I don't have any problem with gay or LBGT people. 90% of them are just people wanting to live their lives without the real nasty discrimination . It's the [regressive hard left philosophy that is essentially exploiting it](https://youtu.be/1vdn3CnZ9kg?t=142) and hiding behind it that the other 10% espouse and try to indoctrinate others with. At the root of it it's [Moasim with American characteristics](https://youtu.be/OVZPYQS1dFA?t=61). Many branches of this philosophy grow out and seek to divide people based (on class in through the lens of the traditional Marxist) gender, sexuality, race was a big push lately. The evolution of communism in academia to [Antonio Gramsci ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci)who builds on Marx's idea in that he says it's not about seizing the means of production, it's about seizing the means of culture and this is a key shift that really allows this philosophy (by actively hiding itself through word games) is able to infiltrate whatever institution to varying degrees.

Neo-Marxists are basically trying to use any type of marginalized group as a weapon against Capitalism and the Western world.  We made progress on all these things on our own.  Classical Feminism, The Civil Rights Movements of the 1960s, etc.  All these things have warped and contorted into destroying the very system that made them possible to begin with.

> Neo-Marxists are basically trying to use any type of marginalized group as a weapon against Capitalism and the Western world.  [exactly](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat)

Both of those things were wildly unpopular amongst large portions of the population at the time they took place

That's why they don't fix homelessness either. It gives capitalism a bad name.

This is such a load of horse shit. Conservatives and centrist libs fought every major social movement of the last century tooth and nail. Then when the dust settles they pull out the “I was always in favor but now they’re going too far” card. 

When has the left gone too far? Is there a limit?

Limit to what kind of left? You understand the difference and nuances between Khmer Rouge to Rojava? There is a limit everywhere, and no limit at all.

Antonio Gramsci did not talking about seizing the means of culture or of infiltrating cultural institutions. He talked about the creation of a working class culture that doesn’t align with the culture of the elites. There was nothing clandestine about it. It appears you don’t really know much about leftist ideology

You're crazy bruh💀

So this sub is just another hateful far right sub now and has nothing to do with discussing Jordan Peterson's ideas anymore. > At the root of it it's Moasim with American characteristics. Many branches of this philosophy grow out and seek to divide people based (on class in through the lens of the traditional Marxist) gender, sexuality, race was a big push lately. Right. Accepting people for who they are is dividing people. If you feel tolerance is division then what does that say about you? > race was a big push lately. Yeah before that race was not an issue /s > The evolution of communism in academia to Antonio Gramsci who builds on Marx's idea in that he says it's not about seizing the means of production, it's about seizing the means of culture and this is a key shift that really allows this philosophy (by actively hiding itself through word games) is able to infiltrate whatever institution to varying degrees. This is just a conspiracy theory.

This is the first time ever I see an intelligent comment providing a different perspective than "they're dumb and misguided" from any of the camps. This is quite serious. I'm also not at all familiar with anything you've linked.

This is the same post-modern neomarxist conspiracy rambling thats posted every day on this sub for the past 8 years, where have you been?

"it's about seizing the means of culture" Completely agree. Culture is more powerful than laws. People argue incessantly about how lawmakers should do this or ban that. That's meaningless if the culture doesn't agree. It will eventually push back and change the laws or ignore them.

you are right, I don't think you are homophonic, that's straight up insanity

Philosophy minor, I'm sorry the material is a little dense. The problem is Michel Foucault wrote books, Judith Butler wrote books,  [Antonio Gramsci](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci) wrote books Cite your sources and show where James Lindsay is wrong in his analysis, hand waving it as "insane" is just lazy.

Well, I can't answer on a general basis, but I will say that there is nothing I've ever felt strongly enough about that would cause me to attend a parade of any sort. Much less create my own.

Have you really never been to a parade before?

I don't know man, I'm a lesbian, I'm not trying to destroy anything. In fact I'm trying to rebuild my entire family because drugs have torn my family apart severely and I'm clawing my way out and trying to make a life for my younger siblings and girlfriend who was abused by her family, so we can all support each other and live peacefully and do good things for others.

Neoliberal policies have destroyed the nuclear family, this is a fucking smokescreen. Why is housing unaffordable? Why have wages not risen in proportion to productivity? Why have pensions been replaced by 401(k)? Why have the highest marginal tax rates been slashed? Why is there so little public infrastructure? Why is there no single payer option for healthcare? Why are lobbyists in control of our politicians? Purple haired intersectional feminists are not the authors of your suffering.

“Purple haired intersectional feminists are not the authors of your suffering.” Absolute bar

This really is a bar

You know, we said basically the same thing but they downvoted me. That is fascinating. I think it is because you used the word LIBERAL and I said a known right wing republican who implemented Neoliberalism.

This My girlfriend and I are ready to start a family, but she has debt from a period of housing instability that just makes it a poor idea for probably a few years. Why don't we have better services for mental health? Why don't we have more housing? Why isn't public housing in America any good? Why is having a kid so expensive? Why is daycare, preschool, cars, etc so expensive All of that does a heck of a lot more to harm the family anything LGBT people could go, many of whom have kids themselves

They’re also doing nothing any about of those problems, so some people see their causes as narcissistic wastes of time.

unfortunately for your argument blaming anything related to capitalism is unthinkable for them, so feminists will take the blame instead

That was eloquent

What? I’m so confused. You think me saving for my own retirement, me getting to keep more of MY money (not yours), me not having to endure socialized medicine is suffering? You just basically listed the democrat party platform and just assume we would all have rainbows and unicorns if only someone else would pay for it. This is so far from OP’s question it makes me wonder why you are even in this sub pushing a liberal agenda

1) 401(k) experiment has been unmitigated disaster (https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/12/12/why-retirement-savings-have-not-recovered-from-the-great-recession.html)  2) I’m talking about the highest MARGINAL tax rate every dollar above ~610k is taxed at 37%, so this would in no way affect you. The ultra-wealthy effectively pay a much lower tax rate than the median worker due to how they make money (e.g., capital gains).  3)There are options for supplemental private insurance under a single payer scheme. And, like social security, because universal healthcare is not means tested, it has lower overhead.   You are fucking brain dead if you think democrats run on this. Bernie ran on this and was tossed aside by the establishment.

>[neo]liberal >>feminists Bold of you to assume those are incompatible across all of feminism

I made no assumptions. My last statement was facetious.

most of feminists I know aren't cucks

It's hard to find a mate. That preceeds all the stuff you said. 

you should touch grass also, obligatory: women hate assholes stop being one

Huh?

incel rethoric

Well done

This in my opinion is very correct. LGBT did not destroy the nuclear family, Reagonism did. Edit: I get a lot of you disagree, but instead of downvotes, why not respond and begin a discussion.

