An interesting part of this essay by Lee Edelman comes up early in the essay with a qute from Elias anetti that says, "[He] not only want[s] to exist for always, but to exist when others are no longer there. He wants to live longer than everyone else, and to know it; and when he is no longer there himself, his name must continue" (34). This got my attention beause it seems like a natural desire that I have myself. It also got my attention because when I read it I couldn't help thinking about Tupac Shakur, may he rest in peace. Towards the end of his career Tupac was overly concerned with being remembered, releasing an album titled "R U Still Down (Remember Me)." Why are we so obsessed with leaving a legacy? I would say that it makes us feel like out life has a purpose. However, as this essay shows, it is not an innate, and therefor not in total human nature, desire because there exists a part of us known as the sinthome. What happens with homosexuality, according to a heterosexual view towards it, is that it is stragne because it is death oriented. That is, homosexuality is not a path towards procreation, and therefore, must be a path towards nothing. Well sinthomosexuality then recognizes that we can just simply exist for ourselves. There is a part of us called the sinthome, that we simply identify when we are healthy psychologically, and fall into the trap of believing in when we are living a blind life with a faricated reality. Well, I guess its a good idea to reevaluate ways to look at homosexuality, because there really should be no aversion to it, and it is really interesting to think about how a homosexual might feel about their homosexuality in light that it will not result in offspring or a means to be remembered and live on in future generations biologically.