Is LGBT a Mental Illness?
Yes. I'm a Gender-Fluid Man. BUT, still a Man.
Just because i like dogs, doesn't mean i'm going to start pissing on lamposts and chasing postmen, which is as wonky as those LGBT who can't decide whether to piss with the toilet seat up or down because they will feel oppressed if they think they are forced to choose one over the other.
But yes. I'm gender-fluid, and have been since i was a child, when i looked at the women around me and liked their gentler, caring, nurturing, more reasonable, traits, and thought that they were good moral exemplars, and that i ought to incorporate their traits.
I thought the same when i watched Jesus of Nazereth, Spiderman, 6 million dollar man, Rajinikanth, Clint Eastwood, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Black people, Indian people, English People, Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, bluesmen, tamil musicians, Gandhi, my mother.......
They were role models, moral exemplars, highlights of different aspects of my untapped potentials. So i took those traits on. I learnt from others, of various cultures, climes, times, whom sported traits i've yet to, through comparison and contrast, and learning things even if it didn't translate to food and money (i'm not chinese). Nothing strange about that. It is a natural cognitive progression.
However, just because they were my role models didn't mean i started wearing my mum's dresses, ride around on a donkey with a crown of thorns on my head, get a spiderman suit, paint myself white, get a suit and tie, etc, etc. I was me, ed, a man, taking on a whole load of traits from a whole load of role models. I wasn't like the 'single white female', or poor ole Norman in 'psycho', who completely takes on another character because s/he 'identifies' with the other in some aspect or other. Why on earth would i do that? I like the traits of my mother so i want to be woman? And what next, have children with my father? I like the traits of my neighbour's dog, so i should want to eat out of a container in the corner and piss all over the place in public? Oh, so i sport both male and female traits, so i need to go have sex with both genders?
Never did i ever consider that since i sported my mom's traits more than my dad's, i ought to consider sex with a guy the moment i hit puberty? What sort of insanity is that? Thankfully we didn't have a dog, or i might think that just because i was warm and cuddly, i should go hump a lampost.
Why on earth should 'sexual orientation', or 'gender identity' as terms even exist or be imagined? What is all that 'non-binary' nonsense? People would say that i was 'non-binary' since i scored high on both masculine and feminine traits. But the word back then was 'androgynous'. These LGBT mad hatters obviously take their terms from the computer age with its binary 1s and 0s. So you're either a 1 or a 0, and if you're one or the other, you are oppressed and must choose to be the other. And if you REALLY don't want to be oppressed, you must choose to be both. That's their world, 1s and 0s, cock and pussy, and nothing besides. Why not be an Indian? Or a Malay? A Russian? No. It's either cock or pussy, or both. That isn't mad?
Well, back then, when i was determined to be 'androgynous' in a psychology test at university in England, it didn't mean that if i couldn't marry both a man and woman, i was being 'oppressed' and my 'freedom to love without limits' was being curtailed. It just meant that i was good at empathising, learning from better others, taking on the traits of others like any normal cognitively unchallenged human being. It didn't mean that i wasn't a man, or that i was non-binary, or a homo because i got along with guys, or a lesbo because i liked sex with women, or any old insane rubbish these mentally deranged LGBT come up with. Gender has nothing to do with learning from someone else how to be a better person. I didn't need to 'identify as' this or that. All i had to do was to look at a woman, how gentle and nurturing she was, and decide to be nurturing as well, not immediately run out and buy a dress and a wig, sashay about, and ask men to fuck me.
You see,
...these LGBT nutters and i took on a similar path, but unlike those in the west, i had culture. My culture wasn't limited to MTV, American Pie, Slasher movies, happy meals, and looking to 'score'. No. We had real culture, ancient, full of philosophies, gods, goddesses, holy men seeking out the meaning of life without using their dicks as divining rods, Buddhas, Mahaviras, Guru Nanaks, Gandhis, Jesus, Allah (singular, not plural), mothers who dedicated themselves to nurturing children, dances and music of depth, and so on and very much so forth. And the west's answer to all of that was, drum roll please, The Beatles! Huh?
So at the age of 18, i told my parents, 'I'm not indian anymore, i'm everything i've yet to discover, so no i'm not, i'm yet to be'. My mother thought it was a great idea, while my father looked at me with creased brows wondering what i was banging on about. So i wrote the chinese characters of 'i am not' with a calligraphic brush on a paper, and stuck it on my door till i deserved to take it down. I became a multiculturalist, and it was only decades later that i learnt and realised that that was a quintessential Indian thing to do, and that writing it in mandarin was a contradiction of my intent given that in asia they stick to tradition and like-looking and like-minded people like a fly on a 3m sticker.
