"Sexual acts" for some males may not even look like sexual acts to most people. Money (1988) reports an interesting case:
When I see a drowning or stabbing [of a woman on television]..., I go crazy. I can go up to a maximum of six orgasms in one day over a period of several days. ...I am obsessed with and addicted to stranglings and drownings in my fantasies. ...I don't know exactly what the cause is, but I have had this problem of girls getting murdered by drownings and stranglings since I was very little, say age ten. (65: 164)This man's honesty would be troubling for some people because his favorite "sexual act" is not what most professionals or feminists have been saying, such as: Rape is not a sexual act. It is an act of power and control. It is aggression and violence motivated by anger, rage, and even hatred. A "sexual act" must therefore fit one's beliefs, but this is not a scientific way of investigating a phenomenon. The perspective is, in fact, as self-defeating as the one most professionals had manifested before 1974 when "heterosexuality" was defined to be a valid form of sexuality while "homosexuality" was not. Homosexuality was apparently not what sex should be, and it was therefore deemed to reflect a mental disorder. Believing a LIE then caused mental health professionals to attempt proving (thus validating) their beliefs, but doing this was only possible by violating important scientific rules - and by also remaining blind to this fact.
In adolescence, my favorite "sexual act" was visualizing the torture-murder of women, but I would have never made this fantasy - this sexual desire - into reality, even if it would be greatly rewarded by the orgasm-producing system. If, in fact, someone had asked me if I would ever use force to get sex from a woman, or rape a woman, I would have answered "NO!" Yet, in one study of 356 heterosexual male university students, 60 percent of the males reported a likelihood of raping a woman, if it was guaranteed that they would not be caught or punished (14: 318). Two other studies with smaller samples of males (n =145, n = 172) reported [admission] rates of 40.6% and 37.2%, respectively (52: 299,303; 85: 154). Without doubt, these heterosexual males were inadvertently(?) also admitting to having a sexuality making it possible for them to recognize a "rape-of-women" likelihood, but I would have also answered "NO!" to the question. A group of males in the sample may have also done this while fully recognizing their sadistic sexual attributes.
A 1987 study reports the percentages
of males who had used varied sexual fantasies for masturbation purposes
||Dominating a woman.|
||Tying up a woman.|
||Using force to subdue a woman.|
||Forcing a woman to have sex.|
||Being violent Toward women.|
||Raping a woman.|
In 1980, Canadian researchers reported
their findings from a study of men in a relationship with a woman for at
least a year. The sample consisted of nearly 100 males ranging in age from
20 to 45 (Average = 32), with an average of 14.9 years of education, and
60.6 percent of them were married. The average length of their relationship
with their current female partner was 6.5 years. The study reports the
percentages of males engaging in various sexual fantasies while having
sex with their female partners (21:
||Sexually initiating a young girl.|
||Raping a woman.|
||Being anally penetrated.|
||Having sex with a man.|
||Humiliating a woman.|
||Beating a woman up.|
||Sexually initiating a young boy.|
Amazingly, I have yet to encounter a study of heterosexual males who were asked: "Have you ever fantasized about killing women?" As an adolescent or adult, I would have answered "YES" to the question. In the above cited study, however, one-third of the males reported rape fantasies, and 10.7 percent of the men studied did fantasize about "beating a woman up" because this sexual act sexually stimulated them.
As a rule in sex research, the percentages of people who acknowledge (admit to) engaging in negatively perceived (taboo) sexual realities are always minimums as Kinsey (1948) repeatedly discovered. People may consciously lie, or they may not yet know they would be sexually stimulated by taboo sexual activities such as rape, rape-murder, torture, just killing women, etc.. In adolescence, my morbid hetero-sexual realities were always evident to me, but there were other discoveries to be made. In my early 20s, I was in a movie theater watching The Sandpebbles. Steve McQueen was on a boat in the middle of a river. His friend was on shore, captured by the enemy. They strung him up and began slicing his chest with a sword. The sexual stimulation experienced during this scene was somewhat embarrassing and shocking, but I responded to the discovery much like I had to the torture-murder fantasies involving women. "How interesting!" By this time I was actively seeking to understand my inner sexual realities and essentially appreciated the discovery.
Later, I read about the identical sexual nature in the form of Yukio Mishima's adolescent hero in the novel Confessions of a Mask. The boy first discovers that he is highly sexually stimulated by a painting of Saint Sebastian's torture-death (63: 36-39, 74-78). He then discovers he is most sexually stimulated by visualizing a male who is tied and his muscular chest is being cut. A fantasy focus is on the rivulets of blood flowing and following the muscular structure of the man's chest. To accent this aspect of the hero's sexuality, such a male is depicted on the cover of the novel. Three swords are present, thus indicating the presence of three sadists. One sword has already made a cut into his chest. (63)
There is considerable sexual violence acted out in both heterosexual and homosexual segments of society. In the gay world, there is sexual violence but it commonly occurs between consenting sexual partners. While the rape of women is epidemic in the heterosexual world, prisons are places where males are most likely to be raped and/or sexually used and/or abused, thus explaining why the book, Male Rape, focused almost exclusively on rapes in prison. It was also reported that men believing themselves to be 100 percent heterosexual were the rapists or weaker males in prisons, and that pre-puberty boys are sexually abused either by pedophiles - males who did not have a history of having sex with adults - or males who had a history of only or predominantly having sex with women.
