Part # 2 The Junk Science of Real Clear Science

[Billy Rojas]

 

 

Appendix

The Junk Science of Real Clear Science

 

 

The Word  "HOMOPHOBIA"

By: Billy Rojas

 

Those who use the word "homophobia" have an agenda they wish to impose

on others. First and foremost such people express the view that any criticism

of homosexuality should not be tolerated. This applies to everyone, no matter

how well-informed. Since a good number of  critics of homosexuality are,

in fact, well-informed, they are routinely  mischaracterized as uniformed

through the well known psychological defense mechanism known as "denial."

That is, all is fair to people who use the word "homophobia" as part of

their vocabulary. And nothing will stop them from seeking to impose

censorship on society  -in the name of Civil Rights and free speech.

 

This has been true from the time that the word was first coined in about 1970.

As noted in Byrne Fone's 2001 book on the subject of homosexual history, Homophobia, 

the first known use of the word took place in a 1971 article written by K.T. Smith.

Possibly Smith borrowed the term from then-new usage among at least some homosexuals.

In any case,  the word was popularized by George Weinberg in his own 1972 opus,

Society and the Healthy Homosexual, and it was from this source that the word

became an influence throughout the United States.

 

However, as Fone does not tell us, Weinberg expressed an agenda

in his 1972 volume,  namely, that it was in the interests of homosexuals

to make the most of the neologism in order to discredit all critics of homosexuality

as the equivalent of so many racists and anti-Semites. For the most part this

strategy has been successful, along the way deceiving a multitude of people

who ordinarily would be expected to know better than to be duped, many journalists,

elected officials, professionals, even numbers of clergymen and women.

 

What Fone also does not say is that the word "homophobia" is now widely

equated with prejudice, sexism, and other social maladies. This was exactly

the plan of Weinberg in 1972. The current situation did not exactly come about

overnight, you know. That was hardly the case. It wasn't until the 1980s

that anything like a substantial minority of Americans were using the word

as a commonplace. But by the first years of the Clinton administration

Weinberg had his semantic victory. By then perhaps a majority of Americans

had been hoodwinked. The capitulation of the New York Times, which

became an organ of homosexual advocacy in 1993, was the turning point.

 

The illegitimacy of the term "homophobia" should be obvious. But, since 

relatively few people in our society are actually informed about the subject of homosexuality,

this fact goes unrecognized. Still, it ought to be clear enough that something is very wrong

when current usage of "homophobia" would require us to brand Anna Freud, Karen Horney

(pronounced Hor-nay), Irving Bieber, Abram Kardiner, Abraham Maslow (at least until late

in his life), Sandor Rado, Erich Fromm, and even Sigmund Freud in his classic, Introductory

Lectures in  Psychoanalysis, as "homophobic."  These were among the men

and women, all recognized as 'greats' in the history of psychology, who did

the most in their careers to bring about clinical understanding

of same-sex behavior and personality.

 

As well, use of the term "homophobia" requires people to ascribe psychological

disorder to people whose ideas and examples have made us who we are today

as Americans. After all, it was Thomas Jefferson who wrote Virginia law which

considered sodomy (the word, at the time, that referred to homosexuality) as

utterly reprehensible and to be classified as a capital offense. Then there was

George Washington. He was the commanding officer at Valley Forge when

the first American soldier was drummed out of the military   -publicly humiliated

and disgraced for life-   for homosexual conduct. But this is only the start of

an extremely long list of heroic figures who took the view that homosexuality

was a grievous crime against nature, not only including philosophers like perhaps

the greatest genius who ever lived, Immanuel Kant, like St Thomas Aquinas,

like reformer Martin Luther, plus Martin Luther King, Jr., but including 

virtually all of the founders of the great religions on Earth.

 

One would have thought that informed citizens would have thought twice

before allowing themselves to be led down a garden path, but that is exactly

what happened. It took about 25 years but in that time the wisdom and

hard won values of millennia were thrown out in much of our culture  -in order

to appease homosexuals. This entire farce was presented to the public as

"enlightened" opinion, as a bandwagon to jump upon in order not to be

left behind in society, in order to claim status in institutions like universities,

government agencies, leading edge businesses, and all the rest.

