LGB Drop the T: Gays & Lesbians Launch Hashtag Movement to Marginalize ‘Delusional’ Trans People

I think Scott Ott should have prefaced his remarks on sin /Christianity/ political party with the Groucho Marx’s observation that he wouldn’t want to join a club that would have himself as a member. To perceive the true perspective of what it means to be gay, imagine and apply the same social restrictions and religious opprobrium of being gay to being straight given the reality of being and lived experience of being straight. One must equate sin with harm otherwise it becomes a meaningless exercise. To equate being a “practicing” gay as sinful as a “practicing” alcoholic makes as much sense (very little) as equating a “practicing” straight as being as sinful as said alcoholic.

I remember when it was just GaLA. Before the “B”.

No, they won’t call them homophobes. They’ll stick to transphobe as long as it works.

Okay, I’m confused. The left wants us to believe that you can identify as the opposite sex or even no sex at all. But if you identify as a different race, as in Rachel Dolezal’s case, then you are committing cultural appropriation. Couldn’t you say that trans people are committing gender appropriation? Why is the former accepted/embraced while the latter is scorned? Ms. Dolezal lost her position as president of the Seattle NAACP along with her position as instructor of Africana Studies at Eastern Washington University due to the “scandal”, while trans swimmers and weight lifters win awards.
As a cisgender woman, I am insulted that a man thinks he can slap on a dress and a pair of boobs and call himself a “woman”. Your sex is more than skin deep, it is in every cell of your body. Anyone who thinks otherwise IS mentally ill.

I had a longish posting that I just lost due to clicking on the wrong button, so the quicker recap is to check out these links:
Two links showing homosexuality observed in the animal kingdom:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
https://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/1500-animal-species-practice-homosexuality.aspx
Two links suggesting that implication does not apply to humans, even though humans are also animals:
https://www.tfp.org/the-qanimal-homosexualityq-myth/
https://www.str.org/w/does-homosexual-behavior-in-animals-mean-it-s-natural-for-humans-
A 17 minute 2016 TED talk* considering the possible role of homosexual children in supporting reproductive success of his/her siblings or parents (that someone later said was not really credible, but only a “just so” explanation):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Khn_z9FPmU
I also made a comment about the development of sexual reproduction as a mode for enhancing species survival in changing environmental situations.
None of this solves the core “cause” issue, but provides data/info that should be considered as conversations about sexual orientation, and the moral or political response, continue.

*This Dr. James O’Keefe is not the same James O’Keefe who heads up the Project Veritas project: https://www.projectveritas.com

Scott nailed it.

On the pic of the black and white arms of the straight and gay camps, the interesting caption over the clasped hands is kinda “follow the science” themed: men are men, women are women.
I wonder if the black arm as straight is because more black people are socially conservative and less fans of the LGBT types.

On another point:
I will somewhat temper my disapprobation by not specifically wishing a “Monkey Pox” upon them, but I will ask, when will these promiscuous Pillars of Salt finally be held responsible for the millions of deaths that their behavior caused from spreading AIDS far and wide, beyond their own perverted partners?!?!?

This is all according to the plans for the Great Reset. Two of their stated goals are:

America will no longer be a world superpower.
Western values will be tested to the breaking point.

I posted a video on the member’s blog that was done last March with Charlie Kirk and Pastor Jack Hibbs that provides more detail on their overall goals. But this video today is subject to the two mentioned. When they say ‘western values’, what they really mean are ‘Biblical values’.

Homosexuality IS a mental illness folks.
The LGB’s can’t put the lid back on the box they themselves ripped open.
Unnatural sexual behavior is just that. You don’t get to pick and choose which depravity is more acceptable than another

That is a true as far as it goes but grossly simplistic argument. In the real world the choices available are often which of the lesser of two evils will be prevail. You’re doing nothing more than stating the obvious and we are all quite aware of the obvious, thanks anyway.

I think homosexuality is a depravity, too. I don’t like it one bit but I don’t have to answer for the practitioners of it either. Unlike Allah, my God does not demand that I grab them and toss them off of tall buildings or any of that sort of thing.

