Anti-gay activist and gay erotic fiction author Robert Oscar Lopez is out with a new BarbWire column attacking those “cruel” gay rights advocates who “foolishly took it upon themselves to carry on the tradition of perversion and excess by making their subculture ground zero for old patterns of social breakdown.”
“We aren’t the first generation that got hoodwinked by sexual libertines, rakes, drama queens, and garden-variety scum,” he writes, before discussing the “cult of aesthetical excess that allowed promiscuous cads, homosexuals, demimonde solicitors, and pornographers” who “flourished” in the 1890s “while the poor lived twenty to a room and the masses starved.”
He goes on to add that the children of same-sex couples have been “swindled” by their parents, regretting that society has been “hoodwinked by this toxic mix when it was packaged as celebrating the wholesome liberation of same-sex love.”
We are all living in Jerome Kern’s musical and singing “After the Ball.” We are all Magnolia now, and the whole world is Gay, because a small circle of misguided, and often cruel, gay activists remade our culture in Gay’s image.
Gay Culture Grew out of Decadent Subcultures
We aren’t the first generation that got hoodwinked by sexual libertines, rakes, drama queens, and garden-variety scum. Ever heard of the “Gay ’90s?” The 1890s saw a fin-de-siècle cult of aesthetical excess that allowed promiscuous cads, homosexuals, demimonde solicitors, and pornographers to flourish in wealthy cities like Paris and Chicago, while the poor lived twenty to a room and the masses starved.
Back then, the term “gay” didn’t mean homosexual, but the ties between the two words were already being forged. “Gay” meant devil-may-care, a bit self-indulgent, irreverent, the bon vivant of the party who downs cocktails, engages in forbidden pleasures, and charms his way out of trouble.
The reference point to “gay” was fun tainted by dishonesty and callousness. It is quite appealing, unless you’re Oscar Wilde and society’s backlash catches up with you. “Gay” men were serial bachelors, deadbeat dads, bisexuals, homosexuals, drifters, gamblers, cross-dressers, opium addicts, and circuit boys. In the twentieth century, somehow all these forms of gleeful decadence became reduced to the mere question of homosexuality. Some homosexuals quite foolishly took it upon themselves to carry on the tradition of perversion and excess by making their subculture ground zero for old patterns of social breakdown.
Remember, we aren’t the first ones fooled. We are just the generation that got hoodwinked by this toxic mix when it was packaged as celebrating the wholesome liberation of same-sex love.
In the House committee, middle-class parents sat before the panels and started talking about how they wanted their good-natured and innocent gay son to be happy. They broke down and started crying. Then in the Senate, they performed the same routine. You could have set your timer – here come the waterworks in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1…
Others came forward and partook in the choreographed weeping – Republicans and Democrats, Baptists and atheists – in between the testimonials from sons of homosexuals who assured the committee that they were perfectly happy being deprived of their biological dads or moms, or not even knowing who those dads and moms were. We even got a less famous version of Zach Wahls; from the plains of Minnesota comes the trim white suburban boy conceived through sperm-banking, to say his lesbian moms raised him so well that he turned out heterosexual, a varsity letterman, gorgeous, and articulate.
He is so successful that now nobody will sympathize with him if one day he wakes up, decides a terrible wrong has been done to him, and wants to know who his father is. The poor chap got swindled by his own moms.