Social Science 201 Homophobia and Latent Homosexuality Part II

Hi. It’s me, Dave again. Ursula Undress was unavailable. Each of these "Social Science..." videos should be viewed or read in ascending numerical order because each assumes a familiarity with the previous ones. All of the videos can be viewed on the Party's Video Page or by going directly to Youtube.com and entering "Peace Love and Progress Party" in the Youtube search box. Click this link if you would rather watch than read this video .

In “Social Science 101 the K and R Class Struggle,” we traced the development of historical materialism and the concept of the class struggle. I attempted to persuade you that the K and R theory of the class struggle, the center piece of the New Social Science of the Peace Love and Progress Party, is the correct theory. In Part I of “Social Science 201 Homophobia and Latent Homosexuality,” I articulated what I regard as the basic laws of our psychosexual development. In this Part II of “Social Science 201 Homophobia and Latent Homosexuality,” we will identify three sources for the homophobia that plagues the contemporary world. I’ve had to update this tape because, earlier, I cited only one source. If I have still omitted any common and widespread source of homophobia, please correct me by writing to me, [email protected].

Again, my formal and informal studies of psychology and all of my experience, including 30 years of driving a New York City taxi, an average of 80 hours per week, convince me that the basic laws of our psycho-sexual development are really quite simple. If Mom has a partner and doesn’t stay too available to us for too long, either in fact or fantasy, as is the case for most of us, then our siblings become the people we most love and desire; and they determine our sexual orientations. Of the children that do remain too close to Mom for too long, the little boys become very effeminate and the little girls become very masculine. Both become unalterably and unmistakably homosexual. Our orientations do not change after age 5 or 6. For most of us, our siblings remain, life long, the persons whom we most love and desire. Other factors being equal, persons with only same-sex siblings are homosexual and prefer oral sex. Persons with only opposite-sex siblings are heterosexual and prefer intercourse. Persons with siblings of both sexes are bisexual and enjoy both types of sex.

Freud wrote a lot about the influence of toilet training and the finer details of our psycho-sexual development, such as stages, castration fears and penis envy; but he ignored the sub-topic of sibling love, a sub-topic that is, in my opinion, every bit as important as the Oedipus or Electra complex (the relationship between the child and the parents). Two likely reasons for this glaring omission come to mind. First, Freud had two or three older half siblings and seven or eight full siblings.

As you can see from the Freud family photo on the next page, several of them were brothers. Wow, does this picture say a thousand words! Freud was bisexual and in denial of his bisexuality. Although he smoked cigars so incessantly that he died of mouth cancer, he always insisted that the omnipresent cigar was “just a cigar.” Secondly, within his time, the poor guy was censored enough without having to add the whole of the latent homosexual K Class to his list of enemies. (Sigmund is standing on the left.)

I will introduce, below, some more evidence of sibling love; but K-dominated society is so conditioned by the lies and homophobia of the K Class that all the evidence is bound to fall on many deaf ears. Moreover, no one can make anyone see or accept what he doesn’t want to see or accept. It took me 28 years of research and 23 versions of Decoding the Deluge before I could see the conclusive evidence of the early, Neolithic Great Flood, evidence that had always been before my very eyes. Captain Cook and his crew reported that they had to drop anchor in Honolulu Bay, had to row ashore in a skiff, had to beach it and walk onto the beach amid the Hawaiian Islanders before the latter could see them. A gay taxi passenger once confided in me that his lover and husband of some 15-20 years was still pretending to be heterosexual and introducing him to others as “a friend.” So, I won’t be disappointed if I don’t get through to all of you. Nevertheless, before forever rejecting all of the above, deniers should read Volume 1, Chapter 4 of Decoding the Deluge, especially the subsection “Agencies of the Mind, the Oedipus Complex and Sibling Imprinting.” It begins on page 80 and ends on page 97.

