[lbo-talk] Irish priests beat, raped children

[Miles Jackson]

SA wrote:
> Shane Mage wrote:
>
>> That the Leviticus passage doesn't mention female homoeroticism 
>> (never, ever, condemned in any form until that gonif Paul) or even 
>> extend its condemnation to passive homosexuality or pederasty proves 
>> its specifically cultist purpose.
>
> Hmm. It "proves" it? The double standard on male vs. female 
> homosexuality has a long history, all the way up to the present day. 
> Not just in ancient Israel. So the double standard in the Bible could 
> also "prove" that these recurrent preoccupations with the 
> healthiness/hygiene of (male) homosexuality come from "deeper" 
> cultural structures of ordering than any that could be the products of 
> 18th and 19th century European imperialism or animosity towards a 
> rival Palestinian cult.
>
> SA 

This ignores the important distinction between sexual activity and 
sexual identity.  Yes, the Bible identifies various sexual acts as 
immoral; however, male and female homosexuality as stable sexual 
identity categories cannot be found in the Bible.  In our society, 
committing a particular sexual act does not make you a homosexual or a 
heterosexual; rather, sexual identities are socially negotiated and 
internalized as stable elements of a person's identity.  Same-sex sexual 
activity can be found all over the place; however, the classification of 
people according to stable sexual types occurs in some societies but not 
others.

Miles