What would it mean to be both Gay and blind?
In the debate over homosexuality, one of the arguments used against it is that, rather than one being born into it, homosexuality is a “visually-learned behaviour”, one which is mostly driven by a so-called “lust of the eyes”.
However, the following links would fly directly in the face of such arguments:
American Foundation for the Blind forum – “sexuality and the blind”
Blind Friends of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People
Robert Feinstein – “Being Blind and Gay” (from Chanton)
I’m supposing that its a rarity, as apparently it hasn’t even been discussed sufficiently within LGBT inner circles (I could barely pull up anything of relevance on Google; most of the returns were “gay blind date” or some blooper video involving confusion over whether this dude was either gay or blind). But it does pose a very interesting question.
I mean, look at porn (not in that way, LOL). People look at it to be sexually stimulated (be they gay or straight) and gratified with a masturbatory ecstasy (orgasm) for approximately 10 seconds. Blind people, however, don’t have porn, as their sex drive – or anything else, for that matter – isn’t, and can’t be, visually driven (especially if they were born blind).
On the other hand, porn is generally held by most folks in bad taste for that exact same reason as mentioned above (the part about the masturbatory ecstasy and short-term gratification).
So, if a blind person gets into a relationship with someone – gay or straight – does that mean that the relationship would be much more meaningful between the two because its relying less upon sight – something which we humans use so much that we take it for granted – and more upon touch, hearing, taste, and smell, which are far more intimate and less shallow?
I mean, what exactly would it be like to be without sight and dependent upon, or receptive to, a simple embrace by someone/anyone?
Blind people have a benefit that the rest of us probably will never have: a perception of the depth and width of human feeling, unfettered by our vanities, lusts, and frivolities.
I envy them.
Sometimes I envy the blind, too… as much as I love art, I think I would have a much better sense of self-worth if I didn’t know what I looked like.
Stuart Wilde, a modern philosopher with a more-or-less Taoist approach, observed that an interesting experiment for most of us is to spend an entire evening “blind”—blindfolded, that is. He recommends a cold dinner for that evening, just to avoid any problems with the stove; however, spend at least three hours (he says) unable to see, preparing and eating your dinner, and everything else that you do that evening, blindfolded.
For me, the most interesting problem would be what to do with the three hours. I couldn’t read, nor listen to music or a talking book, unless I had somehow prepared the tape/discs in advance. No computer, no television (although it might be fun to find some way to make the “random” button on the remote easy to find, then try to guess what cable channel I’ve landed upon). There are so many things that rely upon sight, in my life at least, that I truly wonder what I’d do with those hours other than wonder what that strange noise was.
In relation to sexuality: I’ve noticed that some people think it “kinky” to be blindfolded. Those of us who are sighted do rely upon that a lot for our stimulation; without it, we might find that our sexual tastes run in quite a wider vein than we’d otherwise have thought. It would be an interesting experiment (perhaps “immoral”, in the view of some), to arrange an experiment where (for example) I am blindfolded and several people, both male and female, approach me (singly or in concert) to touch me. All are naked, and none of them may speak. If they never press their genitalia (or voluptuous women their breasts) against me, and if all are smooth-skinned (the males aren’t furry), might I not know their gender at all?
Perhaps more importantly: Is it important to me that I know their gender? In this experiment, the stimulation is exclusively physiological, rather than the stimulation of knowing and loving the other person. Apart from the variable of trust (sighted persons must trust others quite a bit before letting themselves be blind [helpless?] with them), it’s only stimulation, touch, perhaps the sound of flesh against flesh, perhaps the scent of skin or sweat. Such stimulation can be genderless.
A fascinating idea. Quite intriguing. This deserves some discussion. (And I’ll not resist the temptation of making the joke about it also deserving experimentation!)