Gay Rollback Is Coming (And That's A Good Thing)

[Anonymous_Lover]

A post by Matt Walsh came to my attention today, Walsh writes

Gay surrogacy and gay adoption are predicated on the idea that gay men (or women) have a “right” to become parents. This idea is not only morally insane but also logically incoherent. It’s exactly like jumping off a building and claiming that you have the right to fly. Nobody has the right to defy the laws of nature. Where would such a right even originate? Two men cannot be parents. It’s impossible. Doesn’t matter how they feel or what they want. It cannot be. The only “right” at issue here is the right of the child. And the child has a right to be raised by a mother and a father, not two men masquerading as mother and father.

The leftist podcasters The Serfs wrote concerning this post "Congrats to all the transphobic pickme gays you're next on the menu" to which my reply is, yes! And that's a good thing! These leftoids began excluding MAPs from the LGBT coalition as early as the 80s but definitively pushed and sold out MAPs from that coalition under conservative pressure in 1994. The rollback on trans rights? Who saw rollback first in terms of acceptance and far harder? MAPs. Rollback on women's right to an abortion? Not only did MAPs get rolled back first but feminists openly and not so openly worked to exclude MAPs from sexual rights coaltions. Those feminists who were in leftist spaces where they couldn't be openly reactionary against NAMbLA found it hard to win arguments with them and but a certain number worked against them nonetheless.

I've been noticing more and more open homophobia and seeing evidence that its having an effect in the polling (not that democracy really matters anymore, it will be rolled back when its decided the time is ripe). Funny thing about that comment on the pick me gays there was a woman in TERF circles that said the recently doxxed right wing twitter personality howling mutant who is consistently making child rape jokes and even some outright pro-c MAP arguments has been added to TERF group chats simply because the TERFs are pro-MAGA now since TERFs hate trans folx and the leaders of said groups decided to include him, causing apparent chagrin to some members. But they made their made and its time to lay in it.

As hard as it is, you have to say the same to anti-MAP feminists, gays, and trans people. "None of us are free until all of us are free"? Good. Then we should welcome the collapse of structures of "freedom" built on exclusion and oppression. And the correct response to this is not to put a hand out to groups that are being repressed that have legitimized themselves at our expense but to laugh at them and humiliate them. And do that a lot. And once that's done see if you can get them to understand where MAPs fit into this. But if not, you leave them to their fate to fight their own battles. Certainly, if they succeed in undoing the recent right wing offensives they will claim they did it all without you, as they do now already with Stonewall.

That's why its a good thing if they lose. That's why you have to laugh at their misfortune. That's why you have to rub it in their face. Rollback is coming and that's an imminently good thing. People will be drawn closer to us when they feel they are closer to being in our boat. Trust the Plan. Proudly Vote Trump-Vance 2028 aka write an X on your niece's etcha-sketch, its the same fucking difference.

[Artaxerxes II]

Speaking of TERFs, pro-lesbian TERF Kathleen Stock has recently came out against abortions: https://archive.ph/AXD6L

It is bizarre hearing a feminist speaking against abortion based on a convoluted appeals to both conservative feminist and pro-life talking points. But it does point to a general direction at least within British, Canadian, Australian, New Zealander and (tentatively) American feminisms wherein TERF hegemony will lead to feminism becoming extremely reactionary and conservative to the point of being indistinguishable from the western right, turning into the white middle-class women's caucus of every right-populist party in the west.

Going back to OP's point, anyone concern-trolling about the gay lobby's demise has to understand that it costs nothing for MAPs to mock the demise of the gay lobby and its supporters within the PMC. If said "freedom" is built on the exclusion of others based on political expedience, then MAPs never had the chance to successfully petition with the gay lobby in the first place by 1994. It's time for people to do away with delusions of grand coalitions because for such alliances to exist every group needs bargaining power, and MAPs lack it. All in all, us MAPs and our allies will never get far if we insist on reforming and appealing to the same rotten status quo that is inherently exclusionary towards us and oppresses us. It's like eurocommunists being so delusional as to think the EU can be turned communist (something illegal for member countries per the current EU constitution) by just electing their MPs into the European Parliament, in spite of the Commission being the actual decision-makers.

As a wise saying goes: "To build something new and better, you've got to destroy the old"

As uncomfortable as it may be for the MAP community, though times are ahead, old tactics won't work as the current closure of the Hormuz strait is wreaking havoc on the world. It's time for a new change. A good start would be to stop trying to appeal to the declining gay lobby like hopeless stray puppies.

