The latest progressive dust devil on the landscape is the campaign to force a private organization to accept its mores and values regarding homosexuals in society. Ruminating a bit on the topic, some thoughts came to mind I have not seen discussed.
For eons pubescent boys and girls have been separated in uncountable cultures for the purpose of achieving some focused group activity, objective, or ritual. The reason is simple, heterosexual boys and girls begin to succumb to the dictates of their burgeoning hormones, and consequently pay less/no attention to the purpose for which they have gathered as a group. This is especially true when the gathering also involves group eating, sleeping, and performing ablutionary activities.
It would have been unthinkable to place boys and girls together in such settings where thoughts could and would turn extra-curricular. Young boys would fantasize about being the only male in a girls’ dorm, and in response society fixed things so that peeking in windows was about as close as such wishes could be fulfilled. We learned long ago not to mess with hormones.
Now there are people who want to put young males into situations in which they are exposed to other sexually attractive young males, and in similar fashion for young females. The theory being that a homosexual’s hormones can be turned on/off like a light switch, or (gasp!) maybe homosexual tendencies are only in the mind which can succumb to therapy. In either case these arguments are a stretch, and a bridge too far for established 21st century ‘truths’.
So let’s posit that the Boy Scouts and other young people’s organizations bow to progressive pressures, and groups of boys only (and girls only) find themselves with a homosexual or two in their midsts (recall, today homosexuals have no compunction to ‘stay in the closet’ – gay pride and all that). The homosexuals, of course, would consider it a boon, else no one would want to foist their joining such groups under duress. And here comes the point – such fortuitous introduction of the odd sexually oriented individual into a single gendered group is discrimination pure and simple.
Why could not a heterosexual young person sue a single gendered group for the opportunity to be equally titillated as are his/her homosexual compatriots? Or why could not the parents of a homosexual boy, fully aware of the pubescent focus arguments, not sue to have a girls school accept their son so that he could be in an educational environment that is not distractive?
I could go on with more examples dear reader, and so could you. The point made here is that we are again fiddling with the latch on another Pandora’s Box.