The Dangerous Hubris of the Alphabet Mafia

NOTE: This updated version contains an expansion to section IV, about three-quarters of the way into the document, which I added in April of 2022.

I. INTRODUCTION

In the present-day West, "sexual minorities" have seldom had it so good. It is now rare for anyone to be actively persecuted or discriminated against solely for being gay, bi, or trans. Every large company and major politician cheerfully panders to the rainbow flag during Pride Month. Of course there will always be some people who are uncomfortable with homosexuality and a handful who want to actively stomp it out, but this is no longer a "mainstream" opinion and our current social conditions bear no real resemblance to the bad old days of gay-bashing and the Mandatory Closet.

Yet a looming threat is presenting itself. And it comes from the political Left moreso than the Right. Namely, the sheer insanity of the so-called "Alphabet Mafia" -- the most aggressive, fringe, and politicized wing of the "LGBT movement," which (with government and corporate backing) increasingly focuses on extreme forms of transsexualism, and is beginning to make horrifically ill-advised, nigh-indefensible forays into "pedophile acceptance."

Not only does the Alphabet Mafia chew up and spit out those it purports to champion, using them as pawns in their endless political crusade, but its refusal to recognize any limits on its power or ambitions is gradually stoking the flames of what could be an ugly and disastrous backlash from the majority-straight population. Restraining this faction's mad rush to the bottom is, therefore, in the best interests of most gay, bi, and trans people. Like General Woundwort from Watership Down they attempt to militarize rabbits while delusionally asserting that hawks, men, and dogs "aren't dangerous."

NOTE: While I sometimes use "queer" in a generic way to mean "anyone who isn't firmly heterosexual," this term keeps getting co-opted to serve specifically left-wing political interests. Instead, I will use "OTS (Other Than Straight)" as shorthand.

In the interest of full disclosure since it is relevant to the essay: I am bisexual, and always have been. I've been "quietly out" for about 10 years or so now; i.e. I don't go around advertising my orientation all the time but I haven't tried to hide it either, and on the occasion that people have asked, I've told them the truth. As a kid I had precocious crushes on people of both sexes, probably more males, though after hitting puberty I started to develop some interest in females. Adolescence was extremely unpleasant. I was awkward in my teens, in addition to coming from a dysfunctional and abusive home, which pushed my development back (I did not date at all in high school and didn't have actual sex with anyone till a bit after I graduated). Plus I grew up in a backwater area where, at least at the time, real, actual, legitimate homophobia was a problem -- anything viewed as remotely "gay" was mocked and scorned without mercy and the very few kids who were brave enough to come out would get harassed and occasionally even threatened with violence. However after getting out of my awful high-school environment I sort of ugly-ducklinged in my twenties, getting in shape and changing my style so that I ended up as enough of a prettyboy that I got a lot of attention from both sexes. By and large, I liked it and found it flattering regardless if it came from guys or girls (though in some cases it bordered on sexual harassment and I had a couple of quasi-stalkers -- mainly girls, actually). The larger portion of my actual experience is with women but I am definitely not SuperStraight(TM).

Based on personal experience, how then do I feel about "queer rights issues?"

Obviously I support the right of OTS people to exist, to not be discriminated against, and to not have to live in fear or shame. And I feel like that particular battle was mostly won sometime around the late 00's. That was the approximate point in U.S. history at which it seemed like the average American's opinion, finally, was something like "Well, it's fine if people are gay, they can do what they want, as long as I and my family don't have to hear about it in too much detail" and people largely rejected actual mouth-foaming homophobia of the traditional sort. This, IMO, represented a victory condition. That's all we ever wanted, really, and we pretty much got it.

(One thing worth mentioning, though, is that adolescence is generally terrible for nearly everyone because kids are cruel to each other. They always have been and always will be. And when they're cruel to each other, they usually pick on whatever a person's most "obvious" trait is to attack. So in the course of standardized teenage antagonism, gay kids are going to get harangued for being gay, fat kids are going to get harangued for being fat, kids who are of a minority ethnic group relative to the rest of the local population are going to get harangued for their ethnicity, etc. This sucks, but it is not the same as the society-in-general treating these people as if they are expendable and condoning their persecution. This was meant to be the underlying idea of the It Gets Better Project, namely that the angst of adolescence does not last forever.)

