Homosexuality & the University

The usually astute columnist, Kathleen Parker, characterized the actions of Dharun Ravi and Molly Wei, who spread movies online of Tyler Clementi in a sexual encounter with another man, as an episode of “unforgivable bullying.” Clementi, Ravi’s roommate and a Rutgers freshman, committed suicide apparently as the result of Ravi’s unspeakable behavior.

The verb “bully” is defined thusly: “to treat abusively: to affect by means of force or coercion: to use browbeating language or behavior: BLUSTER.” There seems to be no action on Ravi’s part that fits the definition. It would be more accurate, perhaps, to say that he simply meant to profoundly embarrass his roommate, who was a homosexual.

There’s no argument with the fact that Ravi acted despicably but if there was a crime, was it a hate crime, and, if so, what would be the charge? Can Ravi be charged with something like manslaughter or reckless homicide on the basis of hate, especially when he obviously did not push Clementi off the bridge? Hardly. Can one person be penalized for another’s frame of mind?

Parker made the whole thing into a “privacy matter.” Clementi had made a deal with Ravi to be alone in their room until a certain time. He and his partner were alone, except they were not alone entirely because of Ravi’s web-cam chronicling the episode. The camera was a voyeur unseen by the two homosexuals, who thought they were enjoying their “privacy.”

There are no easy answers, especially taking into consideration that adolescent minds were at work here, though probably none of the actors were minors, including the “partner,” who, as Parker would have it, had his privacy invaded, also. This leads to further considerations concerning what should be done by institutions of all kinds to guard against episodes such as this.

Should an institution knowingly pair a “straight” guy with a homosexual as a roommate? It’s probably fair to say that most straights would rather not be placed in that position. Certainly, no student should be placed in a room where homosexual behavior is practiced, since that behavior, besides being obviously unnatural, involves the use of bodily organs and orifices in ways that are unsanitary, actually filthy. Significantly, known homosexuals are barred from all U.S. military academies and from any branch of service, from which they are discharged immediately upon being “outed,” either by themselves or some other method. The reason should be obvious.

In the 37 states with confidential name-based HIV infection reporting in 2008, diagnoses of HIV infection among adults and adolescents totaled 41,087 with 30,755 diagnoses in males and 10,332 diagnoses in females, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This being the case, especially with males, why should any student be exposed to even the possibility of contacting AIDS, which remains a scourge among homosexual men, known for their promiscuity.

Granted, few homosexuals will admit to their proclivity if asked about it on a college application but each institution should make the effort to put them together if possible, not blindly subscribe to the nutcase diversity nonsense that has blinded the nation. Under no circumstances should a known homosexual be paired with a straight. Nothing could be more repulsive than anal intercourse or the other things endemic to homosexual “sex” and no one should be forced to live with someone engaged in that stuff.

The quick answer is that, after all, both Defense Secretary Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mullen agreed with the president that “don’t ask, don’t tell” should be repealed; however, when a bill to that effect was actually presented in the Senate both men backpedaled at warp speed, counseling a “go-slow” policy. In other words, they had no intention of this happening on their watch. More to the point, the top military honchos who actually run the services have come out strongly against this “promise” made by Obama.

The Clementi suicide constitutes a reminder that known homosexuals in the military are always in danger. Their antagonists will not show movies on the Internet. They can become much more physical. Actual bullying can turn nasty with grown men who resent living in close quarters, such as on a ship, with people who do strange unnatural things.

This is in no way an effort to excuse the insensitivity and stupidity of Ravi and Wei or to disparage Clementi. Rather, it is simply to state some facts that Parker would do well to consider, though she may be at a disadvantage with trying to understand the overall picture such as, for instance, 60 or more men living in a small compartment and sleeping in racks (beds) configured in stacks and using living arrangements and toilet facilities in anything but privacy.