How to be unfashionable: be heterosexual.

I had the strangest experience a couple of weeks ago. It occurred on Facebook. Someone had posted a comment on their page, which provoked a conversation that struck me as most bizarre. There were, perhaps, a dozen people contributing to the talk. Its subject was human attraction. Now, this might not strike you as a bizarre subject – but the way everyone responded to it, was most strange. You see, out of the dozen or so people commenting on the post, I was the ONLY one who wrote in defence of heterosexuality. Everyone else wrote comments in support of the “rightness” of people finding the same sex attractive. A few commenters even said that it was natural for “heterosexual” people to find the same sex attractive – and jumped on me when I pointed out that that would be the viewpoint of a bisexual.

The conversation was quite a long one, but eventually I withdrew from commenting any further, because the comments against my viewpoint (that heterosexuality was the natural, biologically determined position, otherwise none of us would be here) and against me, personally, were becoming too aggressive. Not only was I surrounded by a dozen proponents of homosexuality and bisexuality – but they were becoming increasingly aggressive in their comments and attacks. I, on the other hand, remained polite and civil throughout, even when faced with a particular commenter who was being strongly abusive.

I must say, this experience really puzzled me. You see, of the many, many people on my FB and on the FB of those others who commented, there would have been many heterosexuals – in fact, most people on them would, I assume, have been heterosexual. Yet, not ONE of these heterosexuals was brave enough to stand up for the heterosexual viewpoint – I, alone, spoke out in favour of heterosexuality. It should be noted that I did not speak against homosexuality or bisexuality in any way – I only spoke up for heterosexuality as the default position of biology. I only spoke in terms of what biologically made sense. I did not address sociological or sub-cultural issues at all. My antagonists, however, were very abusive, at times, against the heterosexual position and me, in particular. So, not only was I being ambushed by a dozen homosexuals/bisexuals, some of whom claimed to be “straight”, implicitly by claiming that it was normal for heterosexuals to be attracted to the same sex – but I was being attacked, sometimes, quite rudely by these people. My question is: why? Why did these pink proponents feel the need to ambush me – and why did they feel the need to do so, so aggressively, when everything I said was true, uncontroversial, and just basic biology?

It seems to me that two things have happened. Firstly, heterosexuals now feel unable to defend themselves in public, they feel they should be silent collectively, on the issue of their viewpoint on life. Secondly homosexuals and bisexuals, feel so emboldened to speak out, that they forcibly push their viewpoints and way of life, onto everyone else, whenever they get the opportunity. Not only that, but some of them do so in an offensive, rude, aggressive manner. They seem to feel anger at the existence of heterosexuals (without which they would not be), and seem to want to extinguish that way of life. The madness of all of this is that the majority position – heterosexuality – now feels unable to speak up in public. The reason for this is clear. If a heterosexual speaks up for their position, many homosexuals and bisexuals will attack them, accusing them of being “homophobic”. The funny thing is, heterosexuals are usually not homophobic at all, when they speak for themselves, however, homosexuals are very frequently HETEROphobic (my spell checker says such a word does not exist, but it should, because heterophobia is a LOT more common among homosexuals, in my experience, than homophobia is among heterosexuals).

So, what I experienced was a “heterophobic” ambush. I spoke out for the biological reasons behind heterosexuality – and was shouted down by a lot of people whose views were clearly homosexual and bisexual in content, some of them in an offensive manner. It seems that no other heterosexual reading the exchange was brave enough to contribute. This strikes me as dangerous. We are now in a world in which heterosexuality may not be spoken of, in some circles – without being attacked. We are in a world in which homosexuality is fashionable, to the degree that those who are not practising it, or openly evangelizing for it, are to be attacked or rejected. Heterosexuality on the other hand, is unfashionable in some circles. It is almost as if homosexuals and bisexuals think the world would be better off without heterosexuals, at all. They seem to forget how the human race is brought into being with each generation.

Sadly, my experience of being ambushed for speaking out in support of heterosexuality – against those who were criticizing it – was so unpleasant that I might hesitate to do so, again, in future. The hassle is not really worth it. Life is too short to spend it being abused by strangers, for one’s views. So it is, that the homosexual community entrains the heterosexual community to shut up. Everyone they abuse is another person who is likely to keep silent again, in future.