However, it wasn't long after high school that I started to notice something was... wrong. And that it goes beyond just LGBT stuff. In a nutshell, it was the cancerous proliferation of increasingly-strident cultural Leftism, or what we now call "social justice ideology" or "wokeness" (it did not really have a name at the time, though it overlapped heavily with what people called "political correctness").

Basically, sexual orientation had become first and foremost a political issue. Of course you had elements of the cultural Right continuing to portray homosexuality as perverted and sinful and trying to funnel kids into "Pray the Gay Away" programs and that sort of tripe, for one thing. But the Progressive Left, in their way, was just as bad, and in the years since then they have become even worse... despite nominally claiming to be on our side.

Notably, the Left often treats OTS people as cannon fodder to be used in its neverending campaign to invert civilization. "Conservatives hate gays," they say (which isn't even always true), "therefore, gays are weapons to be hurled at the Right to inflict harm upon them." Thus they keep pushing the most extreme and ridiculous version of "gay rights" whenever and wherever they can -- frequently less out of compassion towards us than out of malice towards the mainstream majority population.

After all, the Left might profess to "support the LGBT Community," but that support looks positively lukewarm next to how much they absolutely love outing closeted homophobes. The spectacle of humiliation of their enemies is the most valued prize amongst Leftists. And they furthermore will viciously turn on anyone who doesn't support the broader goals of the Left. The posture of empathy and decency is simply a PR tactic to bend more and more people towards their true agenda.

II. THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF CANCER

Explaining this requires a brief detour into what I believe to be the fundamental root of Leftist thinking. First of all, by "Leftism" I do not mean "Enlightenment-derived Liberal Humanism." Liberalism is essentially an open-minded, optimistic, live-and-let-live worldview. Leftism sometimes professes to be "liberal" but in truth it is something else entirely.

As I define it, Leftism is the political expression of the human desire to avenge one's resentful feelings of inferiority, combined with a powerful sense of entitlement. Leftists are people who felt like losers when they were younger, but instead of learning how to win, they trapped themselves in the ideology of "Everything is unfair, I deserve more because I have less, reality should be restructured so that I automatically win and the people I hate automatically lose," etc. They think of people as members of categories so that they can use the power of quantity to overwhelm what they secretly perceive as the superior quality of their adversaries. But at the end of this process they intend to install themselves as Emperors of the Universe. The patsies who helped them into their "rightful" position of leadership will, at best, be rewarded with table scraps in exchange for eternal mindless obedience.

There are some "progressives" who straddle the line. These people may have legitimately good intentions, but they are too-easily roped in by the kinds of propaganda that the actual Far Left excels at, namely that which appeals to human compassion and empathy while using these things as shields for their deceit. Many a "moderate liberal" or "center-left" type has unintentionally sided with truly loathsome people simply because they refuse to believe that there are malignant fanatics in the world who will lie to their faces and use the language of Good as a tool for doing Evil. For an excellent example, look no further than the throngs of moronic Boomer Liberals who actually believed the sob-story of confirmed sociopath Zoe Quinn during GamerGate. Quinn's farrago of deception sounded good to them and they didn't want to seem like the bad guy ("Oh no, I heard that GamerGate is SEXIST and I want to make sure everyone thinks I'm a GOOD PERSON so therefore I will automatically repeat the good-person slogans without doing any actual research"). So they gave money and sympathy to a serial con-artist who once had her repulsive followers literally bully a young man to suicide.

And then there are the malignant fanatics themselves. When it comes to "gay rights," I have personally seen a few of these people in action, and have seen others from afar. Everything they say and do comes from a place of wanting to cheat and sabotage their way to victory. They view all stimuli in the universe through the filter of how best to surreptitiously hamstring their enemies so that they can then "win" against a disabled opponent.