Decoding the Deluge cites more detailed arguments for sibling love and the many examples of early pagan gods, gods with a high level of sovereignty, that were said to have married their siblings. To compile the long list of these gods, search digital Decoding the Deluge for “sibling,” “brother” and “sister.” All the books of the Peace Love and Progress Party are FREE to download at the Downloads Page of PeaceLoveAndProgressParty.org .

I suspect also that the enduring supremacy of sibling love could be demonstrated by a little research into vital statistics. Here’s a good PhD thesis project for someone. Compile a list of deceased persons that had married and had a nearest-in-age-same-sex sibling that predeceased them and a similar list of persons that had married and had a nearest-in-age-opposite-sex sibling that predeceased them. My experience suggests – and I’ll bet five to one – that the death dates and survival rates for most persons on each list will show that the sibling had a greater impact upon the person’s will to live than did the spouse.

All of us are pretending that we love our spouses more than we love our birth family members, especially our siblings. This ought to be true because the spouse is our survival partner; and the marriage vow says “till death does us part” and not, as in New York City, “till the rent comes due.” But it’s not true. This lie -- that we can love someone outside of the nuclear family as much or more than the nuclear family members -- is what I refer to as the First Mask. Incidentally, persona, as in personality, was ancient Greek for mask.

The First Mask arose in the time of Homo erectus, our parent species, as a result of the primal revolution that launched civilization. This mask, this commonly-accepted lie, was necessary to facilitate exogamy, marriage outside the family. Marriage outside the family was the compensation necessary to abolish incest and enable fathers to accept the presence, within the family, of sexually mature sons and to enable the sharing of the females and the abolition of primal fathers, alpha males of the horde (the wondering and foraging pack of ten to forty animals). These alpha males that Freud referred to as primal fathers had monopolized the females when we lived as the gorillas still live. See Freud’s Totem and Tabu or Volume 1, pages 97-104 of Decoding the Deluge .

The Second Mask that virtually all of us are wearing, the second big lie that virtually all of our ancestors embraced, is the lie that says we are not animals, that we are not great apes. This mask resulted from our expunction of the memory of our parent species. This expunction began as a result of Species War guilt, guilt as a result of having taken the Earth from Homo erectus and having driven him nearly to extinction as of the final battles in Ireland circa 32 k.y.a. (thousand years ago). Homo erectus was driven fully to extinction in the “Holy Land,” and, as the Pentateuch details, in the Thirteenth or Fourteenth Century B.C.

The Species War was the most violent, traumatic and important series of events in the life of man and the cryptic major subject of all our religions and most of our holidays. I had to coin the word for it.

Guilt felt toward Homo erectus and efforts to expunge his memory skyrocketed after the Great Flood of 14634 years B.P.E. (before the present era, year 2000). The Great Flood was actually caused by rapid and severe carbonation of the atmosphere and deforestation resulting from a global frenzy of slashing and burning, to lay claim to the most low-lying, fertile and easily-irrigated lands after the discovery of horticulture. This rapid global warming caused a major ice sheet to slide into the sea at a time, only 6 or 7 thousand years this side of the last glacial maximum, when the glaciers were still massive. I estimate that the ocean level rose about a hundred feet, and the tidal wave added another hundred feet. Up to half of the world’s people and virtually all of the first farmers died. Common folks feared that the Flood had been sent by the angry Homo erectus gods, as punishment. So, it became tabu to even think about our first, Homo erectus gods for fear that doing so might incite their anger and elicit more punishment. So, all our oral histories were severely edited at this time to virtually extinguish Homo erectus’ memory. But in so doing, we severed our link with the rest of nature. Then our ancestors had to start thinking super crazy things, such as, “We were created by some god in the sky, in His image, different from all the other animals and plants.” All the modern religions invoked and disseminated this nonsense, the only material and semi-realistic rationale for which was the fact that the ashes of the less edible parts of Homo erectus corpses, which our ancestors burned in bonfires after every successful campaign of the Species War, had risen into the sky.

