Dads Against the Divorce Industry

DA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS.

DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes.

Opposing Queerbonics: Homophobic or Homological?

Gerald L. Rowles, Ph.D.
February 10, 2003

"We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us." - The Homosexual Agenda
In their endless quest for universal public acceptance, the homosexual houdinis are attempting to perpetrate a failed bit of legerdemain from the 'civil rights' movement. In place of the chicanery that was Ebonics, however, you might call this ploy 'Queerbonics'.

In the late 90s, 'educators' in Oakland California arrived at the upside-down conclusion that because of high failure rates, the elementary schools should "help teachers understand the characteristics of their students' speech so they can lead the children to an awareness of the difference"; i.e., they should be thoroughly grounded in Ebonics, or African American Vernacular English.

Instead of calling it defective English, the proponents attempted to mask Ebonics as a 'dialect'. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed: " An Examiner writer editorialized (12/20/97) that "[i]n the real world of colleges and commerce and communication, it's not OK to speak Ebonics as a primary language. Job recruiters don't bring along a translator." Ultimately it was revealed that the real motivation behind the Ebonics craze was an attempt to snatch federal money: "[T]he educators hope[d] to win federal bilingual dollars to help pay for the program."

Fast forward to February 6, 2003 and we find the following news item: "A panel of university professors will gather in the nation's capital on Valentine's Day to instruct fellow scholars, students and homosexuals on the proper usage of "lavender" language and linguistics -- the words homosexuals use to express their sexual orientation." Lavender language? Sounds a lot like 'sexual Ebonics', doesn't it? Point of fact, one of the so-called scholars at this event, Bill Leap, phrased it thusly, "the university-sponsored event will promote a better understanding of the so-called lavender language among students, scholars and homosexuals." It sounds like he is straight out of the Oakland school of linguistics. And it could be said that the entire homosexual propaganda effort should be characterized as Queerbonics.

In this specific case, it isn't clear that the homosexual Queerbonics agenda has financial ramifications for the educational field. No, it's more insidious than that. Consider this bit of nonsense from Professor Leap on so-called "homophobic language used in media coverage": "I think the most viciously prominent example is when media gives all kinds of unnecessary, but definitely salacious information about a gay person...that somehow implies that they're criminal," said Leap.

Speaking of small leaps, will lawsuits against the major news media for employing anti-gay 'hate language' become another 'civil rights' fixture in the very near future? And given that this is a conference of university professors, it is a certainty that if this agenda is successful, implementation of the Queerbonics curriculum at the elementary school level is near certainty.

Let's be very clear, this alarm about Queerbonics is not indicative of a homophobic reaction. Homophobia was not even a recognized word in the 1973 edition of Webster's. It wasn't until the 1995 revision when Webster's included it in the New World College Dictionary - about the same time that Ebonics, which didn't make that edition, popped up. As defined in this brave 'new world' edition, homophobia is an irrational hatred or fear of homosexuals or homosexuality. The operative term here is 'irrational'.

There is nothing irrational about a fear of, or even hatred (strong dislike or ill will) towards homosexuality. Unlike the speech behavior called Ebonics, which merely propagates ignorance, homosexuality is a base, compulsive, predatory behavior that kills people and spreads disease. It is base or indecent because it has no regard for its biologically harmful effects and its human debasement. It is compulsive because it is primarily defined by an unlimited string of brief encounters and repetitious acts of deviant sexual gratification with multiple, sometimes hundreds of, partners. It is predatory because it cannot reproduce itself without preying upon the uninitiated.

For Homo sapiens to condemn homosexuality is not homophobic, it is 'homological'. The term homological derives from the Greek, homologos (same) and legein (logic). In other words, heterosexuality is the basic structure of mankind from a common primitive origin. Certain human fears are not phobic, they are self-protective; fear of heights, fear of small enclosed spaces, fear of unfamiliar animals, fear of unfamiliar sounds and loud noises, etc.

In the species Homo sapiens, there is no genetic predisposition for homosexuality. There are only two sexes, the female sex defined by the XX chromosomal combination, and the male sex defined by the XY chromosomal combination. There is no XYX, or YXY, etc. And when chromosomal aberrations do occur in human beings, such as an extra Y chromosome (Klinefelter syndrome), or an extra random chromosome (Down's syndrome), the results are generally negative; either criminal tendencies or extreme retardation, respectively.

Further, homosexuality is not a lifestyle, it is a deathstyle, as reported by news analyst Mary Mostert:
So, whatís the problem with these warm fuzzy descriptions (in school programs) of homosexuality as a lifestyle? It is a totally false portrayal, thatís the problem. Among homosexuals, suicide, traffic deaths, drug abuse, and recurrent diseases occur at rates 3 to 60 times as frequently as in the general population. And these figures do not even begin to address the near certainty of AIDS. Homosexuals are 14 times more like to have Syphilis; 23 times more likely to contract some venereal disease; thousands of times more likely lo contract AIDS.

