Why I am against the LGBT movement

To be honest, it is more difficult to argue against the LGBT movement than against democracy, because the latter can still be used as a neutral political system after all, while the former is more like a value and more politically correct. I'm in a bad mood recently, so I'm going to challenge this topic.

In the past two or three decades, a major shift in the field of intellectual history has been from studying the major ideas of thinkers in human history to how these ideas were accepted, the latter being more meaningful than isolated ideas. An intuitive example, in the management of romance, how to love someone in the heart is far less important than how to make the other person feel loved, even if this kind of feeling is a kind of routine. This is where scumbags are worth learning.

What this article wants to observe is how the LGBT movement is recognized and accepted in Chinese circles; what it wants to criticize is the "progressiveness" behind it.

The Imitation Game is my favorite movie in the past few years. It describes how the withdrawn Turing deciphered the code for the British army in World War II, and how he was forced to chemical castration because of a homosexual incident after the war, and he was depressed. Final story. I watched it three times, but it's not that I have a soft spot for gay issues, but the twists and turns of this story make people sigh. The first time I watched it was probably in 2014. After leaving the cinema, I was always unable to let go of why such a genius who saved tens of thousands of Allied troops on the battlefield with his mathematical talent, why the British government could not open the Internet to his homosexual behavior. one side?

A year later, the Supreme Court of the United States declared homosexuality legal, bringing the issue of homosexuality to the top. At that time, I was in Taiwan, and many Taiwanese were enthusiastic to promote Taiwan to become the "Light of Asia": the first country in Asia to legalize homosexuality. A friend invited me to go to Taipei to watch the gay parade. Seeing the crowds, many doubts arose in my heart:

I'm not against LGBT, but against the LGBT movement, because I don't understand, personal sexuality, what about this much fanfare and outcry? Both, although I think bisexuality is nothing to blame, why do I feel no identification with the participants of these movements?

For a moment, I remembered what happened to Turing, and these two problems suddenly became clear.

I don't understand why Britain treats a war hero like Turing so inhumanly (and he's not a powerful general), and I don't understand why the LGBT movement is so powerful these days, these are two manifestations of the same problem. :

I have been looking at the issue of homosexuality with traditional Chinese thinking, but Chinese tradition does not discriminate against homosexuality . Compared with the extreme crackdown on homosexuality in Christian society (after all, the Bible expressly prohibits it), Chinese society, like ancient Greece, holds a fairly tolerant attitude towards bisexuality. Buddhism may be a factor that inhibits homosexuality, but Buddhism does not have a political religion. Unity cannot constitute the destruction of homosexual customs and the persecution of homosexuals. In other words, it is understandable how severe homosexual oppression has been in Christian society in the past two thousand years, and how violent the gay movement in the West has been. LGBT is essentially an inevitable reaction of Western society itself .

But today's Chinese society's rejection of homosexuality is essentially the result of learning the "advanced experience" of the West a hundred years ago. This is the exact opposite of what many comrades have to say about "the backwardness of Chinese culture". Of course, the leaders of the May Fourth Movement a hundred years ago also thought that Chinese culture was vulgar, but what they advocated was precisely the "anti-homogeneity" of the West at that time. This kind of behavior of following other people's ass and eating shit is the reason why I can't understand why the Chinese LGBT movement often holds high the banner of "progress and glory" and criticizes China's backwardness with the issue of homosexuality. Qipa said that it is a show that likes to consume homosexuality. I remember that the host of one episode used the topic to suggest when we can get rid of the dregs of the traditional culture of "homophobia". I despise this kind of point of view, there is no historical common sense and no logical thinking , not picky eaters.

The habit of breaking sleeves and the goodness of Longyang, people with certain traditional cultivation will not know it. Even popular novels like "Water Margin" have traces of masculinity. Lu Junyi's servant Yanqing is so handsome that even Li Shishi secretly agrees, and he is nothing more than a kind of prostitution.