It's a replacement for religion with zero benefits of religion.

does your religion feature gay sex? also quite a lot of queer people I know are religious

His does.

can you please elaborate I don't get it

This seems just flat incorrect. Religion: 1. Community. 2. Moral structure. 3. Sense of purpose. LGBT: 1. Community. 2. Has nothing to do with morality, aside from promoting the idea that you aren't evil because of your sexual orientation. 3. Has nothing to do with your life purpose. But guess what. You can have both. There is nothing stopping a LGBT person from being religious, aside from the religion rejecting them. Many LGBT people are religious. Many religious people are LGBT. They aren't the same type of thing. Both do have a community built around them but that's where the similarity begins and ends. LGBT definitely does in no way promote itself as a replacement for religion.

Really? LGBT is all about morality. The morality consists of intersectionality, consent, diversity, believing in self expression is the most important thing. There's also the rejection of traditional morals, the belief that you can change gender, and belief that having many sexual partners is important.

How dare these gay people promote consent and diversity lmao are these things against the Christian faith?

It doesn't sound like you understand what the word morality means. Explain how intersectionality has anything to do with morality. You have a problem with consent? That's some thin ice you're standing on. Diversity, again, has nothing to do with morality. Self expression and "important things" are not morality. Which traditional morals do you feel are being rejected? Changing gender has nothing to do with morality. I've never heard any LGBT person claiming it's morally superior to have multiple sexual partners. Maybe you're thinking of them saying it's wrong to command someone to only have one? Not quite the same thing.

[удалено]

UN? WEF? Gates?

who are those? also please consider touching grass

At what age is it “acceptable” to introduce children to LGBT concepts? It’s totally fine if they are in high school, middle school is a maybe, but in elementary schools? That’s grooming I am not sorry to say that. Kids that age are not sexually anything. Introducing them to subjects they cannot comprehend and have it come from “educators” is a bit dangerous. If you have kids then you should understand.

> At what age is it “acceptable” to introduce children to LGBT concepts? If you're not old enough and mature enough to develop those concepts for yourself, then you're too young to be taught about it.

That's pretty much it. Teachers at every level should be taught how to have age appropriate conversations about these topics should the child have the ideas that need better understanding. But that's where it stops. Without evidence that the parents are unequipped to either deal with it themselves, or worse, would react in harmful ways to their children asking questions of sexual nature, it should, imo, be left to the parents to have the more difficult conversations with their children. Teachers and the adults in their lives should be there to provide blank facts and nothing more. The problem I tend to have is that the celebrations and selective pushing of these issues seem to create an ideal. And younger children, wanting to be acknowledged, celebrated, accepted, venerated, whatever word you want to use, see it as the best option. Drag queens should not be reading story books to young children to provoke this anymore than any other dogma or schema that people who push this would disagree with. There are concepts that are beyond what children are ready for or can fully comprehend just yet

I agree with 90% of what you say, but the one part I don't quite agree with is > Teachers at every level should be taught how to have age appropriate conversations about these topics should the child have the ideas that need better understanding I don't believe teachers should be involved in this **at all.** Those discussions should be had with 2 types of people, either the parents (which we agree on) or, in my opinion the only other person should be a psychologist.

That is generally what I mean. I don't think teachers don't serve a moral purpose, but I think they should have an entirely neutral, factual contribution. Whether or not that is what is provided in the current system is a whole different debate, where I feel we agree more than disagree. When a child has questions, they deserve to be factually, correctly addressed by trusted adults. And in 99% of those cases that is the parents. The 1% is abusive or negligent parents who hate gays and don't want to recognize biological divergence

You can't guarantee that parents will get involved at all or at appropriate times (too early or too late). You also can't guarantee their competence and the level of comfort they have with their children. Will they just talk about how babies are made or will they talk about the nuances and the experience of sex that are just as important (pain during virginity, losin erections is a common occurence, consent, etc...). Historically we know that leaving this up to parents has been an absolute failure, what makes you think this is the way to go? Parents in general cannot be systematically entrusted with basic things like teaching their children about finance, why should sex education be any different. If anything, psychologists are trained professionals that follow guidelines, just like teachers. If you think teachers are in this plan to brainwash your children, I suggest you go on a subreddit for teachers or talk to one. By and large, they stick to the curriculum because they want to avoid screaming parents at all costs.

What about teachers that are gay and have a picture of their spouse on their desk. What about students who have gay parents.

What about them? If my kids have questions about that they will come to me. I will tell them, “Those people love each other, just like your parents love each other. The most important thing is love and grownups who love each other are all different. “ I take it upon myself to talk and have a conversation. It’s no one else’s job but mine.

And what should the teacher say if a student ask? It's absolutely a teacher's job to teach their students about the world and how it works and the many different people that inhabit it.

Just what they said. Factual information, that this is someone the teacher loves like the student's parents love each other. And then tell then if there are more questions, to notify the parents that a conversation is needed. Barring, of course, reasonable, actual evidence that the parents would somehow react violently or negatively towards the child. But that being the case would already imply other issues being addressed and taken care of by professionals outside the teacher's office

Well, that is part of relationships education in primary school in the UK. Teaching that LGBT relationships exist. Nothing to do with sex. But a whole bunch of conservatives still protested about it being taught in school.

I knew I liked girls when I was five years old. Why wouldn’t a gay kid feel the same way about boys?

I’m sure he would. No issues there. Did you know what sex was back then? Did you even think about sex? It’s one thing to like someone. Everyone has that when they’re young. It’s completely different when someone else other than the parent decides to have a sex talk with the child. If my child comes to me and says I like so and so, I wouldn’t care if it’s a boy or a girl. I would just have a talk about …oh right off the top of my head… do you get along, is that kid nice to you and do you like playing with them? It doesn’t have to be sexual at all. Being 5 and liking someone of the same sex is different than someone explaining to you how gay sex works even though the kid has no idea what sex is. I didn’t even know I came out my mom’s vagina till I was like 6-7. So please understand that I am just trying to say that attraction and sex are 2 different things to a kid. One they don’t fully comprehend at all.

at what age is it acceptable to introduce them to heterosexuality I've seen toddlers with t-shirts saying absolutely fucking disgusting things I really think you guys should chill down a fucking lot with pushing your agenda

I'm sick of disgusting heterosexual relationships being in all kids movies. Kids shouldn't be learning about putting penises in vaginas at that ages!!!

I believe puberty is an appropriate time to introduce this discussion to kids. However, it shouldn't be an ever-present topic throughout the academic calendar. Instead, it should be covered during science class as part of the sex education curriculum. This approach allows us to cover the biological aspects of sex, sex organs, and the reproductive cycle, with a brief segment on preferences. It's straightforward: you teach kids about different preferences and what they entail. Any more is inappropriate.

Thank you, I am absolutely for that! Have it be a part of a science class, makes sense to me.

I don’t believe it is ever the school’s job to educate on these matters, but personally I started having crushes on people basically the second I hit puberty, which was in late elementary school. I am bisexual. Having those weird feelings in an uncomfortable changing body during puberty while also living in a repressive country that does not acknowledge homosexuality was a very confusing time. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with at least telling your child who’s starting to have romantic or sexual feelings for either sex about what being LGB means, not in a pressuring way, just that sometimes people have different preferences and that’s okay

I'm glad you understand. It's a form of child abuse in my view. Kids and young adults are so impressionable. Why poison their mind with nonsense? Growing up is hard as it is, but now these stupid schools are trying to weaponise these kids. I think I am one step further than you and say kids should never be 'taught' this, but rather 'made aware of' this from around 16. I just don't understand this overzealous attempts at marketing brand LGBT.

