Today, in the West, it is effectively mandated that male on male sexual activity happens only within the gay ‘scene’ and between gay ‘men’ who essentially are indistinguishable from each other. Through this, the myth has evolved that you didn’t have to be girly to want to be nailed to the bed by a hairy beast. Thus was born the ridiculous pseudo-masculine New Gay Man.
Something similar happened amongst lesbians. Until the 1970s, they’d all pretty much look like brickies, but in the new ‘egalitarian’ mode, they had to appear to be feminine. So now you couldn’t tell a lesbian just by looking at her. Well, you could, really, but that would spoil the story, wouldn’t it?
Underlying these cultural shifts is the lying, green-eyed monster of feminism, the greatest curse to afflict humanity since the Black Plague. This saw females as being ‘oppressed’ by males as a result of their sex. So, conflating sex with gender, they made the jejune proclamation that getting rid of gender — specifically the gender binary — would make it all better again.
But these developments — they’re hardly progress — mask the underlying purpose of the Left: to abolish the gender binary completely and bring about the collapse of all human civilisation. And with that, of course, would come a loss of life on a scale hardly imaginable. Protecting the Gender Binary must be our focus and to do that the Left must finally be destroyed.
Toms and Dees: how the Gender Binary works.
I once came across a self-professed lesbian, herself of Asian extraction but who had been raised in the USA. She told me she hated Thailand, saying it was a terrible place for lesbians. I thought that needed some explanation because anyone who has been there knows it’s chock full of obvious lesbians (toms) and their girlfriends (dees). People always talk about the ladyboys but there are plenty of manly-girls too. Toms are butch, well, as butch as a Thai female can be and dees are feminine – which in Thailand, is a lot. Only toms are regarded as being lesbian, dees are not.
As a result, when this person said she was a lesbian, nobody believed her, because she was conventionally feminine; she was indistinguishable from the local dees. So they wouldn’t go near her, because she neither looked nor acted in a masculine way. They wanted a butch, not a fem like themselves. They couldn’t understand the Western notion of ‘like goes with like’, because everywhere else in the world, sanity persists and opposites attract. A dee with a dee would be a ‘not-match’, as my acquaintance related it. The butches might well have fancied her, but she was repulsed by masculinity and rejected them. As a result, her pool of available partners was essentially zero.
Similarly, the male equivalents, for example baklas in the Philippines, would not dream of being in a relationship with another bakla; they are feminine and they desire a masculine man, not a mirror of themselves. Such an arrangement, between two baklas, might be called ‘pompyangan’, a clash of cymbals. Again, their partners are not regarded as being homosexual. Only the baklas themselves are, because their partners never ‘sing’ (perform fellatio) or ‘dance’ (are receptive in anal sex). Only the bakla engages in these acts and if she is in a relationship with a man, may well end it if he expresses a desire to perform them himself.
As one bakla said, quoted by academic Michael Tan ‘He used to be my husband but now he’s my older sister.’ The desire for penetration instantly cancelled her former partner’s masculine status and she ended the affair – because he was now a bakla too; he had acquired her ‘green blood’ (berding dugo) and so could only be her sister, not a lover. This behaviour has been widely reported by other researchers, for example Professor Don Kulick in his studies in Brazil, which he documented in his book Travesti: Sex, Gender, and Culture among Brazilian Transgendered Prostitutes. The gender binary implicit in the performances of the partners must be maintained for these relationships to continue.
As a result, such systems do not challenge but rather reinforce the gender binary. That’s right, everywhere in the world, except in the West, the rule is ‘Boys go with girls and girls go with boys’– irrespective of what their birth sex actually might have been. So boys become girls in order to attract men and girls become men in order to attract girls. More than just maintaining the gender binary, these people vaunt it, through their behaviour and in every part of their lives. It becomes the focus of those lives, the hub around which everything else spins. That is exactly how it should be: the gender binary is the fundamental, underlying structure of all human societies. Everywhere except in the West today, it seems, it is celebrated.
The modern ‘like with like’ fashion is a canard. Outside of Plato — who, let us not forget, believed that loving a woman made a man unfit to govern — it exists nowhere in either history or in the rest of the world today. Despite the Greek contrarian, homosexual males have always been feminine and lesbians have always been masculine; that is the natural and proper order, preserving the gender binary which is so essential to human culture. It’s about time we put a lid on this can of worms for once and for all.
Protecting the Gender Binary
The alternative — one frequently called for by communists, socialists, feminists and similar malcontent ‘ists’ — is the end of human society as we know it. We must fight tooth and nail to preserve what we have, despite its imperfections, against the monster of collectivism. That means protecting the gender binary.