Crying Wolf over Gay Rights

Apropos of my previous post, this Huffington Post article appeared on my Facebook feed this morning under the heading:

The Mike Pence (Donald Trump) Assault On LGBTQ Equality Is Already Underway

It starts as follows:

I’m not going to sugar-coat this at all. We are in for a full-blown assault on LGBTQ rights the likes of which many, particularly younger LGBTQ people, have not seen. Progress will most certainly be halted completely, likely rolled back. And it’s already underway.

So are we in for an assault, or is it underway?  The opening paragraph contradicts the headline.  We then have an an entire article on how Mike Pence, Trump’s VP, is a homophobic bigot.  We are told we should “forget any of your thinking that Donald Trump is from New York City, probably has gay friends, sent Elton John a congratulatory note on his civil union in 2005” because that wouldn’t fit the narrative of Trump launching an assault on gay rights, before the author turns on Newt Gingrich for these comments:

“I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion.”

Which is as succinct an description of much of the LGBTQ movement as I can think of, and this:

The people ought to recognize, if you’re a young faculty member in a lot of places if you’re a young member of a news department and you have the wrong views, meaning conservative, you have no career. This is just the most open, blatant example of the new fascism, which says if you don’t agree with us 100 percent we have the right to punish you. Unless you’re like Hillary and like Barack Obama and you recant.

Again, what’s the issue here?  Nobody is supposed to raise concern that those who disagree with gay marriage are hounded from their jobs?  That makes them homophobic and their appointments in future administrations equate to an “assault” on gay rights before they’ve even taken office?  This is infantile nonsense.

The article concludes as follows:

If Trump is thus as hands-off on LGBTQ issues as president as he was at the RNC, letting people like Pence ― again, possibly the most powerful vice president ever ― get his way, along with people like Carson, Blackwell, Gingrich and likely many others, you can bet that the assault on LGBTQ rights is already underway. It’s only a matter of time before we know the full magnitude.

In other words, there is less of an assault on LGBTQ underway as a few people – some with views which are perfectly consistent with the principles of individual freedom and liberty that gays used to champion – being lined up to serve under the Presidency of Donald Trump who has thus far to utter a single homophobic remark and, in order that the article doesn’t collapse into complete nonsense, whose gay-friendly past we’re asked to forget.

In other words, we’re getting more childish hysteria of the same sort that cost Liberals the election.  The entire article is crying wolf, something the SJWs have been doing for so long that few people take them seriously any more.  What is going to happen if and when gays really need the political support of moderate conservatives and civil libertarians?  By demonising anyone who doesn’t agree with them 100% and hitching their wagon to the transgender movement – which has far narrower support than the gay rights movement does, particularly if it involves the locker rooms of teenage girls – they have alienated a considerable number of “live and let live” natural supporters, in whose numbers I could be counted.  I don’t think this election had anything to do with gay rights per se, but clearly the result shows that those who think they are a priority are in the minority.  This could pose some problems in the future.

I have said this before, but I think white gay men are going to be thrown under a bus before too long.  Generational changes in attitudes have meant gays are accepted almost everywhere now and news of a colleague coming out gets met with little more than a raised eyebrow and a shrug to the point you forget who is gay and who isn’t.  And that will be their downfall: they are so mainstream they won’t be able to maintain this minority, victim status for much longer (something I’m sure most of them didn’t want anyway), and it is a matter of time before they come into conflict with the feminists and transgender lobbyists in the victimhood stakes.  Give it a few years and we’ll see gay men being discriminated against and passed over in favour of other designated victim groups simply for being men – gay or not.

And to whom are they going to turn to defend their individual freedoms and liberties then?

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

10 thoughts on “Crying Wolf over Gay Rights

  1. Delighted though I was when the absurd and cruel law against poofery was scrapped, and pleased as I am that they are now able to get on with their lives without much threat of violence (at least from Western Europeans), beyond that I don’t really give a bugger.

    I do feel sorry for those young bakers who were shamefully bullied by the politicised/radicalised sodomites, which probably makes me a very evil homophobe or some such cant. Whereas “live and let live” say I.

    Mind you, I have never understood why some purportedly heterosexual males seem to be somewhat obsessed by poofkind. All very odd.

  2. I do feel sorry for those young bakers who were shamefully bullied by the politicised/radicalised sodomites

    Indeed, that was a disgrace. I think the moderate gays allowed the extremists to severely overplay their hand with that one, and for a very small, shallow victory they have alienated millions of the natural supporters I mention.

    Mind you, I have never understood why some purportedly heterosexual males seem to be somewhat obsessed by poofkind. All very odd.

    Indeed. I have always suspected those who are vehemently opposed to homosexuality are normally hiding something deep in their closets. It’s not a subject that bothers me much, unless it becomes overtly political.

  3. By demonising anyone who doesn’t agree with them 100%…

    Well put. This is exactly what leftists do – and then they have the temerity to call other people “fascist”!

  4. Gay activism has had far too much air time especially in the US, I have been accused of encouraging youth suicide for opposing same sex marriage.

  5. The fact that ‘gay rights’ have been awarded is not the issue for most people. Like most of us, I do not feel anything good or bad about those who prefer their own kind for fun and games: whatever they get up in their own beds has been done for countless generations but as far as I know never produced any offspring.

    What has irked many who mostly don’t care however is that ‘gay right acivists’ can with impunity — and with the unquestioning support of the MSM — bring to bear the power of the state (notable for uniforms, weapons and prisons) to hound people who prefer not to approve of one kind of human relationship. As I once told my students back in the days when I taught, there are people who get off by bathing in cold baked beans and while i am not one of them, I am happy to leave them to get on with it in privacy. The one thing you realise as time passes is that people are aroused by all sorts of things; I always recall the Swedish woman who ‘married’ the Berlin Wall. Oh well, each to their own.*

    But a group which talks about equality and fairness and then acts unfairly and with inequality against ‘soft targets’ deserve no praise and no support from the state.

    *Anecdote time: a couple of years ago I attended a wedding between a straight white male and a straight white female. It was just a wedding and good luck the them, but what astonished me (and I am not oft astonished these days) was the gay pride flag set prominently at the entrance to the event (it was by the way an outdoor wedding with no mention of the expected God, only the gods of the nothing much, etc) and I felt we were all expected to purr with delight that while gays were not being married, they ere fondly remembered. Oddly, spirituality was absent from the wedding itself but eager signalling to the spirit of same sex union was present. Funny old world.

  6. “The entire article is crying wolf, something the SJWs have been doing for so long that few people take them seriously any more.”

    They are doing this because they actually want it, desperately, to be true. If it isn’t true, the edifice of their entirely self-centered and self-justified world falls apart.

  7. Why on earth would the gays want to get married?

    I always suspected the best bit of being gay was that you didn’t have to put up with that shit.

  8. Watcher,

    What has irked many who mostly don’t care however is that ‘gay right acivists’ can with impunity — and with the unquestioning support of the MSM — bring to bear the power of the state (notable for uniforms, weapons and prisons) to hound people who prefer not to approve of one kind of human relationship.

    This, exactly. And the rest.

  9. Why on earth would the gays want to get married?

    Immigration is one reason, so they can bring a foreign partner. I sympathise with them on that point, but that should be dealt with by a cold, leaden, impersonal clause in the relevant laws that states any two adults may register a partnership for this purpose (and taxes, inheritance, etc.) instead of the government deciding what does and doesn’t constitute a marriage and dishing out favours accordingly.

Comments are closed.