The resultant, Second Mask denies our animal being and makes us the monsters of the natural world. It also causes the universal prejudice against dark skin because all the other great apes have dark skin; and the sight of dark skin on a human conflicts with and threatens to blow the lid off the whole kettle of Species War lies, guilt, fear and trauma. Finally, the Second Mask gave birth to our false and alienated allopathic theory of medicine. The discovery of how our autonomic nervous system evolved and functions and the critical role that it plays in all disease was only recently discovered by Ryke Geerd Hamer. See article #56, “The New Medicine of Ryke Geerd Hamer,” in Selected Works of David Huttner, Volume 1 or the same on the Blogs Page of PeaceLoveAndProgress.org .

By the way, the New Medicine is only recent on a historical time-line. The basics of it were discovered in the early 1980s by Dr. Hamer. Websites about it have been on the web since the beginning of this century. As measured by his contribution to medicine and to our understanding of our own bodies, Hamer is easily the greatest physician of all time. Only Helmholtz, the doctor that discovered how our heart and lungs function, can be compared to him. Yet, others, whose contributions are trivial in comparison to his, if not altogether false, are still being awarded Nobel Prizes in medicine every year, while he remains relatively unknown. Why? Because the whole medical industry, the hospitals, the doctors and the pharmaceutical corporations, won’t be able to make one hundredth as much money from the New Medicine’s legitimate diagnosis and treatment of disease as what they are now making from fraud. This is but another example of how Big Brother’s world is drowning in lies.

The Third Mask hides homosexuality. It was born of homophobia, which has three sources. (Again, contact me if I’ve missed any.)

The first and most minor source has been with us since our reproduction became sexual and will remain with us as long as it remains sexual. There will always be some degree of reproductive (or genetic) competition among us and to love a genetic competitor is a contradiction causing homophobia.

The second source, a major source of homophobia effects mostly men and arises from and is directly proportionate to our savagery, our tendency to prey upon one another. For our species, at the top of the food chain, without a natural predator and without a literal god or devil to control us, our tendency to prey upon one another is directly proportionate to the excessiveness or irrationality of our instinct-driven, especially female-instinct-driven birth rate. The rational birthrate is that corresponding to the greatest decrease in the death rate. Birth rates higher than that one are irrational, increase the death rate and force men to become the murderous savages that we are. Male homosexuality contradicts this pressure and thus causes homophobia among men generally and latent (hidden) homosexuality in most of the homosexual men capable of hiding their homosexuality. They don the Third Mask, which is best maintained with the macho, savage, Orwellian personality profile that is a reaction formation, that is in fact just the opposite of the loving person hiding beneath the mask. All this homophobia and savagery results from the inordinately high birth rate, for which women are primarily responsible. Most women think that procreation is their natural or “God-given” (?) right. Since savage society produces no shortage of unwanted and homeless children, motherhood is presently the right of any woman civilized enough to adopt. I apologize to men for not having seen this source of homophobia earlier and for having been prejudiced in overlooking women’s full contribution to our savagery.

The third, and other major source of homophobia is exclusive to the modern-era. It is our inept transition to monogamy starting with the Neolithic (Stone Age agriculture). Monogamy forces homosexual people (people who weren’t forced to transfer their fantasies and desires away from mom at an early age and people with same-sex siblings) to choose between having love and having children. This is a terrible predicament that causes homophobia, latent homosexuality and the Orwellian personality profile among the homosexual people that choose (or, more often, were coerced by their parents or grandparents to choose) children.

What could possibly be more unfair than this? We all love our siblings. No one gets to choose his siblings. So why should anyone have to suffer on the basis of what siblings he or she has?

Monogamy will be the ideal form of marriage – in the future. But we must first enable everyone to love, commit ourselves to civilizing the world, create a couple of new software applications and adopt the simplified and standardized form of marriage and child-rearing that is described in our publication, Stage II of the Nonviolent Rainbow Revolution.

