At twenty-five years of age, I wrote my mother the letter written by so many young men and women when that spectacular orbit of one’s life pulls away from its origin-source; we confesses the real nature of our sexual identity to one or both our parents. That is, if it happens to be contrary to what we think they believe or expect. Every letter is written differently and perhaps with as many different reasons, but the ultimate necessity and outcome are pretty much the same. A few years earlier, my mother had cornered me and told me she believed my older brother, her second son, liked boys instead of girls. That’s how she put it. Then she proclaimed: “Whatever he wants is fine with me”. I immediately moved to make a slight correction in her wording. Surely, I believed then and do still, it’s a not a question of what one wants but, rather, who one is. However, I kept my silence. I wasn’t yet prepared to pull back that particular carpet of discourse.
After receiving my letter, she immediately phoned me while I was at work…three thousand miles away. “This is your mother,” she said, demonstrably abrupt, as if I might have forgotten that she was in fact my mother and not someone else’s.
“Who did you think you were kidding? (A long pause) It doesn’t matter, I love you no matter what.”
That was pretty much the extent of our conversation and, at the time, I was grateful and relieved to have the damn issue behind me. But later, as I began to think about her response, I became less grateful and my relief folded over into curiosity. To imply that I was kidding was bad enough. (What could there possibly be to kid about?) But to insinuate she had known I was ‘gay’ and never once raised the issue, never once hinted she suspected, never once navigated a conversation that might have led to even the slightest relief of my fragile, teenage angst. After all, she was the adult. It’s no walk in the park being in the closet…at any age. (Excuse the mix-metaphors; if they sit in the mind like an oxymoron, they are. Growing up gay in the fifties in the southern United States was rather much just that.)
Even though, throughout our lives, she accepted me fully, and was, I believe, quite proud of my creative endeavors as an artist, we never quite got around to discussing our true feelings about the issue. Then she died. My mother wasn’t particularly religious nor at all prudish, yet I’m quite sure she died with the idea being ‘gay’ is something one might choose, like a new suit of clothes or how one might choose to rob a bank.
This perception is a bias expanded from the concept of ‘free will’, something ambiguously bestowed upon humankind from Christian theology-what is right and what isn’t, what is natural and what isn’t. Those who believe this and who declaim themselves to be within God’s gate and who presume gay people to have gone outside the gate are simply wrong. This is a crippled posture struggling to hold an indefensible argument. It simply isn’t so. If it were, then every heterosexual would have the ability to be homosexual. Imagine that. Those who quite happily express their sexuality with only the opposite sex could no more enter into a same-sex relationship than they could grow gills and live in the sea. Even under pain of persecution and fear of execution, they would not, could not, alter what has been naturally given to them through nature. Neither can those gifted with same-sex desires. And there are many of us-very many, in fact-who do suffer persecution and execution for being gay. So, no, same-sex desire or expression is not actuated by choice. It never has been and it never will be. Same-sex expression (SSE) blooms in both genders and occurs in every social stratum, under the most optimal conditions or within the most dismal circumstances, in every country, and in every religion. It clearly existed long before we had the wherewithal to write about it, since it would be very curious indeed if recorded history and SSE were correlates. Despite the changing cultures that have either tolerated it or not, sexual variation is an elemental part of human nature.
There are a number of speculations as to why SSE exists in the gene pool. Aristotle opined that SSE was one of nature’s ways of controlling human population. Recent research has provided bountiful evidence that SSE occurs in many other species. In his book Biological Exuberance, biologist and linguist Bruce Bagemihi suggests that procreation might not be the only reason animals have sex; it could also serve as an element of group bonding as well as reducing tension within the group. There is, of course, zealous opposition to these ideas, but such opposition is generally flexed to support the unsupportable argument that SSE is one of choice.