If they live private lives and don’t try to trans or queer kids, don’t try to get the rest of us to accept and promote some sort of ridiculous legitimization of their depravity, don’t tell us how nasty we are for disapproving of them and generally keep that depravity to themselves same as anyone with any other depravity would … In short, if they ask to be left alone and then behave in a manner conducive to actually being left alone that is not an unreasonable position. It’s not optimal, the optimal would be a world with no homosexuality in it at all but that’s also a completely unrealistic optim. So that’s a lesser evil I can live with. I’m not defending, advocating or legitimizing homosexuality, I don’t approve but not everyone needs my approval or yours. I don’t need to go any further than that because further than that is not in my realm of responsibility or concern.

If such people were at all perceptive they would understand that it is genuine wisdom not to make it the concern of people like me. They’re not going to like the results.

You are correct that the gay people ripped open this box and the lid cannot be put back on. However, that does not mean that they cannot see the error of their particular, personal actions in that regard. I belong to the truly tolerant right, I don’t care what someone’s skin color, sexual orientation or preference in ice cream flavor is when it comes to politics. If gay people want to abandon their Leftist militancy and vote conservative that’s fine with me. The situation actually promotes opportunities to win votes over to our side. I’m not going to invite anyone over for a Saturday family BBQ in any case.

So just how far would you go with your non-acceptance of that particular depravity? I would not condone kicking in their bedroom doors and hauling them out in chains at gunpoint. That makes the cure worse than the disease. There’s a very slippery slope there too.

Instead of telling us what most of us already know and agree with, how about telling us what you suggest we ought to do about it and what to you seems tolerable if not acceptable? Because otherwise you’re just venting your spleen and spleen venting is OK too. It just doesn’t get anywhere and you’ll just build all that spleen pressure back up and need to vent again soon.

Other than that, if all you were doing was trying to puff up your chest and show us what a wonderful, moral person you are — That’s called virtue signalling and we get plenty of that from the other side.

The key in my mind is that people who believe they are not the gender they were born (birth sex deniers), are clearly delusional which is unquestionably a serious mental illness, especially when it leads to attempts at physical alteration / body mutilation! For them to force society at large to accept their delusion, requires that I share their delusional illness, which I’m not about to do. So, I’m sorry Bruce Jenner, you are a man and will never be able to carry a baby in the womb you don’t have or actually give birth, so I’ll not share your delusion that you are in any way a woman, regardless of what you may choose to call yourself, how you dress, what drugs you take nor what operations you might have pointlessly suffered!
Let us suppose that some individual thinks that they are in reality the god, king, emperor of the entire universe and truly believes that we should all bow down to pay continual homage to this delusional deity, and perhaps even provide a significant portion of our personal wealth to them. Would it be in any way sane for us to comply with this person’s delusions of omnipotence and grandeur?
Somehow, I just don’t see any difference between the two seriously disturbed situations!

Thank you, Scott.

I was preparing my comment below, and now this one, during/after ACT commented below. After reading Larry Siedentop’s Inventing the Individual, I generally agree with his assertion:
“So the larger problem is that it really doesn’t matter if you believe in God or any deity. Because the Judeo-Christian worldview and system of living is the best set of rules ever encountered by humanity. You don’t need to be religious (I am, that’s not my point) to see this. It’s an historical fact. That is what the industrialized West is built upon, whether you like it or not or think you can do better or not.”

My understanding is that Christianity introduced the cultural concept that each person was an individual, with a distinct and discrete relationship to God (or G-d*). This contrasted with the previous view that religious worship and belief was to a family, clan, community, or city god/gods. It was a social obligation to perform or pursue this form of worship as a member of a group, not as an individual in your own right. This Christian cultural outlook towards the individual evolved over history with the development of religious canon law (consent of the governed), later secular laws, and concepts of human rights from the Enlightenment to eventually be ensconced in our Declaration of Independence and indirectly in our Constitution.

