Sunday, May 1, 2016

The stultifying price of acceptance

Acceptance is not necessarily a good thing

There’s an old saying which goes, ‘the road to hell is paved with good intentions.’ If there’s one example that illustrates this saying to perfection it would be the long, emotional road for homosexuals and bisexuals to be accepted.

On a certain level, gays, lesbians and bisexuals have always strived for some level of acceptance. Anyone denying this would be lying through their teeth. Well, hate to be a bearer of bad news but it’s a completely futile goal. There’s a difference between the need to feel accepted and the need to be accepted for fundamental human rights. I care for the latter but no so much for the former because there will always be people out there who will disagree, despise and deplore people with same-sex orientations. It’s something I realized early on the moment I was aware of my sexual orientation, which was at a very young age. And I thank the gods that this knowledge has always been with me. There are too many non-heterosexual people who want to bend backwards to accommodate and please the hetero majority, and this pointless need to fit in, for acceptance is doing the exact opposite of what this need is supposed to achieve : to live freely as who we are within the greater society.

Many would say that this need manifests itself in several different ways, mostly with gays conforming to acceptable heteronormative behaviour : marriage, having kids or gays in the military. If gays can have families, kids AND kill evil foreigners, how ‘bad’ can gays be? This need for acceptance has created many contradictions and self-defeating norms. If someone is a homosexual and wants to join the army and be accepted openly within the military industrial complex, that's fine for them but as a pacifist, I don't see this as a sign of progress for gay rights. Conservative demarkations shouldn't be heralded as sings of progress.

Personally speaking I don’t care if people don’t accept me because of my sexuality. As long as there are laws to protect me as a human being, I have no interest in what the panoply of detractors out there   think of my so-called ‘lifestyle choices.’ Unfortunately, the gay community’s desire to be accepted is also its downfall, in so many ways that it would be difficult to cover all of it with one article. And this need is often propelled by self-loathing which is all too often confused with the need to blend in, to be part of the larger society.

Homosexual people have a long history that dates back several thousands years and there were always acceptable roles for gays throughout history. The eunuch taking care of the Sultan’s harem is an example of how the role of a (castrated) homosexual was accepted and even revered by the people back then, just as long as they remained in their lane, remained in their pre-determined roles. Today, many people believe the roles that were once acceptable in Antiquity don't exist anymore but in actuality they still exist. They've simply shifted or morphed into something slightly different. In 2016, they're pretty much the same.

1 - I support gays as long as they fit the usual types and remain invisible

Polls after polls show that the majority of people now accept gays, lesbians and bisexuals. In a Gallup poll from the US, 68% of people say that homosexuality should be legal. The one problem with these polls though : they don't show a clear picture of who was polled. We can easily assume that the majority were straight people. It is great to see that gay rights have progressed to this point in society but what type of gays and lesbians do these anonymously surveyed people have in mind when they answered the survey?

Here are some types of acceptable roles for gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

- The gay court jester, there to please everyone (think of Richard Simmons or Ellen DeGeneres)

- The cute, fashionable gay ‘girlfriend’

- The flamboyant gay entertainer (think of Liberace or Elton John)

- The super efficient personality (think of Suze Orman)

- The hot, alluring starlet who dates men and women (endless number of these)

- The tough female athlete (Martina Navratilova and many others)

- The trendy fashion designer or expert (think of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy or fashion designers (closeted or not))

Almost all of these types are non-threatening, cute and for the most part sexless.

Just by coincidence, as I was writing this article, an old book about homosexual types recently surfaced and made headlines on the internet. The endless number of types is hilarious and sad.

A book on different ‘types’ of gay was once funded by the Government

Acceptance is great but acceptance it’s not a good thing if one’s acceptance depends on how a gay man or a lesbian fits in the above mentioned types. Anyone who doesn’t fit in an acceptable category is not accepted or not heard. I certainly don’t fit in any of the above categories. People are constantly confused with me because they don’t know which box I belong to.

This is a constant problem because the media only shows these cliched types. So it’s easy to figure  that a big chunk of those supporting gay rights are not really supporting all of gays but supporting a preconceived idea of what gays are supposed to be. Of the 68%, how many of them thought of Ellen DeGeneres, the least threatening gay personality in the world?

And out of those 68%, how far do they fully accept gays? Not very far it seems. Just look at articles saying something most of us already know : straight people do not want to see personal display of affections (PDAs) between homosexuals.