The rape of men in prison has been extremely common and, if we asked macho male rapists why weaker males are raped and/or sexually used/abused, they would answer: "It's because women are not available." If we suggested they were homosexual, they would deny this by stating something like: "The men we rape and fuck are women, meaning that everything we do with them is 100 percent heterosexual." If we asked them "What MAKES a man into a woman?" they would answer: "If we ever hear he has been fucked by a man, including being raped. He has lost his masculinity forever. He is now a woman. He has lost the superior status of men and he's then treated like a woman. If he doesn't want to supply us with the sex demanded, we'll rape the bitch! Soon enough, he learns to obey or he's beaten up again, maybe even killed!"
Norman Mailer (1971) describes the North American Prison situation:
"...prison life is a world where everything is homosexual" (51: 123). Although not every male in prison is involved with homosexual anal sex, "buggery is [still] as fundamental to prison as money [is] to social life... there is no humiliation more profound in prison than to be at the bottom of the order, to be helpless without a protector, and usable as a female by nearly every other convict. One's ass is one's honor in prison. Men commit murder to defend that ass or to revenge it if it has been raped. one's ass becomes one's woman; one's honor is that she is virginal (51: 119). "...the queers are enforced queers, ...they have been made female." (51: 122). Furthermore, "nowhere is the condition of being a feminine male more despised" (51: 123).Mailer's description of the "prison" situation corresponds to the descriptions I have encountered, and he makes it clear that these men hate (stronger term: "despise") "feminine males." Yet, these men are creating - MAKING - women out of men! Why? "Because we can't live without women!" they say. "We need women to rape. We need women to sexually use and abuse. We need sex slaves. This is how we get our rocks off." If we accept what they tell us, we must conclude that all men who rape and sexually abuse men in prison have possibly been rapists and sexual abusers of women, and they despise women.
What, therefore, are these rapists of men? Homosexuals, bisexuals, or the 100 percent heterosexuals they claim to be? Given that the rapists of women studied by professionals are usually convicted rapists, it would be interesting to know about their sexual performance was when they raped women; and, for the ones who have raped men in prison, to compare their sexual performance when raping men. If, for example, they had impotence problems when raping women but experienced no such problems when raping men, a preference for raping and sexually abusing males would be strongly indicated, thus reflecting a predominating sadistic homosexual orientation.
Testing this idea, however, would be illegal because the experiment would involve taking a group of men convicted of raping women, asking them - and their victims - about these men's sexual performance when they raped women, and then placing them in an environment where males are available for them to rape so that their sexual performances can be compared. All is not lost, however, because the experiment has been happening for centuries in prisons and the sexual performance of these men, when raping men, has been reported by the best evaluators available: the men they raped who biologically coded the magnitude of their erection and the intensity of their orgasms.
I have yet to encounter a case where males raped in prison report that their rapists were impotent in any way. As a rule, "dominant" males sexually perform in an exceptional manner. One male raped numerous times, including being gang-raped, and he has been in different American prisons, reports on what he saw and felt penetrating him orally and anally against his will:
There is little or no sexual dysfunction - impotence, 'Premature ejaculation, inability to ejaculate, etc. - in prison rape, by my observation (89: 61).When we compare this fact with the results of a 1977 study of 133 convicted rapists of women, a major difference in sexual performance is evident. After having interviewed both the rapists and their victims, it was concluded that for "only 33 (25%) of the offenders was there clear evidence of no sexual dysfunction occurred during rape." (31: 234).
All men who rape women probably claim to be 100 percent heterosexual and, whenever they have been challenged with the "homosexual" implications, they have strongly denied this with statements like: "I'm no fuckin' fag! At least what I do is normal!" The same obsession also applies for the macho violent males who rape other males in prisons. There is something very suspicious, however, when we learn that most self-defined "100% heterosexual males" who rape women have impotence problems, and that all self-defined "100% heterosexual males" who rape men in prison - supposedly because women are not available - are super-potent.
From my own experience, I first discovered my very morbid heterosexual nature - on the basis of sadistic fantasies - but I never sought to make these fantasies into reality as all men who rape women do, or attempt to do. By the age of 28, I had successfully eliminated my socially taught homophobia and, as this was happening, my sadistic heterosexual attribute - which had permitted me to believe that I was 100% heterosexual - simply vanished. It was almost like something in my mind had created this heterosexual nature to prevent me from recognizing my 100% homosexual status and, therefore, from possibly attempting to kill myself as 20 to 35 percent of gay youth do. These sadistic heterosexual fantasies were nonetheless saying: "You hate women!" The implications were that I loved males but I avoided this unacceptable conclusion by thinking: "It's only fantasies. It doesn't mean anything."
The discovery of my repressed sadistic homosexuality, and the disappearance of my sadistic heterosexuality, suggests that my heterosexuality was possibly unreal; it may have been a translation (or displacement) of my much less morbid repressed homosexuality. My experience also suggests that such morbid heterosexualities may be associated with a high level of socially induced homophobia and homohatred in males, especially when believing they are 100 percent heterosexual is important - as it appears to be for most males. Therefore, this conceptualization could explain why many (most) rapists of women have impotence problems. Although they are acting on the basis of their morbid I-hate-women heterosexuality, MAKING their fantasies into reality may not be what their repressed sadistic homosexuality wants. In such cases, impotence would be likely (as reported for most rapists of women), as it is also often the outcome when males repressing (denying) their homosexuality also report - after they come out - concerning their former (often failed) sexual endeavors with women.
