Posted on 05/09/2003 1:48:11 PM PDT by presidio9
A friend's daughter has come out as a lesbian and has embarked on an active sex life. She is barely 16, and seems to be enjoying herself immensely. One parent is bemused, the other upset. But they should be thankful.
Fortunately for the girl and her partner, NSW takes a Queen Victoria-like attitude to lesbian sex. For girls, age of consent laws in NSW do not discriminate between heterosexual and homosexual sex. If you are a 16-year-old girl, you are legally free to indulge in either (or both) forms of sex.
But the story is different for young men. If you are 16-year-old boy, you are legally allowed to have sex with females but not males. For that pleasure, you are supposed to wait till you are 18.
There is absolutely no sound basis for this different treatment of boys and girls. It is fear and hatred of male homosexuality that is behind NSW's discriminatory laws. And it is especially men's fear and hatred of male homosexuality that is an issue in the current debate. As the male-dominated NSW Parliament considers whether to equalise age of consent laws, it is salutary to recall that almost 40 per cent of Australian men think sex between two men is always wrong, according to new findings from the Australian National Sex Survey. (About 27 per cent of women agreed.)
Dress it up as they will, homophobia is the real reason for the continued discrimination against young gay men. If the MPs were concerned about teenage sex per se, they would lift the age of consent for boys and girls to 18. This would turn about half the state's 16-year-olds into criminals, given the sex survey's findings on sexual initiation. But at least that would be consistent.
If the MPs were concerned about teenage homosexuality, they would treat young lesbians with the same solicitude as young gay men, and raise the age of consent for lesbian sex. In the process they would turn my friend's daughter into a criminal, but at least that would be consistent.
There is no escaping the conclusion that male homosexuality is the problem. No matter that the Gay Mardi Gras is one of Australia's most-loved festivals, and that Sydney is Australia's gay capital; among many men the response to male homosexuality is hostile, visceral and irrational.
Is it too much to expect MPs to show leadership, to promote equality before the law, and to respect the facts?
Laws or not, young men are having sex with each other. Among men with homosexual experience, 45 per cent had their first experience before the age of 18, the national sex survey shows. This does not mean they had anal intercourse, and other studies show this to be highly unlikely. But in any case they broke the law.
Changing a law that is already so widely flouted is unlikely to increase the numbers of men who have homosexual sex. But it will make a positive difference to the young men who do.
For a start, health and education workers will be able to counsel young gay men without fear of prosecution for aiding and abetting a crime. And young gay men will see one pillar of discrimination fall, and derive some comfort in a homophobic world.
As the WA Health Department reported in a youth suicide manual: "While there is great pressure to have heterosexual relationships in adolescence, many young people experience homosexual feelings. This can cause turmoil for young people who may try to force themselves to have heterosexual relationships and become confused about why this doesn't feel 'right' to them."
Many young people realise their sexual orientation by age 13, and a large 1996 study by Rosario et al found that by 14.6 years, young people had become certain of their identity as gay/lesbian or bisexual.
Young people are unlikely to be converted to homosexuality if they are not already attracted to their own sex. A change in the law will not turn heterosexuals into homosexuals. And if some young people do "fool around" or experiment with their own sex, so what. It is only horror of homosexuality that leads people to think the experience would be terrible. It is forced sex that is a terrible experience. And it is young girls, not boys, according to the national sex survey, who are at greatest danger of assault, rape and unwanted sex.
Most parents, I suspect, would prefer their child not to embark on any sexual relationship until they had finished high school. High school sex is disturbing for parents, and distracting for students. Parents think in terms of pitfalls, pedophiles and dangers. But if their child has sex, I'm sure parents want the experience to be positive and safe. If their son turns out to be gay, surely parents want him to be happy - not alienated, secretive and suicidal. Given we cannot change our children's sexuality, the only thing we can help change is society's damaging attitudes towards gay men. And we should start by changing the law to treat young gay men the same as everyone else.
At the risk of being called a homosexual or an adherent (whatever that is), I must ask how you came to the conclusion that the H+A are unable to understand a heterosexual's abhorrence. Is it that by merely disagreeing with your view of homosexuals the H+A are being intolerant and not considering your feelings? I hope the "never understand" lament is hyperbole. If it isn't, then I would wonder why you are attracted to these threads. And I am not engaging in the second "thing you will never understand," here.
Why is all this "interesting" to you?
LOL, I could care less. I made two observations and you are proof of the rule. In fact, it's the adverse. I don't feel constrained to tolerate or aquiesce to that which I disagree with. Being America, the same holds true for anybody else.
I hope the "never understand" lament is hyperbole.
Hope springs eternal!
If it isn't, then I would wonder why you are attracted to these threads.
:-}
And I am not engaging in the second "thing you will never understand," here.
Of course not.
Very funny. Did you also tell her about your mouth/butt cleanliness theory?
On second thought, probably a bad idea.
Off-hand, I can think of three possible reasons: First, they may be hoping that it might be true, and that they may be the "lucky" beneficiary of that discovery. Second, they justify their own miserable condition by dragging as many people down to their level as possible. (Even if it's only in their own mind.) Third, they know that most decent people find the accusation so abhorrent, that they're hoping that such a charge would make some retreat from the fray.
--Boot Hill
Indeed. With respect to the whole line of (il)logic about "gay rights," being forced to respect them, etc., I recall a T-shirt I gave to my cousin as a gag Christmas present.
It said, "Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand."
'Nuff said.
Be well...
And that is why gay sexual practices spread nasty diseases much more than lesbian sexual practices do.
Also, gay-on-gay violent crime is, I believe, a lot higher than lesbian-on-lesbian crime. It's hard to get a handle on this though, since as a general rule, media coverage of spectacularly violent, gruesome, dramatic crimes committed by gays is forbidden. Very few newspapers and TV networks are willing to break this sacred taboo.
Also, I haven't heard about lesbians raping children yet (even if the media may be underreporting, it's hard to imagine that happening on the scale of male pedophilia.)
I would say that lesbianism evokes less disgust than homosexuality precisely because it does not evolve the dirtiest area of the human body. Had homosexuals restricted themselves to mutual masturbation, most people would find their practices less abhorrent.
Interesting choice of screen names.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.