38

40 comments

[–] muliebrity 23 points Edited

I read about this a week ago, and it was so freaking creepy I couldn't believe it.

The professor, so grounded in queer theory that she can't see anything outside her own views, was apparently asleep during 90s because if had been awake she'd realize that her stupid views now (which I'll paraphrase as, "animals... why not?") were among the homophobic arguments made by Evangelical Christians that were against gay marriage. The whole, "it's a slippery slope, first they want to marry each other, but what's next... marrying Fido?" She's bringing it up as if, "why couldn't this be included under the umbrella of LGBQWERTY?," which is like when they added the T & Q to LGB, piggybacking onto an established, successful movement.

Exactly, and the LGB alliance got a tweet deleted and were accused of being a hate group for making the same argument! They pointed out that queer theory opens up the possibility for all these conservative arguments to come true … and apparently this was “hate speech”because absolute morons interpreted it to mean that trans people are the same as zoophiles.

You read something like this and you can't help but wonder when they will start openly advocating for pedophilia. I know a lot of them say the quiet part out loud sometimes, but seriously, if bestiality doesn't get you fired, will pedophilia? You know there are tons of queer theorists just dying to justify kiddie diddling.

I feel like 'softening' the taboo of pedophilia at the minimum has already started. I know I've seen a growing sentiment that pedophiles (especially ones who do not actually act on their urges) should be treated with sympathy because they "can't help who they are attracted to."

What's M.A.P. (minor attracted person) but a rebranding? Pedophile is going to be a very hard sell to the general public but a string of very specific identity coding labels and acronyms are pretty commonplace at this point, aren't they?