For "dominant" males in prison, however, given that they are blessed with an ideological environment making the raping and/or sexual use/abuse of males possible without receiving the "homosexual" label, their sadistic homosexual performance is always exceptional. This apparently occurs because targeted males are MADE into females so that they can satisfy their morbid highly sadistic heterosexuality. Doing this is possible because "feminine males," "feminized males," or males perceived to be females, can apparently replace the "women" seen in their sexual fantasies.
Typically, psychologists and psychiatrists who have worked with "dominant" macho violent males have accepted their explanation for their frequent sexual activities with males; they were only using males as substitutes for women. As a rule, professionals have also responded with joy to the idea that most of these men apparently returned to only having sex with females when they left prison, but the joy is homophobia-based. "Oh! Thank God! Prison life did not turn these men into fags!" This joy is also rooted in extreme sexism because it is believed these men were only raping and sexually abusing/using other males because women were not available, and they would therefore return to society to inflict their sexuality only on women.
Mental health professionals have a history of dictating that "being homosexual" was a mental disorder, while believing that heterosexual male sadism - including rape - was "normal," or even an expected fact of life. Freud, as a great student of human history, concluded:
The history of human civilization shows beyond any doubt that there is an intimate connection between cruelty and the [male] sexual instinct... (24: 49).When growing up, including when I was at university, the learned male value system was always evident. Males who took what they wanted from a woman were highly valued, and one objective was setting up situations so that related activities would not be classified as rape, although it was rape and males knew it. Brownmiller's 1975 book, AGAINST OUR WILL: MEN, WOMEN AND RAPE, reports many war-related facts revealing that many men, but not all of them, would participate in raping women, including gang-rapes. In one case, for example, the only male in a group who was reluctant to participate in a gang-rape murder was called "a queer." The expectation when using such labels is that the dissenting male will join in the fun because raping a woman (or women, and even young girls) is perceived to be infinitely more acceptable than being homosexual, or suspected of being one.
The fact that "dominant" males in prison can replace the "women" in their sadistic heterosexual fantasies with "feminine males," and that they perform so well sexually with the male "substitutes," leads to an important question. Could the "women" in their sexual fantasies be substitutes for the males they may really want to rape. Although these men fervently believe that only "passive" males are women or "queers," they are also aware the "homosexual" label may apply if they manifested a preference for raping sexually abusing/using men instead of women.
Given this suspicion, "dominant" males could certainly be given a confrontation type of reality therapy intended to explore why they emphatically believe that the highly enjoyed homo-sex experienced is 100% heterosexuality. One problem related to their belief is their conclusion that only "heterosexual" sex can exist, even between males. Furthermore, they must also be concluding that two self-accepting 100% homosexual males - or women by their definition - must be lesbians! Or worse: one of them could be sexually dominant and also accept the homosexual self-label. Such a threat to their self-deception (not being homosexual) could therefore warrant the extermination of such males, as it has been reported to occur.
"Dominant" males would also be confronted with the fact that, if they raped me, I would then apparently be MADE into a woman, meaning that I would be treated accordingly. Rape and sexual abuse, however, are not acts of love. They are acts of hatred or even "an unfinished murder," as one raped woman defined rape. This perception of "being raped" is, in fact, the same as the one "dominant" macho males have somehow acquired given their perceptions of raped males. Rape is one of the methods used to murder a male, thus MAKING him into a female who will then be regularly re-murdered, for this is how these men perceive the sex act. Their sexuality will be inflicted on males decreed to be women who are hated and despised, apparently because real women are not available so that the same thing could be done to them. Who, therefore, do these men love?
Subjecting these men to such a "third degree" would be "Invasive Socratic Therapy," with even greater challenges. Using the assumption that they raped and gang-raped me, they could be challenged with the idea that, just before they raped me, I was not yet a woman. Therefore, what do we call sex between MEN? After they raped me, however, they then believed I was magically transformed into a woman, and the sex they were subsequently having with me was 100% heterosexuality! Yet, I would not be "a woman." I would simply be a male who has been raped by males who are not the 100% heterosexuals they claim to be. Furthermore, given my post-rape sexual experiences with them, another fact would have become apparent. When they are having sex with me or other males, they are not fantasizing about women!
Invasive Socratic Therapy is effective but the follow-up 'therapy' would be illegal in our society, just like Socrates' existence became illegal in his society. Given these men's belief that a man penetrated by a penis will be magically turned into a woman, they could be subjected to the experience - just to check their beliefs are real or self-deceptions. In such a situation, two outcomes are possible. If they don't become EVERYTHING they have demanded raped males to be, their fraud will be exposed. Some of them would certainly admit their deceitful use of the prison's belief system, and maybe also report always having known about their sexual preference for other males. Some males would also report having denied this fact, especially to others, and maybe even to themselves, possibly for self-esteem maintenance. For other males, however, the results could be dramatic. Their belief would be confirmed, but only for themselves, and only because they would somehow have been magically transformed into "a woman," thus revealing the existence of a psychological construct possibly similar to Multiple Personality Disorder. [MPD, now DID - Dissociative Identity Disorder.]
In my highly Socratic "Know Thyself" endeavor, after having accepted the sadistic component of my homosexuality, and also accepted my 100% homosexuality by ridding myself of some homophobic attributes, I then recognized a more repressed passive masochistic homosexual attribute existing within. This is the one "dominant" males would call "a woman!" and, since early childhood, this aspect of personality had made itself known, but I did not acknowledge its existence for "self-esteem" maintenance reasons. I am not, however, the only gay individual to have made this self-discovery.
