Monday, 26 September 2022

Homosexuality & Narcissism & Enlightenment

Commented on this before but didn't have the word "Narcissism". As a test I bet that in a room of mixed homosexual and heterosexual people with a mirror on the wall the homosexuals will check themselves out in the mirror considerably more than the heterosexuals.

If true that may well be because of an obvious feature of homosexuals that they find themselves sexually attractive.

Now we can't deduce causation here. Is it the narcissism which causes the homosexuality or is it the other way around. But the involvement of self in the construction of sexuality is critical here.

It may be the intricate involvement of self here spills out into other parts of the psyche. The homosexuals are fundamentally more egocentric than heterosexuals, and have a closer relationship with themselves beyond the sexual relationship. But is it the overreach of the self that causes Homosexuality, or does the Homosexuality lead to overreach of the self?

Anyway some speculations on the difference between homo and hetero sexuality with regard to Self.

===

I used to argue a bit more that Sex is about Other. In biological terms Sex evolved so that DNA could become more diverse and mix with other DNA. Its pretty universal across the various kingdoms. Even bacteria exchange DNA in something akin to sex. Certainly in heterosexuality the Male and Female are considered opposites. And this opposition pervades the universe Yin-Yang in Taoism. So Sex has difference at its root.

So how can there be homosexuality? This is actually a misnomer. If there really was just one sex we wouldn't call it homosexuality. Its because there are 2 sexes that homosexuals are able to call themselves homo. In fact homosexuals should do away with this term as it depends upon Heterosexuality for its meaning. But homosexuals still have the problem that they are different from the other half the population. Male homosexuals must ignore the females, and vice versa. That seems an odd society doesn't it. The male population all involved in sexual relations and the female population all involved in relationships. You might argue why are there only 2 sexes? You could have any number of homosexual sexes and each sex only has relationships with itself. But all this immediately makes sense in Heterosexuality where the two sexes fit together -- quite literally.


Well the Male Homosexual may say well we fit together through the anus, and the Female may say well who needs to fit together anyway that is pure dogmatic prejudice.

But everyone must admit it is quite neat that there are 2 sexes and they can fit together leaving nothing over.


Probably my favourite graphic. The whole divides into parts that are made and depend on each other. That is whole the whole divides into separate parts, that opposition that drives them apart is only necessary because they are really together. Newton's Third Law is really universal: when you push things apart they respond with an equal force in the other direction. That force that separates Male and Female, incurs an equal force that brings them together. And when you ask why you need to separate them, it can only be because actually they are unified. Psychologically we note that someone who avoids something and pushes it back, only needs to do this because they originally perceived it as drawing them in. Hate and Love are intimately entwined. When we fight something, it's to keep it away, but we only need keep it away if we already feel it is already here or approaching. Generally we only see opposites as Opposite can originally we had them as a Unity. We pair Salt and Pepper and see them as different but only because they are both Condiments. We never pair Salt and Cats normally because they do belong in any common unity. But perhaps cos of Cat's relation to Witches and theirs to the Occult and the Devil (after Christian persecution of Pagans) and we use salt to protect from the Devil we might now see how Cats and Salt belong together in a new way, and suddenly we have this new way of separating them but only because we first found their connection and unity.

Yin-Yang really underlines the nature and dialectic of Unity/Difference perfectly. Certainly in Heterosexuality the idea is that male and female fit together like this. They are whole because they are different. Its a very sophisticated and ancient idea the Unity of Opposites. The very first writings in the Greek system are about this Law and Logos.

(Famously Derrida wrote his seminal paper DiffĂ©rance on this very subject, placing Difference as the heart of Similarity and observing that when we draw things together as alike one another, it's really based upon movements to separate. Long time since I read that paper... #TODO check this - is he dialectical here or not?)

Anyway by contrast the Homosexual thinks that Unity occurs through Similarity which is quite a different idea and leads to things being left over. It is only as great an idea as a type. If you have 2 sexes you have 2 separate unities which do not fit together. Full sense has not been achieved. With the unity of opposites everything is accounted for and the types all fit together like a jigsaw.

Quick processing of the recently prevailing idea of intersex and non-binary:

People like to make things complex. In terms of gender it is complex if we wish to label every single variant. Perhaps as a man I like machismo, but I also like to be in touch with my feelings and enjoy delicate and fine living. I wouldn't call myself the brute of classical Masculinity, but I wouldn't call myself Feminine. I don't actually know what this is called but its close to Camp. We can invent any number of gender combinations. Actually neutral is a good one where we can't be bothered with gender identity at all. That doesn't get much of a look in. But ignoring all this social stuff and sticking to the physical there are actually only 2 sexes and that is because there are only 2 genital types. If there is an intersex or a nonbinary sex then draw its genitals.