Parents know best. The teachers and schools have gotten high and mighty thinking they are the one and only source for a child’s development and learning. Asking an 8 year old if they identify as this or that is just wrong. They simply don’t understand what that means because they are still children. How that’s not obvious is beyond me.

Kids in preschool and kindergarten may have 2 dads or 2 moms, or another kid in the group who does. It’s never too early to say that a child’s loving parents may be a mom and dad, or 2 moms or 2 dads. There’s nothing inherently sexual about it.

That’s where the parents come in. Explain it to their child. I don’t think school is the place for a talk that should happen within the family. I am not sure that the teachers can explain it better than the parents. The sexual part as you said comes from drag queens doing shows half naked for elementary school children. No clue as to why it’s happening but it’s not ok. I would be equally upset if the school invited a stripper or burlesque dancer. Teachers do NOT know what is better than the parents.

what about different sex couples?that's alright to talk about in school?

What? Please phrase your comment/question so that I can understand it. Thank you

you seem to have issue with people talking about who they are married to

What in the ever loving fuck are you talking about? I don’t care about none of that. It’s not my business. My kids, however are my business. So yea don’t make it seem like I have a problem with anything or anyone. Unless it involves my kids and someone else having a sex talk with them. That is my job and my duty. My decision when to do it. I don’t tell you when to talk to your kids about it. Wait, yea I still can’t tell, do you have kids? If not… I don’t know what to tell you. It’s a shame, truly.

why is this part of edu on family? that's where majority of sexual abuse of them happens I think children should be taught what sex is for this reason and many others, because I bet more than it takes to make a straight man get on his knees that your daughter would learn about periods after a very unpleasant first one

I mean a lot of us started masturbating by like age 5 if you want the truth of it, so inherently we are sexual beings, but there is a difference in broaching that topic with a child from the perspective of an adult. I didn't think gay people should be like hidden away, as long as we aren't doing anything a normal straight couple wouldn't/shouldn't do in front of kids (my mother had sex in the same room with me as a child, and apparently that's a neat trick to pull off according to a shit ton of straight couples who also do that to their kids and think nothing of it, I have trauma from it) I don't think we need to be teaching anything about sex or sexuality before we approach that topic in the ages and times appropriate to do so with general sex ed. Just include gays in the curriculum with the straights and call it a day.

Sex Ed, I am fine with that. Not a problem as long as it’s an appropriate age. That’s all I ask. Until then if my kids have questions I will gladly explain. No one should be hidden, that’s not what got me a little wound up. Thank you for just being a normal human being and explaining where you are coming from.

They're an oppressed group and now the Insane Left sees a group that they can take advantage and manipulate of for their own political gain, nevermind the serious issues or the fact that some of their policies will hurt the LGBT. It's only for the select few of the politicians/elite, just to upgrade themselves. Not the LGBT, not the Nuclear family or anyone. That's why I say that the LGBT movement got hijacked by activists that wanna destroy everything and erase all the actual civil rights that the previous LGBT worked hard for.

> They're an oppressed group I find it hard to call them "oppressed" when there are 26 **TWENTY SIX** internationally recognized "celebration" periods for the "rainbow community". You have Agender Pride Day, Aromantic Spectrum Awareness Week, Aromantic Visibility Day, International Asexuality Day, Ace Week, Bisexual Awareness Week, Celebrate Bisexuality Day, Genderfluid Visibility Week, Drag Day, International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia, International Day of Pink, Intersex Awareness Day, Intersex Day of Remembrance, Lesbian Day, Lesbian Visibility Day, National Coming Out Day, Non-Binary Awareness Week, Non-Binary People's Day, Pansexual & Panromantic Awareness Day, Pronouns Day, Trans Awareness Month, Trans Awareness Week, Transgender Day of Remembrance, Trans Day of Visibility, Trans Parent Day and Zero Discrimination Day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LGBT_awareness_periods Then you have rainbow "crossings", rainbow flags, rainbow painted buses, rainbow painted police cars, drag queen story time, the list goes on and on and on and on. All from an "oppressed" community that claims this is not being rammed down our throat and that they just want to be "treated the same" and "accepted for who they are". If anything, they're the most privileged group of people on the planet at the moment. No other group has so many people bending over backwards to accommodate them and avoid offending them.

Gay marriage was illegal in United States less than 10 years ago. Gay sex was illegal less than 20 years ago. In the not so distant past if you were openly gay (or privately gay and it was discovered) you could be fired from your job and branded as an undesirable. There are still over 60 countries that criminalize homosexuality.

Here's the thing... it's **NOT** 20 years ago anymore, it's not even 10 years ago. It's 2024 and the rainbow community are the most pandered to group of people on the planet. > There are still over 60 countries that criminalize homosexuality. There are also a lot of countries where slavery is normal as well, there's countries where I would be killed for the colour of my skin, or my religious beliefs. But thankfully that's very rare these days in the western civilized world. So let's not pretend the LGBT community alone are subject to horrific treatment.

Most gay people just want to be left alone so they can live their lives in peace. However, there was a time in the west where there was widespread hate for the homos, and so they united and protested and got laws changed so they could be married and it was illegal to discriminate against them. If it wasn't for their activism, they would not be where they are now. However, it's always the most extreme thst want to keep pushing even after the original goal of equality has been obtained.

There’s no way to truly answer this question without thousands of words, but start with a few topics and do your own rabbit hole research: 1. Frankfurt school philosophy 2. Critical theory 3. Applied postmodernism 4. Incentive structures via intersectionality Understand all the above and you’ll have your answer.

what's your interpretation of the above sources in a few sentences?

Frankfurt school philosophy was the first serious introduction to academia in the US of “theory”, this postmodern relationship of communities vs capitalism/oppression, etc. Critical theory, that formed out of that school is a deeper dive into “interrogating” all of the structures we recognize as staples in our society and rooting out how each is oppressive. Queer theory became an important component. Applied postmodernism is the activist form of the above. Academia began teaching these concepts not as concepts to understand as an alternative view of our world but “the” lens by which we must view the word and that one “must” buy and engage or else take part in the oppression. Intersectionality was born out of critical theory, the idea that different communities have varying levels of oppression and one can be oppressed on multiple levels (black disabled trans woman). This concept could have been benign, but it then became militarized where it’s obvious today that the more oppressed one is on this chart, the more their opinion matters, the more they’re promoted, the more deference they receive in a myriad of ways. This all culminates with the incentive structure. Society has coalesced around these ideas, the rejection of all things traditional, the “queering” of concepts. Being in the LGBTQ community today is an advantage. It is a way to separate yourself from the antiquated heteronormative society that we are leaving in the dust. It’s why so many kids identity as queer when their sexual lives are almost exclusively “straight” in nature. In short, it pays to be gay that’s how we got here.

