Political polarization is when we get so scared of our opposition that we start being scary in return. Our positions become increasingly reactive and nonsensical.
In this strange climate, my lukewarm beliefs are considered extremist: I’m not sure if abortion is morally acceptable. I don’t know if Israel is committing genocide. Affirmative action seems kind of racist.
Progressives hate common sense centrism far more than they hate Trumpism, because progressivism has become codependent with Trumpism. We require the other side to keep being scary to justify our own scariness.
The democratic party’s stance on homosexuality can be distilled down to two conflicting statements. “We’re done talking about the morality of homosexuality, but we’re also going to talk about it all the time.”
Pride month itself is doublespeak: we’re defending homosexuality by normalizing it, but also framing the normalization as an innocuous celebration of a perfectly normal lifestyle. If being gay were actually normal, then this would be unnecessary. If it’s not actually normal, then normalization is doomed as a defense.
Let’s start here: being gay is weird.
It’s evolutionarily undesirable, it’s rare, and it makes people uncomfortable. There’s no definition of “normal” that homosexuality meets. In fact, it’s likely the origin of the concept of weirdness—I can picture the shock on the first cavewoman’s face as she stumbled upon her mate with another man’s dick in his mouth.
So, trying to normalize homosexuality is a logical nonstarter. And I’d like to pause here for a moment to preempt our tendency to frame opposing political views as strictly moral or emotional. The progressive (or gay) reader might say, “Max, you’re hiding behind ‘facts and logic’ because you hate gay people.” Maybe so, but I don’t think you should then hide behind my hatred to escape facts and logic, so let’s continue.
Progressives like mantras. Black is beautiful. Rape isn’t about sex. A fetus is part of a woman’s body. Trans women are women. Tactically blurring the line between fact, belief, and wish is dangerous. In the case of gay pride, it’s backfiring, and this is because of the core logical contradiction: no one is proud of being gay.
Like cheap perfume layered over rank body odor, gay pride’s false sanitization increases, rather than decreases, our disgust response.
Let people recoil, gasp, swear, and flee. Let us vomit.
The correct iconography for gayness is a fat, sweaty leather daddy with a flaring red erection choked ruthlessly by a steel cock ring. Not a rainbow. The pulse-pounding adrenaline rush of knowing what a disappointment you are to your cold father, yet deciding to sink your face into another woman’s snatch anyway.
“Pride” is hardly the word.
Paradoxically, the concept of gay pride is inherently homophobic, because it’s weird-phobic. Progressivism has looped around from “it’s okay to be weird” to “it’s normal to be weird”—which means it’s impossible to be weird. An autogynephile writhing in a silky dress as he reads stories to children is normal. Everything is normal.
It’s a lie, and the lie is even more disgusting than gay sex.
Imagine consuming this meal: a cake made of chicken, followed by a chicken made of cake. Even absent any aversion to either food, the misrepresentation itself is nauseating.
Before the day is out, I wanted to tell my gay readers that I see you. I see through all your rainbows, costumes, makeup, and fake smiles. I know what degenerate nasty little fucks you are, and I’ll leave you with this:
You don’t have to be normal to be loved.
Happy Shame Month.
Damn, people really think this is spicy, huh? I'd have hoped this would be the natural conclusion to come to without social pressure from political activists informing your views, but there is also personal trauma to account for. Emotional abuse victims often become the instruments of further repression in their fevered attempts to control their narrative. I'm bisexual and I appreciate you putting this out there, it resonates with me in a way that toxic positivity and virtue signaling is incapable of.
More people would have lukewarm beliefs if they were honest with their ability to understand complex issues. But information warfare dictates that everyone must take a hard stance on things they know nothing about. So they attack their opponents with prepackaged cliches and pretend to be informed.