[RoosterDance]

I understand what you're saying with this, but I cannot see this as a good thing. I don't want more people to lose before we all can win, so to speak. How even do these moral crusaders so often manage to gain such influence and authority anyway?

[Anonymous_Lover]

I understand what you're saying with this, but I cannot see this as a good thing. I don't want more people to lose before we all can win, so to speak. How even do these moral crusaders so often manage to gain such influence and authority anyway?

I don't want more people to lose before we all can win, so to speak.

Unfortunately, by excluding us, the other groups helped to make it inevitable. We unfortunately haven't been able to make much headway while everyone else's rights were respected. Maybe to a distant future historian the gap between LGBT normalization and MAP rights will look like a blip. For us in the present, it may open an opportunity that hasn't existed in a while, back when sexuality was more repressed for everyone, MAPs had somewhat more freedom and were more included in oppositional coalitions. If we're going back to that then that gives us an opportunity to get a sympathetic hearing at the very least. And certainly MAPs who are gay might become more vocal in circles opposing this.

How even do these moral crusaders so often manage to gain such influence and authority anyway?

A combination of bourgeois moralism, religiosity, reaction-formation creating disgust reflex, and punitive impulse. People love something they can pour energy into that makes them feel morally righteous because real life is often filled with moral grey areas and dirty-feeling compromises. The elite need scapegoats that the people can channel their anger towards otherwise it might be turned towards them. We're one of those scapegoats and in this culture, attacking us is not only cost-free, but something your socially rewarded for doing.

[RoosterDance]

Hm. Very well. That was a good explanation.

[zarkle]

Virtually all feminist are anti MAP in the strictest sense of the word. Sex positive feminist that approve of MAPs exist but are very very rare. In left wing cities there is evidence of gay men supporting laws that allow a 7 to 10 year age gap before legal statutory rape is triggered while feminist oppose it supporting a standard 2-3 year age gaps limit, thus making 17 and 21 dating legal rape and kidnapping in their world view. It doesn't look like there is any hope for gay trans and MAP allies in the West considering how hostile they are towards us. When searching for "map rights" and "pedophilia" on mainstream Mastodon and Bluesky servers I found virtually nothing but anti post, many post coming from gays trans and lesbians showing clearly they don't like us. The kindest thing was "think before you act" and "get therapy" post. The bulk of it was conversations of Trump's possible connection to Epstein.

Moving topics, I was thinking for several months that MAPs can take extreme risk and help gays in third world and Islamic countries where the punishment of being Gay is death penalty, such as Islamic countries that throw gays off buildings and or incarnate them. This is the ultimate "rollback" that we can capitalize on. This is a huge risk aiding an armed gay resistance in those countries but the pay off might be huge if successful and of course unlike mainstream LGBT we will tell them we are MAPs and that will give them a strong reason to support us as they don't have the cultural baggage. And of course educate them on the science of disgust and how it affects all of us.

Simple videos like this will do

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0_2LtC3YSM

That way if we take enormous life of death risk - we could get solid homosexual/queer allies in Africa in the Middle east who will defend MAP rights. But once again that would imply 1) going to the middle east and Africa in dangerous zones, 2) finding gay/queer people in desperate scenarios and 3) setting up a civilian defensive militia org to protect them. Gay's in the West who have the luxury of safety won't touch MAPs with a ten foot pole, but gays in Africa and the Middle east who are desperate and have their life at risk will side with anyone kind enough to defend them.

Once again, I am not a leftist. I think the reason gays, trans and MAPs are oppressed is due to nature's mistakes. Natural selection favored humans to be nosy about the sex lives of others as a mating/social cohesion strategy, natural selection favored intense repulsion towards unwanted sexual advances, natural selection favored intense rage to defend child from danger even if the danger is nonsensical BS claims like qanon/pizzgate. Natural selection made all norm violations feel gross to us. These are the reasons we are under such pain. Bigotry is not solely tied to capitalism, colonialism, western powers or the rich 1%, its bad biology. We evolved on a planet that programmed us to think like meatheads, the chemicals in our brain cause us to divide the world into us vs them. Anti Queer people are just behaving like fucking chimps in the jungle like nature intended. Reason must overpower the bad aspects of our nature.

[Anonymous_Lover]

Moving topics, I was thinking for several months that MAPs can take extreme risk and help gays in third world and Islamic countries where the punishment of being Gay is death penalty, such as Islamic countries that throw gays off buildings and or incarnate them. This is the ultimate "rollback" that we can capitalize on. This is a huge risk aiding an armed gay resistance in those countries but the pay off might be huge if successful and of course unlike mainstream LGBT we will tell them we are MAPs and that will give them a strong reason to support us as they don't have the cultural baggage. And of course educate them on the science of disgust and how it affects all of us.

