The LGBT Movement Will Self-Destruct

Will it really self-destruct? Is gender identity too inconsistent? If it does self-destruct, will there be any ideas that will last?

http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/31/the-lgbt-movement-will-self-destruct/

The LGBT Movement Will Self-Destruct
Within my lifetime, the LGBT movement will die. It will be remembered not as a Selma moment, but as a Salem moment: a period of collective insanity.
Rachel Lu
By Rachel Lu
MAY 31, 2016
I was just six years old when it happened. I showed up for the first grade, fresh-faced and ready to learn, only to have my innocence shattered by a monster from the swamps of expressive individualism. In the dark recesses of my memory, he has remained nameless through all these decades. Some Google searches enabled me to find him: inventive spelling.

Apparently, “inventive spelling” has been controversial for some time as a component of “natural child” educational curricula. I’m not sure how I, a young Idahoan, came to be subjected to it, but I clearly remember being encouraged to decide whether I was a “girl,” “gurl,” or “grrrrrl.” Hooray for creativity! Why shackle yourself to the tyrannical dictates of conventional spelling?


This theory seems to have fizzled in most schools, possibly because it’s idiotic. Words have conventional spellings for a reason: their purpose is to communicate. If we encourage kids to form bad habits, it will be that much harder for them to become capable writers later. This theory’s heyday was evidently brief, but still, it left its mark. My classmates and I can thank our lucky stars that by the time we got to college, spell checkers had come along to cover our shame.

Bad ideas do die, eventually. At their peak this can be hard to believe. Whether it’s Malthusian population controls, global temperature freak-outs, low-fat diets, or disco, it often seems that idiocy seems unassailable until suddenly it isn’t. A page turns, and the emperor has no clothes, as his folly becomes a cautionary tale for future generations.

Here is my prediction. Within my lifetime, the LGBT movement will die. It will be remembered not as a Selma moment, but as a Salem moment: a period of collective insanity.

Eventually, Nature Comes Roaring Back
Whether the memory of this period evokes mild derision or deep shame will likely depend on these next few years. It’s still possible that the madness might recede and leave gays, lesbians, and religious conservatives all free to live peaceful and productive lives, knowing their fundamental rights will be respected even where their beliefs and lifestyle choices aren’t. Less optimistically, the early twenty-first century could be remembered as a time when any or all of those groups were harshly persecuted, potentially leaving deep scars in our social memory.


Either way, the movement will die. How do we know? Predicting the demise of the LGBT movement may seem rash in the present moment, as North Carolina prepares to battle the U.S. Department of Justice and Washington issues edicts demanding submission from every public school in America. But gender ideology is too incoherent and too inimical to real human good. It cannot outlast the moral indignation of the present hour.

On some level, even its most ardent advocates may intuit this. Their desperation to push the boundaries as far as possible, as quickly as possible, may evidence the zeal of the terminally ill. Everything must be done today, because there is no tomorrow.

This is not an invitation to relax. Foolish ideas do eventually self-destruct, but they can do a lot of damage along the way. We also should not assume that the eventual collapse will precipitate a widespread resurgence of common sense. The evil fruits of the Sexual Revolution will likely plague us for the foreseeable future, potentially assuming a whole range of dystopian forms.

Still, we can worry more productively about the next chapter when we recognize that this one will pass. The gender ideologies of the present moment just don’t have what it takes to stand the test of time.


Powerful Parents Reject Harmful Ideas
If this seems implausible, consider that the past half-century really has not been a tale of near-unbroken moral decline. Some changes (like the introduction of artificial contraceptives and the embrace of no-fault divorce) seem here to stay. Other bad ideas, like open marriage, proved so unworkable that they were largely rejected. We have also seen particular problems mitigated through a concerted social response, as when Americans overwhelmingly agreed they didn’t want unmarried teenagers getting pregnant.

Historical trends would suggest that society’s wealthier and better-educated tend to reject life patterns quickly when it becomes clear they beget widespread misery and dysfunction. That’s one reason marriage took a hit in the ’70s and early ’80s, but then started to recover among more educated Americans. Once it was obvious that promiscuity and chaotic family structures were harmful to all concerned, people with resources took steps to correct the problem for their own and their offspring’s sakes.