A part of the gay community consists of a highly organized group of males into "leather sex," sadomasochism (SM), or bondage and discipline (BD). At their Calgary 1992 MR. Alberta Drummer contest, an international winner of the contest said: "It takes a good Bottom [a "passive" masochistic gay male] to make a good Top [a "dominant" sadistic gay male]." In their books and articles, including professional papers written about these males, one general reality has been noted. "The top" uses a combination of his own sadistic sexual reality and credible acting so that "the bottom" experiences super sexual stimulation and super orgasm(s), as also experienced by "the top."
The objective for "a top" to find "a bottom" closely approximating the "vision" present in his mind. To simplify this quest, a system of codes was therefore developed in the 1970s. Handkerchiefs of various colors - known as the hanky code (Note) - could be seen hanging from the back pockets of gay males and were used to indicate one's desires or preferences. These include being a top or bottom, if spanking would be enjoyed, and many other activities others would decree to be degrading and/or abusive. These men are honest, however, given that their acceptance (and revelation) that various acts of degradation, including verbal abuse, can be highly stimulating "sexual acts," and activities may include being spanked or whipped until one cries. "How horrible!" some people may think, and the list of condemners includes many gay males, lesbian and bisexual females, and most heterosexual people.
These males are exploring and enjoying their sexuality, and almost always in consenting situations. In prison, on the other hand, what heterosexual males do to other males - because women are not available - and what many heterosexual males do to women in society - including rape-murder, rape, sexual abuse and degradation, and even torture and battery for males who are sexually stimulated by this - is not done with the consent of the "passive" person who is therefore a victim. Why is this happening? To date, the best most professionals (including many feminist theorists) have been able to assert is: "Wanting to spank someone until they cry, and even causing someone to have blue marks on their ass, is not a sexual act! Neither is the use of degrading language, nor the treatment of others as slaves, or as one's sexualized son who wishes to be sexual with his father!" The are numerous gay males, however, who would tell these professionals: "Wanna watch? As the proof that you are wrong? Wanna see males with homosexualities rooted in being responded to in such ways?"
Gay males with "power" sexualities manifest an important reality. The "tops" are seeking a "bottom" who best fits their own inner selves; this is the "image" created (or made available) when they are masturbating to the most sexually stimulating scenarios, thus producing their best orgasms. Given this fact, it is therefore possible that having sex with someone is essentially a "projection" activity with a dual purpose. It is an incredible "Know Thyself" activity, also rewarded by great orgasms, but the "Know Thyself" component (as a conscious endeavor) would only exists if one is not homophobic. An individual must therefore be comfortable enough to accept one's inner realities and especially - in the final analysis - their sexual passivity, or what "dominant" males in prison decree to be "a woman!" However, many gay-identified males usually don't equate being sexually passive with "being a woman" because, for them, being sexually passive is a 100% male activity.
Unfortunately, "projection" is not always such a positive fear-unrelated experience. As previously noted about "malignant bisexuals," or "malignant homosexuals," projection can be used in extremely negative ways. Homosexual males may be hunted down, assaulted, and even killed by males seeking out the ones best representing their own hated and repressed inner Selves, and these acts therefore replicate their own internal war. The same also applies to the "dominant" males' rape / abuse / use of other males in prison. What these heterosexual males demand raped males to be (or become) is based on expectations and is therefore a projection of an "image" existing in their minds. This is "image" with whom they are having sex when masturbating, and having even better orgasms when sexually relating with a male behaving as demanded, which is in accordance to this "image."
In our patriarchal societies characterized by the traditionally obsessive male belief that "being a woman" is inferior to "being a man," as manifested by men even creating gods, religious beliefs and laws dictating that this LIE is the truth, and laws also granting men the right to inflict their supremacy status on women, I was therefore responding to the "men-are-superior-to-women" messages by the age of 2. I was being educated to believe that, for example, crying was a weak "feminine" attribute. Basically, everything defined to be "feminine" - or for girls - reflected weakness and inferiority. Furthermore, everything women did - or more precisely what they were dictated to do - was also decreed to be inferior to what men did! Therefore, everything "feminine" - or what would be equated to being "like a baby" - was to be purged from one's entity.
By the age of 4 and 5, I had special abilities permitting me to feel that something was wrong with the observed ruling males. I knew, for example, that males who just slapped women now and then didn't love women. Parents who physically assaulted their children also did not love their children, given that their love was conditional. You were loved only if you were what they 'fantasize' you to be. They also loved you only if you accept what they believe, which has often been LIES. As our history reveals, our forefathers were quite willing to destroy individuals who didn't accept the LIE that the sun revolves around the earth. At a young age, I was therefore working to retrieve and/or keep many of the feminine attributes boys were to purge, but there were related dangers. At all cost, boys had to avoid the deadly "sissy" label, which was easy to do given that I also enjoyed doing all the "masculine" things boys were to do.
I was therefore actively involved in a conscious form of "personality integration," as opposed to what most boys did: "personality disintegration" or "personality splitting," accomplished by purging everything socially defined - by the ruling males (and their owned generally obedient females) to be "feminine" and "inferior." As a young boy, I enjoyed cooking, being affectionate, taking care of babies, and I even learned to knit - which had been a male activity in my French Canadian culture. I also considered girls to be my equals and played with them in a world where boys would commonly say: "Yuk! Girlsl I'm not playing with them!" Tragically, such boys were deemed "normal" by a society not wanting to see "the obvious.".
