Perception Of Homosexual In Society
We had know that the homosexual simply mean “a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex”. Nowadays, homosexuality had influenced in society but it is still in discussing, the society either accepts this behavior or not. Some of the society said that homosexuality is unhealthy and immoral behaviour which will give negative impact towards individuals, families and societies. Therefore, some argument had been made to the homosexuality.
Arguments against homosexuality
Most of the society had argued that “homosexuality is harmful towards societies”. This argument seems to be common, but has no clear meaning. Most of the society just knows that homosexuality is referring to the sexual orientation but it may also not. If homosexuality is referring to sexual orientation, then its harmfulness is depends on the act performance in homosexuality. Homosexuality itself does not have any harmful in any sense, but if the performance of act which is harmful is included in homosexuality, then it is. But there is still a contradiction, the statement above had claimed that “harmful towards society” but the act in homosexuality is just harmful for individuals or small group of people. Therefore, this statement shows that society had argued about homosexuality without fully understanding.
A unique argument against homosexuality, “Homosexuals do not reproduce and this lead to a threat to the survival of society”, also said among the societies. This statement has clearly showed that homosexuality is not good in society, but it may be a good way. First, keep in mind that the serious overpopulation problem of the earth nowadays in some of the countries and homosexuality can overcome this problem. Second, someone had asked that why all the people must have children even if there is no problem of overpopulation. Homosexual is just existed in a small population on all the culture, thus this has minor or no effect towards the population of people. For addition, homosexuality can fulfill the desire of sexual relationship of the following people: people who do not want children and people who inability to have children. This show that the argument above seems to be used, and sounds like homosexuality can be good. Third, on the other hands, if we read through the history of homosexuality, there are many information about homosexuals do have children. Due to the social disapprobation, many homosexuals had married with person of the opposite sex and had children. This show that the persons who claimed about homosexuality pose a threat toward the society is because of they do not fully understand about homosexuality. And lastly, will human species become extinct if all of the people were homosexuals? This is not true because homosexual can reproduce children via insemination.
Society also claimed that homosexuality will posed a threat to children. This is not true because most of the people had misunderstanding that if a homosexual do molestation on children, then that children will also become homosexual. A research about this fact had been carried out and the result is molestation cannot determine children become homosexual or heterosexual. For addition, the molestation of children mostly done by heterosexual compared with homosexual. Besides that, by teaching children about homosexual can help children to feel attracted towards the children with same sex, and also to make children feel better about whom they are because of the loneliness and fear about society reaction among the homosexual. If there is a good teaching, this can help the children to grow up in healthy and self-confident. Furthermore, homosexuals are also human beings, who have the feeling of love and care of the children, which same with heterosexuals.
An argument, “Homosexuality is a sad lifestyle and very depressing”, also been said in the society. First, we must know that the actual reason of a homosexual become sad or depress because a homosexual life will not cause any negative emotion towards any people. So, the society cannot argue that the depression of homosexuality without any basis knowledge. Most of the people sad and depress for another reason, and also there is no evidence shows that the homosexual is sadder.
“Homosexuals are desire to have sex with different partners”, this thought seems to be common in some of the society. This is true, but somewhat bias. To tell the truth, heterosexuals are more desire for sex with different partners than homosexuals. The society cannot just point all the negative argument towards homosexuals. First, the degree of desire is differences between male and female (not between homosexuals and heterosexual). Males have higher degree of desire than female. However, even if someone argued that homosexuals are more “promiscuous” than heterosexual, this will be fine if both partners agreed with. Therefore, the statement above is just a wrong concept in the society since everyone has different degree of desire and not only for homosexuals.
Someone had argued that “homosexuality has higher rate to cause AIDS, and other diseases”. According to the UNAIDS, there is only five to ten percent of HIV infections caused by male homosexuals, but there is seventy to seventy-five percent of HIV infections caused by heterosexuals. We also cannot conclude that heterosexuals has higher rate to cause disease since the sex-related disease is caused by unsafe sex and this hold for all of the people. Same with other diseases, they are just caused by the negative behavior of the patients. On the same way, the low rate of causing disease among the homosexuals has low or no threat towards the society. To conclude, there is no clear evidence shows that homosexuals has higher rate to cause diseases but in opposite way.