For all its legal victories, gender warriors have little to show for themselves with respect to the most significant of milestones. They have yet to demonstrate that their ideology can provide a foundation for stable, thriving sub-cultures of the sort that can endure. Enormous energy has been poured into preventing skeptics from asking the relevant questions, but that kind of subterfuge can only last for so long.

The evidence we have looks bad. A few years after Facebook gave us our 50 genders, young people flounder to explain why a short white man isn’t a tall Asian woman. We can only imagine how much worse this will be ten years from now if children nationwide are aggressively drafted into the transgendered social engineering experiment.


Same-sex coupling has been socially acceptable in mainstream society for a number of years now, but insofar as it is normalized, it’s the sort of normalization that involves coming to acknowledge that it’s really very different from traditional marriage. (That, of course, is problematic insofar as social research still resoundingly affirms that stable two-parent households are the healthiest place for kids.) Victims keep emerging from the wreckage of libertine sub-cultures. It becomes increasingly obvious, as well, that children are at far greater risk in a culture that is unwilling to encourage almost any kind of sexual restraint.

Ideas have consequences, and gender ideologues are only beginning to grapple with the fruits of theirs. Political correctness can be powerful, but people are not endlessly willing to sacrifice themselves and their loved ones to its more ruinous offerings. Lacking the wherewithal to create a healthy culture, the LGBT movement will dwindle and die.

What to Do in the Meantime
What shall we do in the meantime? My suggestions are threefold.

First, we need to take steps to protect our own children. Engaging the broader culture is important, but that task belongs to grown-ups, not six-year-olds. We must build and preserve communities in which morally important truths can be instilled at least in our own offspring. Within our communities and homes, we must shield our kids from the blight of pornography and a hyper-sexualized media, and more literally, from the sexual predators that predictably emerge when a society celebrates sexuality as a primary form of creative self-expression. Sexual appetite, once unleashed, will not consistently check itself at precisely the point when pious liberals become offended. Children will continue to be victimized. Protect yours.

Sexual appetite, once unleashed, will not consistently check itself at precisely the point when pious liberals become offended.
Next, we must continue to engage our compatriots in civil discourse concerning the body, sex, marriage, and parenting. Encourage responsible sociological research on the dynamics of non-traditional relationships and families. Keep explaining again and again that traditional sexual morality is not a rejection of persons but of behaviors that are inimical to real human good. As the dysfunction of various alternative lifestyles becomes more evident, that argument may become more plausible. In the meanwhile, we should do what we can to hold up our sub-cultures as beacons for those who are looking for alternatives to libertinism.

As the LGBT fervor starts to ebb, we should be particularly solicitous to the needs of America’s poor. We’ve seen already that privileged liberals tend to adapt their lifestyles to new data while continuing to mouth the politically correct pieties of yester-year. No one likes to be seen as the stodgy moralist, but this hypocrisy shouldn’t be allowed to stand. Poor children deserve stability just as much as wealthy ones, and we should stand ready to object if our cultural elites start adjusting their habits without changing their memes.

Perhaps the most important thing is to avoid despair. It’s difficult when our culture seems to keep finding new lows on almost a daily basis. Still, when the wheels start coming off completely, it’s worth remembering that a wheel-less vehicle is no longer able to drive. That might factor into our calculations if the vehicle in question is a critical part of our opponents’ vanguard.

Future generations are sure to ask: how could the gender revolution ever have reached such absurdities? I intend to see that day.

Photo Tinxi / Shutterstock.com

 

Of course it will collapse, and the reason why is because it is founded upon the belief that humans are equal, and that this is a moral value.

Humans really aren't equal, so their moral value will constantly butt heads with empirical reality. As this happens, they will not change their belief that humans are all equal, but rather look for external reasons why all the data suggests otherwise. If a female boxer gets her butt kicked by a male boxer, it can't be because women naturally have less upper body strength, but rather women have less upper body strength because of some external pressure that is keeping women from having equal upper body strength.

enter the feminist theory of intersectionality which basically creates a hierarchy of externalities which suppress and limit the natural equality that would otherwise exist. Since they are not ethicists, they only have a rudimentary awareness of what is, and is not moral based upon current social dogma, and then they used this to create their hierarchy. An uneducated black muslim woman is quite high up on the oppression by the privileged scale, so naturally they will do everything they can to remove the things that are keeping her uneducated, black, muslim, and female.

