| 232 THE PINK SWASTIKA |
For many of today's young men, their ability to choose has been hijacked by a sophisticated program of psychosexual sedition and manipulation, largely sustained by the social weaknesses of our time.
To limit the animating source for human behavior to the brain and animal instinct (as many of today's behavioral scientists do) is both reductionist and left-wing regressive. Human motives and actions are, to a significant extent, determined by the vastly greater non-physical aspects of human existence. Inclinations are non-physical, and behavior causes physical change. (Planting the seed of human life in the passage designed for the expulsion of waste not only causes disease, but also exerts a destructive force upon the individual soul and on the value of all human life).
"Gays" have forgotten that responsibility for personal conduct goes hand-in-hand with our personal dignity and authority. Realistically, we can never dignify something which is profoundly undignified, no matter how hard we strive to. This brings us to another seditious element of "gay" culture, pornography. Dr. Judith Reisman, co-author of Kinsey Sex & Fraud and Founder of the Washington based Institute for Media Education, is an expert on the impact of pornography on society. During a lengthy private conversation, Dr. Reisman asserted that "all pornography promotes homosexuality." I have pondered her comment many times since then, and have come to see its correctness. In her 1994 analysis, Kinsey, Hefner & Hay, The Indoctrination of Heterophobia in American Men & Women, Dr. Reisman explains;
Pragmatically, Playboy (that is, all pornography) manifests a blatant homosexual ethos. Its heterophobia is sustained by an utilitarian analysis of Playboy images and philosophy. It is not too much to say, that just as the im-
agery of stained glass windows and holy cards once initiated, instructed and indoctrinated potential adherents in a religious faith, the didactic images in "soft" and "hard" pornography similarly initiate, instruct and indoctrinate potential believers in the tenants of its religion, its homosexual morality. Hugh Hefner took great pains to write his own bible; he called it the "Playboy Philosophy." And on this note, it is well accepted that "Alfred Kinsey ... gave Hefner the research base for the "Playboy Philosophy."
In fact Kinsey can properly be identified along with his supporters and co-workers, as the one most responsible for justifying the kind of behavior which led to AIDS, and more than Harry Hay, the real father of American's homoerotic revolution (Reisman, 1994:7f).
[In reality, pornography expresses a vicious hatred and contempt for the dignity of all men in that it treats men as nothing more than an appendage to be manipulated by the twisting and exploitation of female sexuality.]
Sons of Oedipus
Clinical research concludes that the target of human sexual affections is not predetermined at birth, but conditioned by a combination of environmental and sociological factors. It would be helpful to turn back to the "Oedipus complex," to present a psychosexual model for the roots of homoerotic attraction. [Oedipus was the legendary figure who killed his father and married his mother.]
Although "gay" research mocks and rejects the validity of this Freudian construct, the idea offers helpful insight into the complex structure and development of the homosexualities. The classic Oedipus complex may be defined as a lust-hate demeanor towards the mother and an irreconcilable combination of longing and contempt for the father. In the words of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi,
234 THE PINK SWASTIKA
Homosexuality is a developmental problem that is almost always the result of problems in family relations, particularly between father and son. As a result of failure with father, the boy does not fully internalize male gender identity, and develops homosexuality. This is the most commonly seen clinical model (Nicolosi, 1991:25).
Analyst Peter Loewenberg in The Nazi Revolution, Hitler's Dictatorship and the German Nation, writes, "Boys who become homosexuals are often those who were left alone with their mothers and formed an intense attachment to them that was unmediated by the father's presence and protection."
The regressive promotion of an androgynous culture advances an equality in which gender distinctions, roles and identity are blurred and inverted. This leads to a loss of healthy self-identity. Paradoxically, the freedom of choice being offered by liberal left-regressive social theorists to today's youth destroys a child's ability to choose. In a similar vein, radical feminism
[*] actually destroys femininity while emasculating males, and socialism destroys social justice. By robbing our children of their ability to conduct themselves morally, today's left-wing regressives are grooming a new generation of potential Nazis.
Today, while chronic homoerotic behavior is limited to a small percentage of the population, its roots (either deficiencies in psychic gender patterning, or deviance initiated by adult-child sexual abuse) may be more widespread. Clinical studies reveal that the sexualization of a search for masculinity is the genesis of homoerotic attraction. It follows that the current generation of fatherless youth may be prime candidates for homosexual recruitment. And the same amoral thinking which allows them to consider homosexuality as a "normal" option may also make them dangerously susceptible to the next Hitler. It is no accident
that Hitler and his cronies came to power on the backs of emasculated German male youth.
Akhtar's Metaphor -- A New Beginning
A primary goal of any people striving to maintain a civilized human society must be to prepare our children to become reliable and loyal husbands and wives and competent fathers and mothers. There is nothing in the world a young man wishes to do more than to be able to love, admire and respect his father. This vision can only be fully realized in the context of a healthy natural family.
There are two primary obligations which the parent has toward his children: to instill in them a moral and healthy sexual constitution and to ensure they are equipped with an honest and productive way of providing for themselves and their families. These two personal assets enable any person to live life as a dignified human being. The parents' obligation, therefore, is to guard the dignity of their children. Conversely, the Biblical injunction contained within the principle of the family is for the children to guard the dignity of their parents. If we kept this in mind, many families could be reunited and divisions resolved. Our challenge is to repair America's soul before the body perishes.
Dr. Salman Akhtar's book, Broken Structures, offers a metaphor for healing the broken person which is also applicable to the mending of a nation. Teaching a course on character pathology to a class of clinical psychology intems, Dr. Akhtar was asked if a severely disturbed client could ever be so completely healed by psychotherapy that he would be indistinguishable from a person who had always been well-adjusted. From the book Broken Structures in which Dr. Akhtar tells "The Parable of Two Flower Vases," I will conclude with his words:
236 THE PINK SWASTIKA
I thought for a moment. Then, prompted by an inner voice, I spontaneously came up with the following answer. Well, let us suppose that there are two flower vases made of fine china. Both are intricately carved and of comparable value, elegance, and beauty. Then a wind blows and one of them falls from its stand, and is broken into pieces. An expert from a distant land is called. Painstakingly, step by step, the expert glues the pieces back together. Soon the broken vase is intact again, can hold water without leaking, is unblemished to all who see it. Yet this vase is now different from the other one. The lines along which it had broken, a subtle reminder of yesterday, will always remain discernible to an experienced eye. However, it will have a certain wisdom since it knows something that the vase that has never been broken does not: it knows what it is to break and what it is to come together.
Kevin E. Abrams