Federico Di Marco - Personal Note on LBGT community

I’m a senior software engineer, born in Genova, Italy, with a master degree in computer science, in the second half of his forties.

Started using a computer at six years, gone through logo, basic, assembly, C/C++, java and finally to .NET and .NET core. Proficient also in databases, especially Sql Server and reporting. Let’s say I have also some experience on security but mainly in the past, now things have become much more difficult and I do not have too much time to keep me updated, but sometimes I am still kicking in.

Fan of videogames, technologies, motorbikes, travelling and comedy (click my name above for my main page).

Famous quotes:

• "No one can imagine how cruel an entire country comes to be when it targets someone, making up stories, going so far as to slander, trampling on the most basic rules of civilized living." (Gaetano Afeltra, an italian journalist and writer).

Personal note

I have always been a heterosexual as my family and I have always tolerated and respected non heterosexual persons, probably due to my limited involvement with them. Around ten years ago a Calabrese former friend of mine introduced me a m***n with a criminal record and non-heterosexual tendencies who tried to involve me into a scam and I literally sent to fuck him off reporting him also to authorities. The judge insanely decided not to proceed with lawsuit and later I was started unbelievably being defamed by other person associated with Calabrians and LBGT community.

Since then, I was stamped as a "crazy" and an anti-LBGT person due to my jokes and my consideration that sometimes they react in the same way as criminal associations. As a matter of fact I stumbled upon this recent news on a Soulash 2, an indie developed game (so done usually by a single developer or a very small group of persons), which was review bombed for the decision of the creator of not allowing same sex marriages.

I do not know why an association of persons should be allowed to put down a single person or a very small group, sincerely this is the well-known behaviour of criminal associations - the "mud machine" see here and also the English translation of the original Italian article by Roberto Saviano (the author of Gomorra book) on Repubblica newspaper - (I'm Italian and unluckily mob is a notorious matter connected with my country) which should be blocked and punished according to the law, but it seems that to judges such behaviour is perfectly lawful. The indie developer even reacted in a funny way by saying " After all, it looks like there was nothing to fear from the oppressive mob." and luckily in the end he managed to recover from the initial damage.

But all that happened during my bad experience and its troublesome consequences made me to be more cautious when dealing with LBGT persons, especially in situations where you are "forced" to liaise with them (e.g. at work). The main insights on them I can pass on are:

