Books, Media, & the Arts
“[I]t’s okay to ask questions about something that’s very new and involves children. The answer can’t always be that anyone from a marginalized community is automatically right, trump card, mic drop, end of discussion. Because we’re literally experimenting on children. Maybe that’s why Sweden and Finland have stopped giving puberty blockers to kids. Because we just don’t know much about the long-term effects, although common sense should tell you that when you reverse the course of raging hormones, there’s going to be problems. We do know it hinders the development of bone density — which is kind of important if you like having a skeleton — fertility and the ability to have an orgasm seem also to be affected. This isn’t just a lifestyle decision. It’s medical. Weighing trade-offs is not bigotry.”
Despite how ridiculous the school book controversy has become, it’s important to remember it began because progressives insisted on including a book that involved explicit incest and sexual assault in middle schools to promote LGBTQ works.— Chad Felix Greene 🇮🇱 (@chadfelixg) January 28, 2022
More than any other value, the brave men and women who started the American gay rights movement in the middle part of the last century advocated freedom—the freedom of sexual expression, the freedom to hold a job, the freedom to publish, the freedom to associate (whether at a bar free from police harassment or in a political meeting free from FBI surveillance), the freedom to serve openly in the military, and the freedom to marry. Now that it has achieved those freedoms and a cultural influence once thought impossible, much of what passes for gay activism today is driven by an impulse which is the very opposite of freedom: control.
As I’ve written before, the pagans bloodily persecuted the Christians, and then the Christians came to power and bloodily persecuted the pagans. Communists began as a small, radical movement for workers’ rights, but everywhere they’ve attained power they’ve been ruthless, murderous totalitarians. Those who were formerly outlawed and subject to arrest and worse, once the tide turns and they have the power of government to force others to bend knee, are totally assured of their own moral superiority in doing so.
Along related lines, but about woke-ism generally:
Update:Buttigieg walks back his criticism of LGBTQ+ media. The hammer, apparently, came down, or his advisors pointed out that LGBTQ+ media has been pivotal in gearing up gay fundraising for him. Others of us stand by our criticism, as below.
Dishonest and dissembling:
Will & Grace was a show about teaching tolerance. Today these people have zero tolerance for those who don’t think like them as Will calls for publication of a Hollywood enemies list. https://t.co/UcjGEVBgU0— Chadwick Moore (@Chadwick_Moore) August 31, 2019
McCormack’s original tweet: “Report on everyone attending the [Trump fundraiser], so the rest of us can be clear about who we don’t wanna work with.” Not misinterpreted. https://t.co/dIqykZGcXM— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) September 4, 2019
When you contributed, nobody demanded you be put on a list so they could avoid employing you, did they, @Debramessing? Because that would be black-listing, wouldn’t it?— Nick Searcy, INTERNATIONAL FILM & TELEVISION STAR (@yesnicksearcy) September 1, 2019
The hypocrisy is truly stunning. This is true fascism. https://t.co/Z4ClEHwmpl
You’ve become what you say you hate. https://t.co/56HJbiwPdO— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) September 9, 2019
Nice to see the university prez standing up to the social justice warriors.
“Not now, not at UArts.”— Caitlin Flanagan (@CaitlinPacific) April 13, 2019
This man is literally risking his job to stand up for our shared ideals.
Dr. Paglia, who identifies as a lesbian and had lived with a female partner for years, should be replaced by a queer person?— Steven Volynets (@StevenVolynets) April 13, 2019
Foolishness indeed. https://t.co/r4GEFoQzA1
Inept crew who protested Camille Paglia were not able to stop her lecture. Only a few protesters made it into hall. Must have been mystifying for them. Had to listen to her scholarly lecture on Nefertiti’s massive wig crown & 18th Dynasty Egyptian design. https://t.co/AJvU7MaMp8— Christina Sommers (@CHSommers) April 13, 2019
“Homosexuality and disease and the closet isn’t the point, suffering and victimhood is not at their center, and ideology is pushed back in favor of simple storytelling. These are films in which a character’s sexuality doesn’t become the whole pathetic reason for the movie to exist. This is, remarkably, in American movies, a new thing.”
Last week’s live performance of the early ‘90s musical “Rent” on Fox TV made some changes to the original stage script by the late Jonathan Larson. Foremost among these, the character “Angel,” who Larson had written as a drag queen, was changed to a transwoman, which New York magazine’s Vulture site confirms.
In the original, Angel’s lover, Collins, referred to Angel as “he” in several pivotal scenes, including after Angel’s death, although in the original characters did use “she” when referring to Angel in drag.
As Vulture reports:
Again in an effort to fully establish Angel as a female-identifying character, Collins interrupted the bickering of “Goodbye Love” last night to express his sorrow: “I can’t believe she’s gone; I can’t believe you’re going,” he says, turning to Roger. In the original, he says of Angel, “I can’t believe he’s gone.”
There’s nothing wrong with having a transwoman as a character, but that’s not who Angel was. Collins, Angel’s lover, identifies himself a gay man who likes guys even if they like to cross dress.
A few years ago, a Fox TV version of “The Rocky Horror Show” cast a transwoman, Laverne Cox, as Dr. Frank-N-Furter, another character who was famously a drag queen transvestite and not, in fact, a transwoman. Which raises the issue of whether it is now too politically incorrect to allow presentations of gay men who are drag queens, even if that’s who they were originally meant to be.
As Andrew Sullivan wrote recently, “Contemporary transgender ideology is not a complement to gay rights; in some ways it is in active opposition to them.”
Matt Latimer writes:
At first, the film shows [Dick Cheney] lovingly accepting his daughter Mary as she tells him of her sexual orientation and even giving up his presidential aspirations to protect her. But later, in a scene that was clearly invented, the Mary accuses her parents of coldly throwing her under the bus on the issue of gay marriage when it suits their other daughter’s political purposes. The true backstory is this: Liz, running for office in Wyoming in 2013, was being attacked by fellow Republicans for supporting gay marriage, since she had a gay sister. Liz expressed opposition to same-sex marriage, putting her at odds with Mary’s view. While Dick Cheney himself had supported gay marriage since 2000, he issued a statement defending Liz’s differing stance. Same-sex marriage was a difficult topic for many people, so it wasn’t unusual for one daughter to have a different view of it than another and for a parent to still love them both. Not long before that, Barack Obama and the Democratic Party had opposed same-sex marriage, too. It was also perfectly understandable for a father to want to help his other daughter any way he could, and Liz was losing the race badly. This clearly painful, anguishing dilemma is not explained to viewers at all. Instead, we are shown Cheney, looking down absently, while a tearful Mary accuses him of betrayal.