Gays Rights Are Great, but Ixnay on the PDAs

As you can see this acceptance doesn’t extend far and wide : the straight majority supports us as long as we fit the typical gay types while same-sex relationships remain pretty much invisible in the public eye.

Yay for gay rights!

——

2 - Who speaks for gays and lesbians?

Who exactly speaks for gays, lesbians and bisexuals? It’s certainly not orgs like GLAAD or the Human Rights Campaign. They might have once been voices for the LGB but not anymore. Today, they are echo chambers hijacked by the cult of gender identity. The gay rights movement never had a leader whom people of the community could turn to for unwavering support. Someone who championed gay rights for a long time and is a dependable voice of reason. This is not to say that there are no amazing activists out there. There are but leaders? In 2016, no one it seems. Unless you consider Duran Duran as spokespersons of the LGB.

The best example of this is the current brouhaha in the US over trans women having access to women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, and women’s spaces.

In 2016, Bruce Springsteen, Ringo Starr, Bryan Adams, Pearl Jam and Duran Duran are now the voices of the LGB.

What? Wait a minute. These old rock stars, many not heard in decades, are now getting media attention for supporting the ‘LGBT’ and cancelling concerts in NC and Mississippi because of new laws passed to limit access to bathrooms to transgender people or based on religious beliefs. Bryan Adams? Duran Duran? Champions of gay rights? Since when?

Well, since the ‘LGBT’ are the good guys.

Aging rock stars have come out of the woodwork and suddenly the 'LGBT' are a ‘cause’ to them, regardless of the fact that these aging rock stars have been playing in countries which are extremely anti-gay for decades now.

Bryan Adams canceled a concert in Mississippi in protest over their new religious rights laws. People applauded the decision. Adams finally got some media attention. Remarkably enough, no one made a point that Adams recently played in Egypt, a country with horrid treatment of homosexuals.

Another fading rock star, Ringo Starr, entered the fray by showing his support by canceling a concert in North Carolina, even after he played in Russia, a country known for its deplorable human rights in regards to homosexuals.

Why isn’t anyone from the left denouncing these hypocrites? There are no more critical thinkers, in the media or with people within the community. Straight up hypocritical stars like Bryan Adams should have been roundly dismissed but since gays are now a ‘cause’ in the media and social media, anything or anyone can claim they’re on our side to gain publicity and no one on the left will make a point about the complete lack of support for gay rights of these fading rock stars during their illustrious careers.

People look the other way when this happens but if an actual gay person wants to voice their concerns over aspects of their own so-called community, they are shut down immediately, branded a bigot and silenced.

One of the biggest problems with this need for acceptance is how the voices of gays and lesbians are now being silenced not only within the dreadful ‘LGBT community’ but also because of this so-called acceptance from the heterosexual majority who only see us as one big, united one dimensional happy entity. The mainstreaming of gay rights has eradicated its own true voice. Any voice of dissent about the ‘LGBTwhatever’ from the LGB is met with confusion and distrust.

Duran Duran can speak for us but the LGB can't speak for themselves (except with blogs like this one). You just can’t make this shit up.

Yay for gay rights!

——

3 - Gays have always been the way I pictured them

And lastly, acceptance is not a good thing when those who hate us see us in the way they always perceived us to be. It's a form of acceptance albeit a negative, twisted one.

One can easily say that the trans / gender identity movement is the actual manifestation of what the right always had in mind when they imagined what gays were really like. Therefore the whole thing becomes a self-fulling prophecy. Right wingers think gays are men who want to be women, and lesbians are women who want to be men. Add the T to the LGB and voila! Acceptance, in a "I told you they were like this" way. Adding the T to the LGB only reconfirmed the right's prejudice.

Those on the right hate gays and lesbians because they are sinners but then confuse them with transgender people and suddenly the entire muddled ‘LGBTQSLTDXYZ++’ makes sense to them so they inadvertently accept us as ‘LGBTwhatever.’ It’s one mantra repeated endlessly by those who support the T within the LGB : we share the same oppressors!

Like the chicken and egg parable, one wonders which came first : the oppressors’ idea of what the oppressed were like or the oppressed trying to live up (accept) to the oppressors’ hateful views.

This needs to be said : the ‘LGBTwhatever’ is a wet dream come true for the left and the right. The left loves to use ‘the gays’ to irritate the right. Once the left are finished with us, they put us back in a glass casing with the words ‘Break in case of a need to annoy the right’ written on the glass door.

