Search this Site!
    Dedicated to the return to the constitution as written by our forefathers, The return of common sense in our laws, the return of morality in our
    Decisions, and the proliferation of environmental truth.

    1953 – My First Encounter with a Homosexual and Some Info

    Editor’s Comment: For those of you who haven’t read any other post, I’m writing a book about my life, not for publication, but to be distributed among my family members so they can to get to know who I was, in my words. I just about have the first twenty years nailed, but it still needs some tweaking. What follows is part of what I’ve written.

    1953 – My First Encounter with a Homosexual and Some Info

    When I was fifteen I had worked my way up as a Journeyman Produce man in the Produce Department of the Food Giant market in Hawthorne Ca. I was in the tenth grade and I was making “journeyman’s” wages, the highest pay category in the Retail Clerks Union at that time. Men in their forties and fifties, who had been working in “produce” for twenty plus years, were not making any more than I.

    While I was young to be a Journeyman, I learned the trade very quickly and in the process became very strong for my age. A typical workout was pressing 100lb sacks of potatoes in the back room. That’s a lot different than lifting weights. Not only that, but between February of 1952 and February of 1953 I also grew about nine inches in height.

    I would work the night shift at the market, alone in the produce department, and the store closed at 10:00 PM. It would usually take me till about 10:45 to finish my work and then wait for a bus across the street from the store on my way to Inglewood, about a half hour bus ride north. I would then transfer to an eastbound bus for another forty five minute ride home. In an effort to speed things up, I would usually thumb, or hitch a ride while waiting for the bus whenever I could. It was quicker and definitely cheaper.

    On the night of my encounter, I was across the street from the store thumbing to get a ride before the next bus came. It was a few minutes to 11:00 PM when an older man stopped and asked me if I wanted a ride.  I said I did and got in his car. As I got in his car I noticed he had the radio tuned to a classical music station which is no big deal, I was a jazz bug and classical music was OK with me. As we got on our way he didn’t talk much but he asked where I was going.  I told him I was going to Inglewood and then east on Manchester.

    As we approached Manchester Blvd., in Inglewood, he turned east and said he was just driving around with nothing to do so he would take me a little further.  East of downtown Inglewood there was a stretch of about a mile long with a cemetery on the north side of Manchester and a Golf Course on the south side, where the Forum was later built. It was a dark stretch for about a mile.

    As we were going east along this stretch he suddenly said, “I’m just a cocksucker out looking for a sailor or someone who wants to have his dick sucked.”  He then turned to look at me said, “you look old enough, how old are you?”

    At that point, before he could say any more, I reached into the pocket of my leather jacket and placed my bicycle chain on my lap. I carried a bicycle chain, wrapped with black tape for a handle and wrapped in six inch sections, for self-defense. I used it when I would get chased by a bunch of black guys closer to home, but that’s another story.

    Back to the homosexual guy.

    He looked at my bicycle chain and his eyes damn near popped out of his head. He started stuttering, “Now look here son, I don’t want any trouble.”  By now we were arriving at the next bus stop and I told him to stop and let me out.  He did and that was it.

    What that man had done, at the time in 1952, was against the law. I just wanted the problem to go away and get out of the car so I did. I didn’t report him or call a cop, I just dropped it. Most people under the age of thirty five or forty probably don’t know that back then, actually it was before 1974, homosexual acts were against the law and homosexuality was considered a mental disorder.

    Homosexuality was listed as a mental disorder in The American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) list of mental disorders. As in most societies of the time a homosexual act was a crime, but in 1974 the APA removed homosexuality from the list. It did so after homosexual activist’s harassed APA meetings with tactics similar to what we now know as the Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter tactics used in 2012 and today.

    When the APA caved to the pressure and removed homosexuality from the list of mental disorders, the noted psychiatrist Charles Socarides in a 1974 Time magazine article, called the ruling:

    “The medical hoax of the century.” He said, “It is flying in the face of the one fact we know, which is that male and female are programmed to mate with the opposite sex, and this is the story of 2 ½ billion years of evolution and any society that hopes to survive.”

    In his 1981 book “Homosexuality and American Psychiatry, The Politics of Diagnosis,” Ronald Bayer wrote:

    “The entire process, from the first confronta­tions organized by gay demonstrators at psychiatric conven­tions to the referendum demanded by orthodox psychiatrists, seemed to violate the most basic expectations about how ques­tions of science should be resolved.”

    This may have been the birth of “Consensus” science. You know, like “man-made global warming” today. In this case, however, they were voting to make what was thought to be an abnormality, normal.

    It certainly doesn’t sound like a very scientific way of doing something. Science is not voting on something to make it fact. Science is proving something that others can verify as fact.

    Regardless of how or why, homosexuality was removed from the list of mental disorders and the homosexuals have been moving forward ever since.

    In 1974 I was already 37 years old and I was pretty much conditioned to believe homosexuality was an abnormal condition, I still do, but I certainly believe a homosexual has the right to exist, just because they do exist. Right or wrong, as far as I was concerned when they won the vote, that was it.

    Later in life I would find that it wasn’t “it” because there were some in the homosexual community that didn’t want it to be “it.”

    Over the years I’ve read articles that bothered me that were written by certain so called revolutionary homosexuals who stated things like:

    We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies.
    We shall seduce them in your schools,
    in your dormitories,
    in your gymnasium,
    in your locker rooms,
    in your sports arena,
    in your seminaries,
    in your truck stops,
    in your all-male clubs,
    in your houses of Congress,
    wherever men are with men together.
    Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding.
    They will be recast in our image.
    They will come to crave and adore us
    All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked
    If you dare cry fagot, fairy, queer at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts
    all churches who condemn homosexuals will be closed.