Given our current improved understanding of white supremacy, we would correctly predict the "adolescent" and "adult" outcome for young white boys if we heard them say: "Yuk! Niggers! I'm not playing with them!" There was a time, however, when white slave owners really believed they were doing black people a favor by having them as slaves! Many also believed they loved black people, but only if they accepted their slavery status and, therefore, their inferiority status relative to white people! This is not love! It is hatred, always made evident whenever a black individual dared to behave as an equal to a white person.
I was therefore refusing to hate females, or hate what was "feminine" within me, meaning that - because I am a homosexual male, and if I had been studied by Bell et al. (1981), I would have contributed to their major finding. Homosexual males, for reasons unexplained, were best distinguished from males defined to be heterosexual by the higher levels of "femininity" - or gender nonconformity - manifested during childhood (08: 74-81) Unfortunately, the damage to me had already been done, as it became apparent in early adolescence when I discovered my morbid "hatred-of-women" torture-murder heterosexual fantasies. In a symbolic manner, which was somehow linked to my sexuality, I was reproducing the social message I had internalized in early childhood. The female in me was to be eliminated, destroyed, or murdered! Killing her was also a highly sexually stimulating experience producing super orgasms.
The female within, or "the anima" as Carl Jung called her has been recently renamed or transformed into "the inner child": the passive [female] child boys were to purge but only managed to repress and deny. For me, however, gender nonconformity was something I was able (chose) to retain, while I was not responsible for the torture-murder fantasies discovered to exist within my mind. The same applies for gay youth who are also not responsible for their discovered homosexual fantasies, nor would they be responsible for attempting suicide because of the implicated socially induced homohatred. How could we then ever blame men for raping women, or even for rape-murdering women, if this is the only heterosexuality they know? Wouldn't the blame be much less (or even nil) if we studied these individuals and discovered that the only alternative was accepting their homosexuality, but that doing this had made impossible by society's teaching of homohatred. For such highly homophobic males, such a reality banquet would have been death-producing, meaning that "condemning" such an individual would therefore be somewhat illogical.
As a gender nonconformable gay male, as most gay males are, we may have an ability not existing in ultra macho heterosexual males. As often observed, gay males often have females as friends, or even as best friends, but this experience would be IMPOSSIBLE for the ultra macho males in prison as made evident by answering this question. Could these men be friends with a woman given what they do to males believed to be "like women"? Given that all men who are "like women" are to be their slaves, and especially their sex slaves? Given that they believe women to be inferior beings? Given that they despise "feminine males," thus reflecting their real feeling for women?"
There is a myth in our society regularly encountered when average people asked me questions apparently because they wanted to better understanding what causes a male to be gay. They often believe that gay males hate women and, in the affirmative because they are expecting a confirmation, they ask: "Do you hate women?" They have assumed that, because I love men and I am not having love/sex relationships with women, that I must therefore hate women; this is the same logic often producing the conclusion that lesbians must hate men.
Unfortunately, the thinking faculties of these individuals have been subverted by their cultural indoctrination and I ask: "Who hates women? The more gender nonconformable males who often have women as best friends, or the men seeking seek women to rape or rape-murder? Do men who rape women love women? How about the men who beat up women because it sexually stimulates them? How about the men who seek to have love/sex relationships with women when the ultimate objective is to sexually abuse and degrade these women?"
Just because white people had black slaves in their homes did not mean black people were loved by white people, and a similar situation may apply to heterosexual males. For example, the evidence suggests that some men married a special woman: a woman they hated the most, because this was the woman they regularly assaulted, raped, sexually abused in many ways, and maybe even killed. Simone de Beauvoir, after having described the self-given powers men had over women in the male created marriage institution, concluded that the institution was "obscene." Men had the legal right to rape their wives, and to also batter them.
Furthermore, on the basis of the penalties Canadian men were receiving when they murdered their wives, articles could still be written in 1986 with titles like: "Killing wife just not murder" (03). No one, however, would ever concluded that the majority of white Americans loved Afro-Americans during the 100 years after they were granted equality, mostly because "Killing Black people [was also] just not murder." Yet, we remain blind to the reality that many men have hated women and that we live in a sexist society in which men's traditional hatred of women was generally called "love!"
The myth that gay males hate women, however, is not totally wrong. It's only wrong about most males defining themselves to be "gay" or "homosexual": the males we have traditionally hated and sought to destroy, possibly because they valued women and were therefore "women lovers!" It's certainly not correct to say: "Men who are gay- or homosexual-identified hate women." It may, however, be correct to say that "Men who hate women are homosexual." "Dominant" macho males in prison are certainly in the hatred-of-women category, but they are the opposite of the traditional homosexual male stereotype: gay males who are more "like women" or "gender nonconformable." This was the most significant difference between homosexual and heterosexual males studied by Bell & Weinberg (1978). but their sampling was biased.
The obsession to prove that gay males must somehow be "like women" is a bias also present in the recent research supposedly suggesting - proving - that even some parts of the brains of gay males are more like the ones found in female. The results, however, are the product of bias sampling because, given my experiences, samples from "the gay community" are of predominantly socially constructed (and therefore more feminine) self-defined homosexual males; this phenomenon is a product of the process well rendered in the title of Greenberg's 1988 book, The Social Construction of Homosexuality (28). Almost all males who are also 100% homosexual - but are very macho with a hatred-of-women heterosexuality as the one I had - would generally not define themselves to be gay, nor would they become part of modern gay communities. I would therefore estimate that five of these males - who never become part of "homosexual male" study samples, nor are they recognized to be homosexual because they are not sissies - exist for every gender nonconformable gay-identified male.
