A unifying theory of the term ‘homophobia’, part 3: the political perspective

image_pdfClick for pdf, print or save

Homophobia is part of the ideology of homosexism, and its use implies that homosexuality actually exists as a separate physical entity and that hence people can be labeled ‘homosexual’. By using the word ‘homophobia’, the speaker is forced to conform to that mind-frame, whether he agrees or not. The term has great negative political implications for society. The flag size grows bigger by the year, as does repression of other views on sexuality.

1. Homosexism as an ideology

Homosexism is not the same as emancipation, although homosexists strive to make it look that way and to monopolize the debate at the expense of broader-minded views.

Homosexism is a narrow-minded 20th-century philosophy, dividing humanity into two immutable groups: the ‘heterosexuals’ and the ‘homosexuals’. Each individual has been born into one category or the other and receives a distinct label to show his immutability, so was the idea. Unsurmountable towers with thick imaginary walls are built to ‘protect’ the inhabitants from the looming presence of the tower of the ‘straights‘, the ‘other side’. These are all social constructs.

Many people, however, based on their own experience, defy the ideology showing that feelings are fluid and that sharp borders are fake. Subsequently, they are assigned an immutable sexuality of their own, called ‘bisexuality’.

They are sealed in duck tape and shoved under the chair of the gay activist to keep them out of harm’s way. In the public debate, they are mentioned no further. They are there, but they are not there. It is called repressive tolerance. The notion that everyone has a full sexual spectrum to his disposal, that everyone has a bisexual potential and that human mental growth never stops, is sealed off for evermore.

Homosexism goes on to assert that the label signifies who you ‘truly’ are and what you ‘truly’ need to become. Four decades ago, the phrase ‘coming out gay’ was introduced as a ‘welcome home party’ for the lost souls.

After the party, you are urged to say goodbye to your previous existence, and like every beetle, mosquito, and butterfly you are urged to leave a constraining hardshell case behind, spreading your wings and flying to freedom, fresh air and sunshine. A new dawn for mankind. The romance of it all.

2. George Orwell

It wasn’t always that way. Speech and thought are deliberately being manipulated.

The term ‘doublethink’ was introduced by George Orwell in 1949 in his book Nineteen Eighty-four. It is part of ‘newspeak’. Gay-lib’s ‘doublethink’ about the immutable division of mankind, differences popping up out of nowhere, is merely one generation old. How strange. Why did mankind never think of all these things before? Have the Dark Ages of ignorance ended only in 1980?

No, the ignorance is merely starting around 1980. We now find ourselves floating on a historical bubble, a hype, a passing surge of delusion in the same way that Lenin thought he could lead mankind to a new world order of liberation, in the way that Hitler had a hunch that a 1000-year Empire would arise, in the way that Mao Zedong proclaimed a Cultural Revolution in China in 1966 that would transform the Worker into the New Human Being for generations to come. One ideological leader was more authoritarian than the other.

Luckily, all these totalitarian ideologies with their ‘newspeak’ are extinct, but at the same time, we witness endless graveyards with unnamed corpses rotting away into horizons as an everlasting testimony to their intolerance, a sight that cannot be erased.

3. The rise of homosexism

The new culture is homosexism, crafted in the exclusively gay suburbs of California and New York. This exclusiveness became the norm.

Starting as a small group much like the Bolsheviks in Russia a century ago, calling itself LGB as of 1990 and using the rainbow flag made in 1978 byGilbert Baker, gay-lib is rising to power, labeling dissidence to their world-view as a ‘mental disorder’, forging a political weapon with which to smite the foe. That weapon is called ‘homophobia’, a pseudo-psychological phrase meaning a sloppy multitude of things. And those who are designated this label are hence to be cured, assimilated, or else to be silenced for evermore, much like in Stalin’s Soviet Union, Hitler’s Drittes Reich and Mao’s People’s Republic of China respectively.

