I've suspected for a long time that homosex implies more than just
sex, more than just a different set of rules for sex, but a contextual
difference, a standing back and noticing that the rules themselves are
mutable, that you can have a different set of rules serially, more
than one set, or none at all.

It might even be present in some breeders -- to wit the incredible
paradigm flip-flops that kids undergo -- full-on murderous nazi-like
skinheads changed by a single event or thought into punks or peace
punks or whatever. And most can even elaborate on the change, at the
time it happens. (I'd argue that the differences are superficial, but
that's exactly the point.)

Maybe it's a side effect of the social outcast business, but I don't
think that's more than another factor. I think "homosexual" is simply
that the sex part is "visible" and our barbaric culture can't even
detect anythign more subtle than a clunk on the head or hole in the
ground.

Alan Turing in "Computable Numbers" and beyond obviously had more than
a clue. His writing and talking about human thought processes was far
more important than I realized, and I think than most people realize.
Far more than just in it's application to machinery, in which he
dropped interest in post-war.

That the things we think of today as "machine thinking", ie.
algorithmic solutions, stepwise analysis, etc, for shitsake came from
human thought, and at a pretty high level of abstraction at that. The
pigshrinks call it robotic abberant crazy behavior, but as usual any
single idea/tool taken as absolute truth repeated endlessly in usual
breeder fashion, is destructive. They hate it because it's another
path out of their dreary control world.