Being proud of what's between your legs or who you like to rub it on is a mental illness. Those things are no one else's business and they shouldn't have to know about it.
For the record, I really like sloths. So I was deeply disappointed to learn that your Sloth Month is not a month for sloths, but merely a celebration of slothfulness. Sloths always get the short end of the stick.
I've said for some time that championing LBGTQWERTY will not be sufficient, in the end. You will be required to participate in homosexual relations in order to demonstrate your bona fides. We're already seen that governments do not hesitate to impose mandates for "your own good." In the march to the uplands of Utopia and equity, why would this be any different...
Yep...teenaged girls used to display their neurosis with bulimia, but now they get attention by becoming fake boys....after which, they eventually realize that they have destroyed their lives...
It's "Pride Month" every month in the U.S where taking it up the ass is a constitutionally protected "right" (Lawrence v. Texas) and transitioning one's sons and daughters is seen by many as so normal it doesn't even need to be mandated. Shame Month 24/7-365.
I got perma banned for stating trans women are male and commit violent crime at male rates. So much for Musk saying we won't ban people for stating the truth.
My German might not be perfect, but perusing the Stolzmonat twitter I literally don’t see anything specifically targeting the LGBT community. Additionally, they are not “devaluing” other nations, they literally are celebrating other nations people who decide to Celebrate their own national pride. But none of the backlash ever had to do with rationality after all.
Also, you should value your own nation over others, that this is considered a bad thing is what’s wrong with western society.
The comments are pretty good, too. Burnouts (smoking one's tires to leave a black streak on the road) on pride flags have become somewhat of a trend in the US. It gives me hope.
It is a jealousy tantrum, plain and simple. All the rainbow people are screaming, "Look at me! Look at me!," but there still remain some obstinate people who are looking at something else instead.
I used to have sympathy for them. I didn't think anyone deserved to be tormented, fired, even prosecuted for homosexuality. What people do on their own time does not concern me, so long as both parties consent. It's no one's business what they do, and certainly not government's.
They said, "We're here, we're queer, get used to it."
Unfortunately for them, people got used to it.
I saw an article where gay individuals were bemoaning that people started treating their gay enclaves as ordinary places. They complained that straight people came into their places and publicly displayed their non-gay affection for one another just as the gays in the area had been doing, and as straights sometimes do in non-gay areas.
The gays thought it debased their area to have straights coming in and acting like being gay was just a normal thing, not something "special" that meant that people not in the club should know their place and keep their unwanted straight behavior out of their territory.
The irony, apparently, is lost on those individuals who think that way. They complained about straights having that same attitude about the areas where they were in the majority, and they claimed they just wanted to be accepted like straights are, but they apparently really wanted to have their areas where "others" are excluded while still denying the "others" any place where they can exclude the gays. They wanted a setup where gayness is okay everywhere, but straightness is only okay in designated "straight" areas. They did not want equality, but superiority.
I can understand the desire to be "special." Humans are social creatures by nature, and intelligent social creatures innately create social hierarchies. In the current leftist paradigm, victimhood is status, so being the hated homosexuals conferred a street credibility that they don't want to give up. They understandably want to give up the things that represent actual victimization, like being beaten, fired, or prosecuted for being gay, but they don't want to give up the victim identity and the status that comes with it.
You can't have both, though. If you stop being a victim, you become like everyone else. Losing their specialness and having "normies" come in while feeling comfortable enough to be themselves in your area signifies a level of acceptance that didn't exist before, which would be a more positive way of looking at the loss of specialness.
They have gone so far beyond their previously very reasonable demands like not wanting to be beaten or fired for being gay that I've used up all the sympathy I used to have. Gay porn in school libraries, drag queen shows for kids, gay victim identity indoctrination for kids, and the very real child grooming they're doing in schools are over the line. Demanding fealty to LGBTQRSTLNE on pain of being fired, cancelled, kicked out of school, flunked, or otherwise penalized for not having the right opinions is over the line. Demanding I participate in the delusions of people who want to play make believe that they are the other sex is over the line.
I no longer accept that liberal line of reasoning that "you can do whatever you want in private if it isn't effecting others" because it's a negative moral statement. In other words, people's private desires trumps a necessary moral fabric to maintain society for generations to come. It is this exact line of reasoning that is responsible for our total, amoral depravity in the West today more than anything else. When morals are no longer superior to "muh rights" then morals have no meaning anymore, which is what we see today.
Same here, I was a classical liberal, libertarian, even an optimistic anarchist once, but since covid the lid has really blown off this crap stew. All the lies of the past several centuries are being exposed for those of us paying attention, with liberalism itself being revealed as the greatest villain, giving birth even to communism and causing the slow death of Western civilization which we are now near the end of
How has it failed? It's never been tried (during our lifetimes). It's been centralized authoritarianism since the Civil War.
If an action causes no direct harm to anyone, it's not government's job to mess with it. The problem we have is not too little government, but too much. The solution to too much government is not more government.
I agree wholeheartedly in what you are saying, way too much centralization of power, government overreach. However, this is accepted by people because the culture war has already been lost to a generic secular humanism that has been translated into a nanny state. To retake the culture, we're going to have to offer a cultural alternative to the race to the bottom...that means Christianity.
Agreed on the government portion, but what we lack is the robust system of social norms and approval that has been destroyed in the last century. That's the solution and guess what: you don't need to vote for it, you just have to pick and choose yourself who you'll associate with and what is/is not acceptable with your actions.
As for "REAL LIBERTARIANISM has never been tried before," dude don't use the commie thinking. It was tried and it led us here: libertarianism is a modern attempt to reconstruct the classical liberalism of early America (which has been degraded many times to where it's just statism now) and it's always been an anachronism since it existed. It's just classical liberalism with no moral limitations (legalize all drugs, prostitution, etc simply let the consumers decide). As such it did fail because 1) it isn't actually that popular other than among a small minority of successful people and 2) it offers 0 resistance to far left madness as nothing is wrong for reasons of immorality, it's only wrong if you try to stop my bad behavior which makes libertarianism entirely compatible with far left madness. It simply is against the welfare state and exorbitant taxes with no alternative vision for society, this is why it became "lolbertarianism" in the end.