In our culture, the "sissy" gay male stereotype, or bias, is strong and it's best expressed with the firm belief manifested by "dominant" males in prison. For them, only males who are "like women" - as defined by their "penetrated" status in the sexual act - are "queers." Males who are "penetrating" anyone are deemed to be 100% heterosexual. There is more to this belief, however, than just assuming it was invented or developed for self-deception purposes, as a few gay-identified males report to have applied for them. In fact, numerous people in our society can be expected to acquire the same belief given bow we still educate (program, indoctrinate) boys.
Generally, boys are encouraged (with many threats) to purge their "femininity" and boys (and adults) commonly use the word "sissy" to insult and degrade all boys not purging their feminine attributes. Males using the "sissy" insult, however, have become replications of their sexists fathers and grandfathers. They have somehow learned (and firmly believe) that "being feminine" is apparently very inferior to "being masculine" and, therefore, that men are superior to women.
During early childhood, most children are not aware of the role "sex" plays in the only relationships - heterosexual relationships - our society permits them to see, almost as if children are to be taught that only heterosexuality exist, or should/could exist. As a result of this traditional penalty-enforced setup - often referred to as "the closet" which has been an important part of society's "compulsory heterosexuality" attribute - most children conclude that men and women are the only ones attracted to each other and have love relationships. By late childhood, after having been exposed to millions of messages emphasizing that women are attracted to men, and they are also fully realizing that sex plays a major role in these relationships, only one conclusion is possible in most cases. It is at about this age that boys begin to perceive "the sissy" in sexual terms because they begin using words like "fag," "faggot," "queer," "homo," etc.. to insult sissy males, and these words were socially created for this purpose. On the basis of their education, the conclusion will therefore be that only females are sexually attracted to males and, if a male is "like a female," he must therefore be "sexually passive" - like women - and also sexually attracted to males, thus being a "faggot," "homosexual," or "queer."
The objective in a sexist and homohating society, however, is to (insidiously) teach the hatred of women and the hatred for all males deemed to be "like women" (or homosexuals), and researchers have reported a relationship between the two hatreds. Yet, the author of Longtime Companion, Craig Lucas, in his 1990 keynote address at the first National Gay and Lesbian Conference, outlined the experiences of gay males as children and concluded: "Homophobia and misogyny are not related; they are the same" (49: 46).
Lucas also noted that "the effeminate man has been, and remains, the laughing stock of our movies, our most successful comedians" (49: 46). To laugh at the sight of a man acting like a woman, especially when he alters himself in ways society decrees to be "female" - the artificial aspects of the image being the use of make-up and nail polish, the hair styles and the type of jewelry worn, wearing clothing such as high heel shoes, dresses, skirts, etc., and acting as a female (a learned attribute) - is to reveal what we really think of women. Such a man has lost status and he is the "inferior-to-male" human men have traditionally believed women to be. Our greatest contempt, however, is reserved for all males who are sexually "like women," as evidenced by the "insult" words our society has developed and uses for this purpose. As Dr. Ziegler, a gay clinical child psychologists explains:
Children call each other "faggot" when they want to be the most cruel, and this is before they really know what the word means. Messages like this are everywhere. (93)Dr. Ziegler's article was aimed at gay males as illustrated by the title: Why do we hate ourselves? Self-hatred, or internalized homohatred, is at the root of major problems for gay males, just like self-hatred has been implicated in major problems for African-Americans and Native peoples. In the latter case, dominant culture was certainly teaching self-hatred to Native children in residential schools, but the same outcome also resulted if they attended public schools. Such indoctrination was, in fact, a highly effective way to harm the ones we were taught to hate. The self-hatred would also make them more likely to engage in a wide spectrum of self-destructive behaviors
The concept has been presented that homosexual males are still being taught self-hatred and that a socially created army of repressed homosexual males has been on the front-line of society's traditional war waged against identifiable gay males. These are the males who, via "projection" of their own self-hatred and the associated denial that they are everything they hate the most, partake in "homo-hunting" activities, the objective being verbal abuse, assault and possibly even murder. Johnson, in the full page article What makes bashers hate? printed in Vancouver's gay magazine, Angles, still doesn't understand what is "the emotional satisfaction" bashers get from their assaults, and deems the problem to be "a chilling mystery." Yet, she fully understands the role of the socially CREATED bashers in a society traditionally obsessive in its desire that gay males be (and remain) "in the closet," thus saying:
We really do not want you to exist. We would also prefer your death, as certain Christians also emphasize, but we'll settle for the status quo as maintained by the frequent assaults and occasional murders of your kind by individuals created for this purpose. "Perhaps no other single factor keeps us in the closet as a community and as individuals as the threat and existence of violence." (40)The idea that socially induced/instilled self-hatred in hated groups creates an army of individuals actively working to harm their own kind, is fascinating, and the concept may also apply to the army of males created to keep women "in their place." Men who murder, mass-murder, and rape-murder women, including men who batter and rape their wives, have been the ones on the front-line in the traditional "war between the sexes," the 'war' men have traditionally waged against women "to keep them in their place" as inferiors to men. If, however, these men were created by socially induced self-hatred, the hatred would be for a female existing within them. This hatred would also be in the murderous range given that she would be equated with "the homosexual" against whom heterosexual males had given themselves the right to act out their murderous hatred.
