Not Using = Misusing?

Is not using the same as misusing?

Asexuals, those who are not interested in sex with anyone regardless of gender, according to Levin, could be accused of misusing their body parts. It is highly probable that asexuals will not be using their sex organs at all. If those parts were intended for a purpose, then not using them must surely be a misuse. I do wonder if Levin would contend that not using is better than, equal to, or worse than using a body part for something it's not 'intended to be used for.' I would imagine that he may not argue that it was worse, but that is equal in that would cause an equal amount of unhappiness for the asexual, because there is absolutely no way that a human being could not want to do the nasty business, if you will.

Surely, it's not unnatural and abnormal to not use something for what it was designed to do. A lamp, for instance, was designed to produce light; it provides an evolutionary advantage of scaring away potential predators and allows us to see in the darkness. Not using a lamp, however, is not unnatural or abnormal. I also hope that Levin has never used an item as a makeshift fix (like using a brick to hold a door open).

Don't Shave Your Beard (It's of No Evolutionary Advantage)

Question: If you accept Levin's premise, wouldn't any use of a body part, if that use had no evolutionary advantage, be abnormal?

While I don't think that Michael Levin would contend with the conclusions of this argument, I think that his argument would eventually lead to the conclusion that any non-evolutionary advantageous use of a body part would be unnatural. Given that Michael Levin probably has had his hair cut, and shaved his beard, I can assume that he wouldn't agree with that conclusion, so he would probably try to explain it away. Playing the piano certainly has no evolutionary advantage, so by Levin's standards that is out. In addition to that, based of of Levin's conclusion, I would have to assume that the only natural and normal sex is the bare minimum that is needed for child-having. So I certainly hope that nobody, not excluding Levin, has every done anything outside of that minimum. He seems to forget that there is only one thing that heterosexuals do that homosexuals cannot. He also seems to forget that those sexual organs are also there for pleasure, for most people at least.

Authority Relationships

There are numerous problems that many people identify with various kinds of relationships. It seems that the only thing this is morally acceptable is a heterosexual relationship between men and women who are no more than 10 years of age apart. To general society, one of the largest and probably one of the longest held negative views on a relationship is the ever-questioned relationship involving one person of authority. Whether it is a politician, religious figure, higher ranked person in the military, teacher, or a police officer, society often objects to relationships where one person has some authority. I do not object to it on it's face. If someone happens to bear some position of power, he or she should not be punished with the inability to have a romantic relationship with somebody whom happens to be a subordinate. It would be terribly unfair to say otherwise.

The dynamic of this relationship can be interesting, I'd assume. I do wonder how often it is that someone falls for an authority figure just because of their power. That would explain some of the problems with politicians and affairs. Well, that doesn't matter much; each party in the relationship should understand the dynamic for themselves. The relationship has no terribly inexcusable aspect which differs from other relationships.

Unnatural v. Abnormal

Question: When people argue that homosexuality is unnatural, do they mean something different?


There are people who argue that homosexuality is not natural. If something is unnatural, then it is contrary to the laws of nature. Nothing which can be done in this universe can ever be unnatural; everything that exists or that can be done in this universe is natural. These people are confusing unnatural with abnormal.


Abnormality is the state of being in a marked category, which is to say, not being a part of the majority. Triangle glasses, for instance, would be abnormal and in the marked category; when we consider glasses, we consider rectangular or circular glasses to be in the unmarked category.


We do not generally meet abnormality with such incredible hostility. Minorities are often oppressed in society, however, after the minority's oppressors have relented, the general population tends to understand that the past was filled with poor choice. This movement for gay rights is essentially akin to the initial movement for the rights of women and of African descent