If an individual, especially a male or a white person, came out of the closet, these types of Leftists' attitude could not be mistaken as anything other than gloating. They leered and rubbed their hands together at the prospect of another person having been A) taken out of the breeding pool, thus making it easier for them to compete sexually, and B) relegated to a "marginalized group" which, in the mind of this type of Leftist, means that they own you.

Such persons frequently fall into the category of either "radical feminists" or "gamma-male allies" -- the sorts of Leftists defined by their loathing of men. They view men-in-general (in the case of radfems) or other men (in the case of gammas) as standing in the way of their ambitions and think that homosexuality or transsexualism is a way of neutralizing their rivals. In other words, they secretly subscribe to the primitive and brutish view that a gay man is someone who fails at being a man. (Many of us do not see it this way, of course.) They actually think gayness is bad, and they want that badness to be inflicted upon the society they hate.

(Related: I once knew a bisexual girl who had difficulty finding compatible female partners precisely because so many lesbians also seemed to be radical feminists who put their anti-male political views at the forefront of their entire identity and personality.)

This is all, of course, highly similar to the way Leftists often encourage ethnic minorities to "remain on the plantation" and keep blaming Whitey for all their problems while following the carrot-on-a-stick that the Left continuously holds out. So, so much of the Far Left's compassion is a false front for their condescension, greed, and malevolence. They are like a cross between ambulance-chasing lawyers, and pimps who scoop up teenage runaways and promise to "take care of them" before getting them hooked on drugs and sending them out to work the streets.

(Note that some Leftists are themselves members of said "marginalized groups," but nonetheless adopt these sorts of attitudes because Leftism itself becomes the thing they care about most.)

Going back to the "we own you" attitude, Leftists tend to justify it on grounds of "But, but other 'progressives' like us are the ones who fought for your rights 30 years ago or something!" There may be a certain kernel of truth to this, but what makes it so repellent isn't the fact that some left-wing political movements have achieved good things in the past; it's all the "pork," the fine-print, the poison pills, the extra stuff that you didn't sign up for but that they nonetheless expect from you anyway to pay off your "debt" to Leftism. If a person once had a broken leg, are they expected to keep walking with crutches even after their leg is healed?

Intersectionality is the Left's answer to this. It is a collectivist theory that all "marginalized" or "oppressed" categories of people are required to support one another. This sounds good on paper, but in practice it means supporting the Left's "NGO Archipelago" of obnoxious and subversive organizations as well as the endless filtering-down of neo-Communist ideology from academia into the mainstream.

What ends up happening therefore is that once some demographic group is ensnared by Leftism, they are almost immediately told that they must contribute to "the struggle" by helping some other group, which is used as an excuse to push everything in society as far leftwards as possible. This allows the Left's narcopathic leaders to create more opportunities for themselves to gain power in the ensuing maelstrom of controversy, while their parasitic middle-managers accumulate cushy jobs as "content moderators" and "diversity consultants" and the like.

Thus there is a perennial hunt for the newest and most extreme form of "civil rights movement" that can be used to destabilize mainstream culture. Any time the Leftist hivemind shifts its focus, the people who question the new direction or insist upon moderation are gradually purged from the movement and replaced by new, more radicalized recruits. Then another cause is added and the purity spiral repeats itself, because any time someone says "Well, we achieved what we set out to do and I'm happy with the way things are now. Time to pop the champagne cork and then relax and enjoy life," the Leftist grift-machine is threatened, because it can only exist while driving relentlessly forward through a storm of disordered negativity. The downward spiral into anarcho-tyranny and primordial chaos will never end until the people running the Leftist "movement" feel that they have enough power -- which is to say, never, because the craving of such malformed egos cannot be satisfied.

