Religio-Politics: Queer, Questioning, and the Quid Pro Quo (No, I’m not gay)…
L-G-B-T… wait for it… Q! That’s the single letter that strikes fear in the hearts of many conservatives, tea-partiers, ‘publicans, and other assorted sinners, but not same-sexers, for whom that ‘Q’, for questioning—or queer—speaks volumes louder than any SCOTUS or any scrotum ever could. Genetic ‘questioning’ does not fill volumes in the field of microbiology….
No, this is the Golden Age of Homosexuality, by any measure, as now the facade of genetic responsibility and/or deniability can be dropped, and we can continue our sexual experimentation forthwith, limited only by our imaginations—whoopee! Order me a case of KY Jelly tout de suite… ‘Gender-fluid’ is the hottest buzzword in sexuality today, and basically indicate that many of us could go either way—depending, presumably, on mood, fashion, or followings…
Don’t think that I have any real problem with the substance of this manifestation. My only objections are to form, not content. For one thing, I like honesty. I don’t like for words to be abused in the service of deceit. For example, you shouldn’t buy your medical marijuana from ‘Grateful Meds’, with a choice between ‘Confidential Kush’ or ‘Maui Wowie’ or ‘Super Skywalker’ (actual brands). You should get it from a clinic, or a pharmacy, or a hospital. Recreational marijuana is fine: just call it that, and drop the BS rap.
And whatever level of genetic predisposition may be present in sexual identity, there’s also a large amount of, uh, experimentation, probably more of it directly involved with identity than sexuality. Whatever: ‘straight’ sex can be experimental, too, right? But of course. And for those who think this is just the last blast of Sodom and Gomer before the final Reck’nin’, well… it just depends on what Book you’re reading. You’re obviously not reading the ancient Greeks. And you’re obviously not watching the Discovery Channel. It’s all natural, baby…
Sexual mores are more a matter of convention than nature or intuition, and sexual identity even more so. I can assure you that original tribal peoples show very little differentiation between gender roles and fashions. Life is too much of a struggle to be concerned with role-playing. That comes later. Isn’t that what we’re getting back to, gender-neutral identities? Women have babies and men have greater upper-body strength. That’s the only difference—big deal.
My only problem with current mores is with the public display of affection of any kind, or cleavage, or any outrageous fashion that divorces us from Nature and Righteousness and Humility and induces us to fall in love with ourselves and our pathetic little lives and our plastic elastic identities. There should be bigger better things to do. I prefer modest dress, and I have yet to understand the Western obsession with ‘cleavage’.
We need to reduce our total obsession with sex, IMHO, not increase it, but that’s probably more a problem for mainstream TV than ‘Orange is the New Black.’ As with money, so with sex: once you’ve got what you need, or enough of it, then hopefully you shouldn’t have to think about it any more, or not much, anyway. Then you can concentrate on art, science, philosophy, literature, and health… not jockstraps and whips and fetishes and push-up brassieres.
LGBT-Q’s, whether by genes or jeans, can’t make any bigger mess of the world than ‘straights’ have done, so more power to them. That world don’t bother me none, girlfriend. But does anybody really get laid anymore or is it all just idle posturing and twerking? My greater concern is that we’re all becoming a bunch of lame-ass city twerps who really can’t accomplish much on our own without the conventions of society.
I really wonder what upper-middle-class Millennials will do without their smart-phones and their fashion statements. I don’t see too many Millennials swinging hammers or threading pipe. Can they survive a major social shakeout? There was a back-to-Nature movement once before. I hope there will be one again. We may have no choice.