I notice the letters LGBTQ+ (or something like that) popup a lot these days especially in print and social media. The advocates claim all the hubbub is to make sure those with a different lifestyle get their “rights”, whatever that means. Okay. Well and good. Everyone deserves to pursue happiness and/or not be mistreated, but in my world that is not a “right” per se. Equal employment opportunity, lifestyle—okay. |
I wish bigotry and mistreatment of individuals who are exceptional from the mainstream (sexuality, race, dwarfism, et.al.) would just go away, but it won’t. The human condition is to (try to) lord it over and be critical of those who are said to be different—sometimes referred to as “their kind”. I learned that as a kid reading THE SNEETCHES by Dr. Seuss. Some of those creatures had stars on their bellies and some did not; the former being the in-crowd. So, along came social hustler, Sylvester McMonkey McBean, who (for a price) could put a star on anyone’s belly thereby destroying the status symbol and the visual differentiation. I wish it were that easy.
Perhaps I am naïve, but couldn’t that be the same for straights and gays? From my point of observation, it’s the LGBTQ+ crowd that keeps trying to point out differences; show they’re the ones with “stars” on their bellies. They have their own flag. Why? Why not just patiently co-exist without accusing the other side over-and-over of being bigoted Neanderthals? For sure some are, but (IMHO) not mainstream society. How does that win hearts and minds? Who benefits from divisive issues and behavior? (Oh, yeah—media and self-promoting opportunists.)
Before all this became a media promoted sensation, in my world both sides of the rainbow got along rather well. Case in point: I used to date a female dancer in Las Vegas. At the time virtually all the male dancers were gay and maybe half the females. We all attended the same after-show parties where I was occasionally propositioned by a male dancer. I replied that I was straight, they’d say okay, and we’d go on chatting like nothing happened. No offense was taken by either party.
However, within recent times the promotors can’t leave it alone, and insist a gay lifestyle is normal—just as normal and commonplace as a heterosexual relationship. Polling in 2020 indicated about 5-percent of the US population identifies as something other than heterosexual with the largest cohort (about 3-percent) claiming to be bisexual. More recent polling indicates that the number of LGBTQ+ in the population is rising particularly about younger people and could reach about 7-percent.
Statistically, that does not qualify as “normal”. And since the only purpose of any species is to procreate, LGBTQ+ does not qualify as “normal” on a scientific basis. I am not debating that those with a choice of partners should be vilified. I don’t care. If that’s your preference—fine. Enjoy. But do not continuously try to shove it down my throat as being normal. It’s not. It’s abnormal. But so what? if you like it, do it. I don’t care. Just leave me alone and stop bludgeoning me with propaganda. Here’s how silly it gets: Sharon Osborne on a TV talk show was almost in tears lamenting that none of her offspring was gay. I mean, being accepting is fine—but being sad because your kids are heterosexual? Madness. But then again that is show business wokeness. On the flip side Arnold Schwarzenegger once said, “I think gay marriage should be between a man and a woman.”
Recently, some male straight actors in Hollywood maintain they have to “fake out” the casting directors, et.al., by assuming so-called gay characteristics in order to be considered for a job. Again, that’s (sigh) Hollyweird culture. It’s nothing new. However, those of the millennial generation think anything that occurred before they were born doesn’t count—like failed socialistic economies. Famous leading men from the 1930s onward were gay: Walter Pidgeon, Cary Grant, Randolph Scott, Tab Hunter, and Rock Hudson to name a few. Females are more open today than 50 years ago, but there were a few of note, to wit: Greta Garbo, Patsy Kelly, and Tallulah Bankhead. According to a book (Title: I KID YOU NOT) written by Jack Paar in the 1950s, the TV personality who brought the Tonight Show to fame, Hollywood was being ruined by “fairies”—his written word and his opinion, not mine.
Of those who prefer an alternate lifestyle route many come from the arts, which begs the question: Are they artists because they are gay or are they gay because they are artists? Unknown and unknowable, but that would be an interesting debate.
I don’t doubt that so-called gay people have been oppressed by society in the past, but the mainstream of today’s society is accepting. Therefore, my advice to the LGBTQ+ community is: Stop with the star-belly sneetch routine because you’re alienating allies. They’ll always be some who don’t approve just like some African-Americans don’t like it because I’m European-American. Example: Three black strangers in Manhattan Beach upon passing by referred to me as a “white-ass bastard”. That’s the human condition.
With respect to oppression, how about a look at sports, namely the WNBA? The league is subsidized by the NBA and is said by several current players to be 96-percent lesbian. Indeed, the WNBA’s top stars Taurasi, Bird, Stewart, Della Donne, Griner, all have wives. Straight ladies claim they’re being oppressed by the majority. How about that? Typically, the mainstream press doesn’t give a damn.
The league has been operating at a loss since its inception, and expenses continue to rise. Yet the ladies complain their level of pay is nowhere near that of NBA players because they’re oppressed. Brittney Griner, now incarcerated in Russia for being caught with drugs, said she has to play in that country during the off-season because she only makes a quarter of a million a year. Topping her sob story, millionaire Meghan Markle and billionaire Oprah Winfrey had a discussion on Winfrey’s show about how they are (sniffle) oppressed. The subtext was that if you don’t automatically like them and/or agree with their point-of-view, you are an oppressor—and a racist one at that! Good grief. (BTW, this is off point, but Meghan Markle would make a good cartoon or fictitious name like Mary Marvel, Gravel Gertie, Tess Truheart, Moonbeam McSwine, Tillie the Toiler, Little Lulu, et.al. It has that comic strip alliteration vibe.)
If one examines the facts, one discovers the WNBA is failing due to poor ticket sales and lack of viewership from (get this) OTHER WOMEN—not misogyny. Note that television cameras stay at floor level during games because upper levels are empty. Last year, even the finals were not sold out. I’ve tried to give the WNBA a fair shot, but frankly I find it boring. To be fair I no longer care much for the NBA either—and I’m a former season ticket holder. The NBA lost me when a former commissioner said they don’t strictly enforce the rules (traveling, double-dribble, etc.) because the league is “entertainment” not sports. (Welcome to the world of rasslin’ and roller derby.)
However, WNBA reality does not fit the agenda of victimhood, racism, and oppression of the participation-trophy minded, leftwing media and special interest groups.
You see, most of us know better.
Your working boy, Gene Myers
Related Articles -
LGBTQ+, bigotry, human condition, Dr. Seuss, Hollywood, WNBA,