Vilification of Homosexuality by identary ethno-nationalists: A Misunderstanding.

By Alfred Vierling

Being vilified for long see . Front en Eurorus by ethno-nationalists for being gay I feel the need to repost to such ill-founded misgivings.

Their argument goes normally as follows: Our ethics of the preservation of ethnicity are conducive of , to say the least, replacement fertility. Any behaviour upsetting fertility is therefore reprehensible. Such as homosexuality for it is foregoing having children and if exhibited in public is bound to lure youngsters into this genetical dead-end. Some even invoke the Bible as a dictate of human behaviour. I am not going into that one.

According to present-day state-of-the-art scientific knowledge of genetics this argument reveals some misunderstandings. I shall give some remarks:

· Homosexuality is no choice by an individual, but an early presumably prenatal and irreversible preference. People like all mammals (in birds it is the other way round) are naturally female unless masculinized , a process triggered by the SRY gene which starts on the Y-chromosome a cascade of events in the developing foetus that’st leads to the development of masculine appearance and behaviour. Female is the default sex and homosexuality in men results from the partial failure of this prenatal masculinisation process in the brain, though not in the body.

· Ray Blanchard’s theory of the fraternal birth order state that elder brother(s) cause a maternal immune reaction against the presumably PCDH22 gene specific of the male foetus, conducive to a rise of one third more chance to become gay of a male foetus for each extra elder brother,.

· If nurture, in the guise of birth order, causes some homosexuality, it does so by causing an immune reaction, which is a process directly mediated by genes. So , one can not any longer differentiate between environmentally determined or genetically determined.

· By consequence, nobody in science now believes that sexual orientation is caused by events in adolescence. Adolescence merely develops a negative that was exposed much earlier, presumably in the womb. It is therefore totally nonsense to state that exhibited homosexuality can lure youngsters into this preference. If experiment is the right of youth, young people will soonest find out whether it is their nature or not.

· One should, however, not fall into the naturalistic fallacy, that ‘ought’can be derived from ‘is’, for this is by definition fallacious. If a greater tendency to violence is innate in the human male, it doesnot make it right (or wrong).

· Present-day genetics do admit that the individuals are merely vehicles of genes. Fitness defines as the quantitative genetic contribution of one genotype to the next generation relative to other genotypes of the same species. Individual fitness defines as the contribution of individuals to the production of offspring. Inclusive fitness allows for compensation of foregoing of having offspring by behaviour that affects positively others processing the same genotype.

· So ethics of the preservation of ethnicity should allow for inclusive fitness, that is to consider self-sacrifice (not conveying its own genes to the next generation) as a foundation for radical activism. If someone foregoes having children of its own but would serve the larger interests of his race, he could be better serving it than the one leaving a large family but living against the larger interests of its race., like f.i. many drug and alhohol users do deteriorating the quality of their genes. So do war-mongerers: The boreal race lost 175 million people last century in fratricidal warfare


· The propaganda argument that the core family is the cornerstone of the nation presupposes a rectangular building, while for many centuries troglodytes did not know but larger families in cave dwellings and the more is ignoring the very fasct that a building needs at least four corner stones allowing for other fitness inclusive forms of relations. Decadence, the falling-down of the temple is due to an distorted equilibrium among the cornerstones, not one should be singles out for vilification.

· Homosexuality is thought of to be exempt from procreation, which might be true in the Talmudic propaganda distributed among gentiles to refrain from progeniture, but it can also describe the mediterranic (a.o.moslim) way of intermale hedonistic sexual prenuptial and extranuptial relations on the same level as heterosexual anal sexual relaqtions and anticonceptive sexual relations, while still allowing for progeniture.

· Criticism by etno-identary natalists on homosexuality should rather focus on this procreation inhibiting sexuality than on homosexual behaviour as such..


1. Nature via Nurture, 2003 Matt Ridley

2. On Genetic Interests, Family, Ethnicity, Humanity in the Age of Mass Migrations,

F.K. Salters, see also interview by M. Polignam in Occidental Quarterly vol7 no3, 2007 zie