It must also be rectified, let’s talk about prostitution first. When I was a child, I read Zhang Dai's "Self-Being Epitaph" for the first time, and it opened with a self-reported statement: "I'm not a scoundrel, I love prosperity very much, I like a secluded house, I like a beautiful maid, I like a prostitute, I like fresh clothes, I like delicious food, I like a horse, I like it. Huadeng, good pear orchard, good advocacy, good antiques." At the time, I felt quite shocked, even if the horses in fresh clothes and the beauties in the Jingshe were fine, can we talk about such things as child molesters together? Subconsciously, I feel that child molestation is a crime, illegal sexual assault, similar to the kind of "Su Yuan". In fact, the original meaning of child molestation is an adjective (beauty), not a verb (rape). Child molestation is the adoption of beautiful boys as male pets. Of course someone might say, is it justified to have sex with a boy? Then I want to say that this accusation means that sexual intercourse with boys is not in line with modern ethics, I do not deny it, but the key is that this involves the issue of minors and has nothing to do with gay issues. All are equally inconsistent with modern ethics. Of course, I can also give examples of adults with good buttocks, which abound in Ming and Qing notes. Taking prostitution as an example, firstly, I want to gnaw the hard bones when making arguments, and secondly, the change in the meaning of the word prostitute coincides with the gist of this article:

In modern Chinese, why did child molestation change from a noun and a custom to a verb, an ugly criminal offense?

This has to be attributed to the sages of the May Fourth Movement. Europe and the United States are absolutely correct incarnations. How could there be a problem with the homosexuality they banned. Therefore, since the Republic of China, the suppression of homosexuality has gradually become the mainstream public opinion, which also constitutes the "dross of Chinese culture" that some comrades are distressed about. Since homosexuality has been cancelled as a concept, pedophilia has of course lost its semantic meaning, so it has become a synonym for sexual abuse of young children. The nature of homosexuality was cancelled, and only the age attribute of "child" was retained, because in a social ethics that persecuted homosexuality, the concept of homosexuality was naturally absent.

In other words, China's anti-homosexuality is essentially the worship of Western society; today's advocacy of homosexuality is still just following suit. People who engage in sports feel that they are the first in history. In fact, many people have done this kind of thing a hundred years ago. "They are anti-gay, but we support homosexuality?" Although they have the opposite position, their thinking is similar. Are people who bought iPhones 10 years ago lagging behind when they bought iPhones today? I'm afraid there are more geeks. The anti-commons 100 years ago is exactly the same as the anti-commons today. The gay movement, separated from the context of reflective Christianity, is itself a tree without a root and water without a source.

I have always believed that homosexuality or bisexuality is a natural thing, and it is not worthy of fanfare (of course, the LGBT movement in Christian society is a natural reaction). But I was still asked by feminist fighters, "Are you homophobic?" I was speechless. Homosexuality is not a value, it's just a sexual orientation. If the value is also a value against Christian authority, don't make fun of the values.

Even in America, where the LGBT flag is held high, its popular shows like Friends and Big Bang Theory are still full of gay jokes. I didn't find gay jokes funny since I was a kid, because jokes are often funny because they're taboo, and I didn't realize where the taboo was. Only a homophobic culture can have a strong supportive voice, which is why I say that the gay movement is a reaction of Western culture itself.

At this point, you should understand why I oppose the LGBT movement. This article is actually closer to the previous criticism of the progressive view of history. Homosexuality and heterosexuality are just two basic types of sexuality to me. How can you object to them? Would you object to Tuesday? But what makes me strongly uncomfortable is the illusion that the LGBT movement is accepted and recognized in the Chinese region, as if homosexuality represents an absolute, universal, and unchanging value. Even gay marriage can be regarded as "the light of Asia". As for you want to discuss the legal rationality of gay marriage legislation, it is even more impossible. The sentence "Why should two people love each other object" can be returned to you. If you say that the logical basis of this theory of love is weak, after all incest and bestiality can also be two lovers (bestiality has crossed reproductive isolation, it seems to be greater), of course, you will be detained on the limitless line, let’s talk about it Homosexuality thinks of bestiality homophobic hats.

Of course, I don't think people who engage in the gay movement are illogical. Behind the gay movement, there is a real "legal reason" foundation, but this foundation is not the chicken soup of "why two people in love should oppose each other", but the established fact that "the United States already supports the legalization of homosexuality". America has done it, why don't we do it? Doesn't this just reflect our backwardness and ignorance? At this time, the ubiquitous progressive view of history is perfectly embedded in it. However, being just doesn't mean it's right. There are countless logical and self-consistent interpretations for any phenomenon, but unlike the mathematical world, there is only one world on this side. To assert which self-consistency is in line with reality, one has to go back to history.