All genetic predispositions are considerably complex events. Like eye color, SSE could have initially occurred through a single mutation and there could be any combined number of reasons why it has succeeded in the gene pool, supporting both the ideas of Aristotle and Bagemihi. If, for example, the SSE gene began as a single mutation but one that ultimately benefited the species as a whole, that particular coding would more than likely stick around. The SSE gene could then be considered an altruistic gene, one that provides no procreative value to the individual but benefits the particular species, allowing a miraculous consistency and longevity in the genetic coding. Geneticists believe we were all once brown eyed but about 8000 years ago a mutant gene (OCA2) for blue eyes appeared. It has been suggested that it continued evolving into the gene pool via sexual predispositions, i.e. if blue eyes were considered more attractive by either sex, there would be no reason for OCA2 to disappear. And it hasn’t. If, on the other hand, the vision of individuals with blue eyes proved less successful than those with brown eyes, OCA2 probably would have disappeared. I suggest, for whatever reasons, the SSE gene shares a similar trajectory and is an indelible part of our human fabric.
In spite of the continuous hullabaloo about gays in the military, we are left to ponder on such events as the battle at Chaeronea in 338 BC. When Phillip II of Macedonia approached the battlefield and inspected the success of his army against the formidable “Sacred Band” of Thebes, an army comprised of 150 male couples, or same-sex lovers, Plutarch tells us Phillip admonished his soldiers: “Perish any man who suspects that these men either did or suffered anything unseemly.” We can’t know these words were actually spoken but they could as easily have been as not. Certainly the ‘Sacred Band’ had a stellar reputation as an elite military unit, unbeaten until it met Phillip and his more famous son Alexander, soon to be ‘The Great’, and the highly efficient Macedonian phalanx.
But what did Phillip mean exactly? The implication seems to be he was charging his men not to make disparaging remarks or desecrations against these brave soldiers because they were couples comprised of older charioteers, called “heniochoi” and their younger companions called “parabatai.” The fact that Phillip II (and his son) also had a robust proclivity toward same-sex expression no doubt entered into the stream of his thinking. How could it not? But perhaps it was the absolute bravery the soldiers exhibited. After all, while the majority of the Theban army broke ranks and fled, the “Sacred Band” held their ground, choosing death over dishonor. We know from records when the ‘Sacred Band’ fell, but we don’t know if and to what extent other groups existed and how ancient might have been the use of homosexual soldiers in specialized military battalions. For surely a portion of a group who have no invested interest in reproduction, i.e. raising and providing for a family, would be more expendable, but nonetheless essential for the whole group. One can find many references to this historical event; almost always the term ‘homosexual lovers’ or ‘gay soldiers’ are used to describe The ‘Sacred Band’; however such terms didn’t exist then and would have held no meaning to ancient men (and women) who generally accepted a broad spectrum of sexuality as a naturally given element of life. Our most ancient historical records do provide clues that indicate male ‘homosexuality’ and militarism were inseparable and engaged in as ritualized, initiatory components of a larger culture.
Same-sex expression existed unchangeable within a wide range of sexual expressions. What did change, rather rapidly and aggressively, was the advent of monotheism, resulting in cultural pressures imposed by religious oligarchy beginning about the 12th Century. It continues.
Why, with the enormity and multiplicity of problems facing all of us, do we continue to become enmeshed and blinded by human sexuality and why do we continue to exploit it’s mystery? It has no bearing whatsoever on the causes of our man-made calamities. A large part, surely, is from ignorance and the intolerance of religious dogma. We must also be mindful that what is less common and less understood remains fuel for fear-mongering politicians who use such issues to obfuscate the ever-present and sinister tentacles of our greed.
If you suspect your child might possibly be gay, you can be sure she or he did not make that choice. Don’t hide from the truth. Don’t pretend it’s a passing fancy. Don’t believe for a second that you or anyone else can change what has been encrypted from genetic coding of remarkable durability. Your job is to make sure your child wears herself or himself with comfort and confidence. Even if your child is not gay, even if you have no clue as to their sexual predilection, the gift of tolerance and acceptance is an extraordinary gift to give. This will go along way in helping subdue the needlessly cruel bullying that so often leads to a persecuted life and suicide for many young people.
In the Kalama Sutta, the Buddha says, “Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”
To lean out into the world is to learn and to grow.