Should We Normalize Sexual Deviance?

The human race’s survival depends, at root, on binary sexuality. Normalization of LGBTQ identities would constitute a tyranny of the minority.

At the recent National Art Education Association convention, the presenters of a session dealing with “LGBTQ+ artists” began with the rather startling declaration that “we owe it to our kids to normalize these identities.” Not one of the more than 230 other registrants for the session questioned that assertion. I find it deeply troubling, however.

To normalize means to cause something previously regarded as anomalous (that is, as deviating from the normal or common order) to be accepted as normal, thereby altering the accepted norm.

Do we really want to do this with LGBTQ identities (much less the unknown identities subsumed by the plus sign I omit here)? Or would doing so constitute a fundamental denial of reality, with ultimately destructive implications for humanity?

The perpetuation of our species, after all, depends on the binary male-female sexuality that LGBTQ individuals deviate from. The very term “queer,” represented by the Q in the abbreviation, signifies deviating from what is expected or normal. If such deviation were the norm, how long would humanity have survived?

It is true that advances in artificial conception tend to muddy this picture. Moreover, many couples choose not to have children. And sexuality involves more than procreation.

Yet the existential necessity of procreation no doubt lies at the heart of traditional religious prohibitions against sexual deviance, and helps to explain (though not to excuse) the persecution of LGBTQ individuals. Understandable concern for the well-being of such individuals, given their long history of persecution, moves teachers to advocate normalizing their deviant identities. But is that the best remedy for their past suffering?

What Should Be Done I would argue that the most salutary way to counter the persecution of LGBTQ individuals is by focusing on the ways in which they can and do contribute to society—to our shared humanity—not by emphasizing their sexual deviation in seeking to “normalize” it.

To their credit, the NAEA presenters cited above advised fellow teachers not to “focus on” gender identity when utilizing the work of LGBTQ artists in the classroom. Yet their own choice of such artists, as well as their discussion of them, seems based primarily on sexual and gender identities, rather than on the quality of the artists’ work. How else to explain their astonishing failure to cite Michelangelo, for example, whose homosexuality did not prevent him from becoming one of the greatest artists of all time? That omission is all the more glaring in view of the contemporary mediocrities that were recommended for study.

The principle enunciated by Martin Luther King, Jr., with respect to race is also relevant here. Our focus should always be on the caliber of the character—and achievements—of the individual, not on group identity. That meritocratic principle has been at the core of American greatness. It is currently under assault by woke warriors, however, for allegedly promoting white supremacy.

We Must Reject Identity Politics The LGBTQ issue highlighted here is but one expression of the present “woke” obsession with group identities that now pervades art education, as well as virtually every other arena of American life and Western society in general. To successfully oppose it, it is crucial to recognize that it is rooted in neo-Marxist ideology deliberately aimed at undermining democratic societies by sowing division.

One of the destructive effects of the woke mindset has been erosion of belief in the “melting-pot” ideal. Yet that ideal enabled generations of diverse immigrants to become successful Americans—not least my own family. As I’ve argued before, contrary to the claims of modern-day critics, that ideal did not require abandoning one’s ethnic or religious identity. It meant embracing a second, transcendent “American” identity—centered on espousing the core values enunciated in our founding documents, and cemented by adherence to English as our common language.

Most important to emphasize is what those founding documents promised: that is, the freedom to pursue happiness (without harming others), not a guarantee of its attainment. Equal protection under the law in that pursuit—not a mechanism for producing equal outcomes—is what our system of government aimed to offer all individuals.

In contrast, identity politics aims to achieve greater “social justice,” conceived in terms of “equity,” or equal outcomes. All perceived inequities are allegedly due to the oppression of certain identity groups by the group in power—namely, Western, white, heterosexual men. Members of the designated oppressed groups are viewed as essentially helpless victims, unable to improve their lot without public intervention on their behalf.

We have not always fulfilled the promise of equal protection under the law. In that respect, we have not entirely lived up to our founding documents. But we have been engaged in an ongoing process of self-correction. Moreover, we have made great strides in the right direction, as evidenced most dramatically by the civil rights advances for blacks since the 1960s and by a sea change in the social status of women.

Given inevitable differences between individual circumstances and capacities, the total “equity” of equal outcomes sought as “social justice” in identity politics is a will-o’-the-wisp—an unattainable goal prompting ever more intrusive government interventions, which actually perpetrate new injustices. Economist Friedrich Hayek correctly dubbed it a “mirage.”

Social justice warriors generally ignore the great progress that has been made toward fulfilling our founders’ visionary promise. Instead of continuing along that path, they aim to replace our system with something essentially different. In place of equal protection under the law for all individuals, they seek to impose equal outcomes by bestowing benefits unequally, based on group identity.