    Our gods are handsome young men
    We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed

    We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of ultimate revolution.”

    The above statements were made by Michael Swift, a self-described gay revolutionary in the Boston Gay Community News, February, 1987.

    I hope he only represents a small radical minority in the homosexual world, but if you re-read each of his statements it almost reads like a manifesto and some of it has already come true.

    Another good example of militant attitude was a 1990 article published by the New York Times entitled, “Fears That Haunt a Scrubbed America,” by an admitted homosexual, David Leavitt. He was responding to criticism of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) by attacking what he identified as the “right wing.”

    “The N.E.A. is simply another target in an effort to legislate sexual demeanor that also encompasses attacks on abortion rights and on laws that protect homosexuals from violence and discrimination,”

    I guess he was implying that anyone against obscenity in the publicly funded art program is for violence and discrimination against homosexuals. I didn’t believe that then and I don’t believe it today. Later in his article he compares homosexuals to,

    “Female in a world of men, Jewish in a world of Gentiles, black in a world of whites.”

    He warns that the real reason for the normal world’s attacks on obscene art forms is actually due to,

    “…..fear of change, fear of difference, fear of cultural erosion: all these fears of the extreme right mask, in fact, a deeper fear, a fear of underground sexual desires every individual harbors

    I believe we all may have harbored “underground sexual desires,” but I believe in the straight world we fantasize about women who might be beyond our ability to attract.

    Back in the 1970’s I didn’t fear the change the APA made when they voted to normalize what was thought to be an abnormal condition. Again, I thought that was it, but I do fear the cultural erosion now.

    While these kinds of statements are revolutionary enough, the feminists movement did their bit to throw gas on the fire with statement like Catherine MacKinnon, a professor of law at the University of Michigan and considered a matron saint of feminism, is quoted as saying,

    “Feminism stresses the indistinguishability of prostitution, marriage and sexual harassment”


    “I think that what women are conditioned socially to experience as love, is a form of annihilation of self

    In these two quotes she is denouncing sex between a man and his wife as prostitution and rape and by loving her husband, a woman destroys her own being.

    While I understand all homosexuals do not align themselves with the words I have quoted in this article, one could believe there are more, in the homosexual world, that do than we think.

    That said it would appear a very vocal and active minority within the homosexual community have a goal of destroying the heterosexual family or heterosexuality itself.  And that is really, really wrong.

    If we fast forward from the night I was fifteen, and my encounter with the homosexual, to today, we would all have to admit things have certainly changed for homosexuals. From being chased into the closet because of the abhorrence of unnatural homosexual practices to now being complimented for “coming out,” things have certainly changed.

    And now the Supreme Court has forcibly made same sex marriage legal in all fifty states. Even though I believe the Supreme Court did not have the authority to make same sex marriage legal, I’ll respect their decision if that will be it.

    But that wasn’t it.

    Since that decision there are rumors that churches and faith based organizations may be in trouble if they don’t submit to homosexual whims.

    Since that decision there are articles surfacing that pedophiles will be seeking sexual orientation protection because their orientation is for young boys.

    Will that be it?

    While surfing the web I found a 2014 article posted by the Washington Post titled, “Health survey gives government its first large-scale data on gay, bisexual population.”
    What caught my eye was,

     “The National Health Interview Survey, which is the government’s premier tool for annually assessing Americans’ health and behaviors, found that 1.6 percent of adults self-identify as gay or lesbian, and 0.7 percent consider themselves bisexual.

    The overwhelming majority of adults, 96.6 percent, labeled themselves as straight in the 2013 survey.”


    Plus POINT SEVEN PERCENT who are switch hitters?

    We are allowing our moral center to be turned upside down for less than THREE PERCENT of the population?

    We are allowing our Constitutional rights to be turned upside down for less than THREE PERCENT of the population?

    We are condemning Christians because they won’t bake a cake for some homosexual couple who wants to prove a point?

    We are allowing Christian businesses to be sued and shut down for the ONE POINT SIX PERCENT who identify as homosexual or lesbian?

    The Constitution doesn’t give anyone the right to shop and just as I have the right to determine who enters my home, any privately owned business has the right to not serve anyone they like. If I own a bakery and do not want to serve someone, for any reason, I don’t have to and that does not violate that person’s human rights.

    Enough is enough!

    When ESPN covered the NFL season picks and the first openly gay person, Michael Sam, was the eighth-to-last man selected in the draft. According to Christine Brennan, a sports writer for ESPN, “Today, he is the most important football player in the nation.”

    Why is that? Why does being one of the ONE POINT SIX PERCENT make a person the “most important football player in the nation?”

    During the broadcast he was seen kissing his boyfriend. Does that make him the “most important football player in the nation?”

    Later, Miami Dolphins defensive back Don Jones: tweeted “Horrible.”

    Proving how far homosexuals have come, Jones was fined, suspended and told to go to a re-education camp, oop’s, sorry, those are in Communist China. Here it’s called sensitivity training.

    Like I said, things have certainly changed, but I thought the days a Black man couldn’t say what he thought ended with the Civil Rights Movement. In fact I thought the day any American couldn’t say what he wanted ended with our defeat of King George.

    I started this article talking about my first encounter with a homosexual and I believe the laws were wrong at the time. I personally don’t care about their sex life, my neighbor’s sex life, my family’s sex life or anyone else’s sex life. I only care about my own and that’s private.

    I care about what our kids are being taught in school about sex, any sex. I believe we need to take our schools back, but that’s another subject.

    When I say I didn’t care about a homosexual’s life I mean, I ignored it. I thought we should all ignore these ranting radical homosexuals who would aspire to rule our thoughts, our actions and our speech. I was wrong and I don’t think we can ignore it any longer.