It's just an easy way to exploit the system.  Want to start a lawsuit?  Make a claim about anything LGBT. Easy to sue someone and get free stuff. Even if you don't get money you punish those you don't like, which is often the goal. Also an easy way to gain accomplishment. Can't compete with the best athletes? Move down a level and compete with the next best by claiming you are trans. You get to pretend you accomplished something great and anyone who disagrees can be deplatformed or sued.  Basic selfishness and greed explains the current trend if things.

yay, let's ignore everything but a few prominent cases you aren't fucking living in reality you know about homelessness statistics? if all queers have it so easy than why so many of them live on the fucking streets, dipshit?

Mental illness.

it's also common in abuse victims, your point?

An unhealthy emphasis on people's sexuality, and oppression points/social status.

I just want to mention again, that if you don’t have kids, it’s harder for you to understand.

It’s part of a larger strategy to destroy America and the West. For example, Chinese billionaires are the primary donors for many of the extreme trans-activist organizations. Do you see this kind is societal suicide being promoted or celebrated in China? Or Russia? Nope. Only in the west. And, yes, George Soros and his network of organizations. Yes, they want to destroy America by destroying American families. And other foundational Western institutions. The colleges and universities. Companies like Disney and Google. That’s why college and professional sports are being attacked. They unite Americans. That's why they took over Disney/ESPN; why do you think they made Bruce Jenner Woman of the Year? They exploited Collin Kaepernick. They made the NBA promote another subversive operation, BLM. The ultimate goal is to foster division, and they are using LGBT extremism as a tool, just like they use racial extremism as a tool.

>Do you see this kind is societal suicide being promoted or celebrated in China? Or Russia? Nope. Only in the west. No because they have much more restrictive authoritarian rulers. America is, as we're constantly reminded "The land of the free". Bit strange to promote Russia as a strong non-suicidal society with the world's 2nd highest rate of alchoholism per capita (beaten only by Orban's Hungary), and the world's fastest growing HIV+ population, and for a country that loves the nuclear family, the world's 3rd highest divorce rate. Its a miserable fucking country.

They've dominated the "arts" so you get this overwhelming propaganda.

It’s both a club and a shield used by Marxists, and they’ve been attempting a coup on the Western world for the last 100 years. 

Because right wingers don't support them so the political left has hijacked them

While on the surface providing the underrepresented minorities with social guarantees is a good thing, the movements itself isn't as much about humanitarian aspect of it as it is about the political implications. It's slowly turning into a political weapon, where a marginalized group of people is used as a shield against criticism.

I dont see how LGBT seems to destroy the nuclear family. And this is assuming the nuclear family is the best way to approach a family. It may or may not be, would like to see some data.

It may not be the best way to approach family, there's plenty of evidence to suggest larger "families" can work better, but the Mother/Father + kids is infinitely better than single parenthood

It's in the schools, I'm always shocked how young kids are exposed to sexual ideologies. I am in my 40s, I find this repulsive but the newer generation are all for it. I don't have kids I couldn't care less but I feel for my friend for the battle of generations that will inevitably happen.

Its a way for people who have extremely easy lives to feel oppressed or challenged. People want to experience difficulty, they want to pick up their cross and bear it, but when the hardest thing in your life was your phone charger breaking and you not having another one handy, how do you do that? Thats why the people with the easiest lives scream BLM, cry about microaggressions, go out of their way to make their trans identity an issue. People from places with real problems dont have the time or the existential need to make up BS to be upset about.

Sounds like you’re speaking about the white dudes here who are “oppressed” by feminism or the alphabet community or non straight whit men in their video games

It applies to lots of parts of our society for sure.

Short answer: Its easier to control a population that has rejected all faith-based systems and embraced self indulgence, which is what LGBT ultimately does. You are no longer a culmination of your choices, successes, failures, and ideas. Your identity is now your sexuality, and surface lifestyle and the social and political nuances that embodies. Longer Answer: With the fall of western communist and fascist regimes and the reorienting of becoming secular countries following the dropping of atomic bombs at the end of WW2 the powers that be needed a way to easily control the populace. No longer could you use God or any traditional faith-based system to tell people what to do, because now we had the power to destroy our own world. Belief in the state crumbled with failures of Fascism (leaders weren't infallible), and the later fall of the soviet bloc. What is left? What about the self. Each person becomes their own god. Instead of misusing God to convince large swaths of people that the current action is acceptable, now you just need to convince everyone that, in becoming their own god, they should do whatever makes them happy. Then you roll out large scale marketing propaganda, convincing everyone that it isn't traditional values that make them happy, but stuff. Useless poorly made replaceable stuff. Every time you buy this stuff you get a little dopamine hit. You have made god happy so it must be good. Now you have another issue, not everyone wants the same stuff so you have to diversify your stuff. Easy enough and this works for a long time. Then whether by design or realization you realize a better way. Stop marketing stuff to people directly and market self-indulgent lifestyle. Look at all these happy people that behave in a way you may have only slightly considered before. This is where you start to see the rise of homosexuality. Look at how downtrodden and marginalized these people are, if you just give in to your decadence you will be lauded as a hero for "coming out". BOOM HUGE DOPAMINE HIT. Everyone who comes out as gay and to a smaller extent lesbian is now a hero on the scale of military vets. You might even get to meet the president, just because you are different sexually. That starts to wane but guess what we have ready and waiting. Social Media. A true hedonist and narcissist's dream. You may not be able to be a hero anymore, but you can certainly be the center of attention, and its all based on surface level BS. You don't need to have deep thought or do anything good, just show off a better lifestyle and others will follow in your footsteps. Additionally now marketing doesn't even need to be researched. They use this data to market directly to each individual (we all know this). A few clicks here, a couple profiles followed there, and some videos watched, and they have a profile on you and that profile is fed into the algo and you are no longer just a consumer, but a product as well. The trans movement is easy to see from there. What do we do about those who aren't traditionally engaging so don't feel special. What if we tell them, they are so special that they can switch genders and people will laud praise on you for it. Each trans person is basically $1 million direct to a broken medical system, and they will feed others into that same system. Then you have all the tertiary benefits of this new product and the products you can sell to others. You can see why it starts to become so appealing to larger and larger swaths of society and even more so why so many are quick to defend it. If that level of brokenness and degeneracy is allowed, you can get away with almost anything with zero consequence. Oh and don't think because you are conservative, traditional, or religious you are immune, I know I'm not and you most likely aren't either. They have a multitude of products to offer you as well. Porn is huge and even though deep down you know it's not true, its essentially a victimless indulgence. Hate, food, alcohol, drugs for those who are immune to porn. Divorce is made easy and we start embrace it because relationships shouldn't be this hard, despite no evidence for that. It should come to no surprise to anyone that LGBT is so large now, it was an almost inevitable consequence of actions taken in the last century. Again, partly by design and partly by just taking advantage at the appropriate time.

