Why worry about same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies? This article is not a rejection of same-sex partners and trans people. It’s a request for the missing narrative about hetrosexual relations and how they affect social organization. Currently it is being drowned out by a particular version of a patriarchal narrative.
It is more helpful to talk about heterosexual relations
The problem is one of focus and proportion. If this conversation is supposed to be about organizing a just society for our children and grandchildren, the same-sex marriage and trans-rights movements should not be dominating it. But the goal of this article is not to fight same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies. It is to supply the missing parts of the conversation. Women need to talk about heterosexual relations and marriage. Failing to recognize this need assures that an agenda will be imposed on them, and therefore on their posterity. Unfortunately, the female role is recognized and valued by the powers that be, much more than it’s valued by women themselves.
Same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies: an imposition on women
Gay and trans people deserve freedom from violence and discrimination, but this can be said about every minority group in the world. We all deserve freedom from violence and discrimination–even women. However, same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies have not only taken over the conversation, they currently dominate the conversation. The overall effect is an imposition on women.
Same-sex marriage increases the market for adopted and surrogate children; trans-ideology tells women they have no right to deny biological men access to women’s spaces. Women don’t even have a right to tell biological men they are men. The trans-rights movement appears to be in a state of denial. It is women who will create the families of the future. However, it may not be denial at all. Appearances can be deceiving.
An over-emphasis on Same-sex marriage and trans ideologies, and an underemphasis on women is anti-social and unsustainable.
How are these movements anti-social? Women are the center of family relations. Movements that impose on women while refusing to admit this imposition are antisocial. How are they unsustainable? They are unsustainable because they depend on the misfortune of other people, especially women.
The anti-social aspects of the trans movement include biological men invading women’s spaces and women’s sports. The anti-social potential of same-sex marriage comes about when the partners feel entitled to adopt children. This potential may be increased by same-sex marriage.
Legalizing same-sex marriage makes a son’s homosexuality more acceptable to his parents. It can be argued that this is a positive effect. However, it goes too far. Same-sex marriage equalizes the son’s social status with heterosexual marriage, and indicates to his parents that there will be grandchildren. This might seem to improve relations within that particular family, but it imposes on other families. There is a potential for adoption regardless of whether same-sex couples really want children. Same-sex partners may not choose to adopt without family pressure.
Taking heterosexual relations for granted is the real problem.
If we believe these movements are anti-social and unsustainable, what can we do about them? That is probably the wrong question. I believe these movements are dominating the conversation because heterosexual relations are taken for granted. Women take them for granted at least as much as men do. In fact, it’s likely that women take heterosexual relations for granted to a much greater degree.
Women need a conversation about heterosexual relations and marriage in general, preferably with input from the parents of women. I propose the following key factors in a properly organized society: marriage customs which involve parents and which are understood by each family in a community; an economy that does not extract excess wealth from the citizenry; a cleansing of racist and misogynistic beliefs and doctrines. They could also set priorities. For example:
- Marriage customs within the family must include financial protection for brides and their future children. This requires a citizenry that can hold on to its wealth.
- If the citizenry is to hold on to its wealth, the modern state must go. The modern state is structured to extract wealth from the people.
- The influence of the Greeks, starting at least as early as Plato, must be purged from our religion, education, and philosophy. Greek influence is imperialistic and misogynistic. At its core is a disguised rivalry between patriarchy and motherhood.
Change must start with families
The goal is not to fight same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies. The goal is to focus on heterosexual relations. Several posts will be necessary to expand on these factors. Unfortunately, even though the conservative ruling class claims to support traditional families it is likely they will not support this. And in my opinion, we should not be under any illusions that we can prevail in the event of a debate. Then what am I suggesting?
Why worry about same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies? I believe they are a symptom. I’m arguing that the problems we face today cannot be solved under our present cultural, social and economic conditions. If we don’t understand this, our efforts will be a waste of time and energy. We may be able to implement smaller measures, but even under the best scenario we will still be left with the system that led us to this place. The goal is not to fight same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies. The goal is for women, (and the parents of women) to supply the missing narrative about heterosexual relations and marriage, and how these relations influence society