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 efficient 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 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, while they are not paying attention. This is because 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 impose 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–including women. However, same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies have not only taken over the converstion, their practice dominates and imposes 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 movement appears to be in a state of denial that it is women who will create the families of the future. However, it is not in denial. 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.
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. It makes a son’s homosexuality more acceptable to his parents. Same-sex marriage equalizes the son’s social status with heterosexual marriage, and it implies grandchildren. While this might seem to improve relations within that particular family, it imposes on other families. This happens regardless of whether same-sex couples really want children. it is possible that same-sex partners would not choose to adopt without family pressure.
Same-sex marriage and trans-ideologies are not the 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 dominate 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.
For example, someone could propose that the key factors in a properly organizated society are: 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 the citizenry to be able to 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