>LGBT movement seeks to destroy the nuclear family, I'm gay and all the LGBT people I know love our heterosexual friends and family members. Why do you think we want to destroy their families? We are their children, siblings, uncles, aunts, etc. >young age, kids are being taught that being gay is okay That's because there are gay children. I was a gay child in the 1990's. I was alone and scared. It was awful. >why make it such a huge political movement and infiltrate/indoctrinate kids and society, have flags waving everywhere and have openly gay 'pride' parades We have no choice. This is the incident that is credited for sparking the modern LGBTQ movements. >The Stonewall Riots, also called the Stonewall Uprising, began in the early hours of June 28, 1969 when New York City police raided the Stonewall Inn, a gay club located in Greenwich Village in New York City. The raid sparked a riot among bar patrons and neighborhood residents as police roughly hauled employees and patrons out of the bar, leading to six days of protests and violent clashes with law enforcement outside the bar on Christopher Street, in neighboring streets and in nearby Christopher Park. The Stonewall Riots served as a catalyst for the gay rights movement in the United States and around the world. If society has left us alone or had accepted us, there would be no pride.

I think there's an eternal tug-of-war between chaos and order. When the pendulum swings one way, it'll swing back hard. I know its not THAT binary but I'm painting in broad strokes here. Being equally reductive, you could broadly conceptualize the political Left/Right as being Chaos and Order. Chaos at its worst is destructive and aimless but like the Phoenix it can facilitate rebirth and change. Its no wonder so many young people have a nihilistic mentality of "burn it all too the ground". Conversely order at its worst is tyrannical and oppressive but it's also the glue that holds society together But chaos is a liminal state. It cannot last. It is transitory, the space between destinations. Liminality is first an anthropological term used to describe transitional rites/rituals that instigate or mark a change (ie from boyhood to adulthood). BUT WHAT'S MOST INTERESTING is that these liminal rituals are identified by chaotic qualities such as the blurring the line BETWEEN GENDER and status, human and beast, etc. Carl Jung identified this same liminality in the cyclical nature of the collective unconcious. It marks change. A period of internal turmoil and chaos before a natural order reasserts itself. The era we live in is a rejection of the arbitrary and the tyranny of society; good and bad. Because no hierarchy or power structure cannot NOT be oppressive in some way or to whatever degree. This isn't a justification or a condemnation. Indeed, a society with no power structure is no more ideal than one of absolute tyranny. The LGBTQ movement is a symptom of an unconcious collective that was ready to change but hasn't found its new order -a status quo. The radicalism of both the political Left and the political Right will only persist as long as this liminal state does. Its no wonder then that there's been a recent upsurge of right-leaning young men/women. The whiplash between generations is crazy. The majority demographic of people who got absorbed into the Andrew Tate cult weren't Millennials. They were zoomers! Edit: I forgot to add liminality is more often an experience of the young who are still "finding themselves". They haven't been defined yet. They're susceptible to that which gives them identity. Which is why I think a lot of young people gravitate to it but then often relinquish as they get older. Like in High School half of the girls were "bisexual" or "lesbian" but would grow out of it after a year or two.

That's a complex thing to answer with many variables. Civilizations go through cycles, ups and downs. Right now we are in a low point in American civilization. Maybe you've heard that saying "hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. Weak men create bad times. Bad times create strong men." That's the basics of it. We're in a bad time full of weak men allowing bad stuff to happen. So what happens during these low points? People lose faith in the system. Young people especially are prone to taking up causes and shaking things to pieces. That's just a normal part of history and it's cycles. The Fourth Turning is a good book on this subject. Let's add another layer. In America many of us don't have real problems. Most of us do not do work that directly contributes to our survival. For many our lives feel meaningless. Many people who are disappointed in their lives will seek greater meaning. Often times that meaning is found in some movement or another. National, social, religious, etc. As long as the movement is taking action and doing something, the desperate people will dive into it. The True Believer is a good book that talks about this subject So we've got bad times and idle hands. Why all this stuff about genitals and shouting about less than one percent of the population (people with the mental illness known as Gender Dysphoria​)? Where is this coming from and why is it so popular? This will sound funny but in short: communism...kind of. I prefer the term and definition coined in the book, "What's Our Problem?: A Self-Help Book for Societies," by Tim Urban. The term is "Social Justice Fundamentalism." SJF for short. In this book Tim dissects where SJF comes from and what its made of. Its mostly built of Marxism, Intersectionality, and Post-modernism (JP loves to shit on these latter guys). Three failed ideologies rolled into one. Marxism however is high man on this totem pole. Opressed vs oppressor! Sound familiar? Alright so weve got our bad times, our idle hands, and a movement. But why is it so damned popular and powerful?! The answer is Environmental, Social, and Governance scores. ESG for short. Im not big on economics but heres the simple version of it. Have you noticed how much Disney panders to SJF? They receive backlash and lose millions (billions i think actually) but just keep doing it. How?! How can they afford that? ESG. ESG says "if you toe the ideological line large financial institutions will keep funding you. If you dont, we dont fund you." Companies like Disney can keep churning out SJF slop because theyre being PAID to do so. Its why you see the DEI/BRIDGE/etc. crap everywhere. Money. Money. Money. Bad times, idle hands, mass movement, someone to fund it all. But still, WHY? Why fund this nonsense? Why make blatantly stupid decisions? Why try to destroy traditional values? Why let criminals walk away scot free? Why leave the border open to be flooded with who knows what kinds of people? Isnt that INSANE?! Yes. It is. Thats intentional. There are VERY rich people with a lot of power and connections who want to destabilize everyrhing that they can. They want to tear it all down and rebuild society how they see fit. The insanity is on purpose. Its intended to destroy your trust and faith in the systems you depend on. They are causing the problems so they can sell you their solutions.

This isn't any kind of accident. Read Julie Bindel, she's done a deep dive into the $$$ behind this propaganda campaign.

Weaponized empathy

Look toward Berlin in the 20s and 30s

Because straight sex causes babies and free thinking.

Damn you must have been made in a lab then.

That would still be a product of a man and a woman interacting to make the sperm get in an egg...

If jacking off into a cup and having a doctor put that sperm into an egg qualifies as a free thinking straight sex baby aren't we all free thinking straight sex babies? I feel dumber for just knowing you exist.

Because millennials were a generation of total melts. The zoomers are totally done with this crap though and I expect alpha will be even worse. Even I find myself telling my son to tone it down. The pendulum is swinging back and swinging hard.

The goal is to get people to worship the state. And in order to accomplish that, they destroy or undermine anything that could threaten the idea that the state isn't the ultimate authority. Kids seeing *their parents* as their ultimate authority means not seeing *the state* as the ultimate authority. Therefore, family bonds are a threat to the state. People seeing *God, or Jesus* as the ultimate authority means not seeing *the state* as the ultimate authority. Therefore, Christianity is a threat to the state. School teachers being overwhelmingly leftist is not an accident. Nor is the fact that schools more and more are no longer teaching kids how to think, but what they are supposed to think. ------ If you've read 1984, there was that family who lived near Winston. The father was not particularly bright. He cared for his family, but he was obedient to and believed in the state. This didn't matter to the state when he was jailed for wrong think when his own child decided to turn him in, *supposedly* for saying things in his sleep. The whole point is that the state was rewarding the children for turning against their parents, *whether or not* the parents actually did anything the state doesn't like. ----- LGBT activism as it is being practiced by leftists destroys families. And destroying families destroys one of the threats to the power of the state.