The monk can touch it, but I can't? The United States can touch it, but I can't touch it? Touch it, of course. But I hope to make it clear that the ignorant China you criticize today is just the result of learning from Europe and the United States a hundred years ago. The LGBT movement does not represent any progress, it just replicates the inner self-correction of a linear view of history, and it is precisely the death knell of a progressive view of history.

I'm not a relativist and I don't deny that China does have dross. However, the issue of homosexuality is not exactly this kind of dross. On the contrary, it points out the fragility of the progressive view of history: the progress of the gender issue a hundred years ago may be a symbol of ignorance a hundred years later, and it was abandoned a hundred years ago. The feudal dross of the shoe will be transformed into the goddess of freedom and progress in a hundred years - then in another hundred years. As far as traditional Chinese culture is concerned, the rise from homophobia to LGBT through the West was originally an opportunity to build cultural self-confidence and abandon the progressive view of history. However, for those who are really brainwashed by the theory of the superiority and inferiority of civilization, even the homosexuality issue can be turned into another whiplash against China. It is conceivable that there will be no more evidence to wake them up, and the logic has already formed a closed loop.

The funny thing is, no matter how you look at it, you can't escape the fact that Christianity is LGBT's worst enemy. However, in China, the public officials worship not logical reason or historical facts, but Europe and the United States themselves. So Christianity is the embodiment of goodness, and LGBT is of course the embodiment of progress. Both of them can be positive and exist, and both can be blamed on China (culture). But when Christianity meets LGBT, it seems that this contradiction cannot be reconciled even by public knowledge, right?

I was still wrong. When I saw the public know that some extremely secular priests in the United States presided over gay weddings, I completely admired the ability of people to lie with facts (this news is of course true, but the degree of its apostasy Not enough to exemplify anything at all). In China, Christianity and LGBT can still be two saints and go hand in hand, because they are too progressive, because they want to progress too much.

A brain bound by a progressive view of history, or Eurocentric Teleology, seems to draw and corroborate the conclusion that China is backward and the United States is progressive through the gay movement. Any aspect of a social phenomenon is put on top . In this way, no matter what phenomenon can overturn the existing conclusion, in other words, such a brain cannot think empirically.

The famous quote of Fujita, the founder of McDonald's in Japan, is an extreme manifestation of this teleology: "The reason why the Japanese have short limbs, yellow faces and thin muscles is that they have only eaten fish and rice for two thousand years. If we continue to eat McDonald's hamburgers and fries, In a thousand years we'll be taller, whiter, and blond hair on top of our heads."

Of course, we now feel that Fujita is talking nonsense, because we have solved the problem of food and clothing for most people after all, and have a little cultural self-confidence. But the repression of homosexuality in the Republic of China and the worship of LGBT today are essentially no different from Fujita's worship of McDonald's. Its absurdity can only become obvious to those sports fighters if the cultural self-confidence is higher.

Sometimes one wonders that a pantheist nation probably doesn't breed deep worship of any value (but that's not a bad thing), and when people talk about the paradox of democracy and freedom, Christ LGBT, are they worshipping values or not ? Knowing the land, disguising his worship of power:

Let’s end with this story in Mozi. I don’t have the original text at hand, so let’s retell it in colloquial language:

One day Mozi's students approached Mozi: "Teacher, I quit my job."

Mozi: "Hey, what's the matter, don't you say this job is pretty good. Is it a matter of salary?"

"It's not about money, my boss doesn't talk about credit!"

"Why don't you trust me?"

"He promised to give me an 8,000 year-end bonus, but he didn't give me the last point?"

"Is that so, if he gave you 8,000 yuan at the time, would he still be creditworthy. Are you still resigning?"

"If he gave me money, he would say the same thing, and of course he was trustworthy, so why should I resign?"

"So, it's not about credit or not, it's about money."

Whether the student is credit or money, of course it makes sense. I don't mean to be either, but this story has some ins and outs that seem inspiring.