• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Thoughts That Come Unbidden Department

You are here: Home / Thought That Came Unbidden / The not-so-new Boogeyman

The not-so-new Boogeyman

I got some interesting comments on my essay about fear and human behavior in modern society. They brought up some follow-up thoughts.

Name: Susan

This “fear of missing something” that you describe so well is probably
firmwired (i.e. not quite hardwired, but definitely present when the hardware
comes out of the box.) It’s not optional software.

<snip>

Human behavior has to be learned. One very unfortunate aspect of capitalism
is that it thrives on our worst (most animalistic) reactions. Part of why
capitalism works is because it builds on what is most ‘natural’ in us. It is
in the interest of capitalist type ventures to nurture these tendencies
(which don’t need much help as it is) – and probably to undermine the
alternatives. Now that is a really scary thought.

And this from Matt

Name: Matt

URL: http://crammed-cranium.blogspot.com

“Firmwired?” Yeah, I think Susan might be onto something.
These are the things we’re all afraid of, albeit to varying degrees. What I
wonder about are the things that only some of us are afraid of, even as
others embrace them. “Alternative” sexuality, for instance — I wonder where
those fears come from.

I don’t think they’re a evolutionary fear, per se — how does the existence
of a homosexual man undermine my survival? (You could argue — and I think it
has been argued — that it perhaps theoretically undermines the continuation
of the species, but I think that’s a weak argument, atleast by numbers.) Is
it just our differing experiences, the nurture part of life, as opposed to
nature? I’d be curious to hear your thoughts.

Some very interesting questions, and I have thoughts on both of them and they are related so bear with me.

I can see where there is at least one thing that comes built in with to us as a species, but to a certain extent that one thing is common to all living beings on the planet. That would be the instinct to survive. How that manifests varies, I suppose, but it manifests none the less. Look at the grass that pushes its way up through the tarmac in a parking lot; it’s just trying to survive. I do think Susan has a point, though, in that some of the behavior mechanisms that humans are still using after years of evolution (namely the push to conform) don’t make any sense in the changed face of society. We no longer need fear that alienating the group will threaten survival at least not on a base level anyway.

I think a lot of the fears, particularly the one Matt points out about “alternative sexuality,” that don’t make any sense are directly related to that evolutionary impulse, when being different meant being ostracized from the group, which often meant death by starvation or from the elements.

Except…except…many so-called primative people (such as most Native American tribes) had no problems with homosexuality (specifically) until the introduction of Christianity. Where do those fears of alternative sexuality come from? I found a very interesting essay, which I find credible not just because I happen to agree with it, but also because there are footnotes (never underestimate the power of footnotes, or of saving your receipts, but that’s another essay) titled Saint Aelred the Queer: The Surprising History of Homosexuality and Homophobia.

Basically what it boils down to is that early Christians came to associate homosexuality with particular animals they found to have disgusting habits. That disgust then became associated with homosexuality generically and divorced from its natural, animal-behavior observed origins.

The reason, I think, that many people fear homosexuality doesn’t really have anything to do with the weak evolutionary objections. I think the reason that many people fear homosexuality is simply because it exists, or used to anyway, in a rarified atmosphere hence making it forbidden and interesting. But, at the same time, our society tells us in an incalculable number of ways that homosexual acts, and by extension homosexuals, are disgusting and that curiousity then becomes frightening. I mean, lets face it, American society in particular doesn’t have a long history of curiousity for curiousity’s sake: we’re a very black and white people. If you try something you’re branded nigh on for life, with some things you don’t even have to try them to be so branded.

I’m not entirely sure that I agree that capitalism builds on our most naturalistic tendencies because I think that gets more into the nature of man than it does to how we behave. True, capitalism, like any other societal system or system of government, works off humanity’s basic urge to survive, but so does socialism which, generally, is more oriented to maintaining the health of the whole for the good of all rather than the health of the individual. I also don’t think you can explain away the whole of human behavior with biological impulse.