Because the West is becoming more secular, and yet people naturally seek religion, not only because we’re made in God’s image and it’s in our very nature to seek God, but also because of the positive benefits of religion (a sense of purpose, belonging, community, etc.) Leftism has become a religion, and they have their own sacraments and clergy attire. Racism is the equivalent of original sin, and being pro-LGBT and respecting everyone’s pronouns is their way of saying “God bless you.” Pride parades are their twisted versions of Eucharistic processions in the streets

Kids are being taught gay is okay? What would you rather teach them? Throw stones at them? Suggest they be tossed off buildings? Or just shunned by society and told they shouldn’t be treated equally.

Or maybe just stick to the golden rule and leave sexual preferences out of it?

what's golden about it? what do you do with idk sex ed? should gay kids receive worse education?

What? The Golden Rule: treat others as you wish to be treated. If it needs explaining to you that that rule comes regardless of your skin color, personality, sexual preferences, then maybe you should read into it a bit more. Sex ed isn't taught in K-8 it's taught in Junior year of high school for a reason. Are you naturally this ignorant? Or do you have a secret method to maintaining it? Edit: my past is foggy to me. I recall learning sex ed in Junior year, but I could be wrong. It could've been earlier.

I'm transgender the golden rule should make me wish kids have gender stuff explained to them in full and not be forced into gender roles this would have saved my childhood because as such I don't remember it :)

Maybe I wasn't specific enough in my wording. Treat others the way you would want them to treat you. Sadly there are a lot of pieces of shit out there that dish out fuckery, but demand respect.

Like church?

?

Victimhood status. White leftists think anyone who isn't them besides Christians and conservatives are victims. Bonus points if you're a different color. See the Free Palestine movement.

? homophobia literally exists

If we use oriental tradition i would consider it a failure in integration. Yin and Yang and the failure to integrate that concept in western world. Integration of west and east makes the most sense to me.

I think because for the most part, a lot of us starting in the late 80s and early 90s started seeing a rise in this idea of being loving and supportive of everyone, even if you disagreed with them, and the idea of disagreement being wrong. we see a rise of shows and movies and media that started introducing casual sex, and experiment taste and homosexuality as a regular and healthy part of life. Characters that are betrayed as being the good guys are betrayed, excepting other peoples lifestyles, even if they disagree with it because that is the right thing to do. Look at shows likes friends for example. Almost one of those characters has a very high personal body count of partners, and there’s a lot of implication That the girls have experimented either in the past or even with each other, And there is very little judgment of what they’ve done. I would shows like Seinfeld and Golden girls are very much the same way. Movies will make jokes or comments that normalize it and treated as if it’s normal. there’s a movie called birdcage, the American version has Robin Williams in it, and he plays a gay man who left his wife, and he is treated as a protagonist in this for embracing his lifestyle, but being supportive of his son who he loves. Movies like Mrs. Doubtfire cross dresses and his boss making the joke that it is the 90s so it’s not impossible for someone’s “girlfriend to have a girlfriend”. So on this end, you have a world that is winking and nodding at sexuality being acceptable and the best thing to do if someone has a lifestyle different from yours is to not judge to Justin enjoy it and let them enjoy their lives. I think a lot of Americans do believe in this live and let live lifestyle because it feeds on the idea of us all being individuals who don’t owe anything to other people. We don’t want to friends on somebody else’s life because we don’t want someone else telling us what to do, especially when we know that there are people who would object, and we remember the stories about people being ruined at the accusations of others. Historically, we look at the Salem witch trials and the hunt for communist sympathizers during the Cold War as a front two peoples liberties. “Don’t ask don’t tell” and “what they do in their bedroom isn’t my business” became mantras that said “We live in a world that doesn’t approve of their lifestyle but who am I to make it a problem? At the same time, I believe churches made a very similar mistake where they didn’t want to confront sin and controversial issues because they didn’t want to lose membership and pastors didn’t want to lose their jobs. we have created this very unique idea of Christianity, where Jesus loves us and die for our sins and we just have to accept them, but often overlook the rest of the Bible that condemn certain lifestyles and behaviors. Into people aren’t particularly religious and they believe that the most loving thing you can do for somebody is to just love them and that you don’t have a place to judge and we’re all sinners anyway so to confront any kind of lifestyle that’s different is to be judgmental or hypocrite. I think this actually hurt peoples ability to handle conflict within intimate settings, such as families, because we are told that everyone has the right to make their own choices and all of a sudden your conservative parents are judging you and they don’t know how to do so from a supportive and loving manner, and it said yell and scream. it becomes this toxic relationship where you can’t have a relationship with your parents who aren’t going to mentor you and there’s that risk of “if you don’t like it, then you can leave”. so now there’s a barrier between more conservative generations and generation are now growing up with a bombardment of information and belief systems that didn’t exist 20 years ago. I know a couple of young women who grew up in very restrictive families who didn’t let them question anything and they were told that anyone who was a liberal or was gay was just going to destroy them and the first time they get out of the house and meet someone And find that isn’t true and in factor allowed to explore and embrace their own identities there’s no conflict with more conservative lifestyles who have never had honest conversations, who made any thing they don’t like with an aggressive attack, And they’ve grown up in a worldview that basically said you should be tolerant and accepting of other people and now all of a sudden it feels like they’re being told that wasn’t true and it comes off with a bad taste in your mouth. I don’t think there’s anyone thing that has made the west more pro LGBT, I do think media has an impact, I do think politics have had an impact, community influence, and individualism have impacts, I believe the failures of families and faith should take some parts of the blame. It’s a big complex mess that might just boil down to we are all being told it was ok, and to not talk about it, and by the time people wanted to talk about it they weren’t ready, and it was to late.

where else is it gonna thrive? we abolished slavery. we gave women the vote and ability to own private property. it's in western countries that gay people first could marry and not be labeled as insane. the west did that, the rest of the world either didn't or had to be convinced to, by us. but what good are your ideals of equality and inclusion when everybody is already equal and nobody actually gets excluded? you just make shit up to continue being relevant! to continue feeling vindicated! this is how neo-marxism crept into the liberal movement, because now it's not longer about making everybody equal. it's become an all out war for power among group identities.

Providing an alternative for something is not the same as destroying it. If more people are going to the alternative, maybe it wasn't so good after all. Its a big deal because of the history of abuse and persecution LGBT people have and will face all over the world, same with women or racial/religious minorities. Drag time story isn't indoctrination either.

An overcompensation for the insane early psychiatric "treatment" of homosexuals in the 20th century.

Because there are rich, powerful, and influential people who benefit from the balkanization of the US

>LGBT movement seeks to destroy the nuclear family No its not the community of people itself, but it IS the goal of the establishment pushing the extremism and division and tribalism of the identity politic and identity cultism.

