The Homintern

I was reading some Roman history the other day, specifically about the short reign of Elagabalus, the first truly foreign emperor. He showed up in Rome from Syria wearing eyeliner and silk robes. Before long he was dressed as a women and having people call him queen. As Gibbon put it, “Elagabalus abandoned himself to the grossest pleasures and ungoverned fury.”

Elagabalus was not the first queer emperor, but he was probably the most flamboyantly queer. Romans were indifferent to homosexuality as long as it remained private and the respectable public man was in the dominant position. The submissive role was for slaves and lower class boys used by the elite. Pillow biters had no place in the Roman elite. Elagabalus was assassinated, his corpse dragged naked through the streets and then thrown into the Tiber

The ancients were slightly more tolerant of homosexuality than modern Europeans, but not by a whole lot. That is, until the Homintern got control of the culture. We have suddenly lurched from mildly intolerant to, well, complete intolerant. Intolerant of traditional views of human sexuality. Everywhere you look, it seems that the gay mafia is waging the finger at us, warning that we are violating some taboo.

A friend sent this to me the other day.

The Turing test detects if a machine can truly think like a human. The Bechdel Test detects gender bias in fiction. If you were to mash the two together to create a particularly messy Venn diagram, the overlap shall henceforth be known as the Ex Machina Zone.

In writer/director Alex Garland’s thought-provoking new film—out Friday—we meet Ava (Alicia Vikander), an artificially-intelligent robot. Ava’s creator, genius tech billionaire Nathan (Oscar Isaac), has asked his employee Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson) to determine whether Ava’s thinking is indistinguishable from a human’s. Until she meets Caleb, Ava has only ever met her maker and one other woman. (Hence the failing of the Bechdel Test, which stipulates that a movie must feature two female characters who talk to each other about something other than a man.) Her existence, and her ability to learn how to interact, is a fascinating study of what makes us human.

It’s also a compelling, if problematic, look at the interactions between men and women—or at least that’s what I thought.

The word “problematic” is always a clue that you are dealing with a lunatic. Fanatics love that word. It has that Torquemada vibe they like so much. On the one hand it is banal, but on the other is the threat that you better fall in line or else. A quick look up of the authoress conforms that she is, at the minimum, a minor figure in the Homintern.

This story from the NYTimes explains how homosexual pressure groups are gnawing through the fiber of the culture.

The stacks of Supreme Court briefs filed on both sides of the same-sex marriage cases to be heard this month are roughly the same height. But they are nonetheless lopsided: There are no major law firms urging the justices to rule against gay marriage.

Leading law firms are willing to represent tobacco companies accused of lying about their deadly products, factories that spew pollution, and corporations said to be complicit in torture and murder abroad. But standing up for traditional marriage has turned out to be too much for the elite bar. The arguments have been left to members of lower-profile firms.

In dozens of interviews, lawyers and law professors said the imbalance in legal firepower in the same-sex marriage cases resulted from a conviction among many lawyers that opposition to such unions is bigotry akin to racism. But there were economic calculations, too. Law firms that defend traditional marriage may lose clients and find themselves at a disadvantage in hiring new lawyers.

Now, the nuts at the Times think this is just swell, but it used to be called a culture of fear. The sort of thing that went on in Nazi Germany or Stalin’s Russia. People are altering their behavior, foregoing their rights and privileges as citizens, out of fear.

This is not a conspiracy, of course. I just like the analogy because it is useful. The fact is we are seeing a mass conversion, forced upon the people by their rulers. The people in charge want to stamp out traditional customs and beliefs. Unleashing mentally disturbed deviants to harass respectable people that fall afoul of the new ways is a time tested way of converting the people.

Elagabalus was not assassinated because he was a homosexual or even that he was a degenerate homosexual. In addition to his sexual peculiarities, he also thought he was a deity and was a devotee of the cult of Elagabal. He created a new god to rule over the pantheon of Roman gods and started turning all of the Roman temples into temple to Elegabal. How long before the Homintern starts forcing Christian churches to marry homosexuals?

This will not end well.

 

13 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bob Reed
Bob Reed
9 years ago

What amazes me is, over a relatively short period, the whole focus of the argument has shifted from a desire for equality under the law viz their partnership unions to a broader one that focuses on the alleged equivalence of these bonds with marriage. Even if you put aside any religious arguments, for a moment, the proposition is ridiculous. Socially speaking the monogamous pair bond represents the successful strategy for the propagation of that same society. Until relatively recent medical innovations this was not possible for the medically barren as well as gay folks. But as you mention, the “Homitern”… Read more »

Steve C.
Steve C.
9 years ago

Yes, seeing the word “problematic” causes me to stop reading at once.

