(This is the heteroseparatist.com home page.)
(Updated 19 August 2013)
a: A person who wishes to separate their self from homosexual acts and stand apart from those who engage in such acts.
b: A person who rejects homofascism, homosexuality, and homophobia.
c: A person, entity, or organization that respectfully declines to associate with any or all divisions of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender community, but does not hate, fear, or persecute people that are GLBT.
d: A person who quietly shuns people and environments that are anti-hetero.
I’ve looked at hundreds of logos to create mine and this is it. My logo, and the symbol of a heteroseparatist...
It was late June 2002. And I was, as usual, minding my own business. I was maneuvering through cyberspace, checking out the various threads on YouThink.com, on which I had just created my own profile. In my first month, not yet fully aware of my surroundings, I posted a question with words to the effect of...“Can’t I disagree with homosexuality without being a homophobe?”
Oh. My. God. It was my first encounter with homofascism.
A bit disturbed by the group attack that ensued, I set out to clarify myself since the word “homophobe” was a complete mischaracterization of my point of view, an accusation of cowardice, a rallying word, a silencing word, and a social stigma. How clever. All that... in one word. And one of the most powerful scarecrow words of my generation.
Although counterfeit in its construction, (“homo” meaning “same,” and “phobia” meaning “fear,” the word literally means, fear-of-the-same) the word is defined as a person who hates or fears homosexuals. But from my point of view, the word “homophobe” is nothing more than a condensed, adult version of the, “What are ya? Scared?” tactic that children use to manipulate each other. And then there’s the, you-hate-gays-because-you-hate-the-gay-in-yourself argument which is also an adult version of the, “I know you are but what am I?” childhood taunt.
And another counterfeit word from the GLBT community is the word “transgendered” which is ridiculously inaccurate since no human being has ever naturally impregnated a human female via sexual intercourse, and then become impregnated via sexual intercourse. Or vice-versa. (Will somebody please tell me that I’m not the only one noticing this?)
Also, I’ve noticed that any public figure who doesn’t say the phrase, “...and there’s nothing wrong with that...” whenever speaking about a member of the GLBT community is in danger of being labeled as a “homophobe” or a person who is “anti-gay.” And then there’s the word “intolerance” which, ironically, the gay community is guilty of since one of the definitions of “intolerance” is a refusal to accept new ideas, and homosexuality is older than the Bible!
Wow. What a dilemma. How do I escape stigma and speak the truth? There must be millions of people that feel like I do because it is mathematically impossible that all those who reject homosexuality do so out of hate, ignorance, or fear. There are people that have a rational, dispassionate rejection of homosexuality, but where is the single word that describes us?
Will I step on toes with my portmanteau? Can't I separate from those who equate “tolerate” with “validate”? Aren't I free to disagree when my ideology... is hate-free? Can I fight gay abuse, while I rhyme like Doc Seuss, and expose those I oppose with the blows of my prose? Who knows? Here goes...
It was somewhere around 1982 when I first heard the “born gay” concept, and it took me twenty years to figure out that people can actually deceive themselves into believing that they were born “gay,” whilst common-sense observations about the human species prove them wrong.
The “born gay” concept is in direct opposition to the ridiculously obvious pattern of human reproduction. Human beings reproduce sexually. This means that people who say that they were “born gay” are, in effect, saying that nature has chosen to remove their ability to reproduce.
Except for the very, very, very few that are born sterile, nature doesn’t do that. And, when someone is born sterile, we know that something has gone wrong. Nature is, very obviously, dedicated to the reproduction of all species of life. Why would nature create a life form with millions of cells and remove that life form’s attraction to the opposite sex which is necessary for the propagation of the species?
Wouldn’t a human being that was born without the desire to mate with the opposite gender be able to reproduce asexually like some other species? How can a cockroach be born pregnant and a human be born gay? Judging by the complexities of the human psyche, isn’t it a hundred times more likely that people have convinced themselves that they were born gay? (Isn’t the “born gay” concept an ideological Titanic?)
I once saw a television news story about identical twin boys where one was gay and the other was straight. Also, when my wife was in high school, she knew a set of identical twin boys and a set of identical twin girls where one of the twin boys was straight and the other gay, and one of the twin girls was gay and the other straight. How can one twin be born gay and the other straight when they’re genetically identical?
What about the media-ignored, ex-gay community? The entertainer Little Richard is a former homosexual and a man named Steven Bennett, who is also a former homosexual, is the head pastor of a church that reaches out to the GLBT community called Steven Bennett Ministries. Wasn’t Anne Heche “gay” for a time and now a mother in a true marriage? Then there’s Restored Hope Network, a ministry that’s full of formerly “gay” people. Also, I’ve personally known (not just known of) three men that were once homosexuals and aren’t anymore.
Because of my time and travels on planet Earth, I’ve spoken, at length, to at least one hundred and seventy homosexuals and at least eighty lesbians. And, when I sifted through all of the bits and pieces of information that I’ve gathered from talking to members of the GLBT community, I came to the conclusion that the gay lifestyle, although not an overnight choice, still begins as an emotion, sparked by sudden and/or gradual childhood, psychological trauma. And then becomes a daily choice to ignore or rebel against the normal order of human life. Homosexuality isn’t a choice, but it is still a matter of choice.
