For example, in Rugby, thirty sweaty men run around a field and proceed to lie on top of each other to control the possession of the ball. You wouldn't get away with that in normal life unless you were naked in bed with your sexual partner(s). While the game is violent, and there is the goal of winning, this is simply a veil. The real underlying reason is to allow men to act out their subconscious homosexual feelings within a male sphere of violence. By doing this they placate their homosexual desire, thereby reducing it. This allows their heterosexual desire to "take over," reaffirming the traditional view of masculinity of being heterosexual and violent. Piled on top of this is violence, or even warlike virtues of honor and loyalty, which hides the homosexuality of sport, twisting it into the opposite of anything "gay" and instead, into the pinnacle of heterosexual behavior. Sport therefore, is a defensive mechanism designed by people to reject the "wrong" sexual desires they consciously or subconsciously feel within themselves.

There are many examples to back up this idea. Baseball, a sport where there is limited chance for players to touch each other within the game, resort to wearing skin tight pants and patting each other on the buttocks when their fellow players, "do good." What do these same players do when the win the World Series? They metaphorically "climax", by congregating in a huge pile on the pitchers mound (no pun intended). What do hockey players do when they score? They go hug each other after the goal. An incident in soccer this year takes the "gayness" of sport to another level. While these may be proof positive of the thesis proposed, the coup de grace in this case has to be "pro-wrestling". In a bizarre duality, the World Wrestling Federation projects an extremely aggressive image of masculinity, while at the same time the most obvious and blatant homosexual imagery in all of sports. Furthermore the WWF is fake. It is theatre for the ignorant masses. It is well known that real theatre is populated by gay people; the connection between the two is obvious. The WWF, however refuses to acknowledge its blatent homosexual undercurrents, and tries to veil it with violence and other "manly" behaviors. Men in their underpants, covered in oil, wrestling each other is obviously homoerotic. Add to this the ripping off of shirts to reveal bare chests, and special moves where men's heads are in each others crotches and you have to wonder why Attorney General Ashcroft hasn't tried to ban this sport. The reason lies in the violence and misogyny presented by the actors. Smashing each other in the head with chairs, drinking beer, hitting women and generally treating them as sexual objects, all move the focus away from the obvious homoeroticism of the spectacle and towards traditional heterosexual values of manly strength and virtue.

The men watching sports, share in the homo-excitement that the sport projects. This is a safe way to placate homosexual desires, because "watching sports" has been labeled as a "man's pastime" which runs against female values. The clich�d story of the husband who undermines his wife's demands to watch the football game, stands as an obvious example. The homoeroticism of each sport obviously has degrees; and reflects the demands of its viewing public. The fans of the WWF, are obviously people with the highest need for homosexual relief because they watch the "gayest" of all sports. The fact that this "hyper-gayness" is veiled with "hyper-masculinity" suggests a deep seated need in WWF fans to hide their homosexual needs with the violence of traditional masculine values. They simply refuse to come to grips with their sexuality.

Where does this lead us? Others have argued that homosexuality is the next step in human evolution. This essay would argue that most men are at least bisexual, and are currently secretly satiating their biological urges by participating and watching "manly" sport. Women reject there own bisexuality to a far lesser degree. They don't have a similar vechicle to act out their homosexual desires. "Straight" female characters on TV, like on Friends for example, have engaged in lesbian behaviors with no detriment to their images as characters or careers as actors. Joey and Chandler kissing would not fly, but when Phoebe, Winnona Ryder, and Rachael do, it brings in huge ratings. Obviously the mainstream is comfortable with bisexuality in women. Furthermore the image of the jock needs to be revised. No longer can jocks be deemed staples of man-hood, but as secretly gay or bisexual men acting out their feelings in the safest manner avalible to them. With the massive numbers of people that play and watch sport, the oft quoted statistic that 10% of the population is gay or bisexual, must be revised and pushed up to at least 95%.

If you are a parent and your son loves the WWF, you have a choice to make. Obviously he is at least interested in homosexual behaviors; to what degree is another question. To prevent him from watching the WWF will reduce his outlet for homosexual desire, thereby bottling it up until he explodes at age 25 and moves to San Francisco. If you do prevent him from watching the WWF, the only other avenue I can think of, that is comparably "gay", would be to get him working on the Linux kernel with Alan Cox. As Western society becomes more and more liberal the future looks very bisexual. Eventually the WWF will drop the auspices of violence and become a male make-out body massaging show; with the other sports following in a less homoerotic manner.