>>12631825I unironically approve of this. Know why? Because LGBT wiggled out of the grasp of social constructionist theorists in the late 90s and were banging on all cylinders, since. The same fucking communists and social constructionists that ran around talking about radical feminist sisterhood, trying to conflate their radical socialist agendas with LGBT rights and sticking up for oppressed minorities, who ranted about how men would be rendered obsolete as feminist communes grew and grew and more women chose to be part of this "moral, pure, woman only society."
Fast forwards since the 1960s and the whole, 'women are wonderful nurturing healer goddesses and we'll eventually make men obsolete' crap turned out to be against the grain of the female human experience. That never happened, because you can't choose to be gay. Sexuality, hetero or homo, isn't a choice. And the only reason LGBT got that shot in the arm was because commies tried to make them into a voting block in their histrionic ideology, at odds with mainstream society.
Well mainstream secular American and European society embraced them. And the mentality that sexuality was a choice, whether crowed from bigoted religious kooks and homophobes or communist "everything is top-down taught to you by SOCIETY. We are all blank slates for SOCIETY to program. Capitalism and western religion just teaches you wrong! DEATH CULT DEATH CULT!" nonsense, was kicked to the curb.
And then lo, but a decade later, the transgendered rights movement gets co-opted by these jackodaws again, trying to retroactively go, "Gender is fluid and a choice and a social construct and sexuality is subject to gender, not sex. Pucker up your bigots and get ready to suck this WOMAN'S penis! Because if you're straight, you also give oral sex to girls with penises!" Totally ignoring biology, trying to make the state and society ignore it, too.
We'll have our trans rights AND we'll get rid of you shitsmeared social constructionists, too.