Here's where the SHTF big time, and why feminists are doomed. The very things that oppress our uneducated muslim woman can't be replaced with the things that oppress her, such as christianity, an education, whiteness and being male. So what they have to do is demonize those that are not as oppressed while celebrating the things that keep her oppressed.

I can only imagine how hard it must be for them to get through the morning without constantly butting up against reality, which is why they came up with this "triggered" word. They really do get "triggered" by reality, and it is driving them quite insane.

 

Of course it will self destruct ...... No one cares about who is gay and who isn't, hence the whole basis of the movement is moot..... It's not a real issue it's made up issue. They're promoting homosexuality not fighting for basic human rights.

 

Nice ride belch. Thanks.

Cheers

Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk

 

Evolutionarily speaking, homosexuality is a cul-de-sac leading to the end of a particular set of genes. Yet, homosexuals require resources to survive, all the while not doing the one thing that we, as a species, need to do in order to survive which is to produce the next viable generation.

You can be homosexual all you want, but gird your loins and do your duty no matter how distasteful it is. Either that, or realize that you'll have to come up with some other way to pay for your right to take your share of grain from the pyramid. Put more grain in the pyramid than you consume, and that way you're not a net-loss.

Homosexual men have managed to do this quite successfully. Lesbians aren't pulling their fair share of the load. Most gay men have had sex with women, and quite often have fathered a child or three. The angriest lesbians are basically virgins, and like any female animal, their emotions are fueled by the biological imperative to reproduce.

Do you know why campus feminists are talking about a rape culture that doesn't really exist? It's not because they hate rapists. It's because it's their only chance to reproduce, and attain an elevated status as a victim of the oppressive patriarchy. Mattress girl wasn't hauling around a mattress in order to protest all the rape that was happening on her campus. She was basically carrying around a big sign that said "Free Eggs!".

 

Bingo, nobody cares about gays.

 

I don't care who is gay and who is straight - just don't wear your sexuality on your sleeve or want to be defined by your sexuality...

Being gay isn't like being black where I can't tell someone is gay like I can tell someone is black..... Hell I know this one dude who is gay and I didn't know he was gay until I told him I thought this one chick was hot and perhaps me and him should go out and get some ladies..... I was shocked he was gay but whatever - we're still friends....

 

The first gay rights organization was founded in the US in 1958.

In 1953, gays were banned from positions in the federal government.

Two years later, Daughters of Bilitis was founded and subject to constant police harassment of their meetings and social functions.

1958 SCOTUS rules that a LGBT magazine was protected by the 1st Amendment.

Jump to 1979 when upwards of 75,000 march on DC in support of LGBT rights.

1993 the US military bans barring candidates based on sexual orientation.

1996 DOMA.

2004: Massachusetts legalizes same-sex marriage. New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut, Iowa and Washington D.C. follow shortly after.

2010: Senate repeals "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

2015: SCOTUS rules on Obergefell v. Hodges finding that state bans on same-sex marriage are a violation of Constitutional rights.


So keep waiting for the movement to end.

Should be any time now...



Meanwhile, you might as well get used to:

 

What people do in their own bedroom is none of my business.... Some gays just need to shut up about being gay and stop wearing their homosexuality on their sleeve......

 

On an individual level, of course we don't really care. It's when you look at it from an evolutionary perspective that the problems manifest themselves. We require resources to live, and our goal in life is to reproduce. If you require resources, but do not do your part to produce a viable next generation, you are a leech on the buttcheek of society.

 

No, not really. There is no requirement that anyone have the goal to reproduce. One can require resources and contribute to society in other ways.

This isn't rocket science.

 

It's funny how people are mad that they can't keep them in the closet anymore. Maybe if they didn't have to face violence and discrimination based on who they are for all those years prior, they wouldn't be so out in the open now.