But I am not religious myself, and want to explore a slightly different take on Bill’s comment at minute 18:00: “If you believe something is true, … it is true”. He is of course applying this to the woke Leftist community, but it applies equally well to Scott, ACT, Bill, presumably Steve, and any others, including my very intelligent and great neighbors and friends, most of whom are also religious believers.

It is also clear that our brains have evolved over millions of years from less capable ones possessed by primates and earlier hominids. The core causes are open to debate (bipedalism, opposable thumbs, better diets via control or use of fire, physical and mental adaptations for language, increased sociality, etc.), but they have resulted in some mix of inherent mentality and a capability to incorporate social and cultural adaptions on top of the inherited ones. One of those “conjoined” characteristics seems to be a desire for transcendence, spirituality, or religious experience. My supposition is that this desire exists along a spectrum from strong to weak across (or within) populations, but is not directly relatable to levels of intelligence (capability for pattern recognition, logical analysis, possibly superior observational skills(?), etc.).

This matches Steve’s comments about the complexity of the brain, in that my view now is that in addition to those neural features, nodes, networks, or whatever, that contribute to intelligence and many of our other abilities evolving to homo sapiens sapiens, some similar but separate set of brain elements also evolved to support this desire for transcendence. This desire in turn led to increased cooperation among early peoples who were able and willing to adopt a similar set of beliefs and ritual practices, enhancing that groups survival compared to other groups not exhibiting this level if transcendence and cooperation.

The corollary to this viewpoint is that our concepts of morality are also a mix of inherited genetic “instincts” and cultural acquisitions (i.e., a combination of both “absolute” and “relative” natures). We exhibit both an innate ability to “judge fairness” and to apply that mode of judgement to a wide variety of cultural features, including contracts, trial by jury, warrantless searches and seizures, “proper” displays of public affection, etc. This raises the prospect that our moral views do not come directly from divine revelation, as captured and documented by prophets many centuries ago; and as believed by a wide, transcendent desiring populace. “If you believe something is true, … it may stlll not actually be true”.

*If anyone here has the background to assert this cultural view of the individual was actually present in earlier (1200 BC to 500 BC) Judaism, I welcome feedback (and links) exploring that possibility.

During her HS days, it truly seemed like not a week went by that one of Ronette’s friends announced that they were gay. Seriously, I am talking about 10-12 young people. It truly seemed to me like they were jumping on the bandwagon of cool that teens of any era do.
My only comment upon meeting them was to say, when they introduced themselves and quickly let me know their orientation: You know when I first meet someone, typically they let me know something very interesting and unique about themselves or their passions in life: music, art, sports, whatever. You seem to think that the most interesting thing about you is your sexuality.
Amazingly, Ronette’s friends still came around our house. Maybe people really do crave honesty.
Now 6 years later, only 2 girls are still gay and 1 guy is actively transitioning M2F.
Of the two young ladies who are living their lives as lesbians: one was abused by a male relative (we found out later) and trusts no men; the other I still think was lashing out at her incredibly rigid upbringing (not religious BTW, just rigid) and this was the best way to hit them. But she is still living her life that way so what do I know.
Of the guys who thought they were gay, all of them now come under the heading of will essentially sleep with whoever is available. I don’t know their histories, but as Scott pointed out, this is destructive behavior whether limited to heterosexual behavior or bi-sexual. There is a hole in there lives that they are trying to fill, and have been since they were 15.