Your personal decisions on morality are none of my business unless you infringe on my birth rights. Who gets to decide what’s “moral”? The government? Your weird church or my weird church?
BINGO! Well said. My sympathy and tolerance is used up as well, and for the same reasons.
I have no problem whatsoever with equal rights, AS LONG AS minors, animals and those who cannot give informed consent are not involved. I DO have a BIG problem with special privilege, globalism, the police state and Marxism, which is REALLy what this is all about. And if the parties involved either cannot, or don’t want to separate the issues, then it’s up to us to do that FOR them. And they’re not gonna like the results. Should my have to be this way, but when you play stupid games, you have to expect to win stupid prizes.
I think it’s the activist group grifters losing donations and control. I do not think this hysteria is emerging from the rank & file. Until the acronymic explosion emerging from academia, most of the alternative gender expression groups didn’t even like each other, hardly a cohort. (And btw, gender dysphoria is a real thing, just because it’s been turned into a viral trend does not negate the microscopic % suffering from it.)
"I saw an article where gay individuals were bemoaning that people started treating their gay enclaves as ordinary places" - what I heard is that more and more women are going into gay bars and are often even celebrating their bachelorette parties there (who are annoying af regardless where they go). Then you have loudly screaming drunken women dominating a place for gay guys. Now you're saying that when a gay man wants to go into such a gay bar to meet other gay men and is annoyed by all the women there changing the vibe is somehow hypocritical?
Chico is one of the cities where there is active intent to keep kids' parents away from their medical and educational decisions through weird "health centers" within the schools themselves. A Chico State professor was just outed as writing torture porn about young boys https://reduxx.info/exclusive-california-gender-academic-inspired-pedophilic-fantasy-on-castrating-enslaving-young-boys/, so, though they don't say it aloud much, you are absolutely right, and it is a huge criminal global criminal enterprise as well as a global cult.
Do you actually mean that large parts of the current German government are Israelis? Or like all too many these days, are you confusing Israelis with Jews?
Thx for explaining this E. Another great article. There are times when I feel like all of us who see through this bullshit should just form our own country.
Remember when Trans/Deviants respected the fact they were not "normal"? In other words, they respected the fact that they were a vanishingly small minority and the world wasn't "made" to order for them.
Homosexuals have a right to live their lives in peace but they have no 'right' to try to bully the rest of humanity into falling into line with the bogus notion that there is no such thing as normal sexuality. If tv viewers find (as in almost all UK and European murder mystery tv dramas) that every episode must tick the 'gay couple included' script tick-box, they are entitled to feel irritated by this. If their town is annually invaded by a flag waving 'Pride' jamboree, they are entitled to feel irritated by that too. And if all this is something they dislike, it does not mean they have a 'phobia' about it.
I've watched many different TV shows lately, dozens of them, and every one of them has unnecessary gay relationships that are out of character for the show (not talking about romance shows or soap operas) and gratuitous. Sci-fi, superhero shows, you name it, has to be loaded with gays and gay drama, not to mention the assorted other bits of woke propaganda. Every show has to be a vehicle to spread their message... all leftism, all the time.
I remember an episode of Star Trek: The New Generation (from the '80s) where Captain Picard's artificial heart was failing, and it looked like he was going to die. On his deathbed, he bemoaned the mistakes he had made in his life that had led to a lifetime of regret and him needing the artificial heart whose failure was killing him now.
Q (a very powerful, godlike entity who transcends space and time) appeared, and gave Picard the opportunity to go back in time and redo his life as a young ensign. Picard went back in time, and he changed those things about his life that he had always regretted. He avoided an ill-advised affair with a much older woman as a youngster. He avoided using his technical knowledge to hustle some dangerous and violent aliens at pool (or a game much like it), which had failed, causing one of them to run him through, destroying his biological heart.
I forget how Picard signaled how he was done with that and went back to the present day, but when we got there, Picard was surprised to find himself in the blue uniform of a science officer rather than the red one of a command officer. He asked his former first officer Riker about the possibility of getting into command rather than science, and Riker brushed it off with a "we'll see." When Picard pressed the issue, Riker said that Picard was not cut out for command, as it requires a certain kind of personality that involves risk taking and boldness, traits that the "new" Picard did not have.
Picard yelled for Q, and demanded that he return him to his former self, the one dying of the failed heart. He shouted that he would rather die as himself than live as this pathetic shell of himself he did not recognize.
Q did as Picard asked.
Picard did survive, and I seem to remember that he was unsure of whether Q had done anything to save him from death, but in any case, he might possibly owe Q a debt of gratitude for the lesson he had learned.
That was a tremendously profound message. The things you hate the most about yourself, the tortured past that you may have, the things you wished you had not done or that others had not done to you, could be the very things that make you who you are now, that are responsible for the things about yourself that you value the most.
The profundity of that message is why I remember that episode (more or less) decades after having seen it. It has changed my way of thinking about the parts of my past that I would rather not remember. It's all a part of me.
That message is completely apolitical. You can say things of importance without browbeating people or making them feel like you are lecturing them. That message would not make it in any show today, because every message in every show today has to be about wokism, and it has to be ham-fisted and heavy-handed.
"Homosexuals have a right to live their lives in peace..."
Here's a thought: do they?
Consider it. Do they have that right because they are homos, or is it a basic right that everyone has?
The homos insist they have rights /because/ they are homos - that's not rights, that's privilege, and an unearned one at that as anyone can claim to be a homo.
Compared it to something as commonplace-trivial as the privilege (or right) to drive a car once you qualify for a license: you the individual has to prove that you deserve the right, and you do so by showing you can behave properly in traffic.
But that's not what the homos are doing, and it hasn't been since the 1980s.
