 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
"The
patterns of (RH [ritualized homosexuality]) examined below are clearly
known from only a small number - perhaps 10 or 20 percent - of all Melanesian
groups that have been studied" (Herdt,
1984a: 8).
"The
homosexual act incorporates the boy into a new group, the ritual cult,
with a new status and role. The boy's insemination coheres with the native
view, universal in (RH) cultures, that the key (manifest) goal of homosexual
contact is to get sperm inside the boy's body [orally or anally] so he
can grow" (Herdt,
1984a: 61). They are to grow into very masculine adult male who
will then inseminate younger boys and then marry and have children.
"What
about the erotics of ritualized homosexuality? Let us underline the obvious:
without erotic desire, arousal, and consummation, any sexual intercourse
is impossible" (Herdt,
1984a: 63).
"The
theme of this study, semen transaction, may appear esoteric, not to mention
vulgar: certainly the question of who gives and receives sperm is not one
that much concerns Westerners today. Indeed, human fluids in general seem
obvious and trivial, even embarrassingly natural, or unnatural, as the
case may be. Seldom do we wonder how and why they are produced, or where
they are consumed or discarded, or by whom. The perspective in certain
Melanesian societies, however, is contrary to our view..." (Herdt,
1984b: 167).
"Male
growth after weaning comes mostly from homosexual insemination following
initiation. This semen-nourishment form is male monjapi'u, which
men liken to breast-feeding... In sum, semen creates biological growth
directly in initiates and wives through sexual contact, primary fellatio,
whereas it creates growth indirectly in fetus and newborn through being
transformed by a woman's body into fetal tissue and milk"
(Herdt,
1984b: 182).
"It
is a moot point whether the sensitivity of Western anthropology has inhibited
their studies of human sexuality in general..., but there is no denying
the paucity of anthropological data on homosexual behavior... Responding
to these international sensitivities [re: homosexuality], because anthropologists
need the support of many foreign governments, the Executive Board of the
American Anthropological Association resolved in 1975 'not to endorse anthropological
research on homosexuality across national borders.' Though I believe the
resolution was subsequently rejected, following protests from some of the
membership, the blanket ban, which did not take into consideration the
possibility of some positive responses from host governments, is indicative
of the persistence of Western attitudes toward homosexual behavior as a
'sensitive' subject which, though it is probably as prevalent as witchcraft,
is morally distasteful and unnatural, that is, less than 'human'" (Read,
1984: pp. 216-7).
|
|
|
 |
|
| Visitor Numbers |
Tracker |
Total Hits |
|
|
Cell Phone Reviews |
| Search for |
|
|
|