This post is one of those posts that, distasteful as it may be, one simply has to write, due to a nasty personal experience in my youth intersecting with the recent capitulation of the Boy Scouts to the Rainbow Fascists in allowing active homosexual scout leaders.
I must sadly disclose a personal experience from my own Boy Scout experience; a Patrol Leader attempted to play hide the salami on camp-out with me when I was in my teens. A machete, brought by me against the rules, preserved my virtue, and I had to shed no blood, although I would have done so upon necessity. This experience informed my personal opinion about victim disarmament as well as about male homosexuals.
As a libertarian, I didn’t care if he bent over for the whole football team, but as the intended target of his lust, I found the prospect unspeakably repulsive. I didn’t report him because I didn’t know you could and because his father was a member of the troop leadership clique. Instead, I quit Scouting for Space: 1999 , a decision I’ve second-guessed but never regretted.
I seem to remember a recent undercover video where denizens of gay bars admitted they weren’t born that way so much as they were molested or recruited by an older homosexual. This was common belief, even among mental health professionals, until homosexuality was removed from the DSM soon after Stonewall, one of the first great moonbat street battles. I would bet it’s still true, political correctness or not, except for that 1% of the population that’s just wired wrong from birth.
Warning: EVIL THOUGHT EXPERIMENT to follow. DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME, OR IN ANY COUNTRY NOT ENDING IN ‘-ISTAN.’ Since 1% is only about 3.15 million in today’s population, you know they’d soon die out if they didn’t recruit, and hookups would be tough in small towns. Furthermore, AIDS reduced their population significantly until antiretroviral drugs became available. It’s recruit or else for them. Now they’ve just opened up a whole new pool of potential recruits.
Culturally, male homosexuals are still over a barrel. If they go with the ‘born that way,’ trope, they open the door to eugenic abortion of babies with any putative gay-associated genetic code, for which they can thank their liberal pals and Roe v. Wade. The estimated 3.15 million who made it past Planned Parenthood could be managed epidemiologically with quarantine or euthanasia (logistically speaking, Hitler put paid to many more than that). If they go with the ‘choice’ stance, then they open themselves up to a revived criminal code against sodomy in a future, more moralistic society. I doubt many of them consciously understand this dilemma, but I’m sure most of them are aware of it on a subconscious level, hence their screeching moonbattery, unpleasant militancy and unsavory triumphalism.
To write this, I had to suspend my moral code long enough to think like a Progressive(or rather a Nazi, although I’ll grant you that there isn’t much difference between the two except that the Nazis dressed sharper and persecuted different groups). I don’t recommend this mental exercise and, as for the actual program, it falls under the category of ‘Modest Proposals,’ understood as logistically feasible but morally reprehensible.
Years ago, a homosexual tried to recruit me; as I wrote above, the thought grossed me out and I defended myself with a weapon. Anyone who is uncomfortable with this event would also be uncomfortable with females defending themselves with weapons from unwanted sexual advances. Either way, the scenario involves an initiation of force by the sexual aggressor, which is something no libertarian can condone. A woman today has the de facto right to hurt, with or without a weapon, a sexual aggressor; I should’ve had the same right to draw blood from, or inflict pain upon, that former Patrol Leader. The only difference between my experience and a female’s similar experience is the sex of the intended victim.
I suspect that much of what passes for anti-homosexual ‘hate crime’ consists of forceful resistance to unwanted advances, but the mavens of Political Correctness attempt to obscure the true moral issue here, which is the right to refuse unwanted association. We males are not accustomed to sexual aggression aimed at us, whereas almost every woman could relate her own particular experience or experiences in that unsavory realm. It wasn’t fun for me, and I’m sure it’s no more fun for females.
Here is another of the legion failures of Political Correctness; it accepts a woman’s right to say no, even with a swift knee to the groin, to a frisky male, but condemns the male who slugs another man who grabs his butt or his crotch. In the sphere of sexual relations, no should mean no, regardless of who says it to whom and how violently… even on Boy Scout camping trips.