What they are doing is saying: "Move aside and acquiesce to our demands and worship us, or else!" and that has nothing to do with rights nor privileges, except in the sense might makes rights.
When they say they have rights, they mean you or I must obey their will, nothing more.
Therefore, I'd challenge the assertion that they have rights, as rights are conditional of behaviour:
Act right, and you have rights. Violate the social compact, and you lose your rights.
I meant it as a basic right that everyone has... and I think that was clear enough from the rest of my comment. But since you raise the matter of 'rights', I'm not sure that anyone has a 'right' to anything. "Everyone has a responsibility to not be a bully". works better in my view. I think the whole concept of 'human rights' needs to be interrogated. Who is supposed to guarantee these 'rights' for instance? And how exactly?
Oh, surely - I'm not faulting your reason, I just want to offer the perspective that rights are conditional, and that homosexuals are violating the conditions of basic civil rights since they in no way respect the rights of normal people in the slightest.
And therefore lose their rights themselves.
Dutiy and responsibility absolutely works better as concepts, but I think they benefit from being balanced by the ideas of rights and privileges; fulfill the terms and conditions (do your duty) and you are awarded rights.
Which is how civilised society functions, up until present day (exactly what duty by whom to whom and so on has of course varied greatly), when the cult of rights instead made it all mean "I can do whatever I feel like and eff you if you don't respect that" (which homosexuals are by no way unique in thinking).
Here, it used to be thus:
Want to hold a parade? Apply for the requisite permits well in advance, fill out the forms, pay the fees (if any), and obey the law while parading/marching/protesting/whatever. The police was allowed to deny permission on grounds that the event was /intended/ to cause an affray, but only on those grounds - say an organisation nown for rioting when marching, they could be legally denied permission, but there had to be a previous violation so as to have reasonable suspicion.
This held for "counter"-marches too.
Now, Pride can violate all kinds of public indecency-laws, littering regulations, noise regulations, and so on while "counter"-marches are routinely denied permit - and the homosexuals see no problem with it.
I do. And I argued the exact same in the 1980s, when it was homos being denied permits for no good legal reason.
One law for all, or no laws for anyone, is a core principle we deviate from at our peril.
I'm absolutely with you on the issue that "rights" is a concept that needs interrogating; I'd go so far as to say it needs to be re-created since today it is just as void of meaning as "respect" or "truth" or "facts". As a certain author says in one of his "juveniles":
"When two are drowning, who has the right to the only life-jacket?"
There is no such thing as a "homosexual", an absurd contradiction in terms coined to give weird sex stuff a medical/sciencey patina. People are not sexual desires or proclivities. Or any other kind of desire for that matter.
I'm a left-hander. It has never occurred to me, and would never occur to me, to demand that the rest of the world adjust itself to my inclinations.
IMHO it was wrong, decades ago, to force schoolchildren to write right-handed when they were natural left-handers. But thankfully that day has long since passed and handedness is now a complete non-issue. That's what real tolerance and freedom are all about.
As a fellow left-hander, perhaps we could start a Lefty Pride Month - say November - and if any of the Righties try to be proud of their handedness, well then we get the state police to invest them
Yes I was born a lefty and got smacked with a spoon for using my left hand to eat with. Had to learn to write with my right hand .
I was never any good at sports because of having to dribble with my right hand or bat with my right . I tried archery and because I was by my self I realized I was left eyed . So aiming had to be for a left handed bow or golf club .
They still do. It's the astroturf "activists," labeling those who pay attention as Far Right enemies, creating a diversion as they strip away fundamental rights.
You realize this in Asia as well as Africa. I was astounded by how free speaking the people of Thailand and South Africa are. Almost none of the current intersectional politics has taken hold there.
It's similar to the working class in the West, who are far more hostile to intersectional groupthink than most of the wealthier classes.
The fag flag is six colors, not the full seven of the rainbow, so it can be considered distinct. If we had the means, we'd make people aware of this fact, making the distinction common knowledge, saving the rainbow proper. While we're at it, we might as well make it commonly acceptable to throw stones at those who fly fag flags.
The predominant color scheme for the colors of the rainbow at the time was Red, Orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet (RYGBIV if you remember), and the color excluded was blue, because it was the color most associated with St Mary, paragon of purity, modesty and chastity, in direct opposition to those. Also in the Bible 6 is the number of man, rather than 7 of the divine, and it is commonly said that the world was flooded because of homosexuality being rampant, and so an altered rainbow being adopted as the symbol is the best colorful thing that could be come up with which appears anodyne and positive that also is giving the finger to God.
Calling them hypocrites, making fun of them, laughing at them, and picking apart the flimsy logic they use to justify themselves is fine and all, but it's not enough. They don't care what we think, and unless we have the power to make them care, it counts for almost nothing, and they know it.
They prefer us stuck making fun of them, rather than having politically effective ideas which allow us to collectivize and stand behind our own beliefs that don't have to make sense in a universalist frame. We should have the power to ignore those who point out our beliefs are inconsistent in a universalist frame. All political power requires the hypocrisy that wielding power, among other things, is in fact OK when we do it and wrong when our enemies do it.
For our enemies, it is OK for them to discriminate for their own interests, but not OK for their enemies to discriminate. Truthfully, this is not hypocrisy, but seeing clearly that universalism is bunk and treating people equally in any meaningful way makes it impossible to organize, politically or otherwise; not to mention that it is also civilizationally suicidal.
Since the rainbow idiots took over the movement (meaning all the letters after lbg) it is just a month to celebrate mental health issues of very confused people that support everything that is woke without understanding what is going on - like BLM, Ukraine, palastine or climate change.
This is only possible as all those leeches don't have to work anymore as the liberal woke governments will support them as long as they vote for them and support all their woke agendas.
And the biggest cesspool of those crazy ideas are universities and unfortunately for north America also schools where they work on brainwashing all kids to support this insanity
No sane society would celebrate those refusing to or incapable of procreation, ie ensuring the future existence of said society. No sane society would celebrate the consumption of finite resources by that same cohort.