Tyranny of the Minority What identity politics leads to, in effect, is a tyranny of the minority, aptly characterized by one writer as “a system in which a particularly extreme and motivated fraction of the populace can wield outsized power in the face of a majority which is either too indifferent or too scared to oppose it.”

Our democratic system’s legal protection of individual rights has in fact contributed to a policy of tolerance regarding some forms of sexual deviation. But toleration does not mean normalization. Normalization of LGBTQ identities would constitute tyranny of the minority. Controverting the reality that the human race’s survival depends, at root, on binary sexuality, it would serve a small minority (currently less than 10 percent of the U.S. population) at the expense of humanity as a whole.

Ironically, under such tyranny, the objectively normal majority—heterosexual individuals—are often denigrated and disparaged. Still worse, they are burdened with unearned guilt as “oppressors.”

In the present woke climate, however, it is impossible to raise these concerns without attracting instant calumny for alleged homophobia and anti-trans hatred. As shown by my experience in challenging the woke groupthink in art education, this essay would be barred from discussion among the very teachers for whom it is most relevant. Yet the recent parental outcry nationwide against other aspects of sex education clearly suggests that most Americans would share my concerns and would welcome thoughtful debate on the complex question of how best to deal with LGBTQ identities.

"FWIW, I doubt homosexuality is a mental illness."

I had to take abnormal and criminal behavior back in the day, this is what I remember.

Homosexuals cluster with others on several metrics. They're more likely to commit crimes, they're more likely to be the victim of crimes. They're more likely to physically harm themselves (hospitalized frequently). Their more likely to commit suicide and to attempt it. Those are the ones I remember from older sociology texts.

The others they cluster with were called mentally ill. It's why they were classified like that in the first place.

PS - Among the statistically normal behaviors of homosexuals is the pursuit of minors for sex. This was in the previous class and also in a recent class so still current. So to deal with child sexual abuse requires sheilding them from your everyday garden variety homosexual.

How are they oppressed? They have a whole month in which we celebrate their perverse lifestyle. And that is just their ‘special’ month. Try to say anything anti-LBGTQ+ anytime and see where it gets you. That’s why no one spoke up. That can’t afford to have their life destroyed for express the ‘wrong’ opinion. We already have tyranny of the minority. People have been taught who and what they cannot speak ill of a ND they toe the line or else. I lost a straight friend over a cupcake joke Saturday. Someone on FB asked her where she got her ‘pride’ cupcakes. I answered, ‘I knew snowflakes had gender preferences, I didn’t know cupcakes did.’ She deleted my post, unfriended me and then wrote me an email explaining how intolerant I was.

Secondly, they don’t want to be normalized in the classic sense. That would be a step back for them. They are special in their minds and the only thing that makes them such is their mental disorder. If we treated them like normal people, they would lose that status. They want to be different. Loud and proud as they say. I said in the late 70’s when all this started that it wouldn’t stop at tolerance. Next it would be acceptance followed by celebration and participation. They are mentally unstable narcissists who crave attention. They need this special status. People rolled their eyes and laughed. They aren’t laughing now.

Heck. We’re there dude.

That is true. This weekend as my wiafe was watching various programs on the Discovery® channels (Food, Cooking, HGTV), almost all the commercials were about queer themed crap on other Discovery® channels. I got an email from Petsmart telling me to celebrate Pride Month. Why do they assume everybody is interested in that crap? I can see having a display in the stores with rainbow collars and such, but why send out mass emails? I hit unsubscribe/report spam. Tired of this BS.

Here’s a question: What happens if we find out someday that people are genetically wired for sexual preference?

What happens then, hmmmm?

FWIW, I don’t give a rat’s patootie what people do between the sheets as long as it’s between consenting adults. And not a national security threat.

Want to save the institution of marriage, increase the chances of kids being raised in an intact, healthy family: Get rid of no-fault divorce.

I don’t see too many FReepers willing to sign on to that last one, and no-fault divorce is a far bigger threat to the institution of marriage, to my mind, than allowing people of the same sex to marry.

I watched the Platinum Jubilee pageant yesterday, and they featured both gay “pride” and drag queens as part of the history of ER II’s reign. I’m surprised they didn’t feature “trans” people too - maybe they did and I missed it. Alistair Bruce, one of the Sky News commentators, made comments about how he would have been booted out of the Army for his sexual preference in past times, and that he would have been unable to marry his partner.

All of this deviancy has already been mainstreamed and normalized. Little kids watching the parade got to watch the rainbow flag and drag queens go by.

"Should We Normalize Sexual Deviance?"

You can try, but you cannot succeed.

Sexual deviance is a mental illness characterized by a lesion of the reproductive system.

The lesion can be psychological, hereditary, the result of trauma, e.g. post-traumatic stress disorder, or of some other etiology, but sexual deviance is a reaction to injury, which is the definition of disease.