Lovernios
Lovernios
9 years ago

I just finished a recent autobiography of Charlemagne. (No, he wasn’t gay; he was actually quite an Alpha male hetero) As he consolidated his empire, more and more non-Franks came under his dominion. To provide a cohesive ideology for his diverse subjects he pursued a rigorous reform of the Church, standardizing all aspects, both lay and clerical. Nothing escaped his notice, theology, liturgy, hymnals, texts, preaching and religious education. Most of his subjects including his own Franks were CHINOS (Christian in Name Only) who carried on most of their pre-christian rituals and folk beliefs. He wasn’t above making examples of… Read more »

Walt
Member
9 years ago

Boy Scouts Of America have managed to hold out against homosexuals being given leadership positions. Major corporations have punished this proud organisation by stopping donations to them. I tend to think the BSA would be finished within 5 years if it should start accepting homosexuals as leaders. White middle-class parents can tut-tut all they want over those who don’t accept how wonderful homosexuals are but I can bet London to a brick that they wouldn’t want their sons to go into to the woods on the weekend with two married gay men in charge. I know if I wanted to… Read more »

Tripletap
Member
9 years ago

It has always seemed to me that homosexuals are perpetually stuck in adolescence; preoccupation with attention seeking and genitalia. I have had several queer acquaintances and have observed a degree of selfishness not normally seen in heterosexuals. Those engaged in the business of raising the next generation are accustomed to giving most all to their mates and offspring, willingly. Parenting, or should I say good parenting, leaves little time for “clubbing”, social networking, evening meetings at cause groups, etc. That might contribute in part to the “success” of the homintern. Or, maybe not, I don’t really understand homosexuality. It really… Read more »

The Z Blog
The Z Blog
Reply to  Tripletap
9 years ago

This is probably one of the best things I’ve read about the puzzle homosexuality. http://takimag.com/article/the_straight_dope_on_homosexuality_elizabeth_mccaw/print#axzz3XBwkheHW

Bob Reed
Bob Reed
Reply to  Tripletap
9 years ago

Certainly part of their success is the disposable time, and maybe more importantly within the US, the disposable income… Money can sway a lot of folks to trade away their personal views of morality; especially when their views are informed exclusively be secular beliefs. It’s also a near-aphrodisiac for politicians. And regardless of lifestyles, wealthy folks are afforded a greater degree of respect in modern America than members of the lower classes. Where does this wealth come from? One can’t deny that a greater number of gay folks are in educated, white collar jobs; one’s which generally pay well. As… Read more »

philip gahtan
philip gahtan
9 years ago

think cromwell wolf hall our reformation

Peltast
Peltast
9 years ago

The whole Severan Dynasty is quite interesting because it shows that by the end of the 2nd Century AD the Roman Empire was already full “orientalized”, the Severans were of mixed Roman and Punic/Syrian stock, The Semitic God El Gabal (Heliogabalus to the Romans) was worshipped as stone like the one in Meccah and they wanted to make the main God for all the Empire.

The Z Blog
The Z Blog
Reply to  Peltast
9 years ago

The Severan Dynasty also produced some outlandishly bad characters and not just the emperors. The thing I like about that period is it shows just how far along in the process of eating the seed corn they were. The Severans force you to retrace your steps and think about when Rome really began to decline. That provides some useful example of how leader addressing immediate concerns make addressing future problems more difficult and complicated.

Bob Reed
Bob Reed
Reply to  The Z Blog
9 years ago

I’m not as scholarly as you fellows vis-à-vis the history of Rome, but my personal feeling is that the decline, at least in their society, began sometime between the end of the Republic and the time of Nero. But most definitely by the time the Gracchi come on the scene a century later.

My regards

James LePore
9 years ago

Not to worry, all these identity groups will end up devouring each other. The fight to be at the top of the victim heap will leave them all dead or critically wounded.

Thrasymachus
9 years ago

I have been going on about this. Homosexuals can’t be discreet and behave normally, as we are expected to believe they will, because they have a deep need to be seen as normal. Since most people don’t see them this way, they must seek power to force others to accept them as normal. But they know that most people are only doing this out of fear, so forcing more and more assent is necessary. It’s the same process as leftists totalitarian singularity.