Lastly, is homosexuality undermining religious and stability in society? Most of the society agreed with this but it is also a wrong statement. First, it is incorrect to say that religious can bring stability to society. The stability of society is created through a well-functioning society with caring individuals without any religion at all. Second, homosexuals themselves also have their own religions. For example, the conservative people thought that homosexuals are negative towards Christianity (mostly in Western countries), but actually homosexuals are also Christians who having a good behavior. In conclusion, the argument of homosexual is less religious than others is totally wrong in the society.
In conclusion, the modern society had not fully understanding about homosexuality and give out only the negative impact of homosexuality.
Psychologists and psychoanalysts’ view against homosexuality
Homosexuality is not universally viewed as pathology. In the modern time, the society had set the homosexuality as unnatural act among the people. Therefore, several psychologists and psychoanalysts had pointed out their own view against homosexual.
Richard von Krafft-Ebing had defined homosexuality as a degenerative sickness in his Psychopathia Sexualis. He had argued that homosexual behavior is not useful to the society but rather creates a harmless “Criminal Class”. He noticed that male homosexuals are not more likely to be child molestation.
Later, both Sigmund Freud and Havelock Ellis had adopted better and more acceptable views. Havelock Ellis argued that homosexuality was natural and not immoral, thus it is not a disease. He also states that homosexuals made a outstanding contributions to the society.
On the other hand, Sigmund Freud, a well known psychologist, had stated the basic theory of human sexuality which was different with Ellis’s theory. He believed that all human beings were bisexual when born, and when grows up, they will became either heterosexual or homosexual depends on their own experiences in their life with anyone they contact or communicate. On the same way, Freud agreed with Ellis that homosexuality should not be looked as a form of pathology. His view against homosexual also clearly stated in a well known letter to an American mother in 1935. In the letter, he stated that although homosexuality has no advantages, but it is also nothing to be ashamed of, no guilty, no degradation, cannot classified as unnatural disease. He also said that people should considered homosexuality as a sexual development in a human beings. For addition, many highly respectable people are homosexuals include Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci.
Although Sigmund Freud’s theories were accepted by most of the society, but later on, some of the psychoanalysts did not follow his view. Sandor Rado (1940 and 1949) had rejected Freud’s concepts of inherent bisexuality. He argued that heterosexuality is natural while homosexuality is just a behavior to fulfill the sexual pleasure. Bieber (1962) argued that homosexuality is a result of the relationship within pathological family during the oedipal periods. Charles Socarides (1968), on the same way, though about the causes of the homosexuality and the result was pre-oedipal, even more pathological than earlier analysis.
The arguments above seem to be theoretical but it is just based on their own views and may bias. First, the researchers should not pre-expect the result of several experiments to avoid the bias but such procedures have not been used in the studies of homosexuality. Second, psychoanalysts had only examined homosexuals who already under psychiatric care. Therefore the patients’ views cannot be assumed to represent all of the general population. On the same token, psychoanalysts just draw conclusion about all heterosexuals based on only a few data collected from heterosexual psychiatric patients.
Alfred Kinsey, a more tolerant researcher towards homosexuality had conducted a research on the sexual behavior among American adults. His research had revealed that the participants who having the homosexual behavior is because of the point of orgasm after 16 years old. Furthermore, Kinsey and his colleagues reported that only a minority of male and female had homosexuality for at least three years between 16 to 55 years old. This gives a more acceptable concept about the homosexuality in the society
An innovative study had been carried out by Hooker (1957). She had given out the question of the difference in psychological adjustment between homosexuals and heterosexuals rather than simply accepting the concepts of homosexuality as pathology. She also recruited a sample of normal behavior, homosexual men in society for research rather than studying psychiatric patients. On the same way, she employed some experts to rate the adaptation of men without any earlier knowledge of their sexual orientation. After that, she conducted three projects tests which are the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), and Make-A-Picture-Story (MAPS) to groups of homosexual males and heterosexual males, which consists of 30 participants each. All of the participants were not in therapy and matched for age, IQ and education. In her projects, she concluded that homosexuality is not inherently connected with psychopathology. Freedman (1971) used Hooker’s projects to study homosexuality and heterosexuality within women and the result was same with Hooker.
Gonsiorek (1982) had conducted various psychological tests of comparing homosexual and heterosexual on he found that both groups regularly graded within a normal range although there is some difference between two groups. He concluded that homosexuality is unrelated to psychological interference.
In conclusion, some of the psychologists and psychoanalysts still have negative personal thinking towards the homosexuality. However, most of projects and tests had supported the idea of homosexuality is a form of mental illness nowadays.
