WI: State enforced homosexuality?

Anawrahta

Banned
With any number of POD with reasonable probability, have a government for even a brief moment to a civilization lasting many millenia sanction homosexuality upon its male/female populace.
 
Perhaps this scenario could happen to curtail overpopulation.
'Over population', for the last fifty years or so, has generally been Africa and other places having their infant mortality rates slashed and their life expectancies lengthened. This is somewhat balanced by the richer parts of the world using twenties times the resources of those without the cash or connections to get it. I mostly just am posting here to counter that idea that there is some overpopulation crisis, when it is simply people not dieing at a high rate. This idea for this thread would 'merely' be a state enforcing rape on the population. It doesn't specify what percentage of the population this would involve, but if enforced violently then we would get things like the 'men who have sex with men' categorization rather than true homosexuality, where someone is actually attracted to someone of the same gender. There are plenty of places around the world were homosexuality is forced on boys, (such as some stuff in Thailand perhaps where boys are forced to behave as girls and due chores) and the 'dancing boys' thing in Afghanistan. Led to some utterly abhorant things where the US military prevented American soldiers from complaining or helping the mothers and family members who wanted to have their children returned from the Northern Alliance members who lived on the base. That gets into power dynamics and such which also go back to the he Romans and Greeks in their practices. Part of why I find it distasteful when people laud the Classical period for relationships between men, when it was mostly between guardians/adoptive fathers and 'youths'. It was considered freakish or a sign of someone mishandling the boy's money if they kept it going after puberty. I expect there is similar things elsewhere in the world, and have heard of some examples, but it isn't exactly the sort of thing I go out of my way to find.



Anyways, to make a long story short, there is no possible way for the OP to happen.
 
Last edited:
Anyways, to make a long story short, there is no possible way for the OP to happen.

I mean... you could theoretically see the creation of some radical LGBT sort of organization securing themselves essentially a radical state entity somewhere that no only protects the rights of the oppressed, but requires it as a gateway to citizenship. Even if it's a micro-municipality. Hyde Park go a'secesh.
 
'Over population', for the last fifty years or so, has generally been Africa and other places having their infant mortality rates slashed and their life expectancies lengthened. This is somewhat balanced by the richer parts of the world using twenties times the resources of those without the cash or connections to get it. I mostly just am posting here to counter that idea that there is some overpopulation crisis, when it is simply people not dieing at a high rate. This idea for this thread would 'merely' be a state enforcing rape on the population. It doesn't specify what percentage of the population this would involve, but if enforced violently then we would get things like the 'men who have sex with men' categorization rather than true homosexuality, where someone is actually attracted to someone of the same gender. There are plenty of places around the world were homosexuality is forced on boys, (such as some stuff in Thailand perhaps where boys are forced to behave as girls and due chores) and the 'dancing boys' thing in Afghanistan. Led to some utterly abhorant things where the US military prevented American soldiers from complaining or helping the mothers and family members who wanted to have their children returned from the Northern Alliance members who lived on the base. That gets into power dynamics and such which also go back to the he Romans and Greeks in their practices. Part of why I find it distasteful when people laud the Classical period for relationships between men, when it was mostly between guardians/adoptive fathers and 'youths'. It was considered freakish or a sign of someone mishandling the boy's money if they kept it going after puberty. I expect there is similar things elsewhere in the world, and have heard of some examples, but it isn't exactly the sort of thing I go out of my way to find.



Anyways, to make a long story short, there is no possible way for the OP to happen.

If anything the west is seeing under population due to falling birth rates
 
Indeed, but even there most immigrants after a generation or two start having fewer kids.
Two or three kids seems to be standard for countries at a certain economic level, as education, medicine, toys, clothes, etc tend to be rather pricey and they can't focus on two many at once. Plus I read or heard somewhere that people kept having children in some places in say Africa, but that only two or three would reach adulthood. Less motivation to keep having children if you can be sure the ones you have some that will reach adulthood.

Back to the homosexual stuff (probably need a different term for it in this thread) I would say there would be double dates, surrogate mothers, people having sex with the opposite gender, etc. Anythig else is effective suicide for the community.
 
Ihor Kamenetsky, “Secret Nazi Plans for Eastern Europe”

As early as November 25, 1939, the Commission for the Strengthening of Germandom [a branch of the SS] issued a circular outlining such a program: All measures which tend to limit births are to be tolerated or to be supported. Abortion in the remaining area (of Poland) must be declared free from punishment. The means for abortion and contraceptive means may be offered publicly without any police restrictions. Homosexuality is always to be declared legal. The institutions and persons involved professionally in abortion practices are not to be interfered with by police.

A Nazi Victory involving mandating homosexuality for the Slavs seems possible, and in-line with their OTL thinking on racial hygiene.
 
If you are trying to reduce population size, whether because of overpopulation or Nazi Genocide, wouldn't it make much more sense to enforce asexuality on the population in question, rather than homosexuality? Same effect, but it's probably easier to implement measures keeping people from having intercourse with the other sex, rather than forcing those that don't want to into homosexual relationships.

Extremely weird scenario either way.
 

Anawrahta

Banned
Ihor Kamenetsky, “Secret Nazi Plans for Eastern Europe”



A Nazi Victory involving mandating homosexuality for the Slavs seems possible, and in-line with their OTL thinking on racial hygiene.

But it seems they are encouraging it not enforcing it. Considering how LGBT were treated I highly doubt the Nazi establishment would be totally comfortable with this line of thinking
 

Anawrahta

Banned
'Over population', for the last fifty years or so, has generally been Africa and other places having their infant mortality rates slashed and their life expectancies lengthened. This is somewhat balanced by the richer parts of the world using twenties times the resources of those without the cash or connections to get it. I mostly just am posting here to counter that idea that there is some overpopulation crisis, when it is simply people not dieing at a high rate. This idea for this thread would 'merely' be a state enforcing rape on the population. It doesn't specify what percentage of the population this would involve, but if enforced violently then we would get things like the 'men who have sex with men' categorization rather than true homosexuality, where someone is actually attracted to someone of the same gender. There are plenty of places around the world were homosexuality is forced on boys, (such as some stuff in Thailand perhaps where boys are forced to behave as girls and due chores) and the 'dancing boys' thing in Afghanistan. Led to some utterly abhorant things where the US military prevented American soldiers from complaining or helping the mothers and family members who wanted to have their children returned from the Northern Alliance members who lived on the base. That gets into power dynamics and such which also go back to the he Romans and Greeks in their practices. Part of why I find it distasteful when people laud the Classical period for relationships between men, when it was mostly between guardians/adoptive fathers and 'youths'. It was considered freakish or a sign of someone mishandling the boy's money if they kept it going after puberty. I expect there is similar things elsewhere in the world, and have heard of some examples, but it isn't exactly the sort of thing I go out of my way to find.



Anyways, to make a long story short, there is no possible way for the OP to happen.

Wow. I did not suggest state enforced sexual assault. I meant that heterosexual relationships are extremely discouraged and abhorred and instead vice versa is promoted with great energy by the state. The question you are answering the later parts of the paragraph is distinct from the one I posted.
 

Anawrahta

Banned
Back to the homosexual stuff (probably need a different term for it in this thread) I would say there would be double dates, surrogate mothers, people having sex with the opposite gender, etc. Anythig else is effective suicide for the community.

This is quite likely. Considering that the uncle often raised the children in some native american societies, how exactly would a society not based on the family unit would resemble? A homosexual society seems to be a good canddiate.
 
Top