Typically, a boy “misbonds” with his father before he’s five and bonds to a female that is usually his mother. Then other boys sense his effeminate behavior and humiliate and reject him. And often, a homophile (homosexual pedophile), plays on the boy’s father-hunger and offers the lonely, misdeveloped boy, “love” and acceptance. The gay lifestyle is the psychological equivalent of a broken bone that wasn’t set correctly before knitting itself back together.
There are two specific psychological terms relating to the GLBT lifestyle; one is called, “gender identity disorder,” and the other is called “gender dysphoria.” Simply put, it’s a boy who doesn’t grow out of the “I don’t like girls” stage of male sexual development. Or, vice-versa.
The five divisions of homosexuality are...
The Stockholm (syndrome) homosexual, who was seduced and/or graduated into homosexuality by another, almost-always-older, male. The Effeminate homosexual who over-relates to women, usually due to a cruel or passive or absent father, and/or an overbearing mother. The Spotlight homosexual who’s rebelling against manlaw and loves the attention and drama that homoantagonism brings. The Vagiphobe homosexual who’s terrified of girls/women, usually due to older-female-on-younger-male sexual or physical or emotional abuse. And finally, the rarest division of all, the Normalphobe homosexual, who is without any outward signs of homosexuality and doesn’t need or want attention, but just can’t stand being sexually normal. Every homosexual is in at least one, but usually two, of these five divisions. (The ultra-rare "neuralgay" man, who became a homosexual after a brain injury, doesn't get his own division since he became an Effeminate homosexual.)
The eight divisions of lesbianism are...
The four major categories; the Disappointed lesbian, who’s decided to live her life having romantic, sexual relations with other females due to her disappointment with the sexuality of and/or the weak and passive nature of modern men. The Exotic lesbian who’s turned on by the sheer rebelliousness of the lesbian lifestyle and/or the attention that it brings. The Feminist lesbian who sees sex with a man as an act of submission and oppression and just isn’t going to have sex with a man. Then, there’s the type that I care about the most, the Betrayed lesbian, who was sexually and/or emotionally abused by a male (usually her stepfather, mother’s boyfriend, or father) usually when she was very young and wants no sexual contact with anyone with an actual, live-flesh, penis.
The two minor categories are; the “Butch”/masculine lesbian, who’s decided to live her life as a man due to her appearance, rugged personality, and masculine/protective nature. (Most of these come from fatherless homes.) And the “Femme”/feminine lesbian, who usually doesn’t believe that the human male is capable of the kindness, compassion, or empathy of the human female, and/or wants a penis-free “man.”
The eight types of lesbians are much more emotionally intertwined than the five types of homosexuals because the former four types of lesbians; the disappointed, the exotic, the feminist, and the betrayed, choose one of the latter categories of butch or femme. Every lesbian that I’ve ever spoken to fits into one of the four major categorizes and one of the two sub-categorizes.
The best examples I can give are Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi. A betrayed-butch lesbian with an exotic-femme lesbian. And then there’s Rosie O’Donnell, who is clearly a feminist-butch lesbian.
(I wasn’t even going to attempt to categorize lesbians until I was challenged to do so. Understanding the mind of the human female takes a heterosexual man at least twenty-five years of painful training. At least twenty-five years!)
Then there’s the omnisexual who can be a male or a female and will become whatever they think the other person/being wants to have sex with another (and I’m going to leave out the word “human”) being, whether that being is male or female, adult or child, human or non-human.
And then there’s the sad reality of same sex “marriage” which adversely alters American culture and absurdly removed the words “bride” and “groom” (for about five months, until someone sued) from the marriage licenses in the state I live in.
Legalizing same sex “marriage” will legislate the acceptance of the gay lifestyle in the sex education classes of schoolchildren. Which is now happening in Massachusetts. This will discriminate against those who can’t afford to send their children to religious or private schools. I mean no disrespect to the GLBT community, but I must speak the truth. And, I have the right to speak out about that which degrades the culture in which I live, since same sex “marriage” will end the religious freedom that my country, The United States of America, was founded for.
The gay community has no right to redefine marriage, which should be between one man and one woman who; were born male or female, love each other, share the same religion and/or values, and aren’t relatives by blood or marriage.
When this, minimum-level-of-common-sense definition of marriage is broken, any two (or more) humans can marry, including blood relatives. I can hear it now... “My sister can’t have kids and we’re two consenting adults, why can’t we marry?” Same sex "marriage" isn’t like interracial marriage, it’s like consanguineous marriage; like a sterile man marrying his consenting, adult sister. Or a woman marrying her brother because she’s had a hysterectomy. Or a man marrying his mother because she’s too old to bear children. And what about the inevitability of two people pretending to be gay to pay lower taxes or cheaper healthcare? How could they be denied “marriage” if the one-man-one-woman, common-sense-definition, is changed?