But my denial of my identity in search of more didn't mean, 'hey mom, hey dad, i don't have to be a man, so i want to suck dick and muff-dive, and if you say no, you're being oppressive, homophobic, a bigot, and any other word i can pull out of my ass to justify all that my overflowing testosterone has learnt to dictate by an overly sexualised western culture.' And anyway, the west wasn't like that back in the 70s. Their degenerate slant really picked up speed around 2000.
Theirs indicates a diseased culture, like a rotting corpse with nothing but the genitals intact, or like The Walking Dead, seeking, not to eat anything without a birth certificate (like the chinese in asia), but to fuck anything that moves. It was something that ancient Indian Holy Men sought to cast aside to seek their true identity. It is what Gandhi did in his quest to achieve the wisdom required to bring about the eviction of white supremacists correctly and morally - it is no surprise that the west has never had a white equivalent to Gandhi - but have had many Hitlers and Caligulas. The west, however, finds its identity in what is viewed as toxic waste in Indian culture, wants to bathe in it, and demanding that the whole world sink in its swill of depravity or else. Typical neo-colonial white supremacist pricks aren' they. And these twats, or pricks, or both rolled into one, want to dictate to the world what is right? Too arrogant to know how degenerate they are, it appears? It is our fault for being too magnanimous in the face of their many foul-ups over the past century and not telling them off for it.
So in the 80s, before the western LGBT reached the proportions they did in their search-and-destroy mission to rid humanity of all obstacles to their desire to fuck both genders in their 'quest for freedom', i sought to take on the best elements of all cultures, religions, histories, musical genres, and take THAT as my ethnicity, my race, my culture. I didn't let my testosterone dicktate the direction of my self-realisation.
Whilst they, for want of culture, were focused on Sexual Orientation, i was focused on Cultural orientation. While they, for want of culture, were focused on 'identifying' as the other or both genders, i was busy identifying as Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim and saying that this made me a better Christian. While they, for want of culture, were focused on women being more like men, or vice versa, i was focused on being a BETTER man by taking on the best traits of women, AND, different cultures, genders, religions, etc. And if it wasn't for that, i wouldn't be looking at the LGBT of the west today and calling for men in white coats and butterfly nets to address their concerns.
BUT THE WEST...
...is like the petulent kid who snaps, 'you are not the boss of me!', and goes on to do what you told him not to do simply because he wants to prove that, 'you are not the boss of me!'. Childish? Yes. But when it turns into a social movement, demanding same-gender marriage, insist they be allowed to adopt kids, insist that children all over the world must be taught to consider doing what they do, that's when you need to bring in the butterfly nets.
So are these people mad? Well, the logic is identical. If i liked dogs, would it be normal for me to henceforth only eat puppy chow, lick my balls (if i could stretch that far), sniff other's bums, piss on lamposts, chase postman, and be beyond the scrutiny of the law or the consternation of common modesty and decency? No it wouldn't.
And that applies to LGBT. (and Eurofeminism as well) The question isn't one of freedom. The question is one of indecency, immodesty, and insanity being put forth as evidence of 'being free' and 'freedom to love without limits'. No limits. Everything is for consumption. That is the ethos of the western capitalists' since day 1. (which is why the LGBT is being supported by them by social media silencing global and multicultural opposition, and promoted by the corporate-owned Whitehouse to the BBC.)
He who controls information, controls evolution. And the propagation of the LGBT is tantamount to the promotion of gross consumerism, and results in the decimation of all philosophical, inquisitive, and oppositional thought in favour of reaction and immediate gratification, and which is the means by which the Corporation can rule indefinitely.
1. And this problem became full-blown when the western juvenile became the main market force;
2. when the smartphones came in that kept them sticking with their own demographic, uniting them with the ignorant juveniles of the west, and thus prohibiting learning anything besides;
3. and being taught (suspiciously) by the entertainment and news media to disregard their parents and older people.