Resistance to homosexism comes from both the religious community and from many parts of the secular community. Those who are secular and who protest against labels are then labeled and stigmatized. The labels ‘queer‘ and ‘questioning’ have been invented by the radical movement as of 1996, leading to the use of even more duck tape. Once nicely sealed off, they are then shoved yet again under the chair of the radical activists and told to keep quiet.

Church leaders are much hated by radical gay-lib. But churches have never strived to rob gay affirmative psychotherapists with secular views from their license as is happening in New York where ‘conversion therapy’ is persecuted, nor to lock them up while they talk with youngsters in a secular way as a form of preventive incarceration as in Malta, and as in Europe in the years to come. Neither have they strived to rob them of funding or to purge them into disgrace. When you are looking for intolerance and state-approved violence, do not look at the conservative religious people in the USA or the EU, but at the secular Social Justice Warriors. By all means, start packing your bags.

4. Distress equals ‘harm’

At the heart of all this is a form of ‘newspeak’ that is spilling over universities and campuses, namely the notion that distress or discomfort is equal to ‘harm’. And that ‘harm’ should henceforth not just be defined as something happening to the body, but also as something happening to the mind.

Political polarization, and especially the way that the National Center of Lesbian Rights and the Southern Poverty Law Center, drag political opponents to court, successfully suing them into bankruptcy and even out of existence as with JONAH, has caused much fear on the conservative side. When this fear is demonstrated, it is then used as an alibi to increase the pressure on conservative values and its adherents, leading to a vicious circle of antagonism.

5. Persecution of dissidence at campuses

On campuses, most professors are left-wing and liberal, with only 15% daring to express more conservative views.

In their book ‘The Coddling Of The American Mind’, Lukianoff and Haidt write,

In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don’t like,”

The notion is spreading that exposure to offensive or difficult ideas is traumatic and that feeling upset by an idea is a reason to discount it. Us-them thinking is becoming the norm on campuses, so-called ‘communities’ are fabricated out of thin air, and this primitive tribalism leads people to shame those whose views fall outside that of their group. The atmosphere is polarized, cranky and intolerant.

The more intolerant the far-left becomes and the more they take to action to protest, stifle, terrify and to put big signs and flags under the noses of others the minute these people come out into the street, the more frightened and concerned they themselves become. After all, by means of projection, their own vices are assigned to ‘the other side’, creating great fear and many preoccupations.

In the meantime, the mantra is spreading that people, in particular young people, are fragile and that they need to be ‘protected’ against each and every danger, especially mental dangers. The youth is taught to always trust your feelings and that these are your best compass, not rational investigation, feelings define who you are, and they are taught that life is a battle between good and bad people.

On campuses, the fight is on against any train of thought that is labeled ‘offensive’. Speakers are banned, employees are named and shamed if private email exchanges are discovered, forcing them to resign, and the undermining of the funding of institutes behind the institutes’ backs, has become a major weapon to create ‘mentally safe environments’.

In this way, the fabric of scientific research, of society itself, is being undermined. Despite the fact that the world is becoming an ever more safe place to live, people demand even more safety. This is expanded to emotional safety, where each and every disturbing thought or adversary political opinion is considered painful and distressing, hence ‘harmful’, and a reason to step in and do something about it.

Gay-lib is defining ‘safe schools’, where dissident thought is to be banned, and if a conversation with a therapist proves to be distressing and confrontational, then ‘harm’ is being done. Thou shalt not rock the boat.

6. The Transgender ‘Revolution’

The newest addition to the term ‘homophobia’ consists of the cry for normality as society is hit by a wave of gender confusion being marketed as normal. We are to believe that with a penis you can be a man, maleness is an option, but you can also be a woman, no problem. In fact, a lot of women have penises and a lot of men have vulvas, such is the newspeak. You can then have the penis removed; after all, its existence is only an option (“transition”). And after some time, you can have a penis and testicles sewed back again (“retransition”). It is all part of a normal day’s work.

In George Orwell’s book Nineteen Eighty-four, we read,

“How many fingers, Winston?”

“Five! Five! Five!”

“No, Winston, that is no use. You are lying. You still think there are four. How many fingers, please?”