I mean, I don't really see how counter-signaling Islamic countries helps us since its only in Islamic countries like Iraq or Afghanistan that the age of consent for sex has gone down -- within the confines of marriage. In Afghanistan, I think there's no age limit. In Iraq its 9. In somalia, when the government recently tried to raise the age of marriage to 18, the men of the country rose up and said no and the proposal was scrapped. Feminists on X had about the same reaction you'd imagine, "men are protesting for their right to rape!" but then it was memoryholed because they were POC-Muslims after all and MAGA didn't seem care to make much noise about it on their end.

The situation with gays in most Muslim countries is not quite as bad as it seems. No, they typically don't have "rights" but then most people will say "you shouldn't do that" and look the other way if a person is quiet enough. Most arrests for being gay are for show and don't lead to executions, just a case of picking out a few to make an example of, not grabbing every faggot off the street you can get your hands on and throwing them in jail. That is unlike the MAP situation where cops and prosecutors are typically not going to look the other way in a case involving a MAP that has decent chances at trial. If you openly say you're a MAP there's a good chance that cops show up at your door even if you aren't a criminal. Most of the gays hanged in Iran are pederasts. I'm not defending it but that would be extremely popular in so-called Western democracies too. If you're gay in Iran there's a good chance they try to hook you up with free HRT and surgery so you can become a woman, that's part of their philosophical doctrine, if you are gay then you likely have the soul of a woman so they will help you transition. Now, one wonders how many people that take the government up on their offer are actually just trans but that's neither here, nor there.

Now, ISIS did grab every gay they could find and tried to throw them off roofs but that is not the norm in Islamic countries and shocked the conscious of many even there. People seem to forget that Islam and Christianity are very similar, if you make signs of contrition and show or ask for repentance you can be forgiven for sexual sin. I knew a Saudi Arabian who only had sex with men until he was 25, because of gender segregation and strict social stigma about people of different genders mixing. He seemed to relate it as a normal experience, and I don't doubt that it was. Gender segregation and focus on sexual taboo/codes relating to heterosexual sexual sex very arguably made the West gayer in the past than presently. In medieval times, if a man slept with a boy it was kinda understandable, they are more feminine than other men and available for access then women, if two boys slept with each other it was just fooling around the kind of thing you did before you got married, if two grown men slept with each other it was an unnatural abomination and/or people looked at them as if they were, basically, incels. It was a sign of sexual deprivation and was often thought to stem from people without the property requirements to marry trying to meet their needs.

The Church condemned adults and children sharing beds, or even children sleeping together, because they had sex with each other, but this did not stop it from happening.

Which really does make your evo-psych contentions questionable. There are many societies historically where children weren't treated particularly well or valued. Some of this stuff about people having no conception of childhood appears to be a bit of a reach but children being placed in adult roles or suffering adult punishments for misdeeds like being beaten was very common. And still is in much of the world, including the West, spanking is illegal in a number of countries but most people who study it conclude there isn't a single country where children aren't hit.

MAP oppression is historical. How do you explain Greeks and Romans accepting pederasty and adult child sex and having famously low marriage ages? How do you explain cultures like Japan where heterosexual sex with adolescent girls is literally part of the national literature and mythology (Tale of Genji) and why it was a "laggard" on this issue until very recent times?

[JGHeaven]

I understand what you're saying with this, but I cannot see this as a good thing. I don't want more people to lose before we all can win, so to speak. How even do these moral crusaders so often manage to gain such influence and authority anyway?

I don't want more people to lose before we all can win, so to speak.

Unfortunately, by excluding us, the other groups helped to make it inevitable. We unfortunately haven't been able to make much headway while everyone else's rights were respected. Maybe to a distant future historian the gap between LGBT normalization and MAP rights will look like a blip. For us in the present, it may open an opportunity that hasn't existed in a while, back when sexuality was more repressed for everyone, MAPs had somewhat more freedom and were more included in oppositional coalitions. If we're going back to that then that gives us an opportunity to get a sympathetic hearing at the very least. And certainly MAPs who are gay might become more vocal in circles opposing this.

How even do these moral crusaders so often manage to gain such influence and authority anyway?