It was like a planetary alignment of the perfect ingredients to finally produce an insane and depraved people that has to-date turned much of Europe into Sodom, Gomorrah, into one big Babylonian joint. As young people, they were thus left with their teenage impulses and told to follow it. And that is how it grew to be the white supremacist western-media-backed depraved Leviathan it is today. Whilst the European masses are taught to just seek freedom in the versatility of their genitals, the European elite takes control of the the thinking faculty of human civilisation and gets full control. The age-old conflict between the greedy megalomaniacal elite and the people is finally over. It's like the western elite is telling the people, 'don't question me! Here's a bottle of lube and a bunch of condoms. Go play with yourselves and stop thinking so much!'
It has now become such a problem that even western academics, psychologists, sociologists, have all either been silenced, or incorporated. Even Amazon has placed a ban on all literature questioning LGBT as normal. It is fast-becoming illegal to even ask if LGBT is a mental illness. They talk about banning all 'gay conversion therapy' that implies that LGBT is a psychosis and their congregation need therapy, WHILST, at the same time promoting it globally and converting everyone into their sexual consumerist ideology.
The world's academia, and the curious, need to now distance themselves from their western counterparts as only those who abide by Big Tech's and LGBTithead's stance on the matter are allowed to speak. So these cultural terrorists are basically saying, 'fuck the freedom of speech, we just want the freedom to fuck without limits!' I'm all for even degenerates having their time on the podium. But putting it in their pockets and owning it makes them a social problem and a threat.
That is going to lead us to consider things, not from all available information, but from information approved by Zuckerberg and his cronies, whom are the de facto rulers of Europe. He who controls information, controls evolution. And the propagation of the LGBT is tantamount to gross consumerism and results in the decimation of all philosophical, inquisitive, cultural, and oppositional thought in favour of reaction and immediate gratification, which is the means by which the Corporation can rule indefinitely.
Sum
But the problem starts with western culture, which is a consumerist one (hence not a 'culture' per se), one seeking immediate gratification, one seeking self-gratification, one that is hedonistic, one that is narcissistic. When a culture is extracted of all meaning, the human instinct of wanting to be free will have no other avenue to express itself other than the base, primitive, or insane. And that is what grave-birth to the LGBT.
They talk so much about the 'freedom to love', and being 'gender fluid', but they don't bother about all other cultures, wisdoms, philosophies, faiths, of the planet. Where is the 'freedom to love other cultures'? Where is the freedom to be 'racially and culturally fluid? Nothing going on there.
In a civilised world, people will be speaking about cultural orientation, not sexual orientation; being multicultural, not 'non-binary' genders; seeking freedom in what they can discover when they cast aside depravity, not seeking freedom IN depravity. This is a clash. A clash between civilisation, and one that thinks it is one.
And THAT is exactly why their 'freedom to love' movement is nothing but a 'freedom to just be white' movement, and like their colonial counterparts, they demand that the rest of the world remake themselves in the image of the white-binary-'man'. That is narcissism of psychotic proportions. In a civilised world, people will be speaking about cultural orientation, not sexual orientation; being multicultural, not 'non-binary' genders; seeking freedom in what they can discover when they cast aside depravity, not seeking freedom IN depravity. This is a clash. A clash between civilisation, and one that thinks it is one.
The fact of the matter is, if they had practiced the 'freedom to love' in terms of getting rid of their exploitative and human-demeaning capitalist system; if they had practiced the 'freedom to love' in terms of appreciating other cultures and races for perspectives their history had never afforded them, they WOULDN'T have underdeveloped and finally descended to LGBT, gory murderous and depraved movies and music, drug culture, sexual promiscuity, shaky cameras, etc, to 'feel free' or alive through. The west is a paradoxical 'civilisation' that seeks virtue in depravity, wisdom in debauchery, and celebrates life through death.
The first impetus of the human being is to feel alive and to feel free. If the good, meaningful, and virtuous means to express these are censored or unavailable, they will access the evil alternatives. That is how evil can be confused for good simply because it enables them to express their primordial desire to feel alive and free. Such a people will naturally be averse to God, faith, and religion as it compromises the full and unfettered effort to be free through evil. Such a people will point to some of the good they do to argue that their evils aren't evils. Such a people will be averse to the consideration of anything, as theirs is a species of mindless consumption.
If gross self-absorbed and mindless consumption is normal, then LGBT isn't a mental illness, and those who abide by their anti-philosophy philosophy, aren't a lesser breed of the human being, hitherto unparalleled in human history in the proportions it has reached today.
edX
Comments
Post a Comment