Gay TV characters and Olives on Pizza

A lady friend of mine from Great Britain wrote me recently and told me about a backlash against gay people she said is happening currently in the UK.
I think the backlash she described was bound to happen. Young liberals in the US are taught to see themselves as entitled, victims, who are outrageously offended by traditional beliefs, and speech. They are taught to label anyone who fails to agree with them as bigots of some sort or other.
That might work for them on the school campus, but in the real world, their fatuous, victim Olympics histrionics won’t win them gold stars.
Straight people who don’t want to watch romantically involved, gay TV characters are not homophobic. We are not afraid of gay people. We are replused by the sight of a man kissing another man. It isn’t fear, it’s nausea.

We are also tired of being insulted by the liberal apologists for gay TV tropes who pretend that the ubiquitous gay characters are sort of in the stories by accident. You know the argument: “well, there are gay people in society so naturally there are going to be gay people in TV shows”, implying the gay characters just happened to be there. We all know how specious that argument is. There are millions of NASCAR fans in America. They almost never show up in a TV story or movie. But if there is a documentary on the history of downhill skiing, you can be sure at some point we will learn about some gay downhill skier who set records back in 1920 something.
Young, liberal, entitled, gay people, have been conditioned to believe that they are “part of the solution”. They believe they are helping make the world a better place by flaunting their homosexuality in public, challenging the attitudes and beliefs of the “unreconstructed”, racist, homophobic, white, cis-gender bigots. On the college campus they are heroes for thinking, speaking, and acting this way.
In the real world people don’t pretend there are 57 genders, and it is still considered rude to criticize the random old white guy for being a privileged, bigot.

I know that when I say I am repulsed by the sight of two men kissing each other that a chorus of liberals will chime in saying “he is homophobic”, meaning I am bigoted against gay people. But I disagree. It has nothing to do with hatred or fear or prejudice. It is just a gut reaction, like the way I feel about olives.
I cannot stand olives on pizza, or olives in general for that matter. If I eat an olive I feel nauseous.
I know that other people love olives, and that doesn’t bother me a bit. If a group of us are going to order pizzas and some of them want olives on the pizza, that is fine…for them.
But I won’t touch their pizza. I will order a pepperoni pizza, or a cheese pizza for myself, and for anyone else who likes those types.

That is how I feel about the sight of two men kssing; it repulses me. I feel like throwing up a little bit. I don’t care that they do that, but I can’t stand to watch it. It’s like the olives.
Still, to some young people, it is a problem that “I don’t like olives”, i.e. that I can’t stand to see two men kissing. They are only able to view that as ‘homophobia’ or prejudice, even though it isn’t. I don’t know why they think that way

This entry was posted in political correctness, social, Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Gay TV characters and Olives on Pizza

  1. topcat1957 says:

    My friend told me that parents are protesting the proposed sex ed program in Birmingham schools. My question is:
    What age are the students?

    I think it is a very relevant question. Sex education used to happen when children were on the cusp of being physically ready to have sex. Prior to that age we just allowed kids to be kids. I still recall being a child, making a comment about something, and seeing the adults in the room have a good laugh as they realized what I actually meant. I knew there was private knowledge which made my comment humorous, but I was allowed to retain the innocence of youth, and the adults all knew that was the proper way to handle things.

    But the liberals seem to want to push sex ed to much younger ages, and I have a theory about why that is. If kids are permitted to retain their innocence, to grow up naturally, the majority are going to learn that heterosexuality is the normal state of affairs. They have a mommy and a daddy, so that relationship imprints upon their developing minds. That is simply the natural, and normal way children grow up.

    But the radical liberals who are angry that heterosexuality is seen as normal, and homosexuality has always been seen as an “other” state of being, these radical liberals are well aware that letting children grow up in heterosexual homes will learn that mommy and daddy are the natural, and normal kind of relationship. The radicals liberals favor using the power of the state to force their views on others, since the majority of people don’t agree with, and won’t adopt their views if left alone. I think this explains the push for teaching transgender counseling and medical therapy among young children. Admittedly that isn’t mainstream…..yet. But I have read of cases of children in kindergarten being given female hormones because it is believed that the boy is really a girl in his mind, or at least the adults think this, and have possibly convinced the boy that this is the case. As liberals gain more power and influence, they are punishing those doctors who won’t go along with this dangerous therapy, and punishing anyone who questions any of the radical positions taken by the transgender advocacy groups. It is the same with the gay advocacy crowd. They want to begin teaching the “normalcy” of homosexuality to younger and younger children, to interrupt the natural and normal socialization of the children.
    (By the way, the LGBT sex ed classes were proposed for children from the first through the sixth years. This is much earlier than schools used to provide sex ed classes.)

    IF…if the gay crowd were not so angry, and bent on revenge and dominance; IF they merely wanted to teach that some people grow up oriented differently, and adopt ‘alternative lifestyles’, that they have the right to do so, and that it is wrong to treat them badly because of their lifestyle and orientation, IF that was truly all they wanted to convey to students (of an appropriate age), then I doubt there would be any backlash. In fact, I think there would be overwhelming support from the majority.

    BUT, that is clearly NOT their position. The radical liberal activists are intent upon prohibiting any dissent within the society at large by punishing thoughts and speech not previously approved by them. They are NOT tolerant of differences among people. They are bent on forcing group conformity and the adoption of their radical, liberal positions (social, and economic for that matter).

    They want to force me to like olives.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s