 

If you look at the history of homosexuality you will see it is cyclical. It goes from acceptance to the opposite multiple times. Homosexuality was considered normal in Roman times but fell out of favor with the rise of religion. Previous to that it was openly practiced and denied again.

Think of it as the rise and fall of ice ages.

 

Nice that you understand biology is not rocket science. Did you also know that roller coasters are not transportation?

What ways can a net-loss in resources be good for society? Perhaps, as homosexual men have done, by contributing to the arts and sciences? Yes, there is that. And they can also have a healthy sex life with other men, while still keeping a woman pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen.

Lesbians are a social net-loss, which is why they are like a female cat that hasn't produced a litter yet. Not really happy, and prone to scratching without any provocation.

 

Because heterosexuals are so much better at keeping their sexuality to themselves?

 

We can easily find gay women who have contributed more to society, financially and socially, than yourself. We can easily
find gay women who have reproduced children.

Your post is a pathetic wail against the reality of the universe.

 

First paragraph is just saying "yeah, we can find it but I'm not saying where" and the second is an ad hominem.

Don't you find this lack of any substance on your part just a bit concerning?

 

If anything it is christanity that is dying out. Especially the catholics. Nobody wants to be a priest or nun anymore

 

Easy dude - Entertainment industry, Sports industry.

Have you contributed more to the economy than Ellen? Or given more to charity? Have you created one tenth of the jobs
she has created with her production and clothing companies? Multiple gay women in the sports industry
who have created charities and have added millions to the economy in Tennis and Soccer (Martina, Mellissa Etheridge, many others) . And those
are just a few of the more notable names.

What great things have you done for the world? Not much? Didn't think so.

 

You mean Ellen DeGenders?

Sports is entertainment, so we can put those both in the same basket. Yes, there have been some lesbians that have contributed to the entertainment industry. What you're doing, though, is trying to take the focus off of the big picture and pointing to a specific industry and a specific person.

Yes, lesbians can be found in the entertainment industry. The problem is that Ellen's show could be canceled tomorrow and there would be somebody else to take her time slot.

We evolved a tribal species, so let's say we step back a few millenniums back to a tribe of a 100 or so cave people. Then let's put Ellen in our time machine and after throwing her a dinosaur pelt to keep warm, we place her smack dab in the middle of this tribe.

Homosexual men in this tribe would still be able to hunt brontosaurs. The remaining heterosexual men would be more than capable of impregnating the females, so their reproductive services really aren't necessary to the survival of the tribe. They can still hunt, and at the end of the day, they can help haul bronto steaks back to the cave just as easily as the cis-gendered scum cavemen can. When it's time to bundle up for the night, the homosexual guys can have fun doing whatever they do in their corner of the cave, while the cis-gendered scum men do whatever it is they do with the cis-gendered cave babes.

This latter group is more than capable of keeping all the cave babes properly impregnated, which is one of their main duties, along with cooking bronto steaks and making sure the cave is fairly free from vermin (which is why women are less hairy than men, so when the mosquitoes start biting, women get bit first).

Now we've added Ellen to the cave. But what can she do? She can probably cook and keep the cave free of vermin and cockroaches, but is that enough to allow her to eat with the normal chicks? She's not putting out, and our cave dudes are (for the sake of this thought experiment) gentlemen about such things.

How can a lesbian who does not reproduce or hunt earn her place in the cave?

 

This may be the stupidest thing I have ever read

 

Who says a lesbian cannot reproduce? They are not sterile, dude.
There are gay doctors (medicine women) and gay soldiers - and both - Colonel/Dr.Cammermayer.

 

Biology says that lesbians cannot reproduce. I mean, they can, but then they're no longer lesbians.

- - - Updated - - -

May I ask why it is "stupid"?

 

If you have to ask then THAT may be the stupidest thing I have ever read

 

You can't be this ... hell, dude - just because a gay person has sex to reproduce doesn't change their sexual predisposition - and
how do thousands of heterosexuals couples reproduce when the male is sterile? Science - get yourself
to the 21st century.