Gay Celibacy, Anyone?
By Mikee dela Cruz
PUBLISHED: FEBRUARY 2010

	Share |

Gay and 23, Henry G. is proud “not to have had any sexual relationships,” he says, a toothy smile breaking on his face.  “And that’s with either with a man or (even) with a woman,” he adds – and then, as if as an afterthought, and with a loud laugh: “Or with any animal, for that matter.”

What Henry is, is a celibate – yes, that term that Dictonary.com defines as "a person who abstains from sexual relations," i.e. chooses not to have sex. 

Interestingly – and apparently – Henry G. isn’t alone in opting for abstaining from having sex.  Even sans the availability of hard data on the real number of celibates (or even sexual abstainers) – since, really, how can such a figure be established? – the increasing media coverage on the practice (e.g. Google searches yielded over 1,600 sites for “gay celibacy”; and, get this, 7,730,000 sites for “celibacy”) shows the theme’s popularity.

The question remains, though: Can (or, for that matter, SHOULD) gays be celibates?

WHY CELIBACY?

Gayteens.about.com states the obvious: “Despite the association of gay people with sex, plenty of folks in the GLBT community choose not to have sex and instead be celibate,” the advice site states. “So what does that mean?  There are a million reasons GLBT people may choose not to have sex. These may include: not feeling ready; as a form of safe sex and protection from infection; not being in a serious relationship; and personal beliefs. (But what has to be kept in mind is that) being GLBT is about much more than simply who you choose to have sex with.”

Gayteens.about.com takes particular swipe at the perspective that “a person can't ‘really’ be gay if they aren't sexually active,” calling it nonsensical – and, yes, it is, considering that sexual practices (or lack thereof) do not necessarily a man make.

BIG ON ABSTINENCE

The push for celibacy is strongest when paired by religious zeal.
Celibacy used to be a common practice among religious, err, leaders (of, among others, the Latin Catholic Church, Eastern Christianity, and Anglo-Catholics) – i.e. those who were “called” to serve God adopted a “celibate life, refraining from marriage and sexual relationships, including masturbation and impure thoughts (such as sexual visualisation and fantasies),” states Wikipedia.org.

This is even if the earliest Christian leaders were very largely married men – e.g. in Mark 1:30, Saint Peter’s mother-in-law was mentioned, indicating his marital status; and in 1 Corinthians 7:8, Paul the Apostle indicates that he was “unmarried”: either single or a widower.

Now why the insistence on celibacy, even if Jesus Christ, himself, did not seem to care about the marital status of his followers? Back to Bible, this time to the New Testament, i.e. 1 Corinthians 7:32–33 ("The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife") – this is often cited as a locus classicus used in favor of sacerdotal celibacy, since a married man is assumed unable to serve two, well, masters in God and his wife, so choosing only one is what’s “ideal.” 

Stressed by 1 Timothy 3:2–4, wherein a church leader is expected to be "the husband of one wife", with the Church also deemed a “wife” and should, therefore, be singularly served (as opposed to having more than one wife, e.g. priesthood AND a human woman).

	1 | 2 | 3