• They are a worldwide association whose member vowed to help themselves everywhere in the world: this means that if a non-heterosexual person is mad at you, a lot of them will support him (including their parents), even if he is wrong or you move to hundreds of miles away. Essentially, they are a dense association, almost ubiquitous.
• They are a partially secret (historically secret societies of non-heterosexuals have existed, e.g. see Order of Chaeronea) : you do not know who they are, because several of them hide their "membership" by living a normal life, so it could happen that a trustful friend or an acquaintance takes a stand against you without any apparent reason (e.g. it is difficult sometimes to spot them)
• When they feel in danger or disrespected, they do not hesitate in using "the mud machine" just in the same way as mobster do. In your life you can disagree or not like someone, if both persons are balanced, they understand that the world is quite big enough for everyone to live his life without bothering the other, this however is very difficult to let them understand. Moreover, when you work with non-heterosexual colleagues or managers you have to be very careful, if you show that you are cleverer than them, they could feel envy (essentially many of them can't conceive that a heterosexual person could be better than them) and they could react behaving very badly committing even mobbing or defaming you, even as one of them. Speaking of managers this is a very irrational, they should not care at all if a subordinate is more skilled than them, they should care only about the company objectives, settle office conflicts and facilitate the tasks of their subordinates (many times this is even brought to the next level, since there are managers who know very little about the technical work done by their subordinates). Maybe they could fear of losing their job, but it is high unlikely usually they are in such positions because they have strong connections to someone in the company; last but not the least we all age and sooner or later there will always be someone who is better than us (and I include myself too).
• They have a great economic power (e.g. statistically they usually earn much more than the average and historically libertinism was linked to upper social classes, see for example this article on the history of the Venetian doge Alvise Moncenigo based in turn on this italian book which essentialy suggests that non-heterosexuality, and more generally libertinism, was usually a matter for the upper social classes since the common people who had to make ends meet could not have too many whims in their heads) and they are connected to persons in powerful positions like politicians, judges, law enforcement personnel or doctors: fundamentally, they are all "their armed branch" and they will use it against a target if needed.
• They are known to be "serial" liars, so they can't be trusted at all: there are different papers on internet studying this phenomenon, a former college buddy of mine Paolo Dellepiane once pointed out that there are even famous movies depicting this misbehaviour like The Talented Mr. Ripley starring Matt Damon, but what beats everything is that they are unbelievably the first ones stating so in interviews, even famous Italian actors! They usually use lies to stage their "Latin lover" reputation taking advantage of women both accomplices and non and to live the life they want. The motto of their public events is the word "pride", yet as a matter of fact some of them when they are not attending these events, they live "proudly" a double life. And nevertheless, what takes the biscuit is that women are still attracted to them!
• They usually feel envy towards others and envy is also supposed to be one of the main components of same sex attraction: you can google for this speculated connection, personally they feel envy because they are a minority compared to heterosexuals and they want to prove that they are as good as them. Well essentially we are all born biologically man and women, so there is no limitation in any of them (excluding obviously people with handicaps), some doctors postulated the existence of non-heterosexual genes, but it has not been proved and moreover this conjecture has been confuted by the news that identical twin with different sexual orientation do exist.
• 
  And even if such genes would exist, what if a heterosexual person decides of his own free will to experience a same sex relationship or vice versa ? Would this be impossible due to their heterosexual genes ? No f*****g way (see below for the reasons). This irrational persisting conjecture scares me a lot because it seems to be a "weapon" craved by the same non-heterosexuals who would like their associated doctors to be able to lawfully declare a person as non-heterosexual just in case they need for whatever reason (maybe their cause, of which Mr. Roberto Bazzoni has always been a supporter, though he cunningly used always other persons, in Italy we have a way of saying about this "Sono tutti finocchi con il c**o degli altri" which literally could be translated "They're all faggots using other people's as**s"). To support this point of view, I would like to remind that this news from 1972 which changed the history of non-heterosexuals: a psychiatrist called Dr. John Fryer, at the American Psychiatric Association meeting, wearing a mask and under the guise of Dr. Henry Anonymous, declared that "he was a homosexual and he was a psychiatrist"; since that moment those who were considered at that time "crazy" became those who evaluate whether someone is crazy or not, honestly I can't think of a better move by non-heterosexuals (e.g. making them study psychiatry) to free themselves from the prejudices of the time.
• 
  Moreover, stating that a choice is genetic could be very dangerous: if it would be really true, people could fear of being transformed into non-heterosexuals as a consequence of a transfusion due to blood provided by non-heterosexuals. As a matter-of-fact in Italy there is a funny recent news that a person accused two entrepreneurs of having caused a blood transfusion with "infected blood" which eventually turned him into a non-heterosexual (sorry it is in Italian and you have to translate it); many people would easily dismiss this event as madness, but again as matter-of-fact there are countries in the world which have forbidden or still forbid blood donations by non-heterosexuals, but in the past you can't even think of how many non-heterosexuals have "secretly" donated blood to others without any kind of these issues (blood donations started in the early 1900s and even today non-heterosexual persons can donate blood where forbidden just by lying about their sexual orientation).
• 
  Going back to the reasons, there are several articles and studies who suppose that we are all born bisexuals (even the famous Sigmund Freud stated this) and during our life we learn our sexual preference (so it is essentially a matter of choice, as further proof think to the fact that sexual preference could also change during life, a former non-heterosexual could become heterosexual or vice versa, for Freud instead this was high unlikely and one decides to become non-heterosexual because he had a "distressing heterosexual experience") . From my standpoint it can be reasonably true - I can't say it is true because I am mathematician so it should be proved formally -, in particular due to the fact that when we "play with ourselves" it is the hand of a same sex person (e.g. ours) producing the sexual arousal. Therefore, everyone can go with everyone and it is just a matter of free will (though LBGT community fiercely denies and opposes this):
  • for the women it is far easier to perform a sexual intercourse with anyone they prefer (I do not believe that ALL non-heterosexual women if they are touched by a man they would not get aroused as well as ALL heterosexual women if touched by a woman they wouldn't get excited)
  • for the man maybe it was more difficult in the past, nowadays thank to the erectile dysfunction drugs they too can go with anyone (again I do not believe that ALL non-heterosexual man if they are touched by a woman they would not get aroused as well as ALL heterosexual men if touched by a man they wouldn't get excited). Otherwise, what is the difference between a man suffering erectile dysfunction and a non-heterosexual ? As a further proof just think (in particular women) that erectile dysfunction drugs are even taken by some non-heterosexuals when experiencing a same sex relationship. So according to my way of thinking it is just a matter of choice.
• 
  So, summing up so there is no point in feeling envy which IMHO is more a pathological disease (but this is another topic) and who knows maybe in the future a non-heterosexual will become the president of United States as plotted in a Simpson episode (Season 11 Episode 16 Pygmoelian, by the way in 2024 France appointed its first non-heterosexual prime minister Gabriel Attal, LBGT community and French persons should be very proud of this, even though unluckily he did not last long).
• 
  And there is no point in committing crimes using unprincipled doctors, judges and persons of "doubtful virtue" for staging that someone is a non-heterosexual and he does not understand it JUST FOR NOT MAKING LBGT members appear as "stupids" who prefer relationship with same sex persons OR AIDING AND ABETTING a non-heterosexual courthouse collaborator or a criminal association of scammers. If a judge is non-dishonest, he does not allow fake rumours or slander to be spread against an innocent person or family, if he has really suspected on someone, he puts a silent tail on him without allowing his reputation to be damaged.

