Brazil last week awarded gay couples the same legal status as married heterosexuals. The decision by the nation’s Supreme Court was seen as a victory for the newly elected female President Dilma Roussef. She apparently saw this as an essential plank of her intended social policy reforms, which will turn Brazil into a modern and sexually tolerant civilised society, and which no doubt include plans to send any man who clicks on a youngish looking cartoon character to rot inside a rat infested prison cell.
Gay activists in Brazil are delighted. One claimed that “the degree of civilisation of a country can be measured by the way people in a nation treat their homosexual community”. It seems that Brazil can continue to have 12 million kids sleeping on the streets, hundreds of whom are killed and mutiliated by death squads each year, but so long as we pretend that gay men have as much innate desire as heterosexual women do to spend their entire lives monogamously with one partner, then Brazil shall be proudly awarded a place amongst the 21st century liberal progressive club of civilised nations.
Nor does the mark of a civilisation seemingly depend on the way in which ordinary heterosexuals are treated by society. Men are biologically programmed to find fertility and youth, as well as physical markers of virginity, sexually attractive in females. Girls increasingly begin puberty well before they are even into their teens, yet through feminist lobbying, conservative puritanism, and media hysteria, we have created a society that defines men who openly show attraction towards 16 and 17 year old females as the worst kind of subhuman sexual devient, and even pursuing an interest in young women aged between 18 and 25 now carries with it the risk of falling foul of ‘anti-paedophile’ legislation or social ostracisation.
And are gays themselves really treated much better by society than before? The supreme act of denial behind the more ‘tolerant’ treatment of homosexuals is that the worship of youth and beauty has not been central to homosexual culture throughout history. I don’t wish to denounce or degrade this love – after all, through the ancient Athenian thinkers and the Florentine renaissance artists, it gave us our very civilisation….twice. But it is in an undeniable fact, and it would be harder to name a homosexual in history who wasn’t attracted to youth than it would be to reel off the great rollcall of homosexual ephebophiles – from Socrates to Morrissey (celibate).
Recently, the out-going British Labour government awarded a state apology to the deceased Alan Turing, the inventor of the computer and arguably a man who did as much to save the world from the Nazis as Winston Churchill himself. A man who picked up and sodomized a teenage boy (he was 19, but I wonder if he asked him for his ID?) knowing full well the social attitude to such a crime (at the time) and the risks to himself if caught – which he was, and then chemically castrated and imprisoned, causing him to commit suicide soon after release. We are supposed to believe that if alive in one of our progressive civilised societies today, such a man would never once in his lifetime, likely spent largely at the computer which he invented, succumb to temptation and click on a picture of a boyish looking man in his underwear – a crime soon to be punished by a minimum of 2 years in prison throughout Europe under absurd and evil virtual child porn laws created by feminists.
So why have gay men sold their souls to the feminist devil, and why does society pretend that homosexual men have been liberated, now that they can legally marry (which 99% of gay men probably have not the slightest inclination to do) and yet, just like heterosexual men, face a 5 am boot through the door if they so much as idly click once on a cartoon picture of a sexy manga ‘boy’?
The truth is feminists need to maintain the pretence that they are a civilising, progressive, and ‘sexually tolerant’ force, rather than the brutal anti-enlightenment illiberal fascists that they are, conducting a brutal war upon ordinary and healthy male sexuality. They do this by promoting the rights of gays and transexuals, a tiny minority of the population, whilst criminilising as perverted monsters the vast majority of heterosexual men.
They have carefully engineered a situation whereby homosexuals have been granted escape from decades of formal and open prosecution, but only on condition that they renounce and disown their own culture and history – that of the love of youth. A love that twice inspired the dawn of western civilisation. Thus the feminist controlled United Nations only allowed homosexual lobby groups priviliged access when they agreed to denounce and reject any gay rights groups in their ranks that supported the lowering of the age of consent. The sexual trade union has expertly ensured that the success of gay rights is almost dependent upon the ever increasing hatred and savegary towards ‘paedophiles’, something only possible through collective amnesia towards the fact that virtually every great homosexual in history was such a ‘paedophile’.
This is a true faustian pact with the devil on the part of homosexuals, but it is a short-sighted one. Already a gay Austrian man has been jailed for looking at pictures in the privacy of his own home which involved, in the admission of the court, not one person under the age of 21. The story of Jonathan King reminds us of the absurdity of believing that ever more savage paedohysteria can possibly be consistent with fairness towards gays – here was a 1960’s icon and gay man punished mercilessly by the courts and the media for allegedly having sex with boys in the free love era of the 60’s and 70’s – a time when every heterosexual pop star worth his name was banging every 14 year old groupie they could get hold of (witness how Americans still worship Elvis Presley, despite his predilection for pink pantie clad 13 year old girls being well documented).
Not only will homosexual men increasingly face criminalization as a result of paedohysteria, but feminists will soon drop their gay allies of convenience as the power of Islam grows, and they are forced to choose between the two. This is already happening at the United Nations, where thanks to Islamic lobbying, reference to sexual persecution was dropped from the definitions of genocide.
Gay men have gone along with this Faustian pact in the manner of the granny muggers who spit on the sex offenders in jail. Simple relief and self-esteem that society has found somebody to hate even more than them. It ignores the great history of homosexuality, and it ignores fundamental issues of real justness and true sexual tolerance. They would be wise to understand that, as Orwell observed, the object of the irrational mob’s torchbeam of hatred can be switched by the leaders at any moment. You cannot build a lasting sexual tolerance upon the most vile and savage sexual intolerance that the world has ever known, a hatred that would make the average medieval flat-Earther blush at its very ignorance and stupidity.