Every day new evidence surfaces that the nation most of us were all raised to revere and be proud of is in the final stages of behavioral self-destruction and moral disintegration. I refer here specifically to the pathological epidemic of flagrant, "in-your-face" homosexuality that is sweeping our country. As I have often said, I am not against homosexuality per se. I am also not a religious ‘believer’ (of any sort). I was, after all, born and spent a significant amount of time working and living in the San Francisco Bay Area, where aberrant sexuality in certain parts of the City was always a given (even back in much earlier times, in the late 1800s). To me and my peers who lived and worked there, the freedom to express whatever your particular take on sexuality was, was a given and remained largely unquestioned. It mattered not a whit to most of us in the 60s who lived on this part of the West Coast. If you liked boys and were a boy, that was no big whoop-de-do. Likewise, lesbians were a 'normal' part of the bohemian scene in San Francisco's North Beach community. Whatever extreme kinkiness that existed was usually confined to certain bars, hang-outs and 'watering holes' in the Castro District and no one paid much attention to it, other than to occasionally wonder absently what it was that caused and promulgated such odd behavior.

At one point I and a couple of my cohorts had an apartment on Oakland's Telegraph Avenue owned and managed by a black man named 'Roy' who was gay. He struck us as a bit odd, but beyond that no one cared.

What virtually NO ONE (including Roy) did was EVER try to forcefully flaunt their personal takes on this matter in anyone’s face, and yes, we were admittedly a VERY tolerant community, unlike so many other parts of rural and middle-America. 'The People's Republic of Berzerkeley', we called it. That was 52 years ago!

Back then, however, such 'abnormality' (and it was abnormal in that the 'norm', which was reflected in about 95+% of the nation's population, defined 'normal sexuality' as male-female sexual attraction and interaction) was, in additional being vestigial, considered a highly personal and private matter. Something that was strictly your business and no one else's. Your sexual preferences were NOT something that you discussed, pubicised or advertised in any way, shape or form. Period. 'Homosexual predilection' or proclivity stayed in the 'closet' (where it was generally ignored) and it was not openly discussed or even alluded to in public by any cultivated, educated and/or correctly acculturated individual. If anything, homosexuals prompted pity and moderate forbearance in most broad-minded people, excluding the extremely conservative Christians (Pentacostals, Evangelicals and their 'nut faction' believers and a few other mono-deist religions) out in the ‘provinces’.

Life thus went on without extreme, reactionistic sentiment against what most considered confused, pathetic and perhaps even mentally imbalanced 'fringers' on the far edges of the conventional social order. Consequently, 'Gays' kept largely to themselves and accordingly 'Straights' paid them very little mind, despite the fact that occasionally some of the ultra conservatives (read: religionists) among the above referenced 'nut cases' group would commit a so-called 'hate crime' against one of these unfortunates that the media would make a BIG deal out of (media news is all about sensation-mongering, emotional 'pimping' and stirring up the rabble, after all, is it not?).

The above is all backstory, of course, set against the absolutely credibility-straining circumstances that now plague America like some sort of viral contagion that prances about daily, masquerading as normal human behavior. [Drag queens doing ‘public (or is it more correctly ‘pubic’?) service by reading stories to children at a public library? S&M deviants publicly parading about in full domination regalia, in support of protests against 'racist' cops? The list of such sorry rationalisations is, of course, endless.]

By this point, you're asking yourself "What set HIM (i.e. moi) off?" Let me carefully explain. Today it was announced that the new choice for America's newest nuclear energy czar is about as flagrantly aberrant (in terms of his sexuality) in his/her sexual persuasion as a three-dollar bill. I refer the Biden Administration's appointment of Samuel Brinton as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition in the Office of Nuclear Energy (in the Department of Energy). A black man (of course), Brinton is about as flagrantly 'queer' as one could possibly be, describing his/her sexual orientation and gender style as 'fluid'. If that does full justification and social approbation to a biological male who is 'into' bondage-fetish kinkiness and who enjoys role-playing domination scenarios as a leather-wearing dog on a chain, then I am an Irish pixie with an Oxford doctorate in astrophysics!

Back when I was an adolescent (late 50s, 60s), there were (aside from the above sexual 'deviants') only a few 'geeks', weirdos and oddballs around to provide contexual contrast to the predominant heterosexual norms ‘straight’ society hewed to. These were typically a small fringe of sci-fi fans (early ‘fanboys’ and ‘fangirls’), somewhat later in the 60s to be subsumed into the adolescent Star Trek 'Trekkies'. After that came the puerile comics fans, who obsessed over comic books of the action or Stan Lee 'Marvel Comics' super-heroes genre. We regular Joes thought they were just bumps on the road, so to speak, and that things would straighten out after these 'fads' ran their course and these children grew up and matured a bit. Wrong.