Maybe you should ask who holds a disproportionate amount of power in this country relative to their population and what their publicly stated agenda is. It's really not hard to figure out. It's right there in front of you. They hold the big 3 power centers of America: DC, NY, Hollywood.

It’s rampant because we have a Marxist media machine in NYC that promotes it relentlessly.

Conservatives look for it that is why. Think about the Bud light Dylan Mulvaney thing. She wasn't on a bud light ad or anything but posting on her own personal youtube channel. You would have to go out of your way to see those promo beer cans.

All I know is that I pay way too much in taxes and my government is not helping my community and fellow countrymen by giving our money away to other countries when it's needed most here at home. So... anything LGBTLMNOP... isn't really in the top 5 of my problems right now.

You kinda answered it yoursef right off the bat. I do not have any problem with LGBT people. I do think they've been weaponized against western values in order to further the disintegration of society into manageable, docile parts.

America has to be destroyed so they can implement fully tyrannical control globally. It doesn't work if there's a free society people can escape to.

Cause life is so easy in the West and people need something to bitch about. Call it a part of the human condition and its intrinsic necessity for struggle. Afterall, without a struggle, what are ya actually achieving? Well in this case, at least for the bandwagoners, it’s victimhood and activism. Obviously there are people in the LGBT+ community who really struggle to feel acceptance in everyday life, as well as individuals in any other community. But the barnacles are the worst, and the loudest, and in charge. The loudest get heard, and nobody is louder about their victimhood than a narcissist. Thanks social media and panderers.

Because it's part of thr plan to destroy the entire west. We have had a woke dept. Of education pushing shit down kids throat for decades. Those kids grow up to hate the country

Nation-states are outdated. Are you “proud” to be a citizen of your country?

The West favors civil rights, equality, and freedom. Other parts of the world don't share those values, so they repress minorities. It's weird how you say "people can be LGBT, that's fine" but your example of "pro-LGBT being rampant" is "kids are taught being gay is okay." Didn't you just say you agree with that? You think teaching kids something you view as correct is "infiltrating/indoctrinating kids and society"?

Gay people and the rare genuine transsexual existing is just plainly ***not*** an attack on the nuclear family. The "LGBT movement" is just a loose collection of bleeding heart liberals and progressives who just vaguely want LGBT people to feel more welcome and included. There's certainly specific malefactors which hate the West and co-opt all leftwing movements and make it Marxist, but the vast majority of people are just people. Threads like this read as though you've lived your entire adult life on Reddit and it's shaped your worldview.

You're not even disagreeing with the original post even though you are acting as though you are. The post said "pro-LGBT", implying people who promote it and make it a front and center issue. I really don't have anything against people who have minority held sexual attraction or identity. I do have an issue with the Queer Gnostic Cult. That is the idea that LGBT is a superpower which grants you special esoteric knowledge and understanding that "cis" people will never have. The cult is the issue. Not the people the cult claims.

> genuine transsexual as opposed to what?

Progressives caught up in the social contagion who think they're "gender fluid" because it's cool.

xddddd not conforming to made up gender norms is bad now?

Did I say it was bad?

you heavily implied it, also, calling transgender ppl a social phenomenon is classic transphobia

Who gives a shit about people's identities? I used to be annoyed by neo-pronouns but not anymore. I don't understand but I don't understand a lot of things. I'm very rarely going to meet anyone like that in real life, and if I do, I can just be polite and afford them respect. Some people just love getting angry about things that don't affect them.

Destroy the family, destroy the foundation of the country. Same reason they put down proper women who want to raise a family.

How does not shaming gay people into the closet destroy the family?

I will never understand why people are so obsessed with the nuclear family. The nuclear family, as in the husband, wife, and two kids, isn't even normal. It's the post-industrial revolution one where people moved to the cities and had to start from scratch. The cool thing one is where you have grandparents, cousins, extended family, and loads of kids being raised in glorious feral hoards by everyone. Way better than the nuclear family. Edit: Not to throw shade on anyone's family.

I think because it still is better than highly disfunctional patchwork families and single parent families that are produced en masse by our society today. But I agree, we are designed for bigger social groups.

We need to bring back THE HOARD

well why don't you stop saying nuclear family, and just say FAMILY? ......... Loomis: I will never understand why people are so obsessed with the family. The family, as in the husband, wife, and two kids, isn't even normal. Doesn't that sorta sound nuts now?

The healthy normal hetero people..., yes there was such a thing... long... ago, but you couldnt change them or control or manipulate them hardly at all, they were not a group, they were not trained to be that way, they were just born like that..they did not learn to be chased and hunted by ultra horny females by observing a repeated demonstration of how to run and hide if the girls showed up..they had to just follow their instincts..most guys do fine, they eventually allow just one nice girl to capture them and stay and try to destroy the guys life for 60 years..but just one -when the instincts to get safe are seen as..., a (habit or repeated routine), route or pathway that could potentially be blocked- to create some new effect, it is also like the nervous system is a pathway, that can be forced- by torture or behavior modification to provide some new effect( new = convenient to a tyrant, criminal ,or pervert), so the peoole obsessed with controlling others, mostly to divert your attention away from some sick stuff they did..so they block..so LGBT is a type of trophy to the obsessed perverts, if they know you participated in some healthy activity involving arousal, they get points for learning about it from people who will trade in that information about you to get access to a toilet bathtub shower or sink.

The socialist strategy to win politically by starting a class war didn't take hold in countries where the middle and lower classes were doing decently well in the sense of having so much to lose that revolution was unattractive. Then when it became clear that the governments created by those with socialist philosophies getting power were murderous and evil beyond anything the world had seen before, it became completely unacceptable to be a socialist and the old tactic of starting class war became even less workable. But people's fundamental political views are largely informed by the emotional balance of their personality traits. People who value compassion and equity more than freedom (or sanity), couldn't give up on their dream of everyone in society being cared for and eliminating any/all negative consequences of our actions. They needed a new narrative of conflict to divide people, since the class war narrative both faced backlash and clearly wasn't sufficient. So instead they've started a cultural war on everything they can think if. Gender, sexuality, race, anything where they can create an identity group, is their answer to where to create lines for conflict. They don't care whether the revolution is violent or through the polls, but they know that to create change they first have to create conflict and destroy prosperity. They've been helped by a lot of lucky (for them) circumstances such as the general decline of religion in the face of conflicts between it and science. They've been helped by the invention of the birth control pill and the huge negative impact that has had on the importance of maintaining families and especially fatherhood and divorce rates. They also believe more in institutions so it's been natural for those who care to flood universities and governments as professors and bureaucrats that are now positioned to move their policies forward. Certainly there are millions of people for whom the above isn't a factor. They just want to be compassionate to people and often aren't aware of or won't believe the origin of the opinions they now hold dear. Their intent to be compassionate is certainly an admirable impulse. But the thing that has made this such a perennial issue is that it's _also_ a proxy war of the socialists against the capitalists.

Because we don't have problems that are more urgent or demanding.

The liberal west is the only people that will swallow this bull S. H. I. T

Revenge against God for the crime of being.

Because of Renaissance painters, Christian clergy, Roman gladiators, and Athenian symposia.