Whhooo boy, where to begin! I concur with the general thrust of this R/A session, especially the goodness of “discord” among the “woke” liberal/Leftists, some of whom are beginning to see and face reality. But several more detailed points deserve some discussion as well.
1.    The survey data I have seen suggests about 3% are homosexual (or ~10 million people; = L, G, or B) and about 0.6% are transgender (or 2 million people; not merely 0.001%, or 3,000). Thus, the real elements in this discussion break down to H for homosexual and T for transgender; so HT, not LGBT+++. Each group is relatively small, but still large enough in absolute numbers to provide loud voices in our society and in our politics, promoting their respective points of views and desires. Good on them for that – 1st Amendment free speech, etc.
2.   More recent surveys also suggest that transgenderism is growing among our youth, but hopefully that is only a reflection of kids trying to be popular and fit in, etc., and not a real measure of an increase in that particular abnormality.
3.   Each of the above is an “abnormality”, in that it is not a set of characteristics displayed by a majority of the population, and in some ways is similar to the 10% of the population that are left-handed. We accommodate their abnormalities up to a point, but no further [i.e., left-handed golf clubs, but no left-handed baseball bats or tennis rackets, etc. 😊]
4.   A supposition is that each of these abnormalities (including left-handedness) have a large genetic and/or epigenetic cause, even if they are not totally defined by DNA or the expression of selected sets of genes. The science in this area is not yet totally settled and there may be nurturing and/or other environmental causes as well. To be determined. This seems to apply even more for the transgender situation, which does not quite fit the usual definition of mental illness, and does not seem to impact an individual’s ability to conduct a normal life outside of this orientation or feeling.
5.   But in spite of selective religious dictums to the contrary, the homosexual abnormality is not a “life style” choice. For me it seemed reasonable that the depth of feeling and attraction that I have towards women could well be mirrored on the other side. And that this other orientation would be sufficiently ingrained as to drive people that way even in the face of previous (and severe) social strictures against it. I have never seen this mentioned explicitly, but it might also be the case that in early agricultural and pastoral civilizations a large premium would exist for large families to farm or tend flocks, and resistance against those who would not procreate would be advocated (demanded?) to aid that agenda. Another factor advancing my tolerance/acceptance of homosexuality was seeing Tom Hanks play a gay man in the movie Philadelphia many years ago – suggesting the concept of one man “loving” another man could in fact be real, and reflect an actually deeper emotional attachment than a one-night-stand type of relationship. But I still prefer that men in such relationships avoid any public displays of affection – perhaps a little hypocrisy on my part.

This is such a huge topic and there’s so much to say on this matter. From not putting this video on YouTube to Scott, Steve and Bill’s individual takes, and expanding from any of those points could take hours and pages and pages to comment on.

One time I was driving through the small midwestern town we lived near with my two teenage boys. There were two teens standing on a street corner, her leaning up against a lamp post and him with one hand under her shirt, the other hand cupping a butt cheek and both swapping spit. I stopped the car right in the middle of the street, pointed at those two kids and very calmly told my boys …

“If I EVER see you doing that I will park this car in the middle of the street, leap out and slap the crap out of you. Then I will bodily drag you across the street, throw you in the car and we will leave. It’s unseemly. It’s disrespectful of the girl you’re with, of you, and of your upbringing which means it reflects poorly on your mother and I.”

It’s not that I thought my kids would do that. I was always big on “teaching moments” and that was a prime opportunity to get a point across. There was no way I was letting that opportunity go by without being used. Dramatically and indelibly. I have no doubt those two sons of mine remember that incident even today over 30 years later.

I don’t grope and stick my tongue down anyone’s throat in public. I taught my kids not to do that kind of thing. No one should do that kind of thing. I’m not saying no one should show affection for a partner of any romantic reference. I’m saying that acting that way in public is not affection, it is a repulsive demonstration of the opposite of genuine affection. If you don’t have enough respect for someone not to do that in public then you shouldn’t be with that person in the first place.

This is the “rubbing your nose in it” that I have a problem with when it comes to some gay people. I have as much and exactly the same ire for gay people doing such things as I do for straight people.

My Aussie (ex) sister-in-law is gay. I love her dearly, she is an otherwise really good person and we saw eye-to-eye on most issues. She understood this principle well. I never, ever saw her act in an unseemly fashion in front of other people. In fact one time I was out running errands with her and she had to stop by a place where she worked. As you might expect, she was drawn to environments where there were other gay people. I saw her go all pitbull on a gay guy who was clearly working himself up to hit on me. She really put him in his place and that saved me from having to do it.

