Sexual Inversion

After reading Havelock Ellis I realized many things regarding homosexuality. It is important to note that Ellis wrote this article in 1933, meaning his perceptions and mindset could differ from ours today. I found his writing to be very factual which kept me entertained. For example, Ellis states "This was so even among the ancient civilizations on which our own is founded. It was known to the Assyrians, and the Egyptians, nearly four thousand years about, attributed pederasty to their gods Horus and Set" (3) Once again like Jonathan Ned Katz's article Ellis' article references the historical past of LGBT throughout the world. I found it interesting that Michelangelo, one of the most famous artists from the Renaissance and many other celebrate men were either "inverted" or possessed homosexual ideas. I just find it hard to believe that we live in such a hateful, cruel, anti LGBT society when previous civilizations had a LGBT community. Another point I that caught my attention was when Ellis said "After the coming of Christianity it still held its ground, but it fell into disrepute..." (3). When talking about religion and LGBT together things can get tricky. We could spend numerous class periods discussing the impact of  religion on LGBT people and vice versa. Another point where Ellis brings up religion is when he says "England and the United States are probably the chief countries in which the ancient ecclesiastical jurisdiction against homosexuality still retains an influence" (17). Both religion and LGBT are sensitive subjects to discuss since they are both personal topics, but I hope in class we will get a change to discuss theses two topics relationship more in-depth.         

"Homosexual" and "Heterosexual": Questioning the Terms Response

Jonathan Ned Katz's article about Homosexual and Heterosexual terms got my attention. I always thought of Homosexual meaning gay or lesbian, while heterosexual ment straight, but I was wrong there is a much deeper meaning of the two words that has changed dramatically over time. For example, when Katz says "At the same time, the label heterosexual was also appropriated by doctors as a word for the erotic intercourse of men with women. But since intercourse was not necessarily reproductive , the word 'heterosexual,' well into the twentieth century, continued to signify a bad, immoral relation" (177).  I thought this was interesting to note since terms change and have different meaning to different generations. I've never actually thought of LGBT people before my lifetime so this article gave me insight of what it was like. Also this article has allowed me to think of the future of LGBT and how different it will be from 2011. I predict and hope that in the future our world will be more understanding and less judgmental to anyone who can identify themselves as LGBT. I believe the sum of Katz's article was when he said "Erotic and gender relationships are always under construction and reconstruction within specific historical settings" (179). So who knows what will change or stay the same in 50 years?