I still remember that there was a saying many years ago that wherever there is oppression, there is resistance. Now it seems that this is simply a wise saying. Someone said that homosexuality is like a tiger's butt that cannot be touched, but in my opinion, it is a monkey's butt that everyone wants to touch. Some touched it out of curiosity, some were lustful, and some felt it was not enough and went up to kick it. There are those who claim to be morally upright, there are those who flaunt themselves in defense of traditional culture, and even worse, there are those who claim to be martyrs but are actually defenders of morality. In fact, I am very reluctant to refute some things. It is like arguing with a madman or talking about love with a cow. It is useless and meaningless. However, when I think about it, China has developed to this day, and while others are building our homeland with high spirits, singing and laughing, there are some people who insist on removing some old morality and culture from the grave, regardless of whether it has been * All moldy and spoiled things were pulled out in one go. What’s even more funny is that they may not even know what is traditional and what is national, and they still insist on saying that China is unhappy under the banner of nationalism. Anyway, every time I hear this word, I think of the emperors in the TV series. You want to ask why? Think about it, in this world, except for those emperors who must follow their own wishes, even if they confuse right and wrong and want others to act according to their own wishes, who can always be unhappy. As for the question of what strength some people have to discuss the so-called traditional culture, or what rights they have to make China unhappy, let’s not talk about it for now, because there is no need to say it. Judging from the actual situation around us, even my parents They all think someone is a bit crazy. In my dad’s words: I haven’t worn an armband for so many years, why am I still so childish? And when talking to these people, you can’t use theory or logic, and writing is easy anyway. But since someone has explained the reasons why they discriminate against homosexuals, then we have to talk about the reasons why they discriminate against homosexuals. At first I wanted to write something serious, but then I changed my mind and worried that I wouldn’t understand it, so let’s just be emotional for a while. What's more, do you need a reason to discriminate against someone? It may not be necessary, or it may be necessary. Why they discriminate is not important. What is important is what they discriminate against. Someone said: Homosexuality has existed for a long time. Homosexuality has been a shameful behavior all over the world for a long time. As a common phenomenon, it is true that homosexuality has always existed, but it is hard to say that it is a shameful behavior everywhere in the world. Not to mention, the current Prime Minister of Iceland, the Mayor of Paris, the Mayor of Berlin, and Westerwelle, who is about to become the German Foreign Minister, are all openly gay. But this may be playing into someone's hands, because you see, these people with shameful behavior can actually become the leaders of a country. This only shows that this country is also a shameful country. This doesn't suit someone. Did you mean it? A mature person or a mature nation will not turn to hate the entire country and nation of the other nation just because of the despicable behavior of a small group of scum in the other nation. China does not want this, and neither do other countries. Someone also said: Another fundamental reason for the proliferation of homosexuality in modern society is the nature of capitalist society. According to the basic conditions of human existence, the satisfaction of every desire has a clear purpose. Eating and drinking is to survive, clothing is to keep warm, sexual desire is to prolong future generations, etc. . . In traditional societies, it is advocated to control human desires. The methods of control are different in the East and the West, but the fundamental point is that they cannot deviate from the objective purpose of the existence of desires. So I looked through Cihai first, and found four explanations: (1) The water in rivers and lakes overflows. This has little to do with homosexuality, so I’ll skip it for now. (2) Metaphor for the unrestricted popularity of bad things. There is already a hidden plot here that someone regards homosexuality as a bad thing, so please pay special attention to it. When we understand someone's presupposition, we will find out how diverse he is later. Tolerance is pure bullshit; the third and fourth explanations are metaphors for the unrestricted popularity and uncontrollability of things. What does someone think homosexuality is? Infectious disease or bad breath? I'm confused. From someone's point of view, the values ??of heterosexuality are unquestionable. However, for thousands of years, heterosexuality has been so correct and powerful, but no one has been able to eradicate the infectious disease of homosexuality. That only shows that this virus is really powerful. And according to someone's logic, it is best for tall people not to play with short people, so as not to get shorter as time goes by. And at the risk of becoming narrow-minded and paranoid, I'll play with them for now. Someone emphasized that heterosexuality and homosexuality have different values. Of course, in a strict sense, there are no so-called homosexual values ??or heterosexual values. If there are, are they the values ??of everyone? They are all different, so what is referred to here is the kind of eternal values ????that someone said will last forever. But since he said it, let’s follow his advice and first look at what kind of values ??homosexuals have. An article titled "The Father of Gay Greek Democracy" published by Mr. He took his own life and was called a regicide. In the minds of the Athenians, they were the fathers of democracy. They died in 514 BC.

