–A response to Alisdair Clarke’s homosexualism in New Imperium’s second issue. New Imperium magazine is the official journal of the New Right. For more information, please visit the New Right website via the ‘Links’ page.–
I have to respond to Alisdair Clarke’s homosexualism in New Imperium’s second issue. The truth of the matter is that Uranian discourse remains fey and counter-propositional. For, contrary to Weininger’s doxa in Sex and Character, orientation comes from physiology – hence its division into male and female. The notion, anthropologically, that Indo-European development consists of male-bonded warriorship vis-a-vis the Family is fanciful. More accurately, a primal sexuality always embodies Heterosexuality. It alone relates to blood, genetics, racial causation and gender’s polarity. All culture springs from a child’s birth – it’s in accordance with Nature. A factor which necessitates the weakness of all alternatives: whether these are same-sex, infantilistic or paedophile, bi-polar, necrophile, coprophiliac, trans-gender or hermaphroditic, et cetera…
Another stream in this particular argument involves a defence of women. All sexual beauty has to be female given the divinity of the woman’s body. Without it there’s nothing – in terms of Erotica’s stream of consciousness… When one considers three-dimensional art – Rodin’s The Muse, Cybele or Aristide Malliol’s study for Action in Chains – one recognises the Anima at work. For representation of the female corpus is cardinal to mental creativity in many fields. In Hellenistic art, the Aphrodite of Melos – more commonly known as the Venus of Milo – glistens in its marble splendour in the Louvre. But even this doesn’t do justice to the subliminal eroticism given off by this work. For, in refutation of Edward Carpenter’s notion of The Third Sex, there were only two of them! Whereas all forms of Zoophytic, inverted or ‘alternative’ sexuality are biological in origin; they result from a female hypothalmus in inverse males and its reverse in Gluck’s kindred. Given this, culturalised sexual discourse falls sheer – whether or not it happens to be championed by the New Left. This also gives the lie to the idea that Judaeo-Christianity is uniquely anti-homosexual. Paganism, being polyvalent, can appear more adaptive but its primitivism would tear most epicene forms to pieces. For instance, Robert E. Howard’s Conan the Barbarian happens to furnish heterosexuality with an attractive front… whether or not Frank Frazetta’s water-colours depict it.
Another fallacy needs to be confronted: and this must be the notion that family life, male-female bonding, the nuclear enclave, children, et cetera… are somehow negative, restrictive, reactionary, unalternative, ‘square’ or Bourgeois. Au contraire, the First Sexuality remains primal, chthonic, volcanic, and biologically productive. It erupts, like one of Norman Lowell’s abstracts, from fundamental fissures. In terms of flesh, without a penis in the vagina nought else exists – even inversion. Perhaps the best analysis has to be the masterwork which convened modern sexology. This was Count Richard von Krafft-Ebing’s work, Psychopathia Sexualis, that appeared in the eighteen seventies. It posited the notion that the Heterosexual or Straight world’s all that exists, and, by definition, every other tendency happens to be its penumbra, shadow, affectation or deliquescence. By this lexicon, Basquiat’s doodles represent less under-class graffiti than a form of advanced immune deficiency syndrome within art. Wouldn’t Baumler, Gunther and Rosenberg have christened it Degenerate Art?
This, inter alia, leads on to a further rightist deconstruction of Michel Foucault’s History of Sexuality. For Ancient Greece’s upper-class poetics, a la Theognis, may have incorporated homo-eroticism… yet one has to ask what it means if half of Sappho’s surviving staves concern men and family life. Like Enoch Powell’s own chronicle and Oeuvre; does a disaknowledged or inactive bisexuality really matter if one’s married with children? Perhaps one can take a leaf out of Dr. William Pierce’s book here. Given that the National Alliance’s former leader forced all of its members to marry, on pain of expulsion, lest Kramer’s postlapsarian snake intrude.
Finally let’s provide a critique of Mister Clarke’s exemplum for Manism: namely the collected works of William S. Burroughs (these were his Last Words; so to speak). Nonetheless, one shouldn’t shy away from the fact that Burroughs’ carnival embodies a paedophile aesthetic – in the case of a text like Wild Boys explicitly so. But in all of his effusions, from Queer to Cities of the Red Night, the abiding themes are non-masculine, anti-heroic, separatist, anti-heterosexual and heroin induced. They recall Pasolini’s Salo as an attack on Mussolini’s post-dated Republic. Truly, one inscribes the Latin tag: video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor (put literally: I see the better and approve it, yet pursue the worse).