When did you choose heterosexuality? This question greeted me when I walked by Moore Hall a few days ago and it really got me thinking. As part of Outweek, members of the College community decided to write messages on the ground around campus. I'm guessing that the purpose of this is to promote awareness and discussion about alternative sexualities on campus. So I'll respond to this challenge and consider whether we can indeed choose our sexuality. I find the courage of this mystery writer laudable, but I also believe this provocative question leads to a serious worry. Let me explain.
What I am taking this writer to imply with this statement is that people are either born a homosexual or born a heterosexual?they cannot choose for themselves, so we're saying sexual impulses are uncontrollable. Of course, this leads to the contention that because people do not have control over their own sexuality, homosexuality is as morally defensible as heterosexuality.
While that may not seem to be a radical proposition to many people on campus, it puts us on a slippery slope. If sexuality is beyond human control, how do we draw the line between sexual deviants and the rest of the good population? For example, a pedophile might argue that the impulse of engaging in sexual activity with children comes just as naturally as heterosexual or homosexual tendencies. Certainly we do not want to say that pedophilia is just as moral as normal sexual behavior (for all intents and purposes, heterosexuality and homosexuality). There are laws that specifically protect children from such sexual predators.
A very standard response to the pedophilia worry is that normal sexual behavior is between two consenting adults while pedophilia is between an adult and a child. A child, yet to reach full rationality, cannot give the same consent that an adult can. The child might grow up to realize that she never wanted to partake in such activities and was simply duped by the pedophile. Even if she grew up to never regret the decision, it still seems wrong that such activities should ever be allowed. I think many people can happily agree that even if pedophilia is natural, the tendency still needs to be controlled.
Although this remedies the problem of pedophilia, we are not out of the danger zone yet. The argument just made leads to the question: How do we restrict "natural" sexual impulses that do not violate children but are still considered lewd? For the sake of those of you eating, I will not give any examples, but you probably won't have to think hard to find another type of sexual deviance. In effect, the argument of sexuality being beyond people's control should allow anything that doesn't cause harm to other people. Think of what kinds of trouble this can cause to society.
I want to be crystal clear here?this isn't an argument against homosexuality. All I am proposing is that, if I am interpreting the question correctly, the argument leads to a conclusion that has serious problems. There are plenty of other arguments that we can use to defend homosexuality, this one just doesn't cut it.
Jeff Jeng is a member of the Class of 2009 and Chairman of the College Republicans.