About five years later, in 509 BC, the sculptor Athenor made a set of statues for the lovers and erected them in the agora, the central market of Athens. This was the first time in the history of Athens that a historical figure was commemorated in the form of a statue (most of the statues in Athens were used to represent gods rather than people). And for the next 100 years, their statues were the only statues of historical figures in Athens. In Athens, erecting a statue to any living person was blasphemous and blasphemous to democracy. When Pericles oversaw the construction of the Parthenon when he ruled Athens, his political opponents attacked him for allowing the sculptor he hired to project his image onto a statue in the temple, which made him very embarrassed. Aristogeiton and Harmodios were enshrined in this way five years after their deaths, which shows that their status in the lives of the Athenian citizens was far higher than that of any politician or other citizen, and they almost became semi-god-like figures. In 480 BC, King Xerxes of Persia once led his army to occupy Athens during the Greco-Persian War. He specifically ordered this group of statues to be pulled down, intending to break the spirit of the Athenians. But after the Athenian victory, the sculptors Kritios and Nosiotes re-erected statues of the two regicides in 477 BC. A line of verse is engraved on the base of the statue: When Aristogeiton and Harmodios killed Hipparchos (the brother of the tyrant, see below), a great flame illuminated the Athenians. Some people often attribute homosexuality to the evil consequences of capitalism, but they never thought that homosexuality had already entered the society as early as ancient Greece and became the father of Western democracy. Well, let’s wait for someone to deny the value of capitalism and then deny the value of ancient Greece as well. I don’t know why, but I suddenly thought of some politicians in Taiwan. I also remembered what Premier Zhou said at the Bandung Conference: The Chinese delegation came to seek unity, not to quarrel. It is the same today, whether he is heterosexual or homosexual, as long as he is a Chinese, as long as he has some intelligence, under such historical conditions, if he does not unite as one, build a good homeland and serve the motherland, he must classify others as perverts, which is abnormal. category, and then unscrupulously slanders and insults, creating conflicts and disputes. If the word "brainless" is not invented, I really don't know how to describe this kind of person. Why are they unhappy because they write, but they don’t know that the old China in history has long since declined in the hands of these conservative, ignorant people who frequently hold high the banner of morality. So how can we allow this to happen again? British philosopher Bertrand Russell made the following statement in his 1927 book "Marriage and Morals": Male homosexuality - but not lesbianism - is currently outlawed in Britain. Changing this law would be extremely difficult, although such reform would not in itself make it illegal on the grounds of obscenity. However, anyone who takes the time to study the subject will see that this law is the result of barbaric and ignorant superstition, and that once this superstition is clung to, no rational theory is possible. be able to move forward. Then history is so similar. Russell also earned titles such as immoral, heretic professor, degenerate, heinous, perfidious, advocate of sexual hybridization, root of evil, cancer of sexual liberation, etc. At the same time, Lost his university position. More than eighty years have passed, and today we can still hear such abuse and slander. It is sad in terms of history, and even more a shame in terms of social development. Of course, history is still so fair, and Russell still won the Nobel Prize for Literature in the end. Because he believes that a good life is motivated by love and guided by knowledge, not motivated by hatred and guided by ignorance. Not long ago, the British leader Brown apologized to the world for the unfair treatment suffered by Turing, the father of computer science, after World War II. After so many years, even though Turing has passed away, it can be regarded as a consolation. The regrets of history are still there, but the noise in our ears is louder, making all this even more ironic. Sometimes I think, fortunately Turing was not born in China, otherwise he might not even have a chance to vindicate himself even now. The reason is not because Chinese people are not smart enough, but because there are always some people in China who are arrogant and self-righteous. They use all despicable means to slander and insult things they don't like, and use ignorance as belief. Pretending to be ignorant and masculine, these are the people who are truly hindering China's progress. Look at those people in history who shouted about their ancestors, traditions, and morals. How many of them were able to contribute the power that a person, a man or a woman should have in the progress of history? To take a step back, ignorance is not terrible. It is reasonable to guard one's ignorance. At least it only harms oneself. But what is terrible is that not only one has to be ignorant, but one also has to use one's ignorance to punish others, interfere with other people's lives, and even Thoughts, this is a bit too unkind. Because, sooner or later, the lifestyle advocated by capitalist society will become a thing of the past in human history. Does loving someone require advocacy? Since someone doesn't need someone's advice to love, then neither does homosexuality. If you need to be advocated to love someone, then human love is too narrow. In view of someone’s great nationalistic sentiments, and since the above examples are all from the West, I am afraid that they will use them as an excuse to slander them. So after talking about the West, let’s talk about our own.

Someone said that using the ancient Chinese way of thinking to explain homosexuality in today's China should end like this: homosexuality is a diverse existence. . . However, this objection does not mean that homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality. . . The Chinese believe that the value of cooperation is higher than selfishness, and the value of heterosexuality is higher than homosexuality. As a society, choosing cooperation as the first principle of society and not treating selfishness as a sin is the same as choosing heterosexuality as the first principle of society. This kind of choice made by the public is not "discrimination" as homosexuals are overly sensitive.

Now let's analyze the above passage: It seems that in this passage, someone describes himself as a man with a broad mind, but is this true? The inevitable unfairness mentioned by the author is obviously unreasonable. For example, it is impossible for someone to compete with a certain woman to see who can ejaculate farther. This is not only the same as