Oh heck. All of Christendom turned enforced celibacy of many of its sons and daughters as a celebration of and essential component of piety. An awful lot of young men and women sent off to monasteries and convents were extremely unhappy to be trapped there, often as uncompensated labor.
And even unto the mid-'60s or so didn't families celebrate daughters who became brides of Christ?
In the reign of Emperor Josepius Robinette Bidenus, the rainbow flag is declared the flag of the Empire, of which Magna Germania (as well as Germania Libera and Germanic Barbaricum) are provinces.
Any attempt to deny this flag is therefore ultimately an offence against Imperial rule.
(The sex thing is just a cover story for the USD, NATO and all that.)
Nations are the enemy of empire. Empires destroy and subjugate nations. Therefore, any pride in your nation is a threat to the Global American Empire (GAE) .
almost everyone hereabouts has an American flag out. one thing that struck me when I moved here. you don't see that much in Europe except maybe on a national holiday, and even then it was rare. Glad I lived in Europe when there were only 2 genders, it sure made life easier. I know quite a few lesbian and gay people but none participate in this craze. They are just normal people.
Few people have grasped that promoting sexual perversion was one of Communist Antonio Gramsci's many lines of attack on societies to undermine them, and he dates back to the 1920's. ALL of the Left's nasty ideas are founded in old Communist/Marxist plans to wreck everythinng normal, nice or beautiful, right down to promoting ugly, mind twisting 'art' and brutalist buildings. Marxism is THE ultimate expression of bitterness and hate towards family, Leftism is built on jealousy 'I can't have it, so no one else is going to'. This is the 'smash everything' revolution for thick people.
Also spend any time reading any of the Marxists, from Marx to Gramsci to Adorno and Marcuse to the trendy Parisian Maoists of the 1970s etc, and these professed egalitarian and humanitarian saviors of mankind just reek of misanthropy.
They absolutely despise humans as we are and their entire project is an endless devious attempt to bend our IS into their OUGHT.
Humans only exist to these people as clay they can mold.
(Your comment reminded me of this quote I clipped about Communists: "What we demand is not that all should be happy, but that all should be as unhappy as we are.")
That's really interesting, good points. Yes, there are a lot of busy bodies amongst them, and it's a short step to concentration camp/gulag guards. So many losers end up as protesters, trying to give themselves self importance or their lives some meaning. And their favourite thought 'socialism would work IF ONLY PEOPLE DID AS THEY WERE TOLD!'
yes, and at the risk of repeating myself, their ideology is all about Love! and Justice and Equality, but scratch a Leftist and out comes a raging misanthrope w a long list of enemies they're looking to punish.
Lord save us from all professed saviors of humanity!
In a world that denies God, small things like life/babies, marriage/families, Judeo-Christian morality/sexuality... are smeared by celebrations of evil and immorality.
'LGBTQQIP2SAA appears to be the latest most inclusive iteration'
So the last seven groups resented being lumped under a plus sign or asterisk? Makes sense, because the only thing they excel at is taking offense where none is meant.
Based purely on the title, I have to share a meme
https://files.catbox.moe/kvp5e4.webp
pinned.
Oh, man, I only have 21 days to come up with and make an appropriate flag for Sloth Month.
I've declared August to be Sloth Month.
October for Wrath.
November for Gluttony.
December for Greed.
January for Envy.
February for Lust.
I mean, why celebrate only *one* deadly sin with it's own month of worship?!
Being proud of what's between your legs or who you like to rub it on is a mental illness. Those things are no one else's business and they shouldn't have to know about it.
Well-chosen.
Thanks! I thought they fit pretty well. :D
For the record, I really like sloths. So I was deeply disappointed to learn that your Sloth Month is not a month for sloths, but merely a celebration of slothfulness. Sloths always get the short end of the stick.
It's true, sloths are pretty cool.
💯I’m in…seriously good plan, man😃👍
I've said for some time that championing LBGTQWERTY will not be sufficient, in the end. You will be required to participate in homosexual relations in order to demonstrate your bona fides. We're already seen that governments do not hesitate to impose mandates for "your own good." In the march to the uplands of Utopia and equity, why would this be any different...
Love it.
😂
Trans is mental illness
Yep...teenaged girls used to display their neurosis with bulimia, but now they get attention by becoming fake boys....after which, they eventually realize that they have destroyed their lives...
And boys who think that they can be girls.
I got permanently banned from Twitter a few years ago for tweeting this exact statement
It's "Pride Month" every month in the U.S where taking it up the ass is a constitutionally protected "right" (Lawrence v. Texas) and transitioning one's sons and daughters is seen by many as so normal it doesn't even need to be mandated. Shame Month 24/7-365.
You’re better off here. Musk has done little to return Twitter to a platform for free and open speech, IMO.
Musk should remove all the shadow bans put in place by the past regime
I just got banned for far less
Too true.
I got perma banned for stating trans women are male and commit violent crime at male rates. So much for Musk saying we won't ban people for stating the truth.
I was shadow-banned. Now I can write what I want, but my shadow-ban from the old regime remains.
Well done
Not going to happen as long as Elon calls the shots.
Yes. Plus sexual deviance.
My German might not be perfect, but perusing the Stolzmonat twitter I literally don’t see anything specifically targeting the LGBT community. Additionally, they are not “devaluing” other nations, they literally are celebrating other nations people who decide to Celebrate their own national pride. But none of the backlash ever had to do with rationality after all.
Also, you should value your own nation over others, that this is considered a bad thing is what’s wrong with western society.
We don't have it nearly as bad in the US.
We get a one day reprieve from Pride Month on Juneteenth!...:)
Have I ever said I HATE these commies?
Then perhaps you will enjoy this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsAltH64lcE
The comments are pretty good, too. Burnouts (smoking one's tires to leave a black streak on the road) on pride flags have become somewhat of a trend in the US. It gives me hope.