III. TRANS EXTREMISM: THE CURRENT MAIN THEATER OF OPERATIONS

Within the broader OTS framework, transsexuals are a minority-of-a-minority. There's somewhat of a continuum that runs from "feminine gay man" through "drag queen," to "transsexual not seeking reassignment," and "transsexual who is actively seeking hormone therapy and gender reassignment surgery." (Gender dysphoria is not the same thing as homosexuality, yet it is interesting to note that a study from a few decades ago found that "effeminacy" in boys was a reliable predictor of homosexuality as adults. Note that this is from an older time and seems to imply, annoyingly, that it is healthy and desirable to coach said boys towards heterosexuality.) Based on what I said above, it should not come as any surprise that a major goal of the Left these days is to push as many people as possible as far down that continuum as they can, precisely because these types of transsexuals are the ones who differ most strongly from the mainstream majority.

There have always been some legitimate trans people. Not many, but a few. Gender dysphoria is attested in various historical records across multiple societies. However, it is quite rare. Almost certainly far rarer than one would think based on how often we hear about it lately.

Once gays were mostly accepted by the general population about ten to fifteen years ago, the Left realized, clutching at their hearts with fear, that there was a terrible danger of peace and contentment settling over the cultural landscape. So they shifted focus to an even more "marginalized" group of people. But because legitimate transsexuals are much less common than homosexuals or bisexuals, it was necessary to "create" more of them (and rope in activists associated with other/previous causes through the aforementioned doctrine of Intersectionality) in order to achieve a critical mass of mouth-foaming zealots who could be relied upon to intrude upon everyone else's affairs.

As such there has been a fairly massive push to transsexualize...

A) Anyone to whom the thought of being transsexual occurred even once in their life,

B) Effeminate gay men and gay recreational crossdressers,

C) Tomboy lesbians and butch lesbians,

D) Mentally-ill people who are easily recruited by weird cults,

E) Sexual predators (more on this later),

F) Incels who figure that becoming a woman will finally get them laid,

G) Young children who display even the slightest hint of "gender nonconformity," and

H) Neurotics who just want attention.

Given how frequently "trans issues" keep butting their way into random discussions, the recruitment drive seems to have been successful. Especially in conjunction with sponsorship or allyship from the NGO Archipelago, media personalities, academics, HR and PR corporate types who think Twitter is reflective of reality, Antifa, and the Democratic Party. In other words, Leftism as usual.

Most adults have been aware for a long time that there is a small number of people who identify as the opposite sex and try to present themselves accordingly, and many are willing to tolerate transsexuals who behave within certain reasonable bounds. However the profusion of MTF's and FTM's among people who were mentally imbalanced to begin with has led to an escalating series of stupid and unnecessary conflicts. These deal with everything from "pronouns" and "deadnaming" at the low end, all the way up to the right of transwomen (who mostly retain the greater size and upper-body strength of men) to beat the crap out of women in combat sports, or to demand that straight men and lesbians have sex with them. And at the high end there is the potential sexual danger to women and children posed by certain men who identify as trans in order to gain access to female-only bathrooms and locker rooms.

These specific issues are what anger and frighten the average person, not so much the basic fact of transsexualism itself. Nonetheless the Left deliberately portrays any criticism of these specific issues as simple "transphobia" so that Leftists can keep the victimhood grift going while passive-aggressively attacking normal society. (Recall that the definition of "passive aggression" is intentionally provoking someone else until they overreact, so that you can then claim to be the innocent target of their unwarranted aggression and get them in trouble for doing so.)

But there are two sides to every story. While much of the explosion in transsexualism can be blamed on the Leftist propaganda leviathan, I increasingly wonder: Is the "femmephobia" in the gay community contributing to it? Particularly circa the 90's and 00's, the mainstream within gay male culture tended to prefer "masculine" and "straight-acting" men, with those who looked or acted too effeminate being pushed to the sides and regarded as embarrassments who "make the rest of us look bad" to the straights. These tendencies have persisted in certain areas and may have helped convince some gay guys to fall in with the extreme wing of the trans movement. (This could be turning around somewhat in the last decade-ish, though, with "femboys" becoming somewhat of a recognized "type" that does not necessarily overlap with transsexualism.)