The lesion interferes with the normal function of the reproductive system, just as endometriosis does, and just as blindness interferes with the normal function of the visual system, as subdural hematoma interferes with the normal function of the central nervous system, or malabsorption interferes with the normal function of the gastrointestinal system--et al.

Sexual Deviance is no more normal than any other disease, e.g. diabetes, sickle cell disease, poliomyelitis, tuberculosis, alcoholism, fractured femur, multiple sclerosis, placenta previa, spinal chord injury, melanoma, schizophrenia, deafness, appendicitis, Down's syndrome, malaria, measles, whooping cough, Turner's syndrome, phenylketonuria, cataracts, spina bifida, coronavirus infection, etc., et al.

None of these disorders is normal; neither is sexual deviance.

None is healthy; neither is sexual deviance.

All the reclassification, political involvement, mass hysteria, zeitgeist groupthink, or indoctrination--all the experts, medical boards, psychiatrists, internists, pediatricians, sexologists, geniuses, or anybody else--will not change the fact that sexual deviance is a disease and should be treated as such.

It should not be encouraged to spread any more than any other disease should be.

"we owe it to our kids to normalize these identities.”

They're not talking about normalization -- they're talking about forced conversion and elimination of heterosexuality.

Oh, and, while they're at it, destruction of the current form of the human species: they actually believe that "better" humans can be created in a lab with raw DNA, thereby "male" and "female" are not only unnecessary but must be destroyed.

If you think about it, the core to the mRNA vax debate is over genetic manipulation. Those who push it on infants are essentially arguing that humans need to be "fixed", and "science" knows how.

Take effective measures to end communism and you might be amazed at how fast all this other stuff goes away. Oh, there will always be perverts. But in a capitalistic, law-abiding, free society perversions will be much less evident and perverts themselves will stay on the fringes.

When you start saying, “We have to FIX entertainment” or “We have to FIX our public schools,” when these are things you can easily live without - that’s how you leave the door open for the perverts because they can see that what you’re being asked to give up to get rid of them is too dear to you. You can’t give it up.

So they keep taking advantage of it.

Starve the beast. You don’t need Disney or pro sports, public education or the “environmental protection agency,” or a host of other government-generated money-wasters. Just let them go and put your strength and determination into destroying socialism.

If you normalize that, pedo is next — since that is the goal of the LuggButt community.
So, you support abusing children, do you?

So long as consent is agreed, I don’t care and don’t see why YOU do. What, you wanna watch? That is what the WWW is for.

But, animals and children cannot consent. Touch them as die.

What does it matter whether it's genetic or not? (there is zero evidence that homosexual behavior is genetic)

What if murder is genetic? What if theft were genetic?
It's destructive behavior and on that basis should be discouraged. This is where libertarian fantasy meets reality.

You don't care what others do can be destructive of society as a whole? We just had a mentally ill wacko shoot up a school, one whose illness is promoted with “PRIDE” by our nation. That effected everyone, not just those who were direct victims.

I'm on your side on no fault divorce. Divorce should be harder to get but marriage itself is devalued when our society trys to redefine marriage. If anything can be a marriage then nothing is, children lose and that effects the rest of us as well.

"In any case, why don’t we first make sure that the grooming of the nation’s kids is stopped."

I respectfully disagree for two reasons. One is the slippery slope phenomenon. Basically if we win the argument at one stage and stop perversion at that point, it doesn't go to the next point. This is exactly what's happened with the sexual devolution. Normalizing sex while living together not married led to normalizing one night stands led to normalizing homosexuality led to normalizing pedo. It's quite possible that the reverse can be done (denormalizing homosexuality or one night stands might have the side-effect of denormalizing pedo).

The other is Romans 1:16-32, which clearly outlines the process of the slippery slope beginning with culture saying God isn't real -- from there the sexual deviancy is layered into culture step-by-step, including homosexuality (verses 26-27). We should strive to win the argument over verses 21-23 (where culture turns away from God's very existence and/or ceases to be grateful to God) so that culture has the attitude Paul has in verse 16 (being unashamed of the Gospel). For whatever reason, in today's culture it's the homosexual sin that's most layered with pride --- more than any other sin. If there's any sin that's the largest affront to winning back culture to God it's homosexuality (again, not because of the sin itself but how the worldly people are most proud of that sin).

So our main push should be to win culture back to Christ. And if we pick a sin to fight against it's pride (pride being no need for God, we can be our own gods) which for whatever reason is what the worldly people have tied together with homosexuality. Being successful with that is the best way to stop pedo. If we waste time trying to just stop pedo, we'll be fighting a losing battle by trying to treat the symptoms of the disease without treating the disease itself.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.