What's wrong with homosexuality II: what the Dodo Bird said

So, if male/male sex is wonderful, congruent and natural (NB: see part 1, below!), what’s the problem?

First, this is primarily about male homosexuality. The problem that I see is in fact very much connected with the rest of the so-called LGBT “community”, --in fact the very existence of this Balkanoid acronym is a symptom--but let’s face it: gay men are the issue, the hotbutton, the fulcrum, the flashpoint. In terms of numbers, influence, visibility, vocality, anxiety, and sheer cultural crazymakingness, it is pretty well all about us.

Here goes. I’ll just state my conclusion and do the inductive stuff afterwords. This is the problem with male homosexuality: Gayness in men has become bound up with a social and political agenda that seeks to remake America into a society (like Europe) without any real men at all .

Feminists and gays are allied in naming the real man, aka the “straight” or “conventional” or “traditional” male, as the oppressor. In regard to gays, his crime (real enough) is to exclude homosexual males from the circle of men. The feminist gay response here is to deconstruct, marginalize, pathologize and render laughable and antique the very idea of manhood. Just mention “the patriarchy” and you don't have to think anymore.

In order that gay men should be included in a diverse and sensitive concept of what a man is, the concept of manhood needs to be emptied of anything like a standard or a requirement. Lewis Carroll’s LGBT Dodo Bird proclaims, “All have won and all shall have prizes!”. The deadly irony here is that gay men collude with man-hating feminists to erase the very object of our erotic desire, so that we can be included in the emptied circle where he once existed.


But the problem is this: if anyone who wants to can claim to be a man, then there are no men left at all.

_______________________