(The above also sort of parallels how, amongst women, "traditionally female" spaces and activities have been gradually destroyed over the years by the encroachment of feminism from one end, and from the other end, the takeover of popular culture in the 80's, 90's, and 00's by immature and often aspergic male nerds who did not understand women at all and had no use for them except as window dressing. Consequently, many women were left homeless and rootless, culturally speaking, and so joined the feminists in their aggressive counter-takeover of pop culture starting around 2008. That, however, is a complex discussion for another time.)

Perhaps the most horrific aberration of the trans movement, though, is the way its most ardent supporters try to railroad young children into transgenderism on the basis of minimal or badly-interpreted evidence. Some parents actually seem to view their children as "projects" rather than people and use them as extensions of their own political beliefs, and this may lead them to jump to the conclusion that their son or daughter is trans without the child even being able to properly articulate their own agreement or disagreement.

In the UK, the Tavistock Centre, a transgender clinic specifically for children, encountered a major scandal a few years ago when it was found that over a THIRD of their young patients were autistic. Autistic children have difficulty communicating, and often display "unusual" behaviors that can potentially be viewed as "gender-nonconforming." However, this often takes the form of boys simply having no interest in sports or toy weapons because they're more interested in abstract things; i.e. it is not the same thing as a boy continuously wanting to dress as a girl and expressing an intense desire to be one. Thus, children with social deficits were being overdiagnosed with gender dysphoria without considering that their autism may have been the true cause of their behavior, and in many cases placed on puberty-blocking drugs -- which can have serious consequences for a person as they mature and get to know themselves better. Adults were making nigh-irreversible decisions on behalf of kids who didn't really understand what was going on.

In addition to all of the above, we can mention such things as the bizarre attempt by woke elements in the medical establishment to change the definition of the word "man" so that they can assert that "why yes, men can get pregnant," or incidents such as the sad case of trans comedian Daphne Dorman, who committed suicide after being bullied by the most cultish members of the trans lobby for failing to toe the line.

A final and tragic aspect of the Left's weaponization of trans issues is that those transsexuals who don't engage in the specific behaviors mentioned above are being tarnished by association with the trash mob of insane idiots. The Left's "championing" of transpeople has been so shallow, unhinged, and obnoxious that it has only contributed to the popularity of the memetic slogan that "There are only two genders; everything else is a mental illness." They are doing a disservice to those they claim to represent.

Of course, we must remember: The true goal of the Left is not the well-being of such-and-such group, but the gradual overthrow of civilization so that Leftist ideologues and power-brokers can presume to rule over the wreckage. Whoever their "pet minority of the month" is, they will defend them only so long as it serves the overall revolutionary-totalitarian agenda.

IV. MAPs - NO, JUST NO

Perhaps the most hazardous and irresponsible aspect of the current LGBTQ+(etc) movement, though, is the small-but-growing campaign to add so-called MAPs ("Minor-Attracted Persons") to the list. This is profoundly stupid and evil -- foremost because it potentially opens the door to child exploitation, which cannot be permitted. And also because it revives the pernicious old stereotype that homosexuality = pedophilia. Already some people have been rumbling ominously along the lines of "The queer rights movement is just a foot-in-the-door to get people to accept pederasty." Western society will never tolerate this. Crossing that line will end in disaster.

It is difficult to overstate, to some people sheltered within the Leftist ideological bubble, how utterly anathematic pedophilia is to the average person. It is perhaps tied with, or even exceeds, Nazi-style overt racism as the single most despised and taboo thing in our entire culture. High on the fumes of neo-Communist identity politics, some individuals have failed to grasp this and don't seem to realize the UTTER SHITSTORM that will rain down upon their heads if they don't wise up.

Of course there are some people even within the Far Left who refuse to apologize for pedophilia, yet the fact that "MAP rights" hasn't been completely disowned is itself a bad sign. Furthermore, they have failed to grasp that other foibles of the Alphabet Mafia have only contributed, intentionally or not, to the growing dread amongst regular Americans that the LGBT movement is indeed "coming for their children" (to quote a catastrophic PR mistake by the San Francisco Men's Choir). This, more than any other issue, is likely to be the biggest contributor to a potential backlash against OTS people as a whole -- the great majority of whom are in fact innocent of any threat to children.