Marriage, including a "civil" marriage, is about the appropriate joining of a man and a woman, not two people merely playing the roles of husband and wife. You disagree? Fine. Time will prove my point. I know what I know through experience and scripture.
I’ve also noticed the attempt of the GLBT community to steal the nobility of the civil-rights movement of the African-American/black community. And I wish to point out that it’s only those who cannot discern the difference between race and sexual behavior who are deceived by this tactic.
The homofascists in American society don’t want it to be known that, disassociating with someone because of their behavior and oppressing someone because of the color of their skin are two, vastly different things. Vastly different.
When a gay person calls a straight person a “bigot,” they are, in part, stealing the nobility of the African-American, civil-rights movement due to the historical impact of the word. Comparing black people to gay people is an inappropriate fusion of a social identifier with a behavioral identifier.
For example; if a retailer were to go to an advertising agency and say,"I want two commercials for my product. I want one that appeals to black people, then I want one that appeals to gay people." The retailer has used the words,"black," and "gay," to describe two different social groups.
Yet, in another circumstance, swapping out the word, "black" with "gay" would be wrong since the (ironically bisexual) word "gay" defines a social group and a behavior, when the word, "black" only describes a social group and does not define a behavior. When the word “gay” is in front of the word “people,” it describes a social group. But when the word “gay” is in front of the word “person,” it reveals an aspect of the person’s character, unlike the word “black.”
The vast majority of African-American people that I know are greatly offended when the color of their skin is equated with the sexual behavior of the GLBT community! Not to mention the number of African-American people of my age group that are infuriated when they hear the term, "civil rights" being hijacked by some members of the GLBT community in an attempt to redefine marriage.
When were homosexuals taken from their homeland, shipped across a sea, and sold into slavery? When were homosexuals forbidden to learn how to read or forbidden to vote? When were members of the GLBT community denied the right to own property or relegated to the back of the bus? When were gays systematically and legally denied service in hotels and restaurants. When where there water fountains with signs reading “Straight people only?” Isn’t equating race with behavior the epitome of racism?
How can I support the mentality/lifestyle that launched NAMBLA and “bug chasing” homosexuals that seek out AIDS? (Rolling Stone magazine issue 915, Feb. 6, 2003.) How am I guilty of prejudging homosexuals when I hear about homosexuality up to twelve times (I counted once) a day? I can use my Bible-based judgment without judging; until I’m actually throwing stones at a gay person, I’m not in violation of the “Do not judge...”commandment of my LORD, who defines marriage as being between one man and one woman in Matthew 19:4-6!
Just as I wouldn’t associate with a man who was having safe, consensual sex with his parent or adult sibling or adult child, I won’t associate, in my personal life, with a man who has sex with other men. And people who wouldn’t want to hear about the sexual activities of their married, biological parents, are the same people that vilify me for not wanting to hear about two men sodomizing each other!
Although heteroseparatism is about walking away from all or some members of the GLBT community, it isn’t about hating or persecuting anyone. There’s anti-gay and there’s pro-hetero. There’s standing against and there’s standing apart. There’s the red pill of heteroseparatism verses the blue pill of homofascism.
I’m not out to create laws to segregate gay people to the back of the bus, I’m out to prevent laws that prohibit me from getting off of the bus when two men start French kissing right in front of me. I’m not a heterosegregationist or a heterosupremacist, I’m a heteroseparatist. I am separating from the GLBT community and the homophobes of this world. And my stand isn’t against gay people, my nonviolent stand is against gay propaganda.
A heteroseparatist would never stand near the funeral or memorial of a gay person with a “God hates fags” sign. And vandalism, proactive violence, and economic oppression (like firing or not hiring a person because they’re gay), are not a part of heteroseparatism. Even when a heteroseparatist is attacked by a homosexual, a homofascist, or a homoappeaser, (unless the attack is physical) the aforementioned code-of-conduct still stands.
I walk this Earth in a man’s body and I can say, with God-given data and great compassion, that; if you are male and past puberty, and you are not solely attracted to the female of our species, you are perverse and self-deceived. And, because of the insults, slander, and mischaracterizations that I’ve received from homofascists, (people who persecute people who won’t accept the concept that the GLBT lifestyle is normal) homoappeasers, (people who fear the scorn of the GLBT community) and homosexuals, unless it is to share the good news of what Jesus Christ has done for humanity, I will no longer associate with people who belong to these ideological divisions. I’m done with homofascists, homoappeasers, homosexuals, and homophobes. That’s it. No hatred. No fear. No ignorance. No assimilation. No surrender.
And that’s it. Version 1.5 (19 August 2013) of my Internet Manifesto. My intellectual property is loaded with land mines of explosive truths that destroy the vehicles of homofascism, and my blog is an Everest-sized iceberg of truth in front of a titanic lie. In cyberspace I am called “Mantronikk.” (I can’t use my real name or I may be fired!) I am the creator of the word, the author of this manifesto, the designer of the logo, and the World’s first heteroseparatist.