In fact, the homosexual deathstyle leads to as much as a forty-year reduction in the life span, with one study revealing that only one percent of homosexuals lived to be 65 or older. A recent report entitled: "Homosexuality-A public Health ProblemĒ by Raphael Kazmann states that the average age of homosexuals who die with AIDS is 39. The average age of homosexuals who die of other causes is only 41.
And speaking of AIDS, an issue that is in our faces every day - witness the decimation of the continent of Africa. Or, closer to home, consider the recent revelation that nearly 25% of new U.S. AIDS cases are intentionally inflicted. On February 6th, Rolling Stones magazine outed the new phenomenon of "Bug Chasers" or, "The men who want the (AIDS) virus are called 'bug chasers,' and the men who freely give the virus to them are called 'gift givers'." As related by one participant in this phenom: "If I know that he's negative and I'm f**king him, it sort of gets me off. I'm murdering him in a sense, killing him slowly, and that's sort of, as sick as it sounds, exciting to me." At the risk of insensitivity, what the hell is 'gay' about that?

Make no mistake, homosexuality is a predatory behavior, and its practitioners are also targeting our kids, directly through pedophilia and indirectly through propaganda such as Queerbonics. And throughout the country, government school programs are promoting homosexual 'tolerance', and are thereby threatening our kids' lives. Classroom doors in some school districts prominently display "rainbow triangles" that designate certain classrooms as "safe-zones" for homosexual, bisexual, or transgender students. In one case, the signs were only removed after it was found that "they pitted some teachers against one another because if a teacher chose not to have that symbol on their door -- it was on a voluntary basis -- did that mean they weren't a safe place to go to?"

Renowned columnist Joseph Sobran, writing two years ago, had this sobering epiphany:
"Getting in touch with my feelings the other day, I realized how I loathe homosexuals. All of them? Of course not. Some of them are funny, kind, intelligent, and otherwise pleasant. But homosexuals in general, yes. I canít stand them. Especially the ones who are organized under the rubric of gay rights.

Normal people find homosexuality, especially male homosexuality, repellent. Weíre supposed to apologize for that? Our slang words for the anus, and their use as insults, express our disgust with the whole idea of anal sex. Apart from the personal defilement it involves, itís grossly unsanitary.

Believe me, when a child you love has been sodomized, it takes a lot of the romance out of buggery. What was merely disgusting becomes nauseating. You neednít hate the perpetrator ó who, in this case as in so many others, had been sodomized as a child himself ó to feel utter revulsion at the act, and contempt for those who try to endow it with dignity."
Sobran's fear and repulsion were not unwarranted. In Massachusetts, just a year before, a scandal erupted over what came to be called Fistgate. Billed as a 'Child's Sex Conference,' a workshop sponsored by the homosexual organization, GLSEN, and the Department of Education was held in which educators instructed teens in graphic homosexual sex (Queerbonics in action). If it had not been for two parents, both fathers, named Brian Camenker and Scott Whiteman, who attended the conference and secretly taped the proceedings, other parents might not have known what had transpired. For their protective efforts, Camenker and Whiteman are now being endlessly harassed with lawsuits by GLAAD, the legal intimidation wing of the sodomy lobby. (an MP3 copy of the taped session is available at this link)

Worth noting is that the children who are most vulnerable to the homosexual agenda are fatherless boys. And it is estimated that approximately 80% of pedophilic victims are boys who have been molested by adult males. While no more than 2% of male adults are homosexual, some studies indicate that approximately 35% of pedophiles are homosexual. As blatantly outlined in The Homosexual Agenda, "We shall sodomize your sons ... they will come to crave and adore us."

President Bush, in this year's State of the Union address, proposed a commitment of $15 billion dollars to fight AIDS on the African continent. One columnist, Michael Kelly, celebrated this announcement, saying, "$15 billion, and not just for babies--for vast programs of treatment with the cheap generic drugs, for wide-scale condom distribution. Billions in taxpayers' money. For condoms for Africa. In a recession. In a time of record budget deficits. It is a rare and wonderful thing."

O.K., let's spend billions to save lives in Africa by conquering the AIDS epidemic. Rare and wonderful? Maybe, maybe not, depending on how much of the money the sodomy lobby can misappropriate for "fisting" classes, HIV positive proms, flirting classes, and sexy advertisements, as they have with CDC grants.

But think about this. For more than two years, the anti-father lobby has vigorously fought the Bush proposal to provide a paltry $300 million targeted to promote marriage and eliminate fatherlessness. Now, in Africa, according to President Bush, "nearly 30 million people have the AIDS virus, including 3 million children under the age of 15." But, Mr. President, in America approximately 14 million fathers are being systematically deprived of a meaningful role in their children's lives - affecting more than 20 million children under the age of 18, half of whom are boys.

What does one have to do with the other? Well, at least in one case, two homological fathers protectively intervened in the lives of hundreds of children to protect them from the double-edged threat of homosexual predation and the scourge of the AIDS virus. How many billions was that worth?

Mr. President, why not allocate 10% of that $15 billion AIDS allotment toward a cheap, generic antidote for Queerbonics and pedophilia in the U.S.? That cheap, generic antidote is called fatherhood. Aren't 10 million of America's sons just as deserving as 3 million African kids? That's not being homophobic, it's being homological.

Back to DA*DI's Home
Dads Against the Divorce Industry Dads Against the Divorce Industry