Using a pickup is great, but a dually model is priceless.
love it!
Strangely, I haven't seen one pride flag in our area of Arizona...guess they didn't notice that it happened....
None here where I live in Canada.
Lucky you! Wish that were true here, too.
Been hiding in Meteor Crater?
I've never been there, but it's not the large haha
Don't forget the other 100 days throughout the year to celebrate more lbgt+ nonsense
To be sure the rot began with the blue laws which are so profoundly against our American foundational values.
It is a jealousy tantrum, plain and simple. All the rainbow people are screaming, "Look at me! Look at me!," but there still remain some obstinate people who are looking at something else instead.
I used to have sympathy for them. I didn't think anyone deserved to be tormented, fired, even prosecuted for homosexuality. What people do on their own time does not concern me, so long as both parties consent. It's no one's business what they do, and certainly not government's.
They said, "We're here, we're queer, get used to it."
Unfortunately for them, people got used to it.
I saw an article where gay individuals were bemoaning that people started treating their gay enclaves as ordinary places. They complained that straight people came into their places and publicly displayed their non-gay affection for one another just as the gays in the area had been doing, and as straights sometimes do in non-gay areas.
The gays thought it debased their area to have straights coming in and acting like being gay was just a normal thing, not something "special" that meant that people not in the club should know their place and keep their unwanted straight behavior out of their territory.
The irony, apparently, is lost on those individuals who think that way. They complained about straights having that same attitude about the areas where they were in the majority, and they claimed they just wanted to be accepted like straights are, but they apparently really wanted to have their areas where "others" are excluded while still denying the "others" any place where they can exclude the gays. They wanted a setup where gayness is okay everywhere, but straightness is only okay in designated "straight" areas. They did not want equality, but superiority.
I can understand the desire to be "special." Humans are social creatures by nature, and intelligent social creatures innately create social hierarchies. In the current leftist paradigm, victimhood is status, so being the hated homosexuals conferred a street credibility that they don't want to give up. They understandably want to give up the things that represent actual victimization, like being beaten, fired, or prosecuted for being gay, but they don't want to give up the victim identity and the status that comes with it.
You can't have both, though. If you stop being a victim, you become like everyone else. Losing their specialness and having "normies" come in while feeling comfortable enough to be themselves in your area signifies a level of acceptance that didn't exist before, which would be a more positive way of looking at the loss of specialness.
They have gone so far beyond their previously very reasonable demands like not wanting to be beaten or fired for being gay that I've used up all the sympathy I used to have. Gay porn in school libraries, drag queen shows for kids, gay victim identity indoctrination for kids, and the very real child grooming they're doing in schools are over the line. Demanding fealty to LGBTQRSTLNE on pain of being fired, cancelled, kicked out of school, flunked, or otherwise penalized for not having the right opinions is over the line. Demanding I participate in the delusions of people who want to play make believe that they are the other sex is over the line.
I no longer accept that liberal line of reasoning that "you can do whatever you want in private if it isn't effecting others" because it's a negative moral statement. In other words, people's private desires trumps a necessary moral fabric to maintain society for generations to come. It is this exact line of reasoning that is responsible for our total, amoral depravity in the West today more than anything else. When morals are no longer superior to "muh rights" then morals have no meaning anymore, which is what we see today.
I'm coming around to that too. I was a libertarian, but I see how that's failed.
Same here, I was a classical liberal, libertarian, even an optimistic anarchist once, but since covid the lid has really blown off this crap stew. All the lies of the past several centuries are being exposed for those of us paying attention, with liberalism itself being revealed as the greatest villain, giving birth even to communism and causing the slow death of Western civilization which we are now near the end of
How has it failed? It's never been tried (during our lifetimes). It's been centralized authoritarianism since the Civil War.
If an action causes no direct harm to anyone, it's not government's job to mess with it. The problem we have is not too little government, but too much. The solution to too much government is not more government.
I agree wholeheartedly in what you are saying, way too much centralization of power, government overreach. However, this is accepted by people because the culture war has already been lost to a generic secular humanism that has been translated into a nanny state. To retake the culture, we're going to have to offer a cultural alternative to the race to the bottom...that means Christianity.
Agreed on the government portion, but what we lack is the robust system of social norms and approval that has been destroyed in the last century. That's the solution and guess what: you don't need to vote for it, you just have to pick and choose yourself who you'll associate with and what is/is not acceptable with your actions.
As for "REAL LIBERTARIANISM has never been tried before," dude don't use the commie thinking. It was tried and it led us here: libertarianism is a modern attempt to reconstruct the classical liberalism of early America (which has been degraded many times to where it's just statism now) and it's always been an anachronism since it existed. It's just classical liberalism with no moral limitations (legalize all drugs, prostitution, etc simply let the consumers decide). As such it did fail because 1) it isn't actually that popular other than among a small minority of successful people and 2) it offers 0 resistance to far left madness as nothing is wrong for reasons of immorality, it's only wrong if you try to stop my bad behavior which makes libertarianism entirely compatible with far left madness. It simply is against the welfare state and exorbitant taxes with no alternative vision for society, this is why it became "lolbertarianism" in the end.
Your personal decisions on morality are none of my business unless you infringe on my birth rights. Who gets to decide what’s “moral”? The government? Your weird church or my weird church?
BINGO! Well said. My sympathy and tolerance is used up as well, and for the same reasons.
I have no problem whatsoever with equal rights, AS LONG AS minors, animals and those who cannot give informed consent are not involved. I DO have a BIG problem with special privilege, globalism, the police state and Marxism, which is REALLy what this is all about. And if the parties involved either cannot, or don’t want to separate the issues, then it’s up to us to do that FOR them. And they’re not gonna like the results. Should my have to be this way, but when you play stupid games, you have to expect to win stupid prizes.
nailed it
I think it’s the activist group grifters losing donations and control. I do not think this hysteria is emerging from the rank & file. Until the acronymic explosion emerging from academia, most of the alternative gender expression groups didn’t even like each other, hardly a cohort. (And btw, gender dysphoria is a real thing, just because it’s been turned into a viral trend does not negate the microscopic % suffering from it.)