As an aside, the one aspect of this issue that could be considered remotely defensible is the idea that people with "those" tendencies should be able to seek discreet treatment for them, provided that said treatment prioritizes the safety of children at all times. It makes more sense for "non-offending pedophiles" to get help and decrease the likelihood that they act on their urges, than it does for them to simply bottle them up until they "snap" and harm a kid.

In all other respects, though, the MAP faction needs to be deleted. And aspects of the LGBT movement that specifically involve or target children need to be scaled back, so as to disassociate said movement from anything that could be considered "pedo-adjacent." Many of the queer-rights ideologues probably don't think they're doing anything wrong; they feel that they are liberating kids from restrictive, puritanical, and outdated mores that will allow them to be happier as they mature. BUT in other cases we cannot rule out the possibility that such behaviors are either thinly-veiled pedophilic grooming, or simply yet another effort by the worst sorts of Leftists to weaponize children against traditional society.

The sane amongst the OTS community must understand that most people do not want their kids exposed to sexually explicit materials of any sort, regardless of what orientation or gender identity it pertains to, nor do they want their kids to engage in behaviors that could be construed as openly erotic (like drag dances) or that potentially expose them to abuse and exploitation. These concerns must trump the "progressive crusade" to introduce queer ideology to increasingly younger persons, in the school system, in media and entertainment, and elsewhere.

So long as society is not overtly homophobic (which it isn't, by and large), teenagers will start to figure things out for themselves and can make decisions about their identity once they're old enough. They do not need a large apparatus of ideologically-motivated adults to constantly coach them on sexual matters. And protecting them from bad actors who have infiltrated said apparatus for malevolent purposes is paramount.

**NEW MATERIAL AS OF APRIL 2022**

There are a few things that need to be clarified. Since "MAP" stuff is unpleasant, I originally wanted to get it over with as quickly as possible after making the main point, but:

The now-infamous San Francisco Gay Men's Choir ("we're coming for your children") incident was almost certainly intended as some VERY ILL-ADVISED attempt at snarky, edgy humor, albeit combined with a legitimate desire to indoctrinate kids in "tolerant and diverse" woke ideology. This is what they meant -- "HEE HEE, we'll make your kids non-homophobic!" The individuals in the choir seemingly suffer from a severe case of Liberal Privilege -- they live in San Francisco, after all, one of the easiest places in America, if not the world, to be gay. They don't have to deal with the horrified reactions from the average person in Middle America, to whom the vid sounded like an even worse sort of threat. They did it for updoots from their fellow coastal-city Leftist types, oblivious to how bad it looked to everyone else.

(ANOTHER EDIT: Apparently several members of the Choir were registered sex offenders. I am at a loss as to who thought this was a good idea; as to how no one stopped and considered what in the hell they were doing when they made that video, released it with these individuals involved, and allowed it seem as though these persons were representative of gays in general.)

Which leads us into "Groomer Schools":

In addition to what I've already said in this essay (i.e. that Leftoids are constantly inventing new "causes" to champion as way of staying in business, no matter how stupid they are), there is another reason why many LGBT activists want access to the educational system.

One thing that unites many, if not most, OTS people is the shared experience of feeling "different," alone, rejected, and frightened as a child; of feeling like you are being "held back" from having a normal and happy life due to being part of a strange minority, and like you must then catch up as a young adult. And many people who felt that way find that they want to help other children to NOT have to go through the same thing. Helping kids becomes a vicarious way of dealing with their own former pain.

Thus, a lot of LGBT activism in schools comes from a place of "good intentions," although I would agree with most conservatives that it is VERY ILL-ADVISED. As I said, above, kids don't really need a bunch of meddling adults helping them with everything. And because the activist types are so blinded by their "good intentions," they cannot see that there ARE potential dangers to children that could become more of an issue under their bizarre plans. Actual predators are likely a small minority, but the majority MUST understand that the safety of kids comes first. Therefore I, like many non-insane OTS people, support the Florida bill and would like to see similar measures implemented to get "queer ideology" away from young children. There are simply too many ways it can go wrong. It's not a good idea.