In our society, a significant training ground for males who may eventually be very violent with women - because they hate women the most - occurs in childhood and adolescence. During this period, boys with socially approved masculine aspirations are insulting, abusing, and assaulting boys called "sissies," "queers, fags," etc., because they are thought to be "like females." Society has also traditionally given its tacit to overt approval to these abusive and violent young males, but what could be expected from feminine-despising boys as they enter adulthood? What self-reality are "dominant" males in prison revealing when they report only having raped, sexually used and/or abused males, and physically assaulted other disobedient owned males apparently because women were not available?
Men in the above category have certainly been on the front-line of men's traditional war against women and, once released from prison, they should be returning to their mission. These ultra macho males, however, may not be the 100% heterosexual males they claim; they may be 100% homosexual with an inner feminine personality duplicating their "feminine" demands on raped males. For these "dominant" males, "gender" is defined solely on the basis of the sex act, thus replicating the beliefs of boys who conclude that "the sissy" is "the fag" who is "like a female" and is therefore (or will be) "sexually passive." Dominant males in prisons, however, also reverse the logic: the male who is penetrated by a penis is automatically MADE into "a woman" or its believed equivalent: "the queer." Their hatred for homosexual males (homophobia / homohatred) and their hatred for women is therefore the same, but their homohatred is rooted in their misogyny. From a "projection" perspective, these men would also be women CREATED to inflict the greatest violence possible on women. As women, they would also be - according to their view of the world - the homosexual males who really hate women.
In Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Youth Need Our Help (86), the idea was presented that many male juvenile delinquents - and especially the males in violent youth gangs - are repressed homosexuals who know they are homosexual and therefore know that society hates them, thus explaining why they are revolting against society, sometimes in violent ways. Their "repressed homosexual" status was argued on the basis that, at least for the group Reiss studied and called "organized career delinquents," about 62 percent of them had repeatedly participated in "dominant sex" with "queers" in society (72: 202). Even though Reiss concluded they were heterosexual, he nonetheless documented important facts related to their sexual activities which, especially after 1973 when homosexuality was deemed to not be a mental disorder, were not being documented by professionals studying deviance and delinquency. They had graduated from believing the LIE that all homosexuals are mentally disordered to the grand delusion that sexual orientation - or homosexual activity - is irrelevant or insignificant in a world still actively teaching the homohatred implicated in gay youth suicide problems.
Reiss reported that the male juvenile delinquents who were most likely to have "dominant sex" with "queers" frequently reported that "they participate in group heterosexual activity" called "gang-bangs" (72: 204): "Most have at least participated in one gang-bang" (73: 49). Few people have recognized, however, that the ultra macho sport of gang-banging is a repressed homosexuals dream ... as I realized when a male friend at university reported on the gang-bang he had participated in, the night before. The female involved was described to be "a real pig" - given what was done to her - because this is what they most enjoyed doing to a woman. I was troubled by his contempt for the female, but I was experiencing a desire making the concern secondary. I would have wanted to be there, not to have sex with the female involved, but to see this male naked, with an erection, and having an orgasm ... because I was sexually attracted to him.
Over the years, I have only encountered one written rendition of the idea that the sharing of a woman by men is a form of 'heterosexual' sex motivated by repressed (or not so repressed) homosexual desires, and the explanation was written in a gay magazine, The Advocate. Generally, the female involved in a gang-bang is always perceived to be a whore, pig, slut, etc. by the males involved. To them, this female has no value except for the role of being a receptacle for male penises and their sperm. The major attraction for a repressed homosexual, however, would be to have his penis where the penises of the other males have been and to have his penis bathed with the sperm of males he values, respects, and loves; this concept is a commonly rendered in gay pornography via the ejaculation of sperm on a willing sex partner . Repressed homosexual males are also seeing the only ones they love - or can love - naked, with erections, and having orgasms! What more could a repressed homosexual who hates women want than to participate in a gang-bang? Even their hatred for women - their heterosexuality or pseudoheterosexuality - is being satisfied because of the types of females chosen for a gang-bang. They are called "pigs" and the only heterosexual activity with the potential of satisfying repressed homosexuals more, if their hatred for women was more intense, would be gang-rapes, and even gang-rape-murders.
Such males exist in the form of "dominant" adult males in prisons but, as Reiss believed about their adolescent counterparts, other professionals have also assumed they were heterosexuals, except when the public was being informed about homo-sex in prisons. In the 1970s, politically aware gay males were upset by the fact that expressions like "homosexual rape" and "homosexual assault" were being used to describe prison homo-sex events (46: 267) because the public would then conclude that it was gay males doing these things. This became an issue of "If you are to hate us, hate us for what we do! Not for what heterosexual males are doing!" Therefore, "in 1978, under pressure from gay organizations, [U.S.] federal prison authorities were ordered to stop using the term 'homosexual rape,' since more often than not homosexual prisoners (or prisoners who happened to be younger, smaller, effeminate, or sexually desirable) are the victims of rape perpetrated by heterosexual males who see their victims as surrogate females" (39: 717).
During the past two decades, gay males have unfortunately been "defining themselves," and the definition includes only males giving themselves the "gay" or "homosexual" labels. As I have often argued, however, the world of male homosexuality is infinitely larger than the so-called "gay community." In fact, many gay males recognize that, for every male who defines himself to be "gay," there is probably five males who will remain - for life - at the stages of denial most gay males have experienced. Some gay-identified report that their denial once involved only being "homo-sexually dominant," and many repressed homosexuals remain at this stage. Others may only act out their homosexual desires when they can totally avoid the dreaded homosexual self-label, meaning that they will be having "dominant" homo-sex only in prison. Another group of repressed homosexuals drink alcohol, then engage in desired homo-sex, and (conveniently) say: "I was so drunk that I don't remember anything I did!"