Yay for gay rights!

——

There’s so much more I can write about this very subject, the need for acceptance within the gay community, certainly when it's coupled with that other dreadful word : the need to be ’inclusive.’ As you can see, all of these forms of acceptance are perceived as being 'good intentions' but upon a closer look, they are not. The LGB is in a sort of hellish situation : we are bound, silenced and hated as a result for this need to be accepted. The road is not over yet but it has been pretty much paved and laid down for us by others. The question remains : how much more of our identity are we willing to concede in order to be accepted?

This acceptance has painted homosexual and bisexual women and men in a corner.

This acceptance is limited only to those who fit predetermined types, and as long as they remain invisible to the hetero majority.

This acceptance has made gay issues the ‘cause du jour’ to be exploited by those on the right and the left for media attention, or for their own political and religious beliefs.

This acceptance often reconfirms the prejudice of those who hate us.

This acceptance from the majority has erased the actual voices of the LGB, who clearly need to take it back.


© 2016 thebystander.ca

contact : thebystandersite@gmail.com

Thursday, April 21, 2016

Random Notes

Identity Crisis -

The Green Party in the UK now refers to women as 'non-males' or 'non-men.' Remember, the Green Party is a party on the left of the political spectrum. This is another example on how the left, or the extreme left, is actually the NEW RIGHT. I wrote about this insanity from the so-called 'left' in my article "The enemy of my enemy is also my enemy."



People on Twitter (not just feminists) made fun of the decision, which backfired badly but the Green Party hasn't backtracked over their decision.

Warning : The Independent article

Feminists mock Green Party young women's group for invite to 'non-men'


Meet the new Trans Woman du jour. Remember, she would be referred to as a non-man by the Green Party UK.


--------------

World politics -

It's apparently illegal in Germany to mock another world leader. A German comedian wrote a poem mocking Turkey's quasi dictator Erdogan, who wants to press charges against the said comedian. Merkel will allow it. The problem is, supporters within Merkel's own circle of power are against this and want to abolish the law before the case goes to court. Cracks are showing in Merkel's control of power.

Who knew identity politics already existed years ago?

Merkel faces rebellion over prosecution of comedian accused of insulting Erdogan


Gay flight attendants who work for Air France will be forced to fly to Iran, where homosexuality is against the law. No words from Transgender crew members, who are welcome in Iran.

Warning : Daily Mail article.


US politics -

Human cartoon Donald Trump wouldn't have any problems with other human cartoon, Caitlyn Jenner, in using the woman's bathroom in his building. With endorsements like this...

Donald Trump OK With Caitlyn Jenner Using Any Bathroom in His Tower



© 2016 thebystander.ca

contact : thebystandersite@gmail.com

Saturday, April 2, 2016

The enemy of my enemy is also my enemy


Ultra conservative ideologies in identity politics have changed the left for the worse

As someone from the left, trying to figure who’s left and who’s right these days is becoming a full time hobby. Maybe most of us who are old enough to remember a time when knowing the good guys from the bad ones was a cinch. The West was good and the soon to be dismantled Soviet Union was pure evil, right?  Everything seemed so easy to sort out during the Cold War. Not so these days. Today, we live in a time when someone like legendary gay pioneer RuPaul is blacklisted by GLAAD, and gay media in general, for using the word “tranny” but the world's most famous Ted Cruz supporter, Caitlyn Jenner, is lauded and even nominated for a GLAAD media award. The lines are so blurred these days that I just can’t keep up with everything going on. Week after week, more insanity, mostly from the extreme left, is making me wonder if I’m really on the left of the political spectrum. But then I think about it for a nanosecond and I usually end up laughing about it, “Of course, I’m on the left…just not on the extreme left.”

Thanks mainly to social media, the extreme left is so strident and polarizing these days that I’m convinced they're not even part of the left. They are so negative and counterproductive to the actual concept of progress that even some right wing pundits have coined a new term to describe them : the regressive left. In a way, it sounds correct but the left, which is supposed to be seen as progressive and forward thinking, cannot be regressive. It’s an oxymoron. It’s like saying the right is progressive. Or going down upstairs. Besides, it’s very difficult to accept that anyone from the right knows what 'regressive' actually means, or that anything from a regressive political point-of-view would actually trouble them since they are often themselves the definition of a regressive political ideology. It would be a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black. No, I dismiss the term ‘regressive left’ because it’s not actually from the left. A better term to describe the extreme left would be…the New Right.