A combination of bourgeois moralism, religiosity, reaction-formation creating disgust reflex, and punitive impulse. People love something they can pour energy into that makes them feel morally righteous because real life is often filled with moral grey areas and dirty-feeling compromises. The elite need scapegoats that the people can channel their anger towards otherwise it might be turned towards them. We're one of those scapegoats and in this culture, attacking us is not only cost-free, but something your socially rewarded for doing.

This is how I feel as well.
I'm not anti gay, I'm not anti anyone, I have no right to judge others for their sexuality or beliefs, I'm just another flawed human being.
But the whole LGBTQ+ community walks around with their flags and pride events, boasting about how great it is to be accepted and respected, how it's a reward for decades of oppression. Then in the same breath they shout the same bigoted hate towards maps and want nothing to do with us.

They're so short sighted that they can't see that they're opening the door to bigotry and hate and as that takes root and grows it will inevitably expand out to engulf the whole lgbtq+ community again. Then they'll be playing the victim and acting all surprised, baffled as to how anyone could treat them in such a mean way.

Well, I think it's a good thing, not because I'm a bigot because I'm not, but in this case it feels self inflicted and will hopefully shake some humanity back into them.

[reaver]

Moving topics, I was thinking for several months that MAPs can take extreme risk and help gays in third world and Islamic countries where the punishment of being Gay is death penalty, such as Islamic countries that throw gays off buildings and or incarnate them. This is the ultimate "rollback" that we can capitalize on.

Same old imperialism, only in a new bottle! If we favor this, what prevents e.g. liberal NGOs from promoting anti-pedophilia in nations more friendly nations?

[Anonymous_Lover]

Moving topics, I was thinking for several months that MAPs can take extreme risk and help gays in third world and Islamic countries where the punishment of being Gay is death penalty, such as Islamic countries that throw gays off buildings and or incarnate them. This is the ultimate "rollback" that we can capitalize on.

Same old imperialism, only in a new bottle! If we favor this, what prevents e.g. liberal NGOs from promoting anti-pedophilia in nations more friendly nations?

I mean nothing. The US left Afghanistan just 4 years ago but you already see rabble-rousing from liberal news media making news segments on child marriage in Afghanistan. One of the things that people don't seem to notice is the LGBT lobby seems to work towards preserving the age taboo and in a number of ways are more extreme than conservatives. You will see them arguing against pedophilia precisely because without pedophilia they wouldn't have a moralistic counter-argument or strong riposte to use against conservatives. What are they going to do cite the Bible for why right wingers shouldn't be hateful Chuds? Maybe you can use the Bible that way and putting textual interpretation aside, religion under class society is generally used to reproduce the status quo, that's why when someone cites Leviticus on homosexuality it typically hits the audience with much more force then if someone countered with something different. Why? Its not simply just a question of whether verses or different ways of reading exist that support a different interpretation, but we are trained in this society to respond more strongly to those verses that uphold conventional wisdom, conventional morality particularly sexual and the existing social order. One might look at how moderate Christian denominations have went into deep decline but very conservative ones have grown. The biggest moderate denomination in the US today is probably Catholicism and it is in theory at least far more "based and tradpilled" then the mainline protestant denominations that formed the backbone of religious mainstream up until recently. Many people might now believe it but the mainline protestant denominations welcomed Roe v. Wade and most did not oppose it, how and why that changed is a little too much to get into here.

Here's how it goes with LGBT Folx:"You just don't want kids getting LGBT sex education in daycare because you don't want them to know about sex so you can molest them!!1" I'm being hyperbolic here but not by much. Until the LGBT movement is willing to reject all collaboration with imperialism and the ruling class, rejects bourgeois morality and bourgeois electoral games (key), and becomes willing to use violence to protect itself, I wouldn't expect much to change. They are playing in the same bourgeois electoral puppet show as everyone else, only it seems more people seem to be realizing its a play and the outcome is predetermined except for them. They seem to me like a pig trying to negotiate with their farmer. They look back to when the farmer let them frolic in the field as if rights that could be granted by the system aren't privileges and the end-game processes according to the farmer's plan, not their own.

As a frontline activist, its interesting to observe the reaction of those LGBT people we've challenged, they either do not engage, or they typically try to paint us as conservatives, nazis, right-wingers, anti-"youth autonomy" (whatever the hell that means). There are those who do not categorize us in this way and they tend to be the most dangerous calling us a danger to children and society and soliciting mass reports. It reminds me a lot of liberals who are used to constantly arguing with or engaging in propaganda against conservatives being confronted by actual communists for the first time. They often have a hard time processing criticism from their left as they are used to being the one criticizing others "from the left."