  In fact, the main characteristic which defines a non-heterosexual person is that he looks for or has an intimate relationship with a person of the same sex, no matter anything else. There is no test in the world which can establish "mathematically" the sexual orientation of a person.

  Some believe that they are those who suffer repeatedly, as "extreme example" in Italy we have an old comedy film series Fantozzi whose main protagonist (an actor from my home town now dead) is the most passive - yet heterosexual - person in the world suffering all possible injustices at work and in life in a very funny way (probably persons similar to the protagonist do exist in real world).

  Non-heterosexuals usually believe that if they can touch a person and he does not get angry it is a "mathematical proof" that they have their same sexual preference; there a lot of reason or situations for which a person could not react energetically, think for example when this happens at work, maybe with a superior or a long-serving co-worker. If you react verbally, you could be "charged" of being homophobic (homophobia nowadays has become a popular "incontrovertible crime" from which nobody can defend), if you react physically, you would be regarded a violent or worse you could be fired and even prosecuted. Deflecting with humour should be the best strategy, but it does not always succeed, especially when dealing with difficult sly people (they could defend themselves as being tactile persons). In my view touching a person of the same sex with whom you do not have a close relationship is a clear sign of disrespect and there are also studies confirming this misbehaviour.

  Many believe statistics is an exact science (whereas it isn't) and therefore they ask an opinion about the target behind the scenes to the person he knows: first to close friends, then both to work colleagues and study buddies and, lastly, to the person in the social circles he attends. They hope to find a congruous number of supporters and they usually do, especially if the target has always had a life above average, because envy is omnipresent and, remember, envy creates silent enemies. The more consensus the defamer gets, the more truthful his and his allies opinion becomes to their brain. This is the core principle of the misleading consensus theory of truth which essentially states that something is true simply because a lot of people generally agree upon it. The main flaw with this theory is that if consensus equals truth, then "truth" can be made by forcing or organizing a consensus: using this principle you can make any "slander" become true. And in fact, many detractors (of any sexual orientation) when they are not given the reason, they take it to the next level becoming psychopaths. e.g. they all start spreading rumours to come true what their brain thinks (e.g. he is a non-heterosexual and he does not want to tell or he does not understand it, holy s**t how many crazy people there are in the world), committing also a crime (I labelled this deleterious one as the "notorious" technique). This is also the main technique of the so called "mud machine", used by mobsters to defame an innocent.

  Others believe blindly to the Latin phrase "In vino veritas" (in wine there is the truth) and enjoy taking several pictures of the target when he is a little drunk (maybe after having offered him some drinks) hoping to get the "unchallengeable" proof, e.g. one or more pictures where he does not look masculine at all (I labelled this one as the "paparazzi" technique).

