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).

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.
• They have a great economic power (e.g. statistically they usually earn much more than the average) 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 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 yet and moreover this conjecture has been confuted by the news that identical twin with different sexual orientation do exist. 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) . 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:
  • 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 ? 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 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).

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".

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.