As it turned out, Japan has always had a free-floating, amorphous sexual component throughout its history and when comics mediums merged with the new Japanese 'Animae' graphic story-telling style, a novel synthesis developed that increasingly assumed a hyper-sexualised character. Japanese animae female characters typically featured disproportionate sized physical traits (big breasts, which for Asians is a physical anomaly, over-amply-endowed bodies, etc., etc.) that took off as a new fad in Japan and was quickly embraced by America's geeky comics super-hero fans. Then, so-called 'Cos-Play' (e.g 'Costume Play') evolved in which individuals don animae-like costumes and emulate hyper-sexualised super-heroes and play-act their heroes’ surreal affects. Early on, such activity in the US was confined to by-now well-established sci-fi and comics conventions, held every year and attended by legions of pimply-faced, sexually frustrated adolescents who usually were starved for female attention (and typically lacked a bare vestige of serious ability to draw and attract a girlfriend). Initially this was confined to what SciFi fans called ‘costume shows’ (in which a kid would dress as his favorite science fiction character). All of this activity was very sub-rosa and never came to the attention of the media, since of course back then America’s media was still largely conservative and either middle-of-the-road or only slightly right of center in its political cant.

At that point, the Hollywood 'entertainment' media quickly picked up on these adolescent fads and began to turn out movies, films and similar audi-visual media that featured 'Marvel Comics' type super-heroes, taking note of the substantial discretionary income of these youths (in a typical corporate tactic to co-opt their fantasies and suck up their money). With all of these dynamics, including a new and unhealthy emphasis on Hollywood 'action' movies that combined extreme (ultra) violence with hyper-lewdness and tawdry sexual exploitational themes, it wasn't long before all of the forementioned geeks, oddballs and socially aberrant adolescents began to feel less uncomfortable and/or conspicuous about their hyper-fantasised imaginings. This loosening of behavioral constraints conveniently augmented the transitional evolution of the former conservative left (the ‘old’ Democratic Party, believe it or not) into what it is now...a radically exaggerated leftist liberal, progressive political dogma nightmare with heavy emphasis on black ‘exceptionalism’, gay rights, fancied racial injustices, ‘wokeness’ and critical race theory (etc., et al).

More backstory, of course. At any rate, all of this behavioral madness on the fringes of modern America’s pop-culture rather swiftly morphed into the absolute, mass social mess we now have (much of it due to the proliferation of that plague of anti-rationalist, anti-intellectual superciliousness called ‘social media’), to the point whereby aberrant hyper-sexual public affect is now being celebrated by influential white people (read: celebrities and powerful white media and entertainment corporations) as not just a new 'normal' but a social phenomenon that is in many cases presented as being aesthetically superior to conventional, traditional private and public modes of ‘normal’ thought and behavior. America’s perversely wealthy corporations (as well as extremely wealthy individual billionaires like George Soros), with their multibazillion-dollar assets, are now doling out huge amounts of money in support of homosexual causes and organisations, just as they have contributed equally to leftist radical political candidates, AntiFa and 'black justice' causes. And it is them, as much as the leftist progressive news media, that are most to blame for the oppressive, tawdry social pressure that is today being literally forced upon all Americans...like it or not.

And why is that, you ask? Simple: So that these monied commercial powers can continue to exploit America's inherent social naivete and inability to think intelligently, reflectively and analyse social issues in a rational, logical manner. In many ways, it's the old 'Mushroom Principle' ("Keep 'em in the dark and feed 'em sh*t!"). Further compounding this mess is the fact that Americans, with their excessively materialist orientation have now become so fat, lazy, spoiled, emotionally coddled and effeminately sensitised that our nation is grossly soft, insubstantial and irresolute when it comes to being able to stand up to, meet and contend with harsh (in most cases severely anti-humane) totalitarian political regimes abroad.

Except for a small, hard core of dedicated, highly trained and motivated warfighters (who tend to the right, politically speaking), even our formerly vaunted Armed Forces have fallen victim to the same sort of wishy-washy, hyper aesthetic permissiveness that presently plagues our entire nation. If you doubt this, just bone up on some of the major military policy directives and policies that have recently come out under the present US Joint Chiefs of Staff. Even a small, objective analysis of these things should be enough to revolt and disgust ANY rational, intellectually reflective individual. But we have so few among us these days that either possess those self-correcting social constraints or exercise them fearlessly, that this rotten-to-the-core status quo simply perpetuates itself exponentially.

Now, this is all just an impromptu, off-the-cuff diatribe (something that I seem to be prone to, as an Irishman with a ‘bad’ stomach), I admit, but my angst over these trends in this specific instance was prompted by the announcement of yet another of what we used to characterise as 'flaming fags' to high office in America (from which elevated position they have considerable influence over what we all say, think and do). I refer, of course, to this outrageous parody of a person named Sam Brinton, and this is certainly not the first time the Biden Administration has promoted the homosexual cause by making high-level appointments of this sort.

We've recently witnessed a host of other such appointments, not least being the selection of the new Health and Human Services Chief, a transsexual Admiral named Rachel S. Levine (who insists on keeping 'HIS' male genitalia, despite the full-drag apparel). Then there's Transportation Department Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who's an openly homosexual individual with a male ‘wife’. The list goes on and on and on (including the new Biden Press Secretary who is a black homosexual). My attitude is this: If they feel they can flaunt it openly, I can certainly speak out against it. Is that not what our so-called ‘free Republic’ was all about from the git-go? Freedom of speech, freedom of expression?