"I saw an article where gay individuals were bemoaning that people started treating their gay enclaves as ordinary places" - what I heard is that more and more women are going into gay bars and are often even celebrating their bachelorette parties there (who are annoying af regardless where they go). Then you have loudly screaming drunken women dominating a place for gay guys. Now you're saying that when a gay man wants to go into such a gay bar to meet other gay men and is annoyed by all the women there changing the vibe is somehow hypocritical?
That isn't what I wrote. I never mentioned gay bars, or any other kind of bar, or any other kind of business for that matter.
What do you think is meant by 'gay enclaves'?
What is meant by it? I wrote it. I will give you a hint... it's not bars.
Do you ever think they are saying more now than "Look at me!" - ?
I think they are also demanding: "THINK like me!" "BE like me!"
I think we should all be including P in their alphabet moniker - just to be clear.
LGBTQP+ P standing for Pedophile, of course.
If they are so proud of it, then include it.
Chico is one of the cities where there is active intent to keep kids' parents away from their medical and educational decisions through weird "health centers" within the schools themselves. A Chico State professor was just outed as writing torture porn about young boys https://reduxx.info/exclusive-california-gender-academic-inspired-pedophilic-fantasy-on-castrating-enslaving-young-boys/, so, though they don't say it aloud much, you are absolutely right, and it is a huge criminal global criminal enterprise as well as a global cult.
Then B for beastiality and N for necromancy. I mean, why stop at abusing humans and living beings? Hey, let’s go for the cannibals next!!
Not "be like me"; it is "be me" that is their imperative impulse.
They achieved equality but want to remain victimized forever.
and with the government. large part of the government seems to be Israeli. they should move there.
Do you actually mean that large parts of the current German government are Israelis? Or like all too many these days, are you confusing Israelis with Jews?
I am in the US, part of the US govt has an Israeli passport
Please clarify.
Many Jews in the US government have dual citizenship, and hold both US and Israeli passports. For some reason, that is not regarded as a problem.
Wait until you start reading what all the 'racists' post.
They're _all_ empty slanders
The Americans value their nation over others. Why not the other western countries?
Thx for explaining this E. Another great article. There are times when I feel like all of us who see through this bullshit should just form our own country.
Remember when Trans/Deviants respected the fact they were not "normal"? In other words, they respected the fact that they were a vanishingly small minority and the world wasn't "made" to order for them.
Even southpaws understand this.
It's just the way it is. Sorry
Homosexuals have a right to live their lives in peace but they have no 'right' to try to bully the rest of humanity into falling into line with the bogus notion that there is no such thing as normal sexuality. If tv viewers find (as in almost all UK and European murder mystery tv dramas) that every episode must tick the 'gay couple included' script tick-box, they are entitled to feel irritated by this. If their town is annually invaded by a flag waving 'Pride' jamboree, they are entitled to feel irritated by that too. And if all this is something they dislike, it does not mean they have a 'phobia' about it.
Not just European shows. American ones too.
I've watched many different TV shows lately, dozens of them, and every one of them has unnecessary gay relationships that are out of character for the show (not talking about romance shows or soap operas) and gratuitous. Sci-fi, superhero shows, you name it, has to be loaded with gays and gay drama, not to mention the assorted other bits of woke propaganda. Every show has to be a vehicle to spread their message... all leftism, all the time.
I remember an episode of Star Trek: The New Generation (from the '80s) where Captain Picard's artificial heart was failing, and it looked like he was going to die. On his deathbed, he bemoaned the mistakes he had made in his life that had led to a lifetime of regret and him needing the artificial heart whose failure was killing him now.
Q (a very powerful, godlike entity who transcends space and time) appeared, and gave Picard the opportunity to go back in time and redo his life as a young ensign. Picard went back in time, and he changed those things about his life that he had always regretted. He avoided an ill-advised affair with a much older woman as a youngster. He avoided using his technical knowledge to hustle some dangerous and violent aliens at pool (or a game much like it), which had failed, causing one of them to run him through, destroying his biological heart.
I forget how Picard signaled how he was done with that and went back to the present day, but when we got there, Picard was surprised to find himself in the blue uniform of a science officer rather than the red one of a command officer. He asked his former first officer Riker about the possibility of getting into command rather than science, and Riker brushed it off with a "we'll see." When Picard pressed the issue, Riker said that Picard was not cut out for command, as it requires a certain kind of personality that involves risk taking and boldness, traits that the "new" Picard did not have.
Picard yelled for Q, and demanded that he return him to his former self, the one dying of the failed heart. He shouted that he would rather die as himself than live as this pathetic shell of himself he did not recognize.
Q did as Picard asked.
Picard did survive, and I seem to remember that he was unsure of whether Q had done anything to save him from death, but in any case, he might possibly owe Q a debt of gratitude for the lesson he had learned.
That was a tremendously profound message. The things you hate the most about yourself, the tortured past that you may have, the things you wished you had not done or that others had not done to you, could be the very things that make you who you are now, that are responsible for the things about yourself that you value the most.
The profundity of that message is why I remember that episode (more or less) decades after having seen it. It has changed my way of thinking about the parts of my past that I would rather not remember. It's all a part of me.
That message is completely apolitical. You can say things of importance without browbeating people or making them feel like you are lecturing them. That message would not make it in any show today, because every message in every show today has to be about wokism, and it has to be ham-fisted and heavy-handed.
You might find this an interesting read on the subject of woke tv dramas: https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/non-binary-sibling-is-entertaining
Thank you for sharing that, it does give rise to profound thoughts. I shall ponder upon it today.
That's what I'm saying. Well said
"Homosexuals have a right to live their lives in peace..."
Here's a thought: do they?