The Stage II system will make heterosexuals of all our children and guarantee everyone love with the perfect partner.

During a transition period between our present, savage, K and R world and this civilized, Stage II paradise of the future, a transition period of about 25 years; we must complete the spread of the English language, educate the public, eradicate every form of prejudice (prejudices cause persecution and deny equal opportunity), put a global halt to procreation (and subsequently homophobia), drastically reduce the human population and enable everyone – especially our present people of various sexual orientations -- to love. That means legalizing and encouraging not only same-sex marriages but also group marriages for the people, especially bisexual people (consciously bisexual and “Friends”-TV-show fans, alike) that need them.

Homophobia develops slowly in the lives of each of us as we learn of the social compulsion to be monogamous. It develops very quickly in the lives of same-sex siblings at some time during or prior to puberty when their parents or grandparents say to them, “Oh no, you don’t love each other. You love the opposite sex. And you will each have to marry someone of the opposite sex to make grandchildren (or great grandchildren) for us.” This intimation seals the deal, mandates monogamy in the lives of individuals to the same extent that modern religion mandated it for the species. (I’ll explain this observation below.)

If your parents are telling you to marry someone of a gender that you don’t love, insist upon them accepting the truth. If you’re hearing it from your grandparents, you might want to (as we said in the 60s), Shine them on. They may be too old and inflexible to learn that nobody’s genes are special, that nobody’s genes need to be reproduced, that genes have nothing to do with the things that really matter, with character, personality or general intelligence. Moreover, them believing in the old genetic nonsense increases your chances of inheriting part of their estates. But if you are thinking this way, thinking that lies that are in your own self-interest are OK; then you are already corrupt and guilty and likely to become more so.

I suspect that general intelligence is a function of the number of neural connections in our brains. This, in turn, seems to be determined by a positive feedback loop consisting of five elements: 1) stimulation, especially at a very early age and by the mother; 2) motivation, to please the loved one; 3) hard work; 4) achievement; and 5) confidence.

Genes only determine what proteins our cells make and the subsequent physical characteristics, e.g. the shape of our nose or the color of our skin. Genes probably do set up, at the insect level of our brains, the hard wiring and conditional logic of the autonomic nervous system; but that wiring and logic is very much the same, if not identical, for each of us. The famous experiments of Sarich and Wilson, which cultured rabbit antibodies in the albumen of various species and then photographed and compared the allergic reactions, suggest that our genes are 98.9% the same as those of the chimpanzee. Extrapolating from this, it is safe to assume that the difference between the genes of the two most genetically diverse humans within the normal range must be negligible. Again, nobody’s genes are special, and nobody needs to reproduce his own genes. What everybody does need is love.

Parents or grandparents demanding grandchildren or great grandchildren are motivated solely by ignorance and animal instinct. This instinct served us well until we got to the top of the food chain. Since then, it’s been the source of the K and R strategies and all our savagery.

Believe it or not, monogamy, in any form, is a novelty in the life of our species and genus (Homo sapiens and Homo erectus). Paleolithic, Old Stone Age, peoples that had yet to learn and practice horticulture, lived polyamorously in long lodge houses. In the most remote rain forests, where such people are still to be found; they still live this way. Here is a long house that has been preserved by the Vietnamese Museum of Ethnology.

Our Paleolithic ancestors had to live communally in long lodge houses because, for any one person or small group, hunting or foraging for food was a risky proposition. By eating and sleeping together, they mutually assured their survival. Tribes were usually matrilineal. A person usually had one principal spouse and secondary or tertiary sexual rights to second and third persons based upon the relationship of their mothers and their clans or moieties. (See moieties in Volume 3, Appendix B of Decoding the Deluge .) Right up until colonial times, in America, the Iroquois Indians referred to themselves by an impossibly long Indian name that meant “People of the Long House.” See an unknown artist’s rendering of a typical Iroquois long house at the top of this article.