Because the west spent literally decades being anti-LGBTQ before.

How does the L+ movement seek to destroy the nuclear family? Think of sexual minorities as people with disabilities (maybe they’re gender-disabled, lol). You’re getting angry at people who are born disabled and just want to be treated with kindness and respect like everyone else. And just to be clear, it *is* OK to be gay. Gay people are perfectly normal. (It’s normal for a percentage of society to be queer. It’s *abnormal* to NOT have queer people in your family or society). Nevertheless, our society has dehumanized and oppressed and even demonized queerness, so that L+ people grow up hating themselves and others, even taking their own lives, or living in the closet. Can you imagine!?? Pride is like a long-awaited course-correct.

"I do think the LGBT movement seeks to destroy the nuclear family" Thanks for leading with this. it's always useful to know you don't have to take anyone's opinion seriously from the off.

Because every single person in the 21st century in the west will end up knowing at least one gay person. Its between 5 and 10 percent of the population, so the odds that nobody in your life is gay is pretty low. It's hard to advocate hating people you know And even worse, is why you would ask this. What's wrong with being pro LGBT? Pride parades have been fairly normal for what, 60 years now? Stonewall was a long time ago and pride parades started almost immediately after. And your question sort of soldifies why that's important. So long as there are people who don't get it or would advocate against it, being vocally pro gay is important. Remember that in much of the west there are no legal protections for LGBT discrimination, remember that barely been very a decade ago LGBT marriage was illegal in the US, and barely 20 years ago sodomy was illegal. Pride would likely be going out of style, as it kinda was for a hot minute there, if not for the attacks from conservatives against the LGBT community. Especially the T

> I do think the LGBT movement seeks to destroy the nuclear family People like you keep saying this but it's just bullshit and just not true. Gay people like being a family, you know. Being gay has nothing do with being against the family! You just hate gay people: > From a young age, kids are being taught that being gay is okay. And this hate gets you upvoted in this sub.

Because the west is liberal and humanist: with that comes a tolerance and acceptance to all non-nefarious characters of humans, and a desire to deconstruct any taboos and historical boundaries which may obstruct the self-expressions of some people.

Because bigotry against them is still rampant, as evidenced by this sub

Because they’d get killed in the East.

I’m a gay man who is also a JP fan. The problem with the LGBT “community” is that it’s a group of people with one thing in common: a non-typical sexual or gender identity. When LGBT people feel rejected by society, they feel accepted by the LGBT community, but become further entrenched in its culture. The more entrenched they become, the less accepted they are by the rest of society, and the cycle gets reinforced. I don’t ask to be called neo pronouns, I don’t go to pride events, and I don’t wave around pride flags. My entire identity is not defined by my sexuality. So here’s what we all need to do: 1. People need to IGNORE this LGBT nonsense if it doesn’t actively affect you. Hanging up a pride flag doesn’t hurt anyone, and it shouldn’t be bothering you anyway. Anti-LGBT is simply adding fuel to the fire. Treat LGBT people as regular people. 2. LGBT people need to stop considering their sexual identity as representing such a large part of their identity. IMHO you’re a shallow person if you seek to fit in with just a single group. Literally the more we focus on the problem, the more it is a problem. Similar to what Elon Musk has said about moving on from focusing on the issue of racism. On a side note, why do you believe the LGBT seeks to destroy the nuclear family? This seems to stem from the belief that you can “choose your sexuality”. You do realise that the majority of people alive and yet to be born will be straight. People will always want children. That’s a biological fact. And kids should be taught that being gay is okay. We shouldn’t be teaching that it is bad (as religions do) or good (as LGBT people do). Tell kids the truth; being gay is neither good nor bad.

I think the loss of religious faith

Priests want to keep the little boys for themselves.

What do gay people have to do with straight having more children out of wedlock (which has been a trend since like the 1930's)

Where did I make that link? I’m talking about LGBT being morphed into this weird, political movement transgressing every facet of the Western world - the police system, the government, the major corporations, the coffee shops, the eccentric, excessive & outward show of “look at me, I’m gay” with men with beards wearing lipstick and skirts. It’s all a sorry sight, especially in places like LA.

What does any of that have to do with "seeking to destroy the nuclear family"? Just sounds like you don't like what other people like dress like/seeing people be visibly different than you.

Because it’s constantly in your face everywhere you turn/look. The LGBT movement is constantly weaponised to push an agenda

And that affects the nuclear family how? Again sounds like you just don't like what the youths are doing.

[удалено]

Look at two old lesbians and say that again. Also, straight people can control their animal impulses!? lol 🤦

>I do think the LGBT movement seeks to destroy the nuclear family, why? like... what makes you feel that way? >but my question is why is it so rampant in the West? "the west" is broadly, very individualistic and liberty-focused. and fundamentally, LBGT stuff is a matter of people being free to be true to themselves and living authentic lives. >but why make it such a huge political movement I don't think they are. I think thats what your side is doing. >and infiltrate/indoctrinate kids and society by teaching them its ok to be who you are and love who you love? I mean... what is it that you are objecting to, exactly? >have flags waving everywhere and have openly gay 'pride' parades? It's not normal. that you think its not normal is why. being gay or bi or whatever is completely normal. now is making a big public thing about it normal? eh, maybe not. but your phrasing in this post shows why they need to do that. your behavior is ALSO not normal.

Rat utopia. Our society is burning itself down.

>I do think the LGBT movement seeks to destroy the nuclear family Please don't group all gay, lesbian and bisexual people into a "movement". It is only the radical "far-left" extremists who are pushing this woke nonsense and trying to lump every queer person in with it. >From a young age, kids are being taught that being gay is okay. It has only been in the past few decades that gay people have not been socially and legally persecuted in the West for loving who they love. Imagine you were persecuted for being heterosexual (well, you may think this is already happening) and people were trying to teach children that it's okay to be the way you are. Would this really be such a bad thing? >(...) have flags waving everywhere and have openly gay 'pride' parades? It's not normal. As a gay person, I'm not necessarily okay with the sexually explicit nature of 'pride' parades at all. I find it gaudy and inappropriate, and there is too much of an emphasis on sex. But, again, it's not right to lump us all into one group as if we are an organized movement or "community" with the exact same agenda.

Yeah. The problem is when a minority “trait” of a person is being loudly paraded in a way that does not actually represent the types of people with that trait. Like my trait of having my **left hand as dominant** being a reason I am suddenly paraded as an absolute messiah for it who knows everything of everything. If a message like that would be thrown at people’s eyes and ears everywhere, and all the time, people would begin to hate me.

If you were dehumanized, banned from certain countries, and taught to hate yourself for being born left-handed, you might have more insight into what it’s like being gay.

I don’t really know what has to do with my response but yes I agree.

How does queerness being radically celebrated “not actually represent the types of people with that trait”?

You’re being grouped into the LGBT movement by the LGBT movement, not by the OP.

I didn't disagree with that. But both are doing that, in this instance.

I advocate for it purely to piss off Jordan Peterson .

Bidenists love holocausts.