 

In any case, use of the word "homophobia" is uncritical and begs all sorts

of very important questions. For example, why isn't it perfectly normal

to have strong aversion to a form of conduct that is disruptive to families,

that is closely associated with child molesting,  -with pedophilia-  that is

damaging to homosexuals themselves, not even to also count close association 

of homosexuality with alcoholism, drug abuse, sadism and masochism,

fetishism, extremely high levels of homosexual vs homosexual violence,

and a wide range of virulent diseases,  and suicide ?

 

But they wear suits and ties, or pretty dresses, and seem like such nice people ?

They may also wear leather pants with the rears cut out to allow better "access,"

they may prefer to dress in circus costumes, or wear Nazi regalia, and pierce their

noses or tongues or scrotums or nipples. All of which is not quite beside the point.

Clinically  --whether the subject is extreme personality disorder, psychopathology,

or medical problems at rates ridiculously far in excess of problems among the

heterosexual population, the fact is that homosexuals are sick people.

 

Furthermore, those who use the term "homophobia" are guilty of gross stereotyping.

Which can be seen in the pages of Mr. Fone's book , for example, telling us that all

critics of homosexuality are Right-wingers, uneducated, religious bigots, and so forth.

Which  I, for one,  deeply resent as a man who has not quite a doctorate (ABD) 

from the University of Massachusetts,  who spent years as a college teacher, who

is a political Independent, and who is as religiously ecumenical as anyone gets.

Nor am I alone in having similar background and also being critical of homosexuals

and homosexuality.

 

Besides, since when is it exemplary free speech to insult everyone who may have

damned good reasons to for objecting to homosexuality ?  How about parents

of children molested by Catholic pedophile priests ? How about parents of

young boys molested by a famous football coach ? And such examples could be

multiplied at length with little difficulty. Don't parents with young children count ?

 

Yet when people openly oppose homosexuals what happens ?  Since I have

seen it with my own eyes, and have read a good number of first person accounts,

I can tell you exactly what happens. Critics of homosexuals are shouted down,

are ostracized (and sometimes black-listed), are de facto censored from the

press or broadcast media, and so forth.  This is precisely what happens in our

communities, courtesy of homosexuals and their supporters.

 

The real problem is not a mythical "homophobia," it is clinical heterophobia

on the part of homosexuals. This was pointed out to best effect, so far, in an

article by Claude Crepault that was published in the Summer 1995 issue

of the  Journal of Sex and Marital  Therapy. The problem, said Crepault,

isn't a non-existent phobia known as "homophobia,"  a word  that is carelessly

used to refer to everything from reasonable criticism to jokes that homosexuals

do not like. The actual problem is clinical heterophobia on the part of homosexuals.

After all, it is as clear as anything can get that heterosexual sex is natural; indeed,

it is necessary for the survival of our species. Which is to say that sustained

aversion to sexual relations with the opposite sex is pathological.

 

The word "homophobia" does not say anything meaningful about people who

are critical of homosexuals. What it does is to define those who use the term

as being part of a social group, namely, any individuals who clearly follow

a pro-homosexual party line, who have internalized Political Correctness ideology, 

and who mask their real sentiments, which are authoritarian in character,

behind Civil Rights rhetoric.

 

The word "homophobia" is a smear word. It is an insult spoken against 

anyone who dares to point out the obvious, that homosexuals are defective

psychologically, and it shows.

 

Those who use the word "homophobia" are also, for the most part, terribly

ignorant of the most basic facts about homosexual behavior and usually are

completely clueless about the many medical and psychological problems

which accompany homosexuality.

 

They compensate for their ignorance by insulting those they disagree with,

and refusal to even listen to what critics of homosexuality actually say.

Worse, homosexuals who dislike criticisms sometimes show their displeasure

through overt hostility, including disruptive invasions of churches.

