This is the “subhuman” half of the Aryan myth of the superhuman, uber-mensch race. The context posed here for this noun is that it applies to the “female” part of the homosexual couple, the one who accepts the role of wife.
The universally despised “subhuman” characterization is alive and well in the modern world!
Adam and Eve
The male and female counterparts of the heterosexual couple have biological and psychological, emotional bases for their respective roles. There is no such basis for a homosexual man playing the role of wife.
When gays apply the “marriage” label to their relationship, it gives the male figure even more power – moral, legal, and righteous power. The ability to have sex whenever he wants it; the bedrock of the marital contract.
The power to get sex on demand is absolute. It doesn’t matter if the one making this demand is HIV-positive and the “wife” isn’t. It doesn’t matter if the “male” has bleeding hemorrhoids or the “wife” has constipation, an enlarged prostate, hemorrhoids, gastritis, or any other intestinal issue.
In marriage, “complaints” only go so far.
Our Bipolar Society
The macho homosexual always gets more acceptance from society at large (i.e., our male-dominated society). Even the Nazis tolerated the hard-core, domineering gays among them. It was the sissified, effeminate gays that had to wear the pink triangles.
Ironically, Nazi Germany was the first nation where gays could live openly and participate at all levels of government. They were 50 years ahead of their time in that regard.
As for the pink triangles, gays adore attention – fashioning themselves with jewelry, clothing and accouterments that garner them the maximum focus is their hallmark. They thrive on attention; even the harsh treatment doled out by the Nazis – good for the ego; up to a certain point, of course.
Gays may be “accepted” in modern society – but effeminate gays are still the lesser of equals. Even at home, the whole world is aggressively violent for the “wife.” Is this any more healthy for gays than it is for heterosexuals?
Is it healthy to put the burden of marriage on the weaker willed half of the couple – the stigma of forcing 60% of Americans to have gay marriage jammed down their throats?
The male gays want this, of course. More power! More enslavement. More domination. Yes!
Yes! Yes!
Gay Bullies
It’s ironic that we ridicule Nietzsche’s “superman” idea and how the Nazis institutionalized it in their ideology – yet, we do the same thing in how we treat gay marriage; morally, legally, and ethically.
Where is the gene pair that says one partner is aggressive/male and the other passive/female? Why do we impose this criterion? By what right do we have to impose our judgment on the weaker link?
Heterosexual marriage is a union of equals. Gay marriage is the slavery of unequals, by definition.
Conclusion
It’s entirely possible that a gay marriage of equals would not survive. Two equally macho, aggressive gays would not last long; or two similarly passive “female” gays.
Any institution sanctioned by a society that mandates total submission – physical, emotional, and spiritual – is heinous and evil; be it for a union of man and woman or two individuals of the same sex.
Ergo, gay marriage is wrong.