10 Comments

I'm with you, but here's a point you glossed and that we all often do. You say you're happy for gay people to live their lives. I think you'd allow that someone living as nonbinary isn't a huge issue? A problem with the LGBTQ... is that accepting "it" involves accepting all of those. And accepting means what here? If a person conceives of themselves as non-binary and decides they want to be a second grade teacher... Is that okay? Is it okay to explain their identity to the kids? Just which things are we normalizing? If a teacher is in a polygamous marriage, is that okay to discuss with the class?

We gloss this issue. We say, "gay is okay with me, you do you." But It never really stays separate.

Modern life is a many gendered thing, and we may never be the same again.

Expand full comment

Gay is real. Nonbinary is elite alchemy. In fact it gives away the whole game when you accept nonbinary, because what about Maverickgender and boggogender and virusgender and xenogender and you think I am making these up but guess what? Every one of them has a flag. How much social mobility, self-spotlighting, and narcissism are we required to reward people's sense of identity? Tell you what, I'll agree to 60 seconds a year. That's it. I don't need a whole Gregorian sex calendar of days to worship the cult of identity. I reject it. Utterly. Get it out of my face and out of my kids' faces, full stop, "this is not a debate."

Expand full comment
author

🔥🔥🔥

Expand full comment
author

Valid point. There is no surgical solution to this. I've thought about your question actually, and I concluded that no, a non-binary teacher is not welcome. It's mental-health disorder. I wouldn't allow a schizophrenic in a classroom. It's harsh, but true. But there are no clean lines, as you said. And pushing the pendulum so far out left is going to cause rebound.

Expand full comment
Apr 29, 2023Liked by Theo Jordan

Your post is of historic importance for its truth and necessary clarity. I would further say, that it is magisterial, and that short documents frequently are so evaluated. Well said!

Expand full comment
author

Thank you! Kind words.

Expand full comment

I like this conclusion. We must not enslave ourselves to the current paradigm, no matter how "impolite" it is, or how "cruel" it makes us appear. These labels are products of the paradigm itself, not reality.

Expand full comment

Sharing, sharing, sharing. Bravo.

Expand full comment
author

TY 🙏

Expand full comment

Nicely done. I am a "recovering" atheist, so I frame this quite differently, but the inversion of virtue and beauty is very much done on purpose. Without the religious/spiritual framework, it can be described as being practically good for the left for the reasons Orwell pointed out, or as Dalrymple pointed out "... I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or inform, but to humilate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better.When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity"

I'll shill for my writing on this topic here, which does touch on the spiritual but I think echoes your major points:

https://williammaize.substack.com/p/maya-lifting-the-veil-pt-2

Expand full comment