In order to demonstrate this, I’ll be going over these two examples here (these are just two examples of many I could have used).


The following tweet was made when the disturbing incidents in Cologne surfaced, after they were suppressed for several days by the German government, police and media (which is a whole different matter).

Laurie Penny’s glib tweet is a typically dismissal one favored by people of the so-called extreme left, also known as 'Social Justice Warriors' or SJWs. From reading the tweet, Penny actually believes that those shocked by the gropings and assaults that took place in Cologne had no reason or right to be shocked since they never cared for issues of violence against women in the first place, and they were just using the events to spout racist views on migrants.

I had to think about this and even to this day, I still can’t wrap my head around it. It’s filled with so many straw men that I decided to use this tweet as an example.

The underlying message from the tweet is this : that all (presumably heterosexual) men are racists and rapists. This message is nothing new if one is familiar with the world of feminism or radical feminism (whom have also been branded as being racist by SJWs). Men, who have never lifted a finger to help with issues of domestic violence or violence against women, are all pro-rape and favour violence against women. Inaction equals guilt...on a massive scale. Though she didn’t specifically singled out men (women could be included as well), almost all her tweets are pretty much directed towards 'evil' men.

And this is where I have a problem. As much as I hate the right, I can’t believe everyone, or every heterosexual men, on the right were actually happy that loved ones, their wives, daughters, mothers and friends were assaulted, molested or robbed that night in Cologne. They had the right to be indignant and angry about this violent incident. An unwanted attack is an unwanted attack, no matter who’s the victim, and the victim’s political views. And who’s the perpetrator, and what’s the perps’ political views. Penny’s tweet is as bad as saying all Muslims are terrorists. And yet Penny is championed by the left as a voice in the brave new world of ‘identity politics.’ She has written several articles for established news outlets, including The Guardian.

As someone from the left, I can assuredly say the tweet wasn’t made by someone on the left or a true liberal. That tweet declared to the whole world how Penny's mind is made up, closed for good. She brands everyone who has failed to support issues pertaining to violence against women as being racist, pro-rape, pro-sexual assault, etc.. This is not a tweet from someone who has some genuine intellectual curiosity, who is open minded and listens to what everyone has to say.

Putting aside the complex geo-political issues of the Cologne attacks, this can be seen as an example on how stealth conservatism has crept in on the left, or in this case, the extreme left via identity politics. The behaviour of Laurie Penny is as strident as the one from the right, who view everyone on the left as pinko commie faggots. To someone on the right, everything is black and white. No shades of grey. So why are the left also seeing everything in black & white these days?

That tweet is proof that the right’s ideologies are the template for the extreme left. The right and the extreme left are two sides of the same coin. Playing politics by emulating tactics used by the right doesn’t make you very smart. In fact, it makes anyone who participates in this style of dogmatic rhetoric look positively clueless. Is that what liberals want to be? As clueless as the right?

One could merrily dismiss her tweet as one of many made from a plethora of other social media instigators to be found on Twitter but, unfortunately, it’s not. Her tweet exemplifies the kind of thinking which has infiltrated the mainstream left. This is the truly disappointing aspect of this tweet : people like Penny are lauded by and now make up most of the left. This includes the once respected The Guardian.

I’m from the left and Ms Penny's close-mindedness certainly doesn’t represent me.

The second example of how the extreme left is looking more like the right comes from an article published by...The Guardian. It's about the disappearing 'gayberhood' in Seattle. You can read it if you want, in order to have some idea of what I’ll be writing about but it’s not critical to understanding the point I’ll be making.

Violence in Capitol Hill: is this the end of the line for Seattle's gay neighborhood?

I have to say that I find the article confusing as it goes on to describe how gays, or is it LGBTwhatever, are being terrorized and priced out by Tech Bros invading Seattle’s gay neighborhood. If you read the article, by the time you finish the last paragraph, one still doesn't have a clear understanding of what’s going on there, aside from a typical 'us vs them' angle. The article is poorly written and unfocused and it ends up being more confusing than anything else. One is not more informed of what’s going on there after reading it. We know something is happening there but one doesn't have a clear picture of the situation after reading it.

Aside from the level of quality of the reporting, the real problem with it is this : the author keeps using LGBT when gay or lesbian would have been quite sufficient. There are only a few instances where gay or trans are used to specifically describe some people, such as the police officer.

