It’s not ‘just your opinion’ when the opinion in question is prejudiced

No, it’s just not OK to justify prejudice as an opinion and we still need to talk about Patrícia Abravanel’s statement on SBT. Recapitulating the bafafá, the presenter made an unfortunate statement last Sunday (8), saying that she is not against homosexuality (sic), but is against saying that this is normal. She also said that young people need to be taught that a man is a man and a woman is a woman. Not satisfied, she still wanted to be witty saying that “Women on women is not that cool, I guess. There is not that toy that we like a lot, it is not possible to play properly.”🇧🇷

Yesterday – after a barrage of criticism – Patrícia tried to recant, apologizing, but reaffirming that this is her opinion and that she was misunderstood.

But we didn’t get it wrong. Who is getting everything wrong is the presenter, and discrimination disguised as an opinion will no longer go unnoticed🇧🇷 For starters, let’s talk a little about what ~normal~ is. That old story: what makes a homosexual abnormal? The fact that his sex doesn’t produce children? Quite frankly! If we are going to enter into this merit, we will have to talk about the non-normality of contraceptive methods and even romantic love.

Marrying for love (heterosexually!) was once considered abnormal, you know? The experience of romantic love has always been in literature, but it was not seen as something to be experienced by everyone. The popularization of the concept happened around the twelfth century, with the spread of a Celtic legend, which would give rise to the work “Tristan and Isolde”. But from a practical, political, economic and religious point of view, romantic love was not functional. Quite the opposite! Long story short: relating carnally for love was something rejected and only much later was this practice accepted. The right to marry for love is something that would only be institutionalized in the 20th century! Regarding the non-normality of contraceptive methods, I don’t think we need to go into details, right?

Well, let’s establish the following: everyone knows that a homosexual individual is not a rule in nature and that, functionally, it could not be. Infertile beings are not either. This is basic biology and the LGBT community is well aware of this. Only you point to a woman who can’t have children and call her “abnormal”? Not. And do you know why? Because that’s cruel. This establishes less value. You are instilling value judgment and you know it. Or should have known.

Another thing: a citizen who has a relationship with another of the same sex is not a rule in nature, but that does not make him abnormal. Homosexuality has already been recognized as natural by the scientific community, as human beings are not the only animal that has homosexual relationships. Monkeys, lions, birds, dolphins and even beetles can show homosexual desire. To explain well explained: homosexuality is natural, as it is part of nature, it is not a whim of the human mind.

That said, teaching a child about “man being a man and a woman being a woman” is not going to change her nature one bit. For starters, this statement is absolutely unfortunate and, again, has nothing to do with opinion. It has to do with a profound lack of information! Lesbians are still women and gay men are still men. Confusing gender with sexual orientation – and broadcasting this misinformation on national television – is a huge disservice! There’s no way to call this an opinion, because it’s a mistake from a scientific point of view, including.

In the midst of so much error, Patricia said something right. She said that young people who go through homosexual experiences may come to regret it later. Indeed they can! But do you know why? Because we still come across discriminatory speeches like hers. Because it is still permissible for our freedom to be seen as something wrong. Otherwise, a homosexual experience will just be a sexual experience like any other. When there is respect and maturity among all the parties involved, the experience of desire is simply natural. It becomes a burden only when we are taught that it is wrong. Do you see the resemblance of this to the rejection of romantic love and non-reproductive sex? see how healthy is it for certain concepts to be revised? Do you see how this revision is, a priori, part of the history of the world? It is normal to understand and question the imposed rules. The name of this is evolution.

What we need to teach – to children and adults – is respect for differences. Full respect and not that which results in narrowly disguised statements such as “I respect, but I do not accept”. This is a contradiction in terms! What does that mean? That the citizen is not even in favor of the extermination of LGBTs, as long as they remain quiet, invisible and on the margins of society? Well, then, here’s some news: respect is not called that.

Once and for all people need to understand that no human being becomes gay (or bi, trans, agender, whatever) from the moment he discovers that this is normal. If today we see more LGBTs in society, it is because there is more freedom to show yourself to the world the way you are. It is not a virus that spreads, it is individual nature that manifests. And trying to carve it into the disguised form of repression of opinion, that should be unacceptable. It shouldn’t be normal.

🇧🇷 On behalf of all the lesbians in this world, the one who speaks to you would like to clarify that we manage to “play well” and that we don’t like that “toy” very much. We don’t need him and, if one day he does, we are free to play in other ways. That simple.