Here is another “One From The Heart” post, originally published on Curiosity Quills last week.

Within the culture I grew up, the general consensus among teenage boys, and later men, was this: A girl might have sex with another girl, but she was still a girl. Okay. Some of those girls were more like boys, only wanted girls, and we called them lesbians. (Or they called themselves lesbians.) But there were those special chicks that tossed in the sack with chicks, yet still looked like chicks and acted like chicks. For us horny dudes these girls were even more a turn-on than cheerleaders. We considered them super-sexed “bad” girls. And that was hot! Girls that kissed girls were more girly, as long as they wanted to kiss boys too. But ya know, as it turned out, men who kissed men were not at all considered more manly. Not even close.

Does that make sense? Where’s the fairness? Should women have more inalienable rights than men? Seems they did. And still do.

As it generally goes down in many parts of this country, a guy who kisses a guy is less a guy. In fact, if he only kisses guys, he’s not a guy at all. He’s a fag. Or worse, he’s a mistake. It’s kinda like being an African American. If you’re 30% negro and 70% Caucasian, you’re still Black. And in the sex world, you can screw three guys and seven girls and you’re still a fag. No self respecting man of religion will buy that bi-sexual bullshit. One fag-fuck and you’re out of the man club. You’re…damaged.

Okay, whether you buy that premise or not, the questions still remain: What constitutes being a man? Is it biology? The gender you sleep with? What you THINK about? And is being a man an all-or-nothing thing?

September 20th was the first day of  the repeal of “DON’T ASK – DON’T TELL.” As we all know, this phrase represented a political means of concealing one’s homosexual orientation while serving in the military. And as we also now know, some marines were, and are, gay. I single out the marines because it’s a well known fact that “men” are separated from the “boys” in marine boot camp and in service. At least that’s the pitch. And it works. Many young recruits join the marines because it’s the toughest and most aggressive branch of the military outside of special forces. So to prove their manhood, eighteen year-old pre-men join this elitist fighting organization to become “real” men. They get tough. “Killing machine” tough, and take on all the responsibility that goes with it.

Now I’m not gay and I’ve never been a soldier, so I can only speculate. But I suppose gay marines have to perform the same requirements as straight men, which applies to feats of courage, endurance, and the ability to “neutralize the enemy.” (In many cases that means killing him before he kills you.) Now if gay men couldn’t tow the line, they wouldn’t stay marines. And we all agree, marines are superior men.

Where did we ever get the idea that most gay men become hair dressers, interior designers, and ballet dancers? Gay men become soldiers too. And they risk their lives to save the lives of their fellow soldiers. Once more, gay soldiers put their lives on the line to protect ME, ‘cause no way do I wanna die for my country. I don’t wanna die for ANY reason. Even old age! Guess I’m just not a man. Or a whole man. Or a man’s man. Or a patriotic man. But boy do I like to sex it up with women! Hummm… What am I then?

So, here it goes. Anybody out there who can answer my questions, jot down a few words in the comment box.

Is a gay marine less a man than a straight marine? Does a gay marine lack the fighting skills that a straight marine does? Will a gay marine kiss the enemy instead of taking him out? Is a gay marine less patriotic? Is a gay marine God’s mistake? Are all Greeks gay? Or just…GREEK?

Really, I need to know. Why is a man less a man if he loves a man?





  1. Jerry's Cousin says:

    If they can fight, defend our country, our flag, our rights and our constitution, I don’t care what they do behind closed doors. That’s their time and their business.

  2. Gary Feixal says:

    Study history dude, and don’t be so limited by your own small experience!
    In the ancient world among the military elites homosexuality was common.
    I myself have known marines who were queer. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with fighting ability. Most members of the armed forces are in combat support or combat service support anyway.
    The military does a far better job of enacting social change than does the civilian world.
    You write “Why is a man less a man if he loves a man?” This is what you believe? Or is this just a rhetorical device? Your writing is not clear.
    Don’t think that soldiers are putting their life on the line to protect YOU. They are not. They soldier because they are soldiers, they sacrifice for their comrades in arms and their allegiance is to the Constitution. Their mission is noble because it is beyond and outside of themselves – you as an individual are the beneficiary of their labors not the purpose.
    Gary the plumber

    1. Irving H. Podolsky says:

      If you read my essay again, with the idea that I agree with all you’ve said, the content may hit you differently.

      Yes, I know about homosexuality in ancient times. I even made a joke about it, referring to all Greeks as being gay. That’s absurd of course.

      I pose the question, “Why is a man less a man if he loves a man?” because I was asking someone to come up with an argument that supports it. THEN, I could challenge that position.

      In my opinion, a man is NOT less a man if he loves a man. A man is a man, period. His sexual orientation does not make him less a man, or more of anything else. This is my premise, and I used the marines to back that up, showing that they do all the “manly” things. Even things I wouldn’t do. Does NOT fighting for my country make me less a man? This was the philosophical question I was posing.

      Yep, Gary, I couldn’t agree with you more. We’re both on the same page. Just reading it differently.

      Thanks for your comment!


Leave a Reply