There's a bizarre lingering after-effect from that article : since no one group was singled out for anyone to empathize with, and the author almost used the anonymous acronym LGBT exclusively to describe the disappearing 'gayberhood,' the article feels like it was written for a newspaper of the 1960s, a time when reporters deliberately removed any details about those nasty gays and homosexuals in order not to offend the predominantly heterosexual readership and their delicate sensibilities. By being so utterly inclusive, the article, devoid of personalized details, ended being completely anonymous and oddly prudish. It's like we're going backwards.

Ironically, that Guardian article did to the people it profiled what the Tech Bros are being blamed for : the complete erasure of gay people. By only using LGBT instead of gay or lesbian, the anonymous acronym suddenly dehumanized the subject it tried to humanize. The article was safe and clean, devoid of any ‘offensive’ element. It was perfectly bland and anonymous. In doing so, it appeared to have been written for readers on the right. The anonymity of 'LGBT+' is one of the many reasons why I never use it. It's a dehumanizing term. It actually means nothing.

And remember, The Guardian is a newspaper on the left.

I only used two examples for this article to demonstrate how new progressive words or terms can actually be dehumanizing, and how using tactics championed by the right are not doing liberals any favors. There are hundreds more of examples out there I could have used. Examples of the extreme left changing the mainstream left for the worse are not lacking. With just these two examples, I can say that there’s an incredible disconnect on the left side, when these things are acceptable, or more importantly, that no one on the left is noticing these troubling changes. It seems though that liberals today believe progress means just about anything, and that would even include ultra conservative ideologies. It’s something quite bizarre and almost impossible to explain. But it all boils down to the concept that any ‘progress’ is seen as positive and correct, so therefore it's all good, right? It’s a fallacy. It’s the fallacy that all progress is actually progressive.

Some might say it’s simplistic just to blame everything on the right. My article is not about the validity of political views from either the right or the left. It’s about the inability of one political group, in this case the left, to recognize that their initial point-of-view have been so distorted by blind allegiance to a single ideology, the fallacy of progress, that many of their cherished causes are now becoming direct liabilities to its very existence.

The enemy is pretty easy to figure out. It’s stealth ultra conservative ideologies permeating many aspects of society, including those of the new darling of liberals, ’identity politics.’ I’m convinced that a lot of stealth political ideologies from the right have infiltrated the left via the extreme left, or the New Right. Funny enough, even some rabid Twitter activists, such as the Trans activist below, are realizing how true liberalism and identity politics, aka the New Right, are mutually exclusive.


Yes, Amy. Social justice and identity politics are not compatible with liberal ideologies. Just don't tell the left about it though.

Unfortunately, for many people, the right is only symbolized by the Harpers, Cruzs or Trumps of the world and if people don’t recognize themselves in them, then they don’t believe they are on the right side of the political spectrum, even if they probably are. This so-called New Right is doing more harm to the real left than anything the right could have accomplished alone by itself, certainly with the inability of the left to see what's going on here.

The enemy is this New Right masquerading as the extreme left. The extreme left are just people on the right who are in complete denial.


Know thy self, know thy enemy.
A thousand battles, a thousand victories

- Sun Tzu


© 2016 thebystander.ca

contact : thebystandersite@gmail.com

Friday, March 25, 2016

Random notes


Identity Crisis -

What will it take for the LGB to figure out that the LGBTwhatever is anti-gay?

(Link goes to Pink News which I don't care for but that's the only link)

National Union of Students says gay men are not oppressed enough to be part of LGB/T


----------

A 'lesbian non-binary Trans woman,' who happens to suck cock, becomes 'convenor' at Edinburgh Uni and is already in trouble, for trying to expel lesbians as they consider them 'transphobes' and also used anti-semetic word in tweets.


EUSA launches investigation after new LGB/T convener tweets anti-Semitic slur


----------


More GENDER FLAVOR OF THE MONTH nonsense...as it always is with The Guardian, the comments are better than the article.

The gender-fluid generation


Culture -

I was surprised the book was even nominated. I thought, Hmm there’s one gay org that hasn’t been hijacked by trans? Alice Dreger has received hate messages on twitter and has been driven away from it.

Lambda Literary awards withdraws Galileo’s Middle Finger by Alice Dreger after complaints from Trans

----------


Paris Lees is a misogynistic trans woman who writes trashy articles like this one, so of course she wins an award from Words by Women.