Unfortunately no amount of social theory can remove the basic physical facts. And there is nothing wrong with that. Facts like the Sun rises every morning, or we need air to breath are not a political expression of authority they just are. And there is a certain madness these days which tries to replace the simple observing of the way things are with some paranoia about political prejudice. One could do well to simply observe this paranoia happening for a start. But the radicalised will say, but the way "I think things are" is just the result of brainwashing or the Male Gaze or the Patriarchal System dictating my thoughts and we are in the paranoia that I mentioned in the blog on Fascism. People need to meditate more. Get clear that you are breathing right now, know that this is true and you have not been tricked by the State, or Descartes Demon, or anyone into thinking you are breathing and then like Descartes go from there and get clear about what your life is and what you think is right or wrong. Absolutely don't let the Patriarchal System tell you want to do, but at the same time don't let the radicals tell you what to do either! 

So actually I've argued myself back into where I used to be. Homosexuality is not just a different type of sexuality it is fundamentally different from Heterosexuality, but also derived from Heterosexuality. If there were not the males and females of heterosexuality to start with then there would be no homosexuality. Important to note there are 2x homosexualities a male and a female one. Homosexuality is bounded by sexuality (it can be labelled as either male or female). But there is only 1x heterosexuality and it is not bounded by sexuality, it explains sexuality with nothing left over.

Heterosexuality is the founding principle here. Now what homosexuals do about that conceptually I don't know. How does it work conceptually and politically to have budded off the main stem of sexuality?

The other issue is psychological and mentioned above. While Heterosexuality embraces the Other, homosexuality allows mission-creep of the Self. It is true that Self is a feature of all our lives, but the Heterosexual must put that aside when forming a relationship and embrace an entirely different creature into their life. The male must link up with the female. At least sexually the heterosexual cannot find satisfaction within them self. Yes they can masturbate but it is always with longing for the Other. For the Homosexual I speculate there is this extraordinary psychological situation where the self can actually find sexual gratification and Romantic Love in itself. I may not be my own type, but there is nothing to stop me actually been drawn to myself sexually. I can gain that gratification within my own essence with no need for searching in the world.

Now this is very akin to the religious path in fact. The life lived seeking worldly gains is also a never satisfied life. Nothing in the world is very predictable, and it is also hard trying to make it conform to what we want. How many house moves and renovations does it take before we just accept what we have. Surely the goal of life is to be satisfied in ourselves and not have need for anything else. At least crudely I believe this is what the Hindus and Buddhists seek, and probably true for all the other religions. We stop looking outside and invite God into our hearts for the eternal fulfilment that He offers.

How then is this different from the Homosexual inviting themselves into their heart to gain sexual gratification without venturing into the world. Being in love with oneself essentially.

Well perhaps this is a huge pitfall for religion. If you meet a religious person who is smug and self satisfied without a care for anyone you would think they have drifted off the path. The religious path has Other people at its heart. The religious is caring, giving, patient, compassionate they are in fact willing to take on the sufferings of other people. But if we are self-satisfied where is the motivation to take on the sufferings of others?

Suppose you have gained Arahant level and have ended suffering for yourself, you might easily think "I am thus come" I have shown and verified the path. If you want to end suffering then walk the path yourself. And then have nothing else to do with people. For those who are suffering, they have only themselves to blame. The path is free and open, if you want to end suffering walk that path. It must be an easy trap. Indeed I believe the story of Buddha includes something similar where he thought the path too hard and so decided to enjoy his freedom from suffering alone. Various deities beseeched Buddha to begin teaching "some beings are blinded by only a single grain of sand" and he relented.

So I guess this is the issue. Is there a type of homosexuality that stems from not wishing to accept the Other into ones life, so that there is the self assurance of sexual gratification within oneself. Or is it the other way around, that homosexuality has other causes which as a side effect open the door to the possibility of self-sexual-gratification.

I guess the use of words there answers the Arahant question too. A self-satisfied religious practitioner still has self!

From a discussion with a homosexual I discovered that the sexuality really is a mirror image. Where the heterosexual thinks sex with the same sex is disgusting and shuns it, so the homosexual shuns the opposite sex. That is quite interesting in that the same mechanism of sex selection is working just in opposite directions.

Anyway extremely contentious issue whether homosexuality is a state in and of itself, or whether it is derivative from heterosexuality. But certainly in this investigation there is a much to explore and think about. 

No comments:

"The Jewish Fallacy" OR "The Inauthenticity of the West"

I initially thought to start up a discussion to formalise what I was going to name the "Jewish Fallacy" and I'm sure there is ...