 

We have every right to  demand that all people in positions of authority, and

this includes Congressmen and women, cease and desist in all use of the

term "homophobia." Using the word demonstrates prejudice against normal people 

-without the least justification.

 

Homosexuals are individuals who suffer from a grievous psychological disorder

directly linked to clinical depression, anxiety disorders of various kinds, behavioral

pathologies of different kinds (exhibitionism, anti-social personality disorder, bulimia,

susceptibility to addictions if many kinds, et. al.) and general social dysfunction.

 

This is due to their choice of a "lifestyle" that is intrinsically unhealthy and

needlessly dangerous. And choice it is, even if, among long term homosexuals,

there is less and less control over decisions. But there is zero empirical evidence

that there is any such thing as a gene that predisposed anyone to homosexuality

and all ( all ) so-called studies of the past that seemed to indicate biological

determinism have been disproven. Which is the truth even though the mass media

refuses, on principle, to tell the public any such thing. And now homosexuals

are seeking to normalize their pathology in American society

at large  -and the Courts are assisting them in this travesty.

 

All of this is completely unacceptable. We should not grant even one argument to

homosexuals, to mentally sick people, because what they need, desperately, is

intensive psychological care with the objective of eliminating their pathology.

That such curative processes are effective was demonstrated years ago by

no less than Masters and Johnson, sex researchers whom no-one can

conceivably characterize as Right-wing zealots. Their 1979 book,

Homosexuality in Perspective makes this very clear.

 

But there are a good number of excellent studies of homosexuality that make its

pathological nature completely obvious. The three best books to recommend are :

Dr. Charles Socarides:  Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far, 1995 

-a psychiatrist and in his lifetime the leading expert in the area of homosexual

psychopathology, someone who exposed the APA,  the American Psychiatric Association,

for what it has become, a sub-professional organization under control of homosexual

interests,  Judith Reisman: Sexual Sabotage,  2010   -best known for her work

in exposing Kinsey as a fraud and pedophile who deceived multitudes, which the press

allowed him to get away with long after these facts were established beyond all doubt,

and O.R. Adams:  As We Sodomize America, 2001   -which is told from the perspective

of a Christian believer but a practicing attorney and conscientious researcher.

 

In so many words there is no excuse for continuing to put up with homosexual

propaganda, to put up with the special pleading of pro-homosexuals in the

news media, with the half-baked utterances of uninformed elected officials,

or even with the hopelessly muddled and misguided views of clergy who

have pro-homosexual agendas.

 

It really does not matter if you know a homosexual and think of him or her as

a friend, it does not matter if someone in your family, a cousin or uncle or

anything else, is homosexual, either. Homosexuality is a disorder with the

gravest conceivable negative consequences   -for everyone.

 

Face the facts, and face up to your responsibilities. There is no other way

to deal with the problem ;  compromise or denial accomplishes nothing

and can easily make matters worse.

 

Because it is not possible to say things any better on the subject of medical

problems that directly result from homosexuality, an article by Kathleen

Melonakos,  a Registered Nurse affiliated with NARTH, the National

Association for Research  and Therapy of Homosexuality,  

is especially recommended;  it is available online.

 

Also included here is a major study by Dr Paul Cameron of the Family Research

Institute on the subject of child molestation and homosexuality. His evidence

is overwhelming to the effect that there is a strong causal connection. In fact,

the single biggest predictor of homosexuality, far more significant than

any other factor, is victimization in childhood by a pedophile. And yet many

local governments now allow and even encourage employment of homosexuals

is teaching positions in public schools.

 

The time is long past due when people of good will need to act to reclaim American

society from others who simply do not care how much damage they have done

to our institutions, to our culture, and to families and to children, all because

homosexuals are the kinds of specimens of dysfunction that they are.

 

And it is time to identify homosexuality for what it is, clinical heterophobia,

a full blown mental illness. We should act accordingly.

 

 

Billy Rojas

 

Eugene , Oregon

November 18, 2011