Words by Women awards Paris Lee for ‘comment writer of the year’


US politics -

The HRC continues to be a shimmering, glowing star in the gay firmament

Human Rights Campaign endorses Republican Mark Kirk

----------

After Kentucky, North Carolina passed legislation to remove all 'LGBT' rights. Of course, no one is brave enough to mention the big elephant in the room: the T is dragging gay rights down...the toilet

Yet another state removes all LGB/T rights



Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Welcome to the Bystander

The Bystander is a new blog which will cover current topics from a decidedly different point-of-view : the one of reason. Hopelessly stuck on the left of the political spectrum but not one the extreme left which is causing so many problems these days, The Bystander will be a voice of sanity amidst the insanity of the global, national and local socio-political landscape. As a non-heterosexual, I will  cover topics affecting the rights of the LGB. Ideas will be challenging and new, things one doesn't usually see and read on the internet. The Bystander will have an outlook of things seen and experienced from the perspective of someone standing by the sideline, not necessarily in a passive way but in an intellectual active way, this in order to see the forest for the trees. 

The blog is brand new and still going through its initial birthing process. They're will be new articles and features added regularly as things get organized here. Make sure to bookmark the page and / or follow us.

Thank you for your interest,

The Bystander

© 2016 thebystander.ca

contact : thebystandersite@gmail.com

Thursday, March 17, 2016

Why the LGBT doesn’t work anymore


The LGBT is at a crossroads right now. Well, I should write the LGBTTQQIAAP+ is at a crossroads. Soon there won’t be enough letters left in the alphabet for anything else to be added. Kidding aside, the coalition has become unwieldy, unfocused and quite frankly, a joke. The fact that no one is capable of remembering the order of the letters and which one actually belongs to it, or what the latest initial stands for (Q is for queer or questioning?) is enough for any rational human being to know that things have gotten out of hand.

The original goal of the acronym was meant to be as inclusive as possible, regardless of the number of people who actually identify within that group. No one group is better or privileged than the other. Inclusivity is paramount. Of course, for those who are cynics like me, the extended acronym is a complete farce but in its present state it perfectly illustrates the absurdity of the coalition. As it is at the moment, it’s simply unsustainable, and under the weight of its own hubris, is slowly coming apart at the seams. And the signs are everywhere.

When you ask people why the LGBT even exists most would say that each individual group suffer from the same type of oppression stemming from the heterosexual majority. Gays, lesbians, Bis and the gender identity bunch share the same experience of discrimination and hate from the ‘normal’ folks. To them, we are all the ‘others.’

This is the constant argument for every sexual or gender minority to be lumped together. I recently posted a message at an article over the idea of removing the T from the LGB. I stated in my post that the T had nothing in common with the LGB. The first reply went like this :

“Every argument used against trans people is used against gay people.

"It's just a phase."
"If you let them in the bathroom, they'll attack you and rape you!"
"If you let them near your children, they'll try to convert them and rape them!"
"They're an abomination unto god."
"They're trying to destroy our culture."
"What will we tell our kids when they see?"
"They're sick and need to be cured."
"They're mentally unstable and can't be trusted."
"They're obsessed with sex.”

This is, in a nutshell, the main and sole reason why the LGB should be with the T and Qs. We have the same oppressors. Brilliant. Forget about the endless number of other reasons gay rights can be championed for, or that same sex rights aren’t enough anymore. We are all seen as ‘other’ by our main oppressor. We, as a ‘community,’ are defined by the ones who hate us. And, sadly, to the majority who support the LGBTTQQIAAP+, that’s perfectly fine with them.

The logic behind this argument is hopelessly flawed. If the fundamental reasons of LGBT’s existence is just a myriad collection of shared experiences of oppression pulled together amongst disparate groups to fight for human rights, nothing good will come out of it, and the tell-tale signs that things aren’t working out are everywhere. It would take several additional posts to cover them all in great details. For this article, I’ll mention the most glaring one : the rise in fake gay bashings.

This is a truly startling trend that is almost totally without any rational explanation. Or maybe there is one. Gays and lesbians would agree that there are enough real cases of gay bashing to contend with, most of which never even make headlines anywhere, that the additional burden of the existence of fake anti-LBGT attacks are not helping the general cause. The idea of falsifying such incidents to garner attention (and maybe money) is totally unconscionable and beyond the pale, and yet it’s happening more and more often. Why are the numbers of fake gay bashings growing these days?