The oddest part about this experience was that the conversation was started by a Malay woman who spoke in favour of homosexuality. This is odd, because homosexuality is illegal in Malaysia. However, it does appear to have a very vocal minority who support it – at least, online. Many of the other commenters appeared to be American.

Now, it should be noted, here, that I have no issues with people choosing their own way of life. They are free to do as they please. However, what I do have an issue with, is when they feel it necessary to abuse those who hold a different view, perhaps even the majority view – as they abused me, for holding a heterosexual viewpoint. To my mind, by being abusive to those who hold a different viewpoint, they invalidate their own right to hold their viewpoint. If they are going to hold a different viewpoint and way of life, they MUST NOT abuse others who hold a different viewpoint. Yet, that is what they were doing. This lost them any sympathy for their viewpoint that I had had before the conversation began. Being abusive to strangers – as they were to me, since none of the commenters, apart from one , was actually a Facebook friend of mine – is never going to do any good for their cause.

This taught me a lesson though. The promotion of homosexual “rights” has gone too far, in some parts of the world. It has gone so far, that heterosexuals are frightened to speak up for themselves. That is completely mad. Homosexuals say they seek “equality” but what they really seem to seek, going by the conversation I had, is total dominance. Already, the situation has become highly unequal. Homosexuals feel free to speak out at any time – whereas heterosexuals are now frightened to speak up for themselves, for they are inevitably accused of “homophobia” when they do – even when they say nothing against homosexuals at all. Well it is time for heterosexuals to start using the word “heterophobia” and “heterophobic” to describe the attacks quite a few homosexuals make on them. It is time for heterosexuals to speak out for their viewpoint and position on life – before it becomes the minority position. Where would the human race be then?

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

On Maternity and Paternity Leave.

Singapore's leaders are waking up to the fact that soon they will have no-one left to lead. By this, I mean that Singaporeans simply aren't having enough children: they virtually halve at every generation - and, as any schoolboy mathematician will tell you, it doesn't take an awful lot of generations, at that rate of decline, for there soon to be no Singaporeans left at all. Something has to be done.

So, the government has proposed a number of initiatives to improve the situation. I shall focus on the implications of one of them, in this post. The government has extended the statutory period of maternity leave from 12 weeks to 16 weeks. This is great for mothers who wish to, and need to, spend more time with their newborns. It is great for the babies, too. It is not so great, however, for employers - particularly smaller employers - for they have to arrange cover, by generally less well-informed and competent staff, while their new mother is away from work. This can be expensive, is inconvenient and may affect the business. Thus, employers won't like this change very much.

Then, again, even 16 weeks is too short, really. What is needed is a much longer period of maternity leave (as in many European countries), but this would only heighten the problems for Singaporean companies which, traditionally, don't really care very much about the well-being of their staff.

This creates a big problem for women throughout Singapore. Employers may come to look on a female employee as a nightmare waiting to happen. They may see a female name and drop the CV in the bin. Why? Because down the line, all they can see is the incurred expense and inconvenience of maternity leave. Employers who think like this will tend to avoid employing young women and will only open the doors to post-menopausal women. It may create a strange kind of ageism in which OLDER women are preferred to younger ones. It would be a curious reversal of present trends.

While the government is intent on improving the situation for mothers, it seems to have forgotten fathers. Dads now have earnt the right to a week off work, sometime, during the year, to help care for their child. A week is a bit pathetic, really. What is needed is for men to have paternity leave. This would give new dads the chance to get to know their children - and their children to get to know their dads.

Paternity leave serves two purposes: it allows dads to be dads - and it ensures that mums will have jobs. You see, if dads get 16 weeks paternity leave, too, then there will be NO difference to employing men or women in the workplace. Employers would have no reason to discriminate between men and women: for both would come with the same potential cost. Indeed, equal maternity and paternity leave for men and women is the ONLY way that a sex divide in employment prospects will not develop in the Singaporean job market.

This, of course, gives rise to a general principle which should apply in all matters relating to employment: whatever breaks or allowances that women get, men should get, too, so that there is no reason to discriminate between men and women in the workplace. It seems the eminently intelligent thing to do and resolves many problems, at once. However, somehow, I don't think it will be implemented. Other considerations will probably still take precedence over the resolution of the population issue - and so the population of actual Singaporeans will continue to decline.

We shall see what is done.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.)