Lithuania Tribune’s Introduction

It is a fact that in western countries during the last few decades the general attitude towards homosexual, bisexual and transsexual people has changed dramatically. It is also a fact that today visitors from these countries often are puzzled by the widespread homophobia in Lithuania and other new EU members. Also, by the same visitors the relationship between men and women are often considered curiously obsolete in the new, former socialist, EU members, although not long ago in all these aspects the situation in Western Europe was very similar as in Lithuania today. The Lithuania Tribune believes that as Lithuania will modernize its business structure and economy society will have to confront the same public discussions and issues as Western Europe. The final outcome and of these discussions and the speed of any changes are obviously to be determined by us, the Lithuanian people.

In this connection it can be really interesting to learn exactly what a visitor from Western Europe actually thinks about the current situation in Lithuania of today. What did they think about our discussion surrounding the Baltic Pride Parade of May 8? About our view towards sexual minorities? About the roles of men and women in Lithuania of today?

The below text has been exclusively written for the Lithuanian Tribune by a visitor from Scandinavia. All views and opinions expressed are those of the author, Mr. Erik Edlund, and may not completely coincide with those of the Lithuania Tribune, although we are convinced the text touches many aspects of issues, which will dominate public debate in Lithuania for years to come. The subject is large so reading the text is a little like going on a bike ride through a historic museum. The text doesn’t go into all details, but we view it as an excellent introduction to these topics.

Below is Part 1 of 4 of the text. The parts should be read in order. The subsequent parts, 2-4, will be posted on our site during the next two weeks. We welcome your comments to this text.

The Lithuania Tribune

”The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.”
                                                                                                                                                                           John Stuart Mill

A foreigner’s thoughts on Lithuania after the Baltic Pride Parade – Part 1 (Introduction, Homosexuality)

Never before I have had any direct contact with the gay movement; neither in Sweden, nor abroad. I wasn’t planning to participate in the Baltic Pride Parade, and I’ve never before in my life taken part in any sort of political parade, or political march. However, since I happened to be in Vilnius anyway, and some very basic and fundamental human rights were threatened I felt compelled to show my support for democracy and an open free society for everyone.

After the parade I have been writing down some thoughts about the situation in Lithuania today. However, it’s a general psychological phenomenon all over the world that people, who freely criticize their own leaders and their own country in discussions with their compatriots, are very sensitive to the very same criticism, when it comes from foreigners. Therefore, it’s clear to me that the very fact that I’m not Lithuanian might make many Lithuanians touchy, when reading my opinions.

In a way it’s like commenting on any family, but your own. Unless parents are really mistreating their children very seriously, it’s generally a good idea for outsiders not to get involved in how the children should be raised. However, it’s also true that in a family many small changes, which are each insignificant, over time can incrementally lead to a huge and crucially important shift. Parents seeing a child every day often fail to recognize children’s physical and mental development, while it’s obvious for a relative, who is only meeting these children once a year; for example at Christmas.

Hence, there are several reasons I feel that I have to share my thoughts on Lithuania today, although as a general rule it’s a good idea not to criticize the situation in foreign countries. First, threats against fundamental and universal human rights are of such importance that it’s justifiable to criticize other countries than one’s own. Second, just as it can be an eye-opener for a child’s parents to get the opinion from someone, who is rarely seeing their child, it could be important for Lithuanians to learn how a person who isn’t raised in your country and not accustomed to your political culture perceives the recent events surrounding the Baltic Pride Parade. Third, the EU is increasingly becoming more like a single country. Therefore, as an EU citizen I’m not really an outsider, when I’m having opinions about situations and events in the European Union outside Sweden.

To be fair and to enable readers to evaluate my opinions I feel I should briefly describe who I am. In Sweden a secular Protestant with generally centre-right values and opinions like me is considered a very average person. However, there are reasons why it would be easier for me than for the average Swede to understand Lithuania. For one, while I was still studying I was active in the Catholic student association, although I never converted to Catholicism.

Also, I’ve always considered a somewhat cautious approach towards new ideas and changes to be the right one. Back in school I infuriated girls in my class by being very critical towards feminist ideas, although, I have to admit, I’ve now been fully convinced that those feminist classmates were mostly right.

Enough about me. These are my ideas about freedom of speech and sexuality related to Lithuania of today following the Baltic Pride Parade of May 8.