Consider it. Do they have that right because they are homos, or is it a basic right that everyone has?
The homos insist they have rights /because/ they are homos - that's not rights, that's privilege, and an unearned one at that as anyone can claim to be a homo.
Compared it to something as commonplace-trivial as the privilege (or right) to drive a car once you qualify for a license: you the individual has to prove that you deserve the right, and you do so by showing you can behave properly in traffic.
But that's not what the homos are doing, and it hasn't been since the 1980s.
What they are doing is saying: "Move aside and acquiesce to our demands and worship us, or else!" and that has nothing to do with rights nor privileges, except in the sense might makes rights.
When they say they have rights, they mean you or I must obey their will, nothing more.
Therefore, I'd challenge the assertion that they have rights, as rights are conditional of behaviour:
Act right, and you have rights. Violate the social compact, and you lose your rights.
I meant it as a basic right that everyone has... and I think that was clear enough from the rest of my comment. But since you raise the matter of 'rights', I'm not sure that anyone has a 'right' to anything. "Everyone has a responsibility to not be a bully". works better in my view. I think the whole concept of 'human rights' needs to be interrogated. Who is supposed to guarantee these 'rights' for instance? And how exactly?
Oh, surely - I'm not faulting your reason, I just want to offer the perspective that rights are conditional, and that homosexuals are violating the conditions of basic civil rights since they in no way respect the rights of normal people in the slightest.
And therefore lose their rights themselves.
Dutiy and responsibility absolutely works better as concepts, but I think they benefit from being balanced by the ideas of rights and privileges; fulfill the terms and conditions (do your duty) and you are awarded rights.
Which is how civilised society functions, up until present day (exactly what duty by whom to whom and so on has of course varied greatly), when the cult of rights instead made it all mean "I can do whatever I feel like and eff you if you don't respect that" (which homosexuals are by no way unique in thinking).
Here, it used to be thus:
Want to hold a parade? Apply for the requisite permits well in advance, fill out the forms, pay the fees (if any), and obey the law while parading/marching/protesting/whatever. The police was allowed to deny permission on grounds that the event was /intended/ to cause an affray, but only on those grounds - say an organisation nown for rioting when marching, they could be legally denied permission, but there had to be a previous violation so as to have reasonable suspicion.
This held for "counter"-marches too.
Now, Pride can violate all kinds of public indecency-laws, littering regulations, noise regulations, and so on while "counter"-marches are routinely denied permit - and the homosexuals see no problem with it.
I do. And I argued the exact same in the 1980s, when it was homos being denied permits for no good legal reason.
One law for all, or no laws for anyone, is a core principle we deviate from at our peril.
I'm absolutely with you on the issue that "rights" is a concept that needs interrogating; I'd go so far as to say it needs to be re-created since today it is just as void of meaning as "respect" or "truth" or "facts". As a certain author says in one of his "juveniles":
"When two are drowning, who has the right to the only life-jacket?"
Excellent!
There is no such thing as a "homosexual", an absurd contradiction in terms coined to give weird sex stuff a medical/sciencey patina. People are not sexual desires or proclivities. Or any other kind of desire for that matter.
I'm a left-hander. It has never occurred to me, and would never occur to me, to demand that the rest of the world adjust itself to my inclinations.
IMHO it was wrong, decades ago, to force schoolchildren to write right-handed when they were natural left-handers. But thankfully that day has long since passed and handedness is now a complete non-issue. That's what real tolerance and freedom are all about.
As a fellow left-hander, perhaps we could start a Lefty Pride Month - say November - and if any of the Righties try to be proud of their handedness, well then we get the state police to invest them
As a biological left hander, having been transhanded right during grammar school, I think I can add a color or two to the Lefty Pride Flag.
I too am a member of the gauche community....
Lmao!
Long since passed? Am I that old? I'm shocked, Sir or Madam, shocked I tell you, at this ageist affront from a fellow southpaw!
And since I'm both a red-head /and/freckled, I have a higher grievance-score, so there!
😉
If you were ever a stepchild , then you are most certainly The grievance grand champion😃 always heard about the proverbial redheaded stepchild,
Yes I was born a lefty and got smacked with a spoon for using my left hand to eat with. Had to learn to write with my right hand .
I was never any good at sports because of having to dribble with my right hand or bat with my right . I tried archery and because I was by my self I realized I was left eyed . So aiming had to be for a left handed bow or golf club .
They still do. It's the astroturf "activists," labeling those who pay attention as Far Right enemies, creating a diversion as they strip away fundamental rights.
Exactly.
Suggestion: let's use the territories called "North America" and "Europe" plus the UK's offspring NZ and AUS.
The destructobots can migrate to, oh I don't know, China or South Sudan or Namibia or something. Lots of diversity needed there, I think.
They wouldn't get a very warm welcome in any of those places. The developing world may have serious issues, but common sense can still be found there.
You realize this in Asia as well as Africa. I was astounded by how free speaking the people of Thailand and South Africa are. Almost none of the current intersectional politics has taken hold there.
It's similar to the working class in the West, who are far more hostile to intersectional groupthink than most of the wealthier classes.
i like it!
That's right! I ain't going down without a fight
Alphabet mafia.
As you point out in footnote #3, the pot is calling the kettle black.
All I know is they ruined rainbows for everybody.
The fag flag is six colors, not the full seven of the rainbow, so it can be considered distinct. If we had the means, we'd make people aware of this fact, making the distinction common knowledge, saving the rainbow proper. While we're at it, we might as well make it commonly acceptable to throw stones at those who fly fag flags.
We should figure out which color they EXCLUDED from the rainbow and berate the LGBT+++++++++ crowd for it.
But the starting point for all this is actually the civil rights legislation in the US.