Lots of these shows on Discovery and the National Geographic channel that talk about modern mating rituals and how people choose partners try to boil everything down to biology: we choose our mate for some instinctually perceived qualities that make him or her likely to produce offspring that will survive. Except…how do homosexual people who generally didn’t produce offspring, at least up until the last 15 years or so, choose a mate? Yes, there’s some biology involved, but it’s a lot more complicated than that.

There are a lot of elements that go into human behavior: fear, previously learned experiences, secret desires, averice, kindness (try explaining that with a biologically based theory), hope, and joy among others all combine to push us around and determine how we behave. Maybe fear is less of a motivating factor than I think. Or maybe I’m right and we’re simply reacting to the stimuli around us. Or maybe it’s both. The only thing I know for sure is that there is a lot more free-floating anxiety in American society today than there was even a decade ago, and people sure seem to be acting like scared animals.

Reading:

  • Saint Aelred the Queer: The Surprising History of Homosexuality and Homophobia, Scott Bidstrup
  • Homophobia: The Fear Behind The Hatred, Scott Bidstrup

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Susan says

    14 June 2006 at 11:39

    Just a quick first shot (your remarks are very interesting and after I digest them, I think I’ll have more to say.) You reference “St. Aelred the Queer” – I did some quick research – skimmed the article, and looked into its references. What I read just doesn’t feel right to me. (I strive at all times to be totally objective!)

    What I really don’t buy is the very hypothesis that seems to appeal to you: that homosexuality was condemned as unnatural in being like the behavior of various animals that were held in contempt – such as hyenas.

    You contrast this idea to that of the thesis that says it was condemned due to it being evolutionarily ineffective, as it were.

    There are other choices – better than either – my own preference: the volatile mixture of the Judeo/Christian tradiation and patriarchal views.

    Personally I think many of Bidstrup’s ideas are open to criticism (big surprise.)

  2. Dev says

    19 June 2006 at 7:55

    You already know that I concur with your view that there is no such thing as a biological imperative for capitalism, given that I live in a (nominally) socialist country and do not remotely understand how any right-thinking person could possibly support free-market capitalism.

    Although I don’t buy the animal theory, as a historian, I also refute anything about Judeo-Christian or patriarchial constructs leading to homophobia, especially as Judaism is a matriarchal religion.

    There are plenty of patriarchial Judeo-Christian countries where gay marriage or partnership ceremonies are legal (the UK, Canada, the Netherlands, etc). That is not to say that homophobia does not exist in those countries, just to say that there was enough settled will of the people, as it were, to acknowledge that homosexuals are, you know, normal.

    The fear of homosexuality in the USA is the fear of that which threatens the ruling elite. If the ruling elite were all gay, then people would (metaphorically and physically) beat up on heterosexuals instead.

    Racism, sectarianism and prejudice of all kinds and colours – throughout history, no matter where in the world – are about the preservation of the current ruling class* and their own particular prejudices. No Irish need apply. Whites only. The examples are legion.

    * Feel free to substitute an appropriate US-ian word for class if you’re not loving its British and Commonwealth connotations.

  3. woodstock says

    22 June 2006 at 6:22

    If we had free-market capitalism any place in the world I could whole heartedly
    agree with you but a reasonable argument can be made that we don’t. What we
    have is corporate welfare states where certain businesses for profit get
    preferential treatment by the government thus undercutting the basic principle
    of capitalism (ie: the consumer rules the market through purchasing power).
    Perhaps my understanding of economics is simplistic.

    Judaism aside (I object to the term Judeo-Christian to begin with but that’s
    another issue), Christianity doesn’t have a long history of being tolerant
    toward sexuality period. After all, for procreation and nothing else. Hard to
    procreate without the necessary participants, isn’t it?

    Class works. I’m still not entirely sure how homosexuals threaten the
    ruling elite. In the U.S. you’d think the ruling elite would *want* us to get
    married (not to bore but: married filing jointly pays more taxes than two
    singles; married filing separately does as well, I think; ergo: more money from
    the government from married gay people).

Primary Sidebar

Looking for fiction?

Read the fiction blog for stories less topical and more diverting.

Categories

Archives

Copyright © 2025