What’s in a Name? :: Research Papers

Whats in a Name?Throughout his book Virtually Normal, Andrew Sullivan explains how sight of all different kinds of beliefs think about and treat homosexuals and homosexual behavior in society. He labels the four most commonly held viewpoints on homosexuality (liberationist, conservative, liberal, and prohibitionist) and poses his aver politics of homosexuality. According to Sullivans labels, gay and homosexual activist Urvashi Vaid would be considered a liberal. Vaid is a liberal because even though she may support some aspects of the new(prenominal) four viewpoints, the main points that the other four entail clash considerably with her own beliefs. Vaid is not a prohibitionist, a conservative, a liberationist, or a believer in Sullivans own politics she is a liberal under Sullivans classification.Prohibitionists, according to Sullivan, are those who wish to cure or punish heap who practice homosexual acts, and to monish all the others who might be tempted to stray into the hom osexual milieu (Sullivan 22). These people believe that homosexuality is a choice, and that homosexuality violates a natural fair play. This natural natural law is the prohibitionist view that heterosexuality is the normal, natural form of human sexuality and that all other deviance, inducing homosexuality, is not normal and not natural. Scripture, and this natural law philosophy, are some of the intellectual ammunition prohibitionists use. They want to stop tolerance of homosexuality at all costs. Urvashi Vaid, on the other hand, wants complete tolerance for homosexuals. She argues against these evils for gibe rights for gays. She desires liberation of gay people, so they do not have to live in closets or in gay ghettos, and she wants the end of discrimination against gay and lesbian people. She will not settle for virtual equality, and her goal of complete equality is against all a prohibitionist stands for.Andrew Sullivan describes his conservatives as people who are inconsiste nt, people who have a hypocritical stance on the issue of homosexuality. These people combine a nonpublic tolerance of homosexuals with a public disapproval of homosexuality. succession they do not want to see legal persecution of homosexuals, they see no problem with the discouragement and disparagement of homosexual sexual behavior (Sullivan 97). They believe that peoples private lives are their own, but in public the heterosexual form is the right form, and anything publicly against that norm will hurt society. So if homosexual people cargo hold quiet about their homosexuality and let heterosexual dominance continue, then all will be well.