Europeans have no memory of the long-house, but the German word vorurteil attests to their early residence in long houses. This word for prejudice literally means “before time divide” (meaning, before the time of the collective meal, divide and consume your food among your favorite mates). Most primitive long-house dwellers would not have even known who their biological fathers were, and they would have had many brothers and sisters. It’s safe to say that most Paleolithic people were (and the very few remaining ones are) bisexual.

So, what caused all the monogamy and its homophobia? Answer: the discovery of horticulture and the advent of class society. The first farmers would have been in hot competition for the lowest, most fertile and easily-irrigated lands, especially river deltas. These first members of the K Class needed sons to help work the land and defend their claim to it. Their interests and life style was at odds with that of the R tribal society and the long house that they had left. Property accumulation required them to bequeath their property to a single or a very few heirs, and they wanted assurance that these heirs were their biological offspring. For this, they needed to become monogamous. But the very first in-born generation of Ks, the homosexual sons of these first farmers to leave the long house, were plagued by the very institution that they needed to constitute themselves as a class, by monogamy. Monogamy created their predicament (forced them to choose between love and children). Monogamy created much if not most of the homophobia that turned them into latent (hidden) homosexuals. Since then, increasing class differences and improved distant-neighbor relations have increased near-neighbor alienation and fostered monogamy by default.

Latent homosexual people become accomplished actors. Because homophobia is so unfair, latent homosexual people are also understandably angry and become accomplished liars. They become the best (most financially successful) savages within our savage world. Since we all want to reproduce children that resemble us, each generation of the K Class has tended to become more latently homosexual and sociopathic. We’ll return to the subject of their personality profile, in Part III of this video. Now is the time to realize what I mentioned earlier, the role played by modern religion in mandating monogamy for all of us and cementing the Third Mask to faces.

Both the K Class and monogamy were slow to conquer. Pagan peoples were especially loath to give up polyamory for monogamy and the psychic impotence that tends to develop between partners practicing our dysfunctional brand of monogamy. This psychic impotence develops as they struggle to survive, improve the lives of their children, become conscious of the fact that the partner is not the incestuous parent or sibling with whom they once associated him or her and begin to associate each other with work instead of pleasure.

As late as the classical Greek period of the Fourth Century B. C., Plato and, we are told, Socrates, spoke openly about homosexual relationships. Even a century later, Alexander the Great, the most powerful and revered man of his time, was openly bisexual.

Plato, genius that he was, seemed also to realize that latent homosexual anger is what turns people into social monsters, monsters that seek to humiliate others in every way, especially, if possible, by monopolizing needed resources. In the Atlantis myth, Plato described the inner-most wall of Troy as “flashing with red light.” (Original Troy, Homer’s Troy, was on the plains of Cambridge in what is now England. The Wessex Culture Trojans were monopolizing the trade in tin. Tin was needed to make bronze during the Bronze Age and was the immediate cause of the Trojan War. See Volume 1, Chapter 1 and Volume 3, Appendix F of Decoding the Deluge.)

It was modern religion that sealed the deal for monogamy, that rendered it (and the subsequent homophobia and latent homosexuality of same-sex siblings) compulsory for our species. It did so by rendering its alternative, polyamory, impossible. The logic of how it happened is a bit complex and is explained in much greater detail in Volume 1, Chapter 7 of Decoding the Deluge. Bear with me as I attempt to summarize it here.

The whole purpose of modern religion, albeit an unconscious one, was to improve distant neighbor relations in the interest of trade. For time immemorial, tribal, pagan peoples had related beautifully and fraternally with their fellow tribesmen and, to some extent, fellow clansmen. But they were forever at war with their neighbors, whom they sought to capture and sacrifice to their gods. It was vaguely understood that the gods were angry because the universal groups of highly ambivalent ancestors and relatives and the sole individual that are the elements of everyone’s godhead (notion of the gods and the demons or “God” and “Devil”) are all persons whom we either killed or persons whom a part of us would like to kill. So, the angry gods were supplicated with blood. Blood sacrifice was the principal work of the pagan priest. But this presented a major obstacle to trade, to people from different tribes and clans coming together with goods in hand instead of weapons and everyone benefiting from their different productive advantages.