“Four! five! Four! Anything you like. Only stop it, stop the pain!”

Abruptly he was sitting up with O’Brien’s arm around his shoulders. He had perhaps lost consciousness for a few seconds. The bonds that had held his body down were loosened. He felt very cold, he was shaking uncontrollably, his teeth were chattering, the tears were rolling down his cheeks. For a moment he clung to O’Brien like a baby, curiously comforted by the heavy arm around his shoulders. He had the feeling that O’Brien was his protector, that the pain was something that came from outside, from some other source, and that it was O’Brien who would save him from it.

“You are a slow learner, Winston,” said O’Brien gently.

“How can I help it?” he blubbered. “How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”

“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”

And so it is in what gay-lib calls the Era of the Gender Revolution, that we must try harder to become sane and to say that gender is anything that gay-lib wants it to be. Your penis is actually your vulva until you change your mind. And if a person suffering from gender confusion is not addressed according to the gender he/she feels like being at this moment in time, then that is distressing for him/her, and therefore he/she is being ‘harmed’.

This ‘harm’ is then considered damaging, and once that has been established, then the offender will have to pay damages. For the lawyers of the radical gay-lib who will gladly drag dissidents to court, the Gender Revolution is becoming a business model, a very profitable one.

7. Wisconsin

A school in Wisconsin was forced to pay $800.000 damages to Ash Whitaker in 2018 for the school administrators’ insistence on using Ash’s birth name and female pronouns instead of the ones he/she now prefers. He also was told to go to the wrong bathroom, which was extremely ‘damaging’. For three years, he and above all his mother insisted on bringing it all to trial, preferably the Supreme Court. As usual, a pathological mother is almost always to be found cheering the gender confusion on, taking great personal pride. The child’s case is her case.

“I am deeply relieved that this long, traumatic part of my life is finally over and I can focus on my future and my simply being a college student,” Whitaker said in a Kenosha News report.

Note how the school is now being blamed for the inconvenience and worries about going to court, even though the fantasies of historic battles at the Supreme Court were his/her own decision. The pay-off would have been great, Ash would have become a superstar in the gay world, world-renowned even. But the downside, the worries, are projected onto the outside world.

As a consequence, schools in the USA now feel heavily intimidated, and their understandable anger and wrath at the Gender Revolution are becoming enormous. One wrong pronoun can cost you millions, but this wrath is then labeled ‘transphobia’, the newest Orwellian branch of newspeak in the realm of the term ‘homophobia’. And some people are becoming filthy rich in the process.

8. Facebook has 71 gender identities

Identities are now becoming grounded in subjective interpretation rather than objective reality.

For instance, the NYC Commission on Human Rights has updated a law in 2015 on “Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Expression” to threaten financial penalties to the amount of $250.000 against property owners who “misgender” employees or tenants.

On CSMonitor.com, we read,

The State of New York is now forcing society to recognize the subjective identities of individuals, regardless of how absurd or surreal they may seem. In New York City, recognizing someone’s identity is no longer a matter of case-by-case common sense and courtesy. It’s zir way or the highway. Writer Paul Joseph Watson at InfoWar said the notion of businesses asking every customer what pronoun they want to use is “absurd,” given that even Facebook delineates 71 gender options.

Science knows that 85% to 98% of gender confusion individuals get over their confusion as long as their confusion is not affirmed, but contradicted. By criminalizing contradiction, however, the small group of gender-confused die-hards are grasping state control, dragging thousands of potentially healthy but confused individuals with them into the abyss of obsessional suffering. The problem is located between the ears, not the legs, so science has proved. But politics is replacing sound and healthy reasoning, much as George Orwell had predicted in his 1949 novel.


The model of ‘homophobia’ is becoming a vicious weapon and a business model, now that ‘hurt feelings’ are seen as actual entities to be brought before a jury or the Supreme Court.

The term ‘homophobia’ and ‘transphobia’ with which small business owners are attacked and molested, have become tools to impose the doublethink and newspeak of 21st -century unbridled extremism.

To be continued.

Job Berendsen, MD