I don’t know if gay people are gay by nature or nurture. Both my wife and her sister were raised in a family where the stepfather abused them horribly on a regular basis. (In hindsight examining the way that marriage turned out I could write a book on why you should not get involved with someone who suffered sexual abuse as a child. The’re badly damaged and my observation is that they never fully overcome that damage. That’s not their fault but the result is something I was never able to overcome for her either.) Her sister is gay and my ex wife is very much not gay. Same nurture, same damage, two completely different outcomes. Clearly for a female being sexually abused as a child is not the triggering factor for homosexuality. There’s something else, or more, involved.

So I have adopted Scott’s attitude that they’re doing something contrary to the Will of God just like anything else that is contrary to His Will. I’m all too aware of the “all have sinned” thing as it applies to myself. So being as I want to not be judged for my sins, I do not judge them for theirs.

That does not mean that I make excuses for them, condone their homosexuality or agree with anything that legitimizes it. We see this happening on another level when people hired or elected to the office of prosecutor define criminals as victims and use their office in a manner that encourages criminal behavior. After all, they’re ‘victims of society’ so hey, their crimes are not their fault. Ask them nicely not to do that again and turn ’em loose. This legitimizes their crimes by making them the fault of someone other than the person who committed them. Doing this ’empowers’ them … To commit more crimes.

It’s all part and parcel of the same issue, that being if someone does something wrong we must embrace their wrongdoing as a measure of compassion for them.

We do not have to do things that encourage intolerable behavior and we should not.

Which is then part and parcel of an even larger issue. Scott’s right, humanity is broken. Living in the United States we’re spoiled because we live such good lives that we can get away with denying that fact. Or at least some of us can.

Saying “I’m a good person, I don’t need a God to give me rules to live by. I’m capable of living by my own rules and thanks anyway.” is a symptom of that very same brokenness. It is illogical and unreasonable to think that the moral codes developed over millennia can be thrown to the wind in favor of your own, broken perceptions. That’s nothing but hubris. Fatal hubris.

By casting out these ages of human experience and thinking you’re a moral force unto yourself leaning on your own judgement you then open yourself up to making mistakes that others have made which end in disaster. Like Bill has said many times referring to aircraft piloting “Learn from the mistakes of others, you won’t live long enough to make them all yourself.”

You might get by with that for a while here in the industrialized West because mistakes do not immediately result in hardship or demise for you and your self-moralizing friends. The test of anything is when things aren’t going well.

You might go for years without an automobile accident and think yourself a good driver. The test of that is not clear, dry roads on a bright sunny day. It’s when someone cuts you off hard on a rainy or snowing day in limited visibility with a semi-truck barreling up behind you. If you really are a good driver you will automatically deal with the situation successfully and if you’re not as good as you think you are you’re going into a flat spin and roll or are about to join the bugs on the bumper of that semi-truck.

So the larger problem is that it really doesn’t matter if you believe in God or any deity. Because the Judeo-Christian worldview and system of living is the best set of rules ever encountered by humanity. You don’t need to be religious (I am, that’s not my point) to see this. It’s an historical fact. That is what the industrialized West is built upon, whether you like it or not or think you can do better or not.

When we deviate from those rules, bad things happen to us. I can’t make you have a religious Faith in God. He doesn’t make you do that so it would be equal hubris on my part to think I can. I can point out that abandoning the rules He gave us is a sure path to disaster.

If an unseemly, rebellious, hedonistic, egotistic behavior is acceptable then it’s not much of a leap to make any such behavior acceptable. The more a small thing is tolerated the easier it is to legitimize the next bigger thing, and the next bigger, etc. This is where the Left sows the seeds of its own destruction. Once you abandon what has proven to work in favor of your own set of rules there is no end to that story that does not conclude in disaster.

Our job as right thinking, moral minded, traditionalist Conservatives is to see to it that disaster only falls on the deserving. The only mechanism for doing that is to not be sucked into the errors that cause certain disaster.