Only a handful of modern religions survived the competition between the thousands of cults of the ancient world. They had all been in competition to become the common religion of the developing empires, a competition that involved absorbing each other’s gods and patrons. The survivors were those that best abolished blood sacrifice, improved distant neighbor relations and trade, promised individual escape from death and suffering, and ministered to guilt and fear.

Improving distant neighbor relations and trade required modern religions to abolish the countless and diverse pagan images. Not only were these images conflicting, but modern men, dividing the production process as they do, are analytical in their thinking and were beginning to see through those images, to see whom they represented. If one could do this, he wouldn’t need a priest! Successful modern religions also had to articulate the Golden Rule, ethical reciprocity, and extend it to all of the faithful. In the pagan past, the Golden Rule had existed only implicitly and for only fellow tribesmen and clansmen. Most importantly, successful modern religions had to abolish blood sacrifice. The Golden Rule helped in this effort, but a creative and convincing rationale was needed as to why the angry gods would settle for something less than revenge in kind, blood. The general transition from pagan to modern religion was from the sacrifice of captives to infanticide to animal sacrifice and finally to votive offerings, giving the priest a coin or a weapon.

But modern religions, though they succeeded in lessening distant neighbor savagery and promoting trade, did nothing to lessen overall savagery because they did nothing to lessen K and R, did nothing to lessen the growing class struggle, did nothing to increase equal opportunity and population control. Remember, from our talk on the class struggle, that total savagery is equal to (all of our social ills are equal to) the extent of the class struggle, the extent of K + R.

Contrary to our prejudices and religious wishful thinking, the world is overall probably every bit as savage now as it was in post-cannibalism, Neolithic times. Don’t assume, as Big Brother does, that our ever-improving forces of production have been used only or even mostly for our betterment.

Defining savagery in terms of its types, we can write: ST = SDN + SNN + SST (total savagery equals distant neighbor savagery plus near neighbor savagery plus suicidal tendencies). Notice that the addends on the right are mutually exclusive and circumscribe the whole of savagery. This gives us two identities for total savagery. Now, because modern religion decreased SDN, distant neighbor savagery, but left ST, total savagery, constant; SNN, near neighbor savagery and/or SST, suicidal tendencies, had to increase proportionately. I suppose that the difficulty of finding monogamous love has, indeed, caused a growth in suicidal tendencies within modern times. But it is the growth in near neighbor savagery, which includes indifference, that is striking and of interest to us here. Near neighbor savagery has and continues to grow within the modern era. Apartment dwellers in our large cities tend to know little if anything about their neighbors and care little more about them than people at the opposite side of the globe. The growth of near neighbor alienation, fostered unintentionally and unconsciously by modern religion, rendered polyamory impossible and monogamy, homophobia and (for the people with same-sex siblings) latent homosexuality inevitable by default.

Notice, by the way, how national socialism reverses this long-standing process of the modern era. The shared goals of nationalism and the compromises between domestic Ks and Rs cause their remaining class differences and animosity to be repressed and projected or displaced onto foreigners.

This concludes Part II of our presentation, “Social Science 201 Homophobia and Latent Homosexuality.” In Part III, we’ll talk about George Orwell, his monumental novel, 1984, and 1984’s dead-on-the-money description of the latent homosexual personality profile. We’ll also discuss the LGBt movement, the most important struggle in the world today and its challenges. (The lower case “t” is intentional and to be explained, later.) We’ll also discuss one of the movements’ early champions, Harvey Milk, and why, as Harvey told us, it is important for all LGBt to come out, to remove their Third Masks. Hope to talk to you all again, soon.

Dave Huttner,

Peace Love and Progress Party Founder,

October 4, 2019