Unfortunately, for political reasons, gay males would not want to include the ultra macho most violent males in society into "their family." This was well expressed by a gay male with whom I was discussing these issues. "Well, we don't fuckin' want them! We have enough problems as it is, without having society also blame us for the violence being inflicted on women. Even if it's ugly to say this, women can have men like that." I understood his feelings. Gay resources - both personal and financial - have been strained by the AIDS crisis. Yet, professionals like Dr. Ziegler have been telling gay males: "The gay community must somehow find the strength, time, and resources in this beleaguered time to wage this battle," which is the battle against the hatred of males who are "like females," because "something as basic as the mental health of a significant portion of the gay population depends on it" (93).
This is, in part, why this document is addressed to women's groups apparently concerned with men's high level of violence inflicted on women. If the "problem" outline presented contains a grain of truth, or maybe a grain bin, women's fight to end the violence inflicted on them by men is therefore the same battle gay males must wage to effectively address major problems created by socially induced self-hatred: the predictable result of society's teaching of misogyny to males. "Being feminine" - gender nonconformable - is equivalent to being "a queer" for numerous gay males, for all "dominant" males in prison, and for many other males. Women must now recognize that the learned hatred for females acquired by boys at a young age - well before knowing what a homosexual is - is the basis for the homohatred manifested later. Homophobia/homohatred and misogyny are essentially the same - and transferable - given that sexual violence in prisons is inflicted on males because women are not available. These ultra macho heterosexual males will continue to be sexually violent with women - and men - until they are given the therapy needed to recognize and accept their homo-sexual desires / orientation.
Some gay males have been wise, especially with their suspicions that ultra-macho males are really, at the inner-self level, the polar opposites of the image projected: the highly credible masculine facade they have MADE themselves into. This concept is often rendered in gay cartoons and even in gay pornography rarely reaching people in the heterosexual world. As a rule of thumb, whenever I see ultra macho males, I use the "doth protest to much!" Shakespearean wisdom rendered in Macbeth. I also remember the observation which placed Freud on the road to psychoanalysis:
Freud was struck by the fact that emotions vented during the [hypnotic] trance very often concerned sexual desires and fears which the patient, at all other times, were either unaware of or even vehemently denied (37: 345).Freud was discovering the unconscious which has amazed psychologists and psychiatrists ever since. Wilhelm Reich, who brought us the radical idea that most of the hetero-sex engaged in by men has absolutely nothing to do with reproduction, expressed the nature of the unconscious in a challenging way:
You think you can determine your actions with free will? Far from it! Your conscious action is only a drop on the surface of the sea of unconscious process, of which you can know nothing about which, indeed, you are afraid to know (71: 33).What would therefore be discovered if "dominant" males in prison were hypnotized or subjected to a Socratic type of therapy? What would happen if they were subjected to the anal penetration they firmly believe to be the "ACT OF CREATION" apparently responsible for automatically and magically MAKING men into women or "the queer" who, like women, are to be hated? Is it possible that these ultra-macho males have been telling us that being anally penetrated is "the royal road to their unconscious?" Maybe even to their inner woman? What does their sexual use and abuse of males reveal about their heterosexuality when they report only having raped males because women are not available? What is their true sexual nature given their exceptional sexual performance when they rape males? Above all, what does the CREATION of these males reveal about our society? Was Kleinberg correct when, after studying what happens in American prisons, he quoted Dostoevsky:
"The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons," and then added, If that is true, then we all live in THE HOUSE OF THE DEAD (46: 265).Have WE been listening to the females men have murdered, rape-murdered, torture-murdered, raped, and sexually abused? To all the wives who have been killed, battered, raped, injured, slapped, sexually abused, and psychologically abused by their husbands or boyfriends? Maybe not! Not at least until some feminists came along and began documenting some related factors. Were WE listening when Gornick & Moran devoted one quarter of their 1971 book, WOMEN IN SEXIST SOCIETY, to the concept that:
Norman Mailer possibly hated Kate Millet! He also called her a Communist many times, to discredit her. He had to. She was revealing his semi-private conversation with his male readers [one of whom happened to be my father]. Maybe, to some degree, he was attempting to understand (rationalize?) why he stabbed his second wife, Adele. Mailer's mother, however, had educated him well. After bearing about the stabbing, she said: "if only Norman stopped marrying these women who make him do these terrible things ..." (53: 334).
Women have been greatly deprived
of important information by the male ruled media which, for example, will
not present what really happens in prison. Many men spend their "time"
there raping or sexually using and abusing weaker males because
women are not available, only to then be released in a world where women
are available. Without doubt, these men would be women's greatest nightmare,
but so are REAL WOMEN who also seethe
with the HOMOHATRED men taught them, which is nothing
more than (often unrecognized) self-hatred.
A MAN IS MADE, NOT BORN.
WOMEN is a Canadian group of women wishing to retain women's
traditional role in our society, and they have been against equal rights
for gay and lesbian people. These women are much like the ones responsible
for the often noted 75,000,000 females on this planet who had their clitoris
cut off and/or their vaginal walls scraped to the bleeding stage - at about
the age of 5 or 6, without anesthetic, by women of the community because
these women know the desires of ruling men in their society and therefore
behave accordingly. As I see it, REAL WOMEN are the
psychological equivalent of women who had their clitoris severed - which
greatly reduces one's ability to respond sexually. REAL WOMEN
manifest all the symptoms of having received a lobotomy given that they
are living up to men's traditional perception of women.