The predominant color scheme for the colors of the rainbow at the time was Red, Orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet (RYGBIV if you remember), and the color excluded was blue, because it was the color most associated with St Mary, paragon of purity, modesty and chastity, in direct opposition to those. Also in the Bible 6 is the number of man, rather than 7 of the divine, and it is commonly said that the world was flooded because of homosexuality being rampant, and so an altered rainbow being adopted as the symbol is the best colorful thing that could be come up with which appears anodyne and positive that also is giving the finger to God.
I knew about the numbers 6 and 7, but none of the rest. Thank you!
Calling them hypocrites, making fun of them, laughing at them, and picking apart the flimsy logic they use to justify themselves is fine and all, but it's not enough. They don't care what we think, and unless we have the power to make them care, it counts for almost nothing, and they know it.
They prefer us stuck making fun of them, rather than having politically effective ideas which allow us to collectivize and stand behind our own beliefs that don't have to make sense in a universalist frame. We should have the power to ignore those who point out our beliefs are inconsistent in a universalist frame. All political power requires the hypocrisy that wielding power, among other things, is in fact OK when we do it and wrong when our enemies do it.
For our enemies, it is OK for them to discriminate for their own interests, but not OK for their enemies to discriminate. Truthfully, this is not hypocrisy, but seeing clearly that universalism is bunk and treating people equally in any meaningful way makes it impossible to organize, politically or otherwise; not to mention that it is also civilizationally suicidal.
Since the rainbow idiots took over the movement (meaning all the letters after lbg) it is just a month to celebrate mental health issues of very confused people that support everything that is woke without understanding what is going on - like BLM, Ukraine, palastine or climate change.
This is only possible as all those leeches don't have to work anymore as the liberal woke governments will support them as long as they vote for them and support all their woke agendas.
And the biggest cesspool of those crazy ideas are universities and unfortunately for north America also schools where they work on brainwashing all kids to support this insanity
No sane society would celebrate those refusing to or incapable of procreation, ie ensuring the future existence of said society. No sane society would celebrate the consumption of finite resources by that same cohort.
Oh heck. All of Christendom turned enforced celibacy of many of its sons and daughters as a celebration of and essential component of piety. An awful lot of young men and women sent off to monasteries and convents were extremely unhappy to be trapped there, often as uncompensated labor.
And even unto the mid-'60s or so didn't families celebrate daughters who became brides of Christ?
Ja, aber ...
In the reign of Emperor Josepius Robinette Bidenus, the rainbow flag is declared the flag of the Empire, of which Magna Germania (as well as Germania Libera and Germanic Barbaricum) are provinces.
Any attempt to deny this flag is therefore ultimately an offence against Imperial rule.
(The sex thing is just a cover story for the USD, NATO and all that.)
And to think that at one time these people withstood the Roman army. Pax
That was before TV.
And for five or six months in 1944-1945, the rest of the world...
Nations are the enemy of empire. Empires destroy and subjugate nations. Therefore, any pride in your nation is a threat to the Global American Empire (GAE) .
Flying an American flag is a threat to the Deep State and the WEF and the globalists.
almost everyone hereabouts has an American flag out. one thing that struck me when I moved here. you don't see that much in Europe except maybe on a national holiday, and even then it was rare. Glad I lived in Europe when there were only 2 genders, it sure made life easier. I know quite a few lesbian and gay people but none participate in this craze. They are just normal people.
Glad I was in the military when there were only two genders.
and probably before a man dressed as a woman lead it !
The US Navy is run by The Village People.
oh dear, poor Kathleen ! so glad you got out unharmed !
There are two sexes, male and female.
In english gender refers to the tense of a noun: steward / stewardess ... uzw.
How about MAGA American flags and F Biden signs?! That’s all I see in our county in rural Alabama. ❤️🤍💙😉
I'm gonna move to where you are...
Come on down… You can be redneck like the rest of us… 😆
But you’ll have to learn how to say y’all… 😉😎
Thanks...
LGBTQQIP2SAA
Invalid password - must contain lowercase letter
lolol. classic
But once found, it's always the root password that disables any constitutional safeguards your country offers.
Few people have grasped that promoting sexual perversion was one of Communist Antonio Gramsci's many lines of attack on societies to undermine them, and he dates back to the 1920's. ALL of the Left's nasty ideas are founded in old Communist/Marxist plans to wreck everythinng normal, nice or beautiful, right down to promoting ugly, mind twisting 'art' and brutalist buildings. Marxism is THE ultimate expression of bitterness and hate towards family, Leftism is built on jealousy 'I can't have it, so no one else is going to'. This is the 'smash everything' revolution for thick people.
Also spend any time reading any of the Marxists, from Marx to Gramsci to Adorno and Marcuse to the trendy Parisian Maoists of the 1970s etc, and these professed egalitarian and humanitarian saviors of mankind just reek of misanthropy.
They absolutely despise humans as we are and their entire project is an endless devious attempt to bend our IS into their OUGHT.
Humans only exist to these people as clay they can mold.
(Your comment reminded me of this quote I clipped about Communists: "What we demand is not that all should be happy, but that all should be as unhappy as we are.")
That's really interesting, good points. Yes, there are a lot of busy bodies amongst them, and it's a short step to concentration camp/gulag guards. So many losers end up as protesters, trying to give themselves self importance or their lives some meaning. And their favourite thought 'socialism would work IF ONLY PEOPLE DID AS THEY WERE TOLD!'
yes, and at the risk of repeating myself, their ideology is all about Love! and Justice and Equality, but scratch a Leftist and out comes a raging misanthrope w a long list of enemies they're looking to punish.
Lord save us from all professed saviors of humanity!
In a world that denies God, small things like life/babies, marriage/families, Judeo-Christian morality/sexuality... are smeared by celebrations of evil and immorality.
'LGBTQQIP2SAA appears to be the latest most inclusive iteration'
So the last seven groups resented being lumped under a plus sign or asterisk? Makes sense, because the only thing they excel at is taking offense where none is meant.
Somebody should add “STR” at the end to indicate straight people and see how long it takes them to notice
🤣
In the U.S.A. flying the American flag is code for supporting Trump
❤️🤍💙