V. CONCLUSION

If the West is to remain a tolerant society in which the great majority of OTS people can be who they are without fear or shame, then the lunatic fringe of the LGBT movement known as the Alphabet Mafia must be rebuked. Despite being the lunatic fringe, it has somehow become the most powerful and visible faction, largely thanks to unlimited sponsorship from Leftist politicians, Leftist media, and Leftist foundations. It is increasingly not an organic advocacy from within the OTS community, but an "outreach program" for Leftism itself that seeks to recruit-and-radicalize people with homosexual or transsexual tendencies so that they can then be unleashed against any aspect of society that the Left considers an impediment to its megalomaniacal goals.

OTS people represent a permanent minority. Throughout history and across the world, our percentage-share of the human population has not fluctuated much; it's generally somewhere in the neighborhood of 5% or less. By definition, it can never be much higher than perhaps 10-15%, even if we charitably include those who merely "experimented" this one time, the "slightly bi-curious," and the like. Nature has always produced some of us, and always will. We have the same rights as everyone else. But it is entirely reasonable for us to compromise with the majority population on a few things. For starters, not constantly harassing them about "pronoun usage" and other such trivia, and leaving their children alone. In exchange many of us are happy to simply be left alone ourselves.

Years ago, an acquaintance who was deep into Leftism (and who later unfriended me for criticizing SJWs while supporting GamerGate) posted one of the most psychotic op-eds I have ever read, and she seemingly agreed with everything in it. The author was a young lesbian woman of South Asian descent. She and a friend went to a gay bar where the featured entertainment of the night was a (white) man performing a drag routine dressed in a traditional Indian sari. The author had a COMPLETE MELTDOWN, screaming at the performer as well as the staff and patrons, for "cultural appropriation" of South Asian traditions. She then proceeded to regale the reader with melodramatic accounts of how the U.S. military was bombing people in Pakistan as we speak, which in turn is because of racism and colonialism, or... something? Which is somehow connected to a dance routine at a gay bar? Okay. Sure. The strident, almost hysterical tone of the article was especially revealing of the worldview, drilled into her brain by the activist media and educational system, that the entire world is essentially a giant oppression machine in which people are processed according to their membership in demographic categories, and this is the only thing we need to understand about history, culture, civilization, politics, economics, or drag performances.

It was one of several incidents that drove home my burgeoning realization that something is very wrong with the current crop of Leftists. Similar such people are behind the Alphabet Mafia (and various other divisions of the Left's army). They are just as insane. And they work for people who stand to lose money and power if normal citizens (of any orientation, gender, race, or religion) are ever allowed to experience too much peace and prosperity.

The gay rights movement was effectively over at least ten or twelve years ago, because we won. (There may still be a place for occasional "watchdog" activity vs. those who want to blame us for all manner of evils and bring back actual persecution -- and there will be no compromise with such people -- but to suggest that the modern West is some sort of homophobic dystopia is patently absurd.) The feminist movement and the racial civil rights movement, too, were largely successful in their main goals. Much of what remains of these movements are cancerous zombies animated by the evil power of hubris; zombies who seek to feed upon, and therefore similarly zombify, "trans rights," "MAP rights," "illegal immigrant rights," "criminal rights," "zoophile rights," and who knows what else. The corporate-financial-globalist overlords who pull the puppet strings of these zombie pseudo-movements will never allow them to rest.

And the "franchisees," the Far-Left ideologues who run the various movements, are giddy with power. By antagonizing the majority population -- deliberately stoking conflicts that don't need to happen so they can profit off the ensuing chaos -- they are bringing us closer to a far-right backlash and therefore endangering the people they claim to protect. Their recklessness and cruelty will ultimately drive them to ruin; and in their fall they may take a great many innocents with them.

Unless, of course, we stop them and stand up to them, making it clear that malignant narcissists, professional grifters, delusional schizophrenics, petty crybullies, child abusers, and totalitarian fanatics do not speak for us.

~ Airyaman, November 2021