The Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) have dropped the “T” from their references to groups for which they advocate. This is long overdue, as Bruce Bawer writes on Frontpagemag.com:
“That’s right – “gender-affirming treatments” are, for many, nothing but a newfangled brand of conversion therapy, an attempt to “turn physically healthy people who are attracted to members of their own sex into superficial simulacra of the opposite sex whose attraction has not changed but can now call themselves heterosexual.” This, I maintained in my letter, was damaging not only for young people who’ve been talked into undergoing “gender-affirming treatment” but also for gay people in general….”
This entire ‘trans’ ideology is in reality a denial of being gay. What is more central to sexual (or ‘gender’ if you prefer) self-perception than the sex to which one is attracted? So it is obvious that here is the origin of the delusion (to which the entire world is required to subscribe) “I was born in the wrong body” - because I am attracted to people with the same sexual organs I was born (”assigned at birth)”.
For the individuals who have been led down this ideological path, this is sad; they are ill, psychologically, and there is no shame in that. They deserve help and support. The help and support they need, however, - as with the myriads of other delusions human beings have suffered down the ages - is not that their caregivers buy into and affirm their delusion. Rather, it is to simply affirm the fact that they are merely gay. The most central characteristic of homosexuality is, after all, sexual attraction to people of the same sex.
Denial of homosexuality, then, by turning an individual into a cosmetic simulacrum of a (non-functional, biologically) different sex by surgical mutilation (including castration and other bodily harms) has always been an affront to ordinary gay people. It says, rather powerfully, there must be something wrong with them. Finally, the LCR have recognized the truth and it is salutary for all concerned. Bravo!
I certainly agree with what he’s saying about sex-change surgery. Look: during the awful chaos the French people endured in the early 19th century (enough to drive anybody crazy, really) lotsa men showed up in French hospitals claiming to be Napoleon. French doctors didn’t respond by grafting bicorne hats to their scalps and insisting that everybody else address them as “M. L’Empereur”.. no, they locked ‘em up. And that’s wht should be done with any person who entertains the delusion, kinda a mass delusion by now, that a person can be a gender which his organs bear witness that he is NOT.
I’ve read Bawer before. I think he’s the one who wrote that he rejected the “born that way” shibboleth about gays because if you accept that you have to give pedophilia a pass, too,
So far so good. And I think anybody can under conducive circumstances, be sexually aroused by anyone. But I still reject the idea that being gay is not a perversion. A harmless one, in most cases, like having a private collection of sexual fetish objects—but still.
As a side note, I hate (HATE!) that homosexuals and lesbians have stolen the word “gay”. But then, they have done a lot of other damage too.
Gay was a little girl with ribbons in her hair running through a field of flowers, laughing as she went. It had nothing to do with people finding different uses for various body orifices.
Were I king for a day, the deal with homosexuals & lesbians would be – you are safe, we won’t stone you to death like the Muslims do. In exchange, give us back the word “gay”.
I’m so glad you brought this up! I read about it years ago in The Guardian or something, and nobody ever believes me about it. I thought of it when I read this OP.
Yeah, see, the idea is that if you are a man attracted to men, you MUST be a woman! There is simply no such thing as same - sex attraction : you ARE a women, and you must undergo surgery to make it so.
P. S.: I’m also thrilled to have read JW’s review of Houllebecq’s Soumission. I have been recommending this book to people ever since I read it. Now we have Houllebecq’s character Ben Abbes personified in Mamdani!
JW was wrong about one thing, though: this novel is NOT merely “social satire”. Like Camp of the Saints, it is a prophetic screed.
Hmmm. The progs have half the equation correct. They definitely despise penises (and everything which attaches to them). They just need to start loving guns.
I totally agree with you about the word “gay”. How did the homos ever get an exclusive on it? There really isn’t any exact synonym. “Cheerful” and “carefree” aren’t exactly right. To me it describes someone who can always make an occasion feel festive. I really needed it when I eulogized my mother -in-law.
I think “queer” was just about perfect. What was wrong with that? They’re welcome to that word, it’s pretty much been superseded by “weird” in modern American parlance.
Ironically, younger people use the word “gay” instead of “weird”, quite liberally. That has long surprised me. In the same “surprise” category, I place the terms “white trash” (whose necessary implications are objectively awful) and promiscuous use of the “C” word in the UK. Tangentially, I’ll say that Hollywood has so overused the “F” word as to have successfully inoculated the population that we have achieved herd immunity to it (If only actual vaccines were half as effective).
