Thursday, July 4, 2019

Can We Handle The Looming Social Crisis?

What IS the looming social crisis? Well, it turns out that young people are increasingly pushing back against the LGBTQwerty agenda. That's what we learn from a Harris poll sponsored by GLAAD (the annual Accelerating Acceptance report). According to John Gerzema, the CEO of The Harris Poll, these findings are “very alarming” and could “signal a looming social crisis in discrimination.” Here are the alarming stats in a nutshell, so to speak:

the number of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 who are “comfortable interacting with LGBTQ people” dropped from 53% in 2017 to 45% in 2018, which is already a decrease from 63% in 2016. 

What could possibly be causing this? According to Sarah Kate Ellis, GLAAD president and CEO, the problem stems from the younger generation "coming into contact with more LGBTQ people, particularly individuals who are non-binary and simply don’t identify as lesbian or gay." Go figure! Ellis theorizes that

‘This newness they are experiencing could be leading to this erosion. It’s a newness that takes time for people to understand. Our job is to educate about non-conformity,’

On the other hand, it just might be that normals are uncomfortable with the results when America's fuzzy kinda libertarianism--America's default public "philosophy"--is pushed to its limits. Or maybe when normals find out that, actually, there may not be any real limits at all when that fuzzy kinda libertarianism is taken seriously. As Jonathon Van Maren at Lifesitenews writes, Americans reflexively thing the government should "stay out of people's sex lives," but when that notion is adopted as a legal principle those same people are discovering they don't like the consequences so much. Young people turn out to be the unfortunate guinea pigs upon whom the muddled middle in America is inflicting the consequences of their confusion:

In other words, the LGBTQ movement may have pushed the culture too far. Many people accept the idea that the government should stay out of people’s sex lives. A majority of Americans also came to believe, over the past two decades, that gay people should be permitted to get "married" (a process described incisively by Darel Paul in his 2018 book From Tolerance to Equality: How the Elites Brought America to Same-Sex Marriage.) But most people simply do not believe that women can have penises, that men can get pregnant, or that gender is fluid. The simple fact is that to most people, “non-binary” and other ever-shifting and multiplying categories are simply nonsense. 
Young people also have a front-row seat to the chaos the LGBTQ movement is wreaking on their schools. Biological males in the girl’s bathroom, biological males destroying the female competition at women’s sporting events, the utter confusion of transgenderism, transition, and the LGBTQ indoctrination—they have lived these things, and it is notable that much of the pushback to this agenda is coming from young people, not from adults. It is teenage girls who are suing their schools over bathroom privacy and biological males in female sports competitions. Their childhoods are being turned into battlefields in the culture wars, and many of them are profoundly unhappy with this. 
... LGBT activists are attempting to use an entire generation as the guinea pigs in a massive social experiment with gender fluidity and sexuality, and many of those guinea pigs, as GLAAD’s own polling indicates, are very unhappy with it. I only hope that the pushback to the LGBTQ agenda will strengthen, persevere, and herald a return to sanity.

This widespread "discomfort" is one of the reasons that Trump surprised the nation in 2016. We have over a year yet to go before the next election, and the Dems are revealing how radical they really are, how little they care for normals. This will be interesting.

My view? I think American can handle this kind of crisis, the crisis of increasing discomfort.

UPDATE: I kinda liked this cartoon--it expresses what sundance calls the Uniparty:


  1. There's a lot of difference between tolerance and acceptance. And most people draw a line when it comes to protecting their children.

    Personally, I resent it being shoved down my throat.

    1. I think the mistake people make is thinking that it's about tolerance, about live and let live. It isn't. It's about enforced conformity to their dogmas and ultimately about the suppression of human nature--a denial of all norms, all normality. That's the point of the trans movement--to deny any fixed human nature. They won't leave you alone.

  2. Lemme tell ya, my agency director, the deputy and many senior leaders of the Agency hosted a transgender seal, Kristin Beck. They were all laughing at Beck's comments and applauding him. Beck stated he wanted to punch someone who doubted that he is female. Now what woman threatens to punch someone? That's how men talk.

    I watched the talk on our in-house TV network. I was thinking "Am I the only who thinks it strange that our leaders are promoting a talk by a man who thinks that he is a woman?"

    And I LOVE it when our senior leaders slip up and refer to the transgender "woman" as 'he', 'him' or 'his' and then get a deer in the headlights look and then quickly say 'she', 'her' or 'hers'. They are so much more enlightened than I.

  3. >On the other hand, it just might be that normals are uncomfortable with the results when America's fuzzy kinda libertarianism--America's default public "philosophy"<

    If you see a libertarian, beat him, he will know why.

  4. Thank you as always for your important work here on the blog!

    There is also the militancy aspect. It is not "let me be" it is "I am going to bad mouth everything you believe in the most vile and aggressive way possible. If you dare to politely and respectfully disagree I will label you a bigoted deplorable Nazi and send a mod to destroy you." My high school age children are telling me about this and sharing their anger and frustration. It is not sustainable yet I see no offramp from this road of insanity. -- MR

  5. I've said for a long time, the day will come that mere tolerance isn't enough, acceptance isn't enough, celebration isn't enough for LBGTQWERTY world. In order to demonstrate your bona fides you'll have to participate in homosexual relations. Otherwise, you're a bigot who discriminates against them.

    Compromise, by acceding an inch doesn't matter until you go the full mile on their demands. Compromise is simply showing weakness--that you're willing to concede your principles for their principles.

    And that explains the hyperbolic characterization of the polling as alarming. The progressive-left loves diversity--but they demand conformity.

    Which is understandable--gays always trying to do square peg and round hole, and it doesn't work. Heteros understand complementary works: square pegs, square holes; round pegs, round holes.

    1. I was at a wedding over the weekend and in my family discussion naturally turned toward this stuff. A lot of pessimism, but I still think there will be a reaction. How effective is the question. So many people have been stripped--through "education"--of the ability to articulate that reaction.

    2. That is precisely the point of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. The more a sin suffuses a population (is normalized) the greater the insistence of universal participation. Homosexuality was the demonstration but the principle holds true for any sin: lust, gluttony, envy, sloth, etc.. Large or small sin those engaging in it will, through wheedling, cajoling, guilting, intimidation or coercion, attempt to ever widen the circle of participation among friends and acquaintances.
      Whether one defines sin as 'contrary to what pleases God' or the secular concept of 'acts that are detrimental societally or personally' it is universal and timeless wisdom.
      Now days we add to that those who would use debasement and humiliation to increase political leverage in their lust for power.

    3. I was emailing with a relative about this and was about to write something along the lines that I remain optimistic that there will be a healthy reaction because human nature has a bias toward the normal. But then I reflected a bit on history and decided that was too shallow.