OK. I've gone on long enough about all this to expiate some of my more extreme disgust but I am forced to ask, given all the offensive degeneracy that now pretends to be innocuous, "How much further must we go before this greatest experiment in a free society called America utterly collapses from within, or falls prey to another, far harsher and 'less egalitarian' nation (read Absolute Dictatorship) like Russia or China? How far?"

Here's the article about Samuel Brinton that triggered all this indignation today.

MY bottom line is this: I do not object to ANYONE practicing whatever sexual preferences they possess...as long as it is done in the privacy of their own home and/or in the company of their peers, friends, cohorts, confreres, what have you, ONLY. What I do object to (strenuously) is being compelled to swallow all this pig-swill quietly because it has been deemed by a small, elite group to be the politically correct line to toe. The public display, much less the open celebration of such absolutely libertine madness is utterly repulsive, ethically untenable and morally censurable to me personally and I have no doubt whatsoever that my sentiments are shared by a great many ‘normal’, biologically cis-gendered individuals.

As oppressive and inhumane as the Russians are, at least they don't tolerate this sort of absolute crap (nor do the Chinese, more power to 'em); I have to say that much for them (if nothing else). You are, of course, entitled to your own opinions on this subject but I certainly hope there are many, many others out there among you who join me in severely rejecting and castigating this unacceptably perverse change in present-day American society. [Then there’s that infamous Twitter statement by a group that identified itself as an official element of the Democratic Party, appearing two days ago, that said “F*CK the 4th of July!” And yes, it was withdrawn very quickly, but really?!]

My outspoken complaint against the present public sordidness and flagrant lewdness we are all observing in our society is not, repeat NOT cushioned within a conservative religious conviction. Rather, as someone raised in the traditions of ancient Western (Greek) philosophy and the more recent French Enlightenment, I base my feelings on logic, reason and the fixed tenets of biological science.

Men are men genderwise, by virtue of their biochemical composition; women, similarly, are designated to be of the female gender through the same biochemical vetting process. Men are unable to conceive and give birth to babies; women are biologically unable to initiate procreative conception. And anyone who tries to tell you differently is so full of H, 02 and CH4 (i.e. Hydrogen, Oxygen and Methane, the combustible components of horse exhaust) that they would explode if someone tried to light a cigarette within 50 feet of them…

And lest there be any confusion as to what American freedom to express such sentiments is all about at its essential core, I strongly suggest that you refer to a book that must be the least-read work on this subject ever written by most Americans (and also the singularly MOST authoritative, despite having been written by a Frenchman in the 1835): 'Democracy in America' by Alexis de Tocqueville.

As for my deepest feelings about patriotism (aside from the fact that I am just patriotic enough to love my country of birth and support its higher founding precepts), consider this memorable quote by Danish composer Carl Nielsen: “Patriotism has become a spiritual syphilis that devours the brains and grins out through empty eye sockets with moronic hate!” [Expressed in the same vein as “Politics is the last refuge of the scoundrel!”].

[Note: While Nielsen was referring to the Great War of 1914-1918 and the rising hatefulness of nationalism, when it comes to Russia and their ongoing genocidal mania against the Ukraine, on the other hand, my attitude is put THAT observation in your fuel/air bomb and smoke ‘em…]

Postscript: Of possible further interest here is the fact that I have a close family member (a cousin) who is gay. She has lived a quiet and dignified life with a female ‘partner’ for several decades now and is now in her early 80s. She was originally conventionally married (to a man), much earlier in life (when a young woman), and had two daughters from that marriage. Of those, one is ‘straight’ and herself has ‘straight’ children while the other one (the older one) is gay and has a female partner (they recently ‘married’), just like her mother.

Of relevance here is the fact that neither of them is participant or interested in the crowds of ‘Gay Pride’ participants who are taking such delight prancing about publicly in drag (or whatever) in the ‘Gay Pride month’ celebrations that have filled our television viewing screens recently. In that sense, they feel no need to make a conspicuous public pronouncement about their sexual preferences and live a happy, contented life bereft of any attendent, needless kerfuffles.

I respect that attitude highly and have absolutely no problem with it. What I DO (intensely) dislike is having homosexuality constantly forced off upon us ‘others’ by a statistically tiny but radical and highly outspoken group of gay activist cadres. And that is what is to me most repugnant about the current state of ‘gay awareness’ that is being so forcefully driven home (no pun intended) by all the weird sexual misfits and their grossly ‘disturbed’ gender politics who insist that we tolerate their gross and uninvited intrusions upon our very different social stance.

One final comment here. I acknowledge that some of the greatest and most influential human personalities, minds and talents throughout history have had (or seem to have had) what Sam Brixton described as ‘fluid gender’ tendencies…the list (including a number of geniuses such as Michaelangelo and Da Vinci) is most impressive to those of us who have examined the data in some detail…but that doesn’t change my contention that this is still something that should not be celebrated publicly or openly, much less flaunted shamelessly (or in fact anywhere where children may be exposed to it, until they're old enough to comprehend the relevant arguments, pro and con).

Mmmmmph!