There are many signs like the one this episode refers to that lend hope. That doesn’t mean it’s not going to get worse before it gets better.

So what is the praxis, the real world practical actions that we can apply? We can refuse to abandon Judeo-Christian morality whether we are religious or not. If you’re not a person of Faith, that’s on you but you don’t need to attack God either. You can’t hurt Him but you can cause other people to use you as an excuse to abandon Judeo-Christian morality. That’s counterproductive to where you want to be.

We can encourage people to resist the damage this wandering away from historically proven workable morality creates. I don’t have a Twitter account nor want one but if you do, you should look up the gay people mentioned in this article and encourage them to speak out. This not only stabs at the Left, it lets those people know you’re welcoming, at least politically, to their viewpoint on this matter. We can worry about the things we don’t agree on later. It’s a hard climb back up that slippery slope but we need to slog it out. Because there’s a moat full of alligators at the bottom.

I suspect the LGB’s renouncing the Transsexuals is more a move to give themselves an imprimatur of legitimacy. They pose a threat just as big, if not larger, than do the Trans types to our culture. Homosexuality is, itself, a gross and evil distortion of human sexuality.

I think its that and because the left has continued to move “regular” gay people are loosing their power and victim status. The gay community has always been guilty of the same things that they oppose about the trans community even if to a lesser degree so I think it is in part a push to regain power and status.

It’s somewhat encouraging that EVEN degenerate perverts have SOME limits beneath to which they will refuse to slither. The “slippery slope,” however, is a far too obviously phenomenon to not anticipate.

I’ve come to the conclusion that trans activists are the bad guys. Likely few of the actual .001% of the population that are actually trans are at issue. However, these Trans activists, that number in the 10’s of thousands, seem to be a bunch of Karen’s using trans people as shields to act like festering piles of crap. These garbage activists are the problem, they’re awful people, and they’re pushing their stupid as if they aren’t turd sandwich filled dumpster fire humans.

I’m glad you used the term Trans Movement because as with many other “movements” they are a very small minority of the Trans Population. I think Jorden Peterson has written/talked about this at length. I have some personal knowledge being the parent of a Trans child. Thankfully he is not growing up now but is 43 and in a very stable loving environment. He does not in any way share the goals of the Trans Movement. He just wants to live his life and be happy.
What I truly find interesting is that the Trans Movement is using people in Drag as their Avatar in all this. If they were truly proud of what they are why wouldn’t they be the ones in front?

Hi Bruce and thanks for sharing. I have a question but if it oversteps, feel free to let me know.
My daughter’s best friend growing up is in the process of transitioning M-F. His dad never seemed comfortable to talk about anything to do with the process. I asked my daughter many times if he was getting counselling prior to starting the hormone therapy, she always said yes but in that way you can tell young people really should be saying I don’t know.
Did your child get any form of therapy? Did you? I really want to reach out to the dad, but have no idea how to start. Anytime I see him he looks a bit lost and has gained a bunch of weight. I worry about the whole families physical and mental health as I have read the stats.
Anyway, prayers for you and your family. And if you have thoughts on starting a conversation, I’d love to hear from you.

In a society with scores of “genders”…
what significance does the “B” retain?

The “B” needs to go, too… that leaves “LG…” + whatever was too long to remember.

I think this assumes that homosexuality is also not a mental disorder, because whether we look at it through the lens of evolutionary biology or religious creation it subverts the core function of human sexuality – to create more humans. From this perspective, wouldn’t it also be a disorder? Taken from a more social perspective, how can the LGB community – once branded as mentally disordered themselves – have a leg to stand on against the Trans movement? Who gets the draw the line and where that line is eventually drawn is the real discussion.

I was thinking what a friend of yours Dave Rubin might say but for me the Rubicon moment was when gay marriage was legalized through the courts and the same slippery slope arguments were made.

Let’s Go Brandon!

26 replies on “LGB Drop the T: Gays & Lesbians Launch Hashtag Movement to Marginalize ‘Delusional’ Trans People”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply