Friday, June 26, 2015

Last Week's Social Matter Post + Preview for This Week's 5

Last week, I wrote about the poly push. It's hard to push really weird deviant behavior, so the next avenue might purely be to erode the institution of marriage.

This week I discuss the phony nature of the new progressive soldiers like Sarkeesian, Deray, Ben Crump and most importantly Rachel Dolezal. Dolezal's work is not important, but a curious case of transracial fraud is. They are even more fraudulent than the prior generation. They have turned the job into a work of performance art.

Last week's SM post...

------------------------------------------------------

What do our elites have cooked up next for us, socially? With the victory of gay marriage, elites have wasted no time pushing ‘trans’ on the public. It’s much more difficult to pull off, mostly because of feminist pushback and the idea of ‘transracialism,’ which further exposes tensions inherent in transgenderism as a concept. The media has also spent the last year promoting still weirder stuff as Weimerica reaches new heights for insane tolerance drives. Those are far harder sells.
The next frontier will be the further destruction of marriage as being between one man and one woman.

It is a cliche (but completely true) that the family is the building block of society. It is the mechanism for transmitting culture, social norms, and group mores. This is why progressive education has changed from the norms of yesteryear that focused on facts and figures and moved towards socialization and group programming. The goal is to separate the child from their family’s culture and to inject elite values in its place. Education is compulsory for a reason, even if it does not educate students.

They can take your kids for eight hours, but how do they get to you? They don’t have to hit all families–just enough to make a difference. The elite try to minimize the use of force in modifying beliefs. They prefer to brainwash you long enough to make you think you want it. Joe Biden was explicit about how gay marriage never would have happened without Jewish influence in the media. Not my words, his. A similar elite figure, Masha Gessen, also hinted at the coming change. Old Gollum herself said:
I agree that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it is a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. . . Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there, because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change, and again, I don’t think it should exist.
This quote alone is enough to banish her platform in a healthy society. Now that gays can marry with government sanction and legitimacy, the work moves to shifting how we view marriage in its entirety. Groups used by progs never really benefit; they just continue to be used as pawns.
The push is already here. Out Magazine quotes a NYC psychotherapist on the straight couples who are looking at the openness of gays to redefine how they view marriage.
But Malpas also says that, increasingly, the straight couples he sees are discussing polyamorous or open arrangements, or the possibility of such. This suggests that, perhaps as much as traditional marriage is conservatizing some gay couples, the increasing visibility of gay relationships is turning more straight couples on to the idea of some degree of openness, or at least of alternate ideas of what marriage can look like.
This is blatant distortion. This is using a sliver of one city’s married couples to extrapolate out to broader society. It is so patently false that it can hardly function as anything more than rank propaganda. How many of these couples is Malpas talking about? Five, ten, twenty? Nevertheless, his collection of haphazard case studies is sent through the megaphone and presented as if a broader swath of straight, married couples are going poly.

Remember, 20 percent of all gay men have HIV and a minuscule percentage of gay men are married, but the message being broadcast here is that straights–on a wide scale–are so taken by the association of gay-as-hip (and the need to be hip) that they will emulate gay behavior within an eons-old institution.

A revealing thing in Malpas’ quote is that it is in the context of “the straight couples he sees” that they discuss poly behavior. He is a psychotherapist. No healthy couple sees a psychotherapist. You see a psychotherapist when there are problems. Out is now using this as a way to frame it as though hip NYC couples are trying poly, as opposed to saying that broken, neurotic NYC couples are trying it. The other reveal: who are these gay, married couples that are influencing these straight couples? Gay marriage is a relatively new status even in New York, and of course very small in numbers. Are gay couples openly cheating already in year two? This makes little sense.

The push will widen for polyamorous and open marriages. Even the Washington Post is writing about poly as though it’s a positive thing. Wapo’s “human” example is already a failure, as she had a marriage end in divorce due to her cheating in her twenties, but now wants to cheat openly today as an older woman. This is public condoning of what was formerly considered risky or fringe behavior. It suits the prog government’s needs: weaken all bonds between people. This is such an old idea that Alduous Huxley put it into his progressive dystopia Brave New World. Everyone belongs to everyone.

This might seem like a hard sell, but this has some media push behind it going back for a few years. Multiple outlets have spotlighted polyamorous couples. The writer, usually a woman, is living or in a relationship with two men, usually all wretched looking but HAPPY with the arrangement. Some outlets have even tried to sell cuckoldry as some new, hot fad in the elite. The groundwork is there, so why not push for it to be in marriages?

Wait! There’s a useful media trick with gays marrying. See, gays have a hard time staying monogamous, and shucks, their marriages are often much more open and accepting of poly behavior. Media outlets have used the behavior of gays in marriage (the incredibly small number of gays who marry) as an example of how straights can learn from them and re-evaluate their traditional marriages.

Trans, bestiality, pedos, incest… these are rather tough pills to swallow. Weimerica can only devolve at so fast a pace. Those fringe kinks run into old taboos. While the media can find a random gay couple for a “Just Like Us” essay or advertisement, it is harder to do it with a man and his horse, or a daughter and her father. They will try. Reworking marriage entirely into a game of acceptable “it was just sex, you agreed, I love you” destroys a potential unit people can identify with outside government connections.

Pair bonding matters. Being roommates who sometimes sleep together is not as stable. Modern society has slung many arrows at marriage, and it is a shadow of what it once was, but the final push will be to remove any sacredness from it by making it a transactional relationship, a disposable relationship, something temporary. It helps the regime kill rebellions that start at the dinner table. In the Life of Julia Democrat video, Julia only came in touch with you if the government was the mutual friend.

Where are your bonds, who do you have allegiance to? Bowling Alone explained the destruction of civic bonds, but look closer. Private organizations are attacked, organized religion is attacked, diversity is pushed everywhere, but your connections to government are reinforced by each policy and each media article. You have no shared values with your Somali Muslim refugee neighbor, so resolving conflicts within the small neighborhood is impossible. The feds, however, are waiting and willing to sort out any dispute. Your church does not provide the safety net it once did, but your government does–if not directly, then through grants to your dying church. Your family is a port in a storm, but the government has its eye on that institution, as well.

Who cares who your dad is, your mom is, or whether they are alone, together, or decide to invite others in? All that matters is the one thing you all belong to and all come together for is your government.

9 comments:

Glen Filthie said...

Yaknow...I don't think there is any 'master plan' or secret cabal undermining society for a couple of reasons:

- our leaders aren't smart enough to pull off a conspiracy like that
- there are too many people who are literally prepared to kill them if they want to get stupid about it.

We have not (in my scholarly opinion) reached Peak Public Stupidity yet. You seem to think our gov't is strong but I say it's weak - pretty much all the gangster gov'ts in the world are wiping their feet on Obama. The gov't is dangerously over extended financially and the lights could easily go out if the bankers get serious about their lending practices. In addition to that nobody seems willing to see and admit the obvious: the white Anglo Saxon male is starting to hate again. When one shot up a church full of black women at bible study the response from our elites was to tear Ol' Dixie down. THAT'LL fix it, right?

Fact is I think there is more a total LACK of planning going on. If the gov't was a car, the wheels would be coming off, oil would be pouring out the bottom of the engine, all the idiot lights on the dash would be in the red - and the driver would be stomping on the gas!

I see a soviet style break up coming for America, and possibly race wars as a result. Bloodshed is almost a certainty.

Anonymous said...

All this madness will stop once America has its first currency crisis, and the power of the Fed is shown to be paper-thin.

I don't know that it's wise to predict all these apocalyptic outcomes (a race war? Get a life. Much better ways to spend your energy than flogging the poor.) However, it does seem plausible that a financially crippled central government would be vulnerable to secession movements around the country. Just - what the heck are you going to do? You have to pay the military to get them to fight, and they'd probably be the source of energy or the movement. (Unless we get drone soldiers etc).

If we lose an aircraft carrier in the south china sea, or have one crippled in the persian gulf - the world perception of our ability to project force would also be greatly damaged. We should just hope no one tries, because it would only take one missile to do it, and the russians and chinese both have the technology and are willing to sell them.

The real glue that holds this country together is the fact that the Fed can paper over all fiscal sins, mask all the deterioration in the tax base, with unlimited spending. It won't continue forever.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Anon - If you've read here long enough, you know my theory is the FED paper $ holds it all together, and the US military keeps the global $ game going which supports the $. Thats why the US wont risk a big fight with russia or china since we'd suffer damage and that would prove us a paper empire. the $ is all that holds together such distinctly different regions.

Bundy said...

No offense, but you sound completely wacko.

Most normal people I know don't even think about homosexuals (being too concerned with children, spouse, career and hobbies).

Good people will get married have kids and lead productive lives.

Losers will not.

Simple as that.

Portlander said...

Oh, come on. We have standards for trolls around here, and this ain't cuttin' it.

No offense, but you sound completely wacko.

Most normal people I know don't even think about
[homosexuals | immigrant crowding | H1b visas | urban black culture] (being too concerned with children, spouse, career and hobbies).

Good people will
[get married have kids | find a good job | buy a house in a decent school district] and lead productive lives.

Losers ipso facto
(fixed it for you) will not.

Simple as that.

GFC said...

Everything within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.

Anonymous said...

No offense, but you sound completely wacko.

Most normal people I know don't even think about homosexuals (being too concerned with children, spouse, career and hobbies).

Good people will get married have kids and lead productive lives.

Losers will not.

Simple as that.


DWL says nothing is really happening, go back to sleep.

Mark Citadel said...

It was a masterful post, and yet I think we should move to capitalize on this recent ruling. Conservative defeats are prime opportunities to recruit people to more radically rightist views.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Mark - I agree with your sentiment. Recruit and push that change can only come from a new system