The more homosexuality, the more peaceful the species”. The article also stated: “Unlike most humans, however, individual animals generally cannot be classified as gay or straight: an animal that engages in a same-sex flirtation or partnership does not necessarily shun heterosexual encounters. Rather, many species seem to have ingrained homosexual tendencies that are a regular part of their society. That is, there are probably no strictly gay critters, just bisexual ones. Animals don’t do sexual identity. They just do sex: a normal thing.
Well, apart from this scientific considerations or studies, shouldn’t the equal rights and freedom involve our sexual tendencies too?!
It happened to a former English rugby player of 26 years: – after having had a stroke for a freak accident while training, in which he had broken his neck – Chris Birch woke up gay. “I’m happier than ever, I would change one iota”, the young man told to the Telegraph, explaining that as soon as he recovered, his life changed beginning to have a relationship with a man.
I confess, after reading this curious news I had to laugh, because personally think it is a very unlikely event. At first glance I thought, “It was just a ploy for the guy to coming out, declaring his sexuality and sweeten family and friends judgment”.
As if to say: “He is gay, but not for his fault, it was the unfortunate incident to give him trouble!”
The same applies to other similar news affirming that someone suddenly found himself with a different sexuality. Absurd!
My beliefs are based on scientific data. Debunked for years (thank goodness!) the belief that homosexuality is a disease, long since most scientists agree to attribute the causes of homosexuality to a mixture of biological (genetic), psychological and environmental (prenatal and postnatal) factors, although it still is difficult to quantify separately the various influences. It isn’t, therefore, a matter simplistically only mental or of options occurring during the critical stages of the development, because a priori there is already a well-defined genetic and psychological orientation that, willy-nilly, brings people “to prefer” a sexuality rather than another. Thus, no matter what anyone says or thinks, no one becomes gay at once, and neither after an illness or an accident. If so, it will go back to the ancient assumption that homosexuality is just a “mental” issue and if it really was so, most of psychologists and psychiatrists, by few sessions, could have healed, long since, a myriad of gay subjects. A validation of this, the fact that no gays in the history has ever “regained” the “normal” sexuality with or without treatment.
Today news travels fast, thanks to the internet too, so we know many more things and facts, that take place in the world, than ever before. Do you remember the case of the boy who already at 6 years old confessed to parents to feel like a “girl” inside. But we can find many other similar cases on internet, such as the recent about Bobby Montoya a seven years old kid who prefers women’s clothing and asked parents to enrol in the “Girl scout”. If these cases do not confirm what has already been widely assumed, namely that homosexuality, as sexuality in general, has a genetic basis, then it means to be blind and biased on this topic that should not even make headlines or dismay because sexuality, whatever it is, must be accepted and understood first. The words “different” or “normal”, usually used, must disappear. When it will come to this, the society will then have taken the right way for that change we are looking for a long time and never put into practice, with no need of tormented “coming out” or other incidents to let other accept a “natural” sexuality.
Walking down the street an old lady sees a thread of string on the ground, bows down, picks it up and puts it in his pocket taking it away.
Scene of the past, times when a simple string even could be useful, to tie an old cardboard suitcase, for example.
Today, those who need a piece of string buy an entire roll then leaving it who knows where, while the cardboard suitcases exist anymore, we buy a Samsonite trolley or the last publicized on TV, even if for a single trip.
Adaptation? Consumerism? Progress?
It possibly has been the new euro currency making worse the things and then the international crisis, but if we go back in time, the situation about economic difficulty begins with the massive advertising (TV?) and worsens with the loss of some value which over the years hit our society.
For values I also mean also the one about the little things, like the piece of string collected from the woman.
Although my relatives criticisms, I do not throw things away so easily, keep them and gather some good object if abandoned, even if I find a simple nail or an used flowerpot in the street.
My old grandmother said: “chi trova astipa” that in Neapolitan means “who finds must store” and we were a family that couldn’t be defined poor or needy. It was the life style to be different and beyond the value given to any goods, the shame, if presents, was not for those having worn clothes or no car.
Well…. A trouble shared is a trouble halved.. .. somebody could say!
Time ago on a sidewalk, next to garbage cans, I saw a large mirror thrown away because of no use evidently. It was a beautiful mirror in a eight-shaped figure and I don’t deny the instinctive urge to take it before some urchin broke it or the garbage collector took it away, but the shame was over, together the impossibility to carry such a burden alone. I only can imagine what the old woman could have said or any other person just living forty years ago, when things were not thrown away so easily after the use, especially if still good and usable, and there was a sort of family recycle. I think that if such a people could be here today, he/she will have the opportunity to live on a private income coming by all the things thrown away.
And thinking of…………. the one that is asking for a loan just to have a dishwasher at any cost or a newer plasma screen to show at the friends.