What really forced me to participate in the Baltic Pride Parade was the feeling that freedom of speech was at risk. It’s sometimes stated that Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet) once said: “I may not believe in what you say, but I will die for your right to do so.”

However, the original purpose of the Baltic Pride Parade, before it turned into a crucial manifestation of human rights and freedom of speech, was sexual enlightenment. Therefore, let me start with stating my views on sexual orientation

Based on various religious and other beliefs people, who claim to believe in god, sometimes consider homosexuality to be unnatural. By definition what can’t be found in nature is unnatural while what is found in nature is natural. I read somewhere that homosexuality has been scientifically recorded in nature among some 3,000 different species. At the same time religion has only been recorded among humans. Therefore, homosexuality could be considered 3,000 times more natural than religion.

I’m not claiming that people don’t have the right to practise whatever religion they want. But no one in his, or her, right mind would use his, or her, own sexual orientation as an argument why other people should be forbidden to practice their religion freely. So why is it that some people seem to believe that their own religious beliefs entitle them to restrict other individuals’ sexuality?

One of John Stuart Mill’s quotes expresses it superbly: “Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.”

At the core of this issue is the following question: What’s the purpose of sex?

Some people would answer that the purpose of sex is to create children. Therefore, since homosexual sex can’t create children, allegedly it’s somehow not as “natural” as heterosexual sex. However, why is it then that homosexuality is so ubiquitous in nature?

In order to answer this question, let’s first determine the purpose of sex in general. Both males and females burn energy when they are having sex. In nature energy is a scarce resource. Therefore, evolution and natural selection would quickly (over hundreds or thousands of generations) alter the sexual desires in such a way that individuals no longer had any desire for sex, which can’t lead to the creation of further generations. But pregnant women do have sexual desires, just like women, who have passed menopause. Heterosexual men can have sexual desires towards pregnant women and towards women, who no longer can give birth. Therefore, the main purpose of sex seems to be something else; not to create children, at least not directly.

What then? The obvious answer is that sex has a strong social function. It creates and maintains strong bonds between individuals. Animals, which are not social, such as fish, don’t have sex at all. Many animals, such as elephants, moose or buffalos, are only having sex during a few weeks every year. During the rest of the year males and females are living separately and neither males nor females have any desire for energy-consuming sex.

Among animals strong bonds between individuals of the same sex forged by homosexual sex can have a positive survival effect. Zoologists have shown how two middle-strong male lions can defeat a superior dominant male, if the two middle-strong male lions co-operate. Homosexual activity between these two middle-strong male lions then is necessary to create a strong enough bond between them to together defeat their superior rival. Only after victory over the dominant male the two middle-strong males had access to female lions and had any chance to heterosexual sex. Thus, for these male lions bisexuality had a positive survival effect on the chances of fathering lion cubs. With an understanding of this mechanism it’s clear why evolution has allowed homosexuality to be so frequent in nature.

In the same way, strong bonds between females can be necessary to ensure that one mother protects her neighbour’s offspring while the neighbour is looking for food. Such a strong bond can be forged and maintained by female homosexuality.

Thus, homosexuality, or at least bisexuality, at times has a positive evolutionary effect on the chances for an individual to pass his, or her, genes to the next generation. By definition nature is natural.

Earlier in history, when weapons were not as sophisticated as today, it was even more important than today for an army that each soldier was ready to die in order to protect the soldier standing next to him. Hence, the ancient Greeks considered male homosexuality between soldiers as something positive. In ancient Greece homoerotic relationships were not only accepted, they were encouraged, and it was said that an army of lovers would be invincible. Basically the logic was the same as for the male homosexual lions. Sex creates strong emotional bonds between individuals and in a dangerous fight that is a real advantage.

Several successful military commanders and strong head of states have been homosexual; Alexander the Great of Macedonia, Fredrick the Great of Prussia and Gustaf III of Sweden were all proven, or likely, homo- or bisexual. Other prominent homosexuals in history are Leonardo Da Vinci (proven homosexuality), William Shakespeare (disputed sexual orientation) and Pyotr Tchaikovsky (proven homosexuality).

Part 2-4 will be posted on Lithuania Tribune’s site during June 2010.

A foreigner’s thoughts on Lithuania after Baltic Pride Parade – Part 2 (Gender Roles) by Erik Edlund

—————————————————————————-
© Copyright 2010, Erik Edlund and the Lithuania Tribune, All Rights Reserved