Here’s just a small sample of this growing trend :

Mari Poindexter faked a homophobic attack at a Toby Keith concert 

Charlie Rogers faked an attack of three homophobic men who broke into her home

Second link of the same story.

Lesbian couple FAKED hate crime by painting their OWN home with 'Kill the Gays'

Alexandra Pennell faked receiving anti-gay messages on notes slipped under her door

Lesbian couple, Carol Ann Stutte and Laura Jean Stutte, burned down their own house for insurance, blamed homophobic neighbours

17-year-old top female wrestler admit she faked gay-bashing incident

Transgender student Genesis Hernandez hoaxed hate crimes at Vassar College

Joseph Baken fakes an attack by three men outside a local eatery

Floyd Elliott admits hate crime attack was false

Joe Williams charged with filing a false report for an anti-gay attack

Richard Kennedy Gay theatre student who claimed he was beaten by homophobic thugs admits he got his injuries when he fell over

Transgender student recants attack, sexual assault report

Student admits hate-mail hoax

UNC student seeks help after falsely reporting hate crime

The list goes on and on.

Some of these cases appear to be standard cases of fraud done by LGBT people doing unscrupulous things for basic monetary gains, but the use of ‘homophobia’ as a shield to discredit the fake oppressors, in most of these incidents, is still a stain on the ‘community.’ Some have said that many of these fake anti-gay attacks are only forms of activism gone too far and shouldn’t be taken too seriously. That might be true but that’s also the issue at hand. How far should activism, spawned from oppression, go? Should these hoaxes be accepted as legitimate forms of activism? For many, the fact that the ‘issue’ was put out there to the general public is good enough and their legitimacy is not important so they turn a blind eye to these incidents. But for me it’s more of a direct correlation of the so-called ‘Oppression Olympics’ currently dominating the LGBT narrative.

In our current epoch, hopelessly obsessed with gender identity, intersectionality and other terms that have no actual use in the real world, the ones who suffer the most, or the ones who are actually being oppressed, get the most attention. There’s a certain level of clout that comes with the suffering. One just has to look at the response from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) president Chad Griffin who used Matthew Shepard’s death not once but twice to dismiss the idea of removing the T from the LGB (Griffin statements were directed at for the DROP THE T petition at change.org and at a recent USA Today article on 'divorcing the T'). In this kind of fevered, irrational mentality, the inevitable use of crowdfunding campaigns like GoFundMe have become the norm whenever attacks have occurred. The lure of instant sympathy and cash may be too tempting to some, hence the rise in fake anti-gay attacks. And very little concern has been voiced by LGBT orgs such the HRC or GLAAD over this troubling issue. One would think that this alarming trend would, at the very least, merit some mention somewhere but alas, like most pressing issues, LGBT orgs have their heads in the sand and don’t see (or refuse to see) the extreme damage this is doing to the credibility of the collation members. These orgs, along with the implicit support of websites from GAY inc, are, in fact, fanning the flames of identity politics. They’ve wholly embraced the concept without realizing the nefarious consequences it always creates in its wake.

When gay activism started 40+ years ago, it was simply G, which stood for gay. Eventually it changed to GL, with lesbians added with the G and later on, the B added to make the GLB. Whether the three groups saw things on the same level or whether they got along was besides the point since the three groups had one common denominator : they were all about sexual orientation, which is positive and life-affirming. It is something I can easily support.

But today the LGBT, or the freakish LGBTTQQIAAP+ counterpart, is a constant reminder that the oppressors have the last word on who is oppressed the most and who isn’t. There’s simply no way around this.

If the overlong acronym was to be splintered, with the LGB separating from the Ts and Qs, the focus of the LGB would revert back to just being about sexual orientation, not oppression, then the number of fake attacks would eventually dwindle since the lure of instant martydom, so prized by the disciples of the ‘Oppression Olympics,’ would quickly lose its lustre. There’d still be fake attacks but not at this alarming rate. Gay activism would not be identified by the ones who want to see them dead but by the actual sexual orientation of its members. What a novel idea! But by glorifying oppression, as it is at the moment, all in the name of some fake kumbaya coalition, the LGBTTQQIAAP+, its raison d’ĂȘtre will always be steeped in abject negativity. Expect more fake anti-gay attacks in the future, and in return, fostering more negativity towards the ‘community.’

In the case of the LGBTTQQIAAP+, misery sure loves company.

© 2016 thebystander.ca

contact : thebystandersite@gmail.com