• 
  Another approach based on the fact that most of women are talkative suggests in analyzing how much a target speaks (it is also one of the cornerstones of the next Hoey priciple), if he "holds the stage" he is high likely to be, but with this "logic" the same would apply also to most of elderly or alone people who enjoy talking a lot just because they are alone most of the times (I labelled this one the "chatty" technique).
• 
  In 1950 a panel of doctors (they are the best) called "Committee of Hoey" was tasked of finding a way to identify non-heterosexuals which were "hunted" in US for national security reasons (probably due to some of the previous points I listed). After two years of studies, they came up with this "incontrovertible" principle: they weren't married, they rarely refused not to speak of themselves and they were usually perfectionist. Criteria not at all rigorous whose application caused also very serious damages to both non-heterosexuals and heterosexuals, including even death. Another consequence of this principle was the fostering of the so-called lavender marriages, a male–female mixed-orientation marriage, undertaken as a marriage of convenience to conceal the socially stigmatized sexual orientation of one or both partners (funnily non-heterosexuals might even have arranged lavender marriages using medical partners :-). And who knows also the archetype of the high school nerd overachievers being non-heterosexuals stems from this principle (I would simply stress out that not all of them are non-heterosexuals even though I must admit that some of them are way too "nerdy", just think for example to the worldwide show the "Beauty and the Geek", but they probably pick them on purpose for audience reasons). As a curious coincidence I highlight that on my Linked profile I have a recommendation from a former Danish co-worker stating I was at some degree a perfectionist since I managed to write successfully an ultra complex SQL query, probably unprincipled doctors or judges could use it with their Hoey principle to stage I am a non-heterosexual :-)
• 
  There are so many other conjectures based on statistics speculating a link between the sexuality and the music, movie tastes or whatever else. In life you will meet an unimaginable number of weirdos suggesting their own "infallible" method. as a funny note the same non-heterosexuals suggests in this video that having an iPhone is a necessary condition for being non-heterosexual and even more oddly some former work colleagues curiously have moved from iOS to Android some time after this video was published :-). And God only knows what AI will invent in the future. The main problem with all these speculations is that you can even destroy an innocent life or a family, simply because a lot of people generally agreed to do it by exploiting the "annihilating" consensus theory of truth.
• They often drop subtle hints or even try to convince to experience a same sex relationship (probably for the speculation it could be a choice which unsurprisingly they deny): haven't you ever heard about or met in your life anyone who you believed he was a friend and then out of nowhere he unbelievably suggested or even asked you directly to experience a relationship with a person of your same sex ? I don't wish it on anyone, but it happened three times to me, even by a close friend of my family (what's worse he previously tried to kiss me out of blue in the middle of party taking an artistic snapshot of the scene with a female photographer accomplice of him minimising it was a joke, I do not even know what they did with this picture, I'll still have the doubt they did it for some ignoble purpose, anyway our "friendship" ended even though he is also a close friend of my sister-in-law), adducing the fact that perhaps I would have enjoyed it. I was speechless and since then I do not consider them anymore persons worth of my respect (the former friend of family has now three sons and I would like to know how he would react if someone would tell his sons the same, anyway). If you ask me, behaviours like this (e.g. proselytism) make me think that non-hetosexuals might be a kind of cult or "religion".
• On Wiktionary there is even a neologism alphabet mafia to indicate the aggressive way of LBGT community in imposing their values ​​on society and this is precisely the crux of the problem: values ​​are teached by one's family and acquired throughout our life and cannot be imposed or forced by anyone else (except when dictatorship). We must understand that what is a value for someone might not be the same for another person (this is the "cultural difference" explained in very simple words). There are flat-earthers who still claim that the earth is flat, for most people an absurdity but they certainly do not impose their theories in schools or in society; they have their own circle, anyone who wants can join freely and they do not bother anyone. Honestly in my whole life I have never heard of anyone making fun of a flat-earther: when the alphabet mafia will understand this, probably it will be too late 🤷‍♂️

I end this personal note with two famous quote from Martin Luther King:

• "My freedom ends where yours begin": this should be the fundamental principle in every civil society.
• "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.": this is not an exact quote from his speeches, but rather summarized from a sermon he uttered the day in 1965 after "Bloody Sunday"
  • A man dies when he refuses to stand up for that which is right.
  • A man dies when he refuses to stand up for justice.
  • A man dies when he refuses to take a stand for that which is true.