Saturday, April 19, 2008

They Want to be Themselves

I reported last night on recent opinion polls in the Netherlands indicating that gay voters are forsaking the socialists and turning to the right-wing political parties.

Our expatriate Dutch correspondent H. Numan has his own thoughts on the same topic.


Dutch Gays Turn Conservative
by H. Numan


If anything, the Dutch are a reasonably down-to-earth people. We pride ourselves on being straightforward, up to the point of being rude in the eyes of other nations. The national slogan could be “doe maar gewoon, dan doe je al gek genoeg” (just be yourself, that’s weird enough already).

In the past homosexuality was seen as a disease or a perversion at best. One could not hire a gay, for he might be blackmailed. Circular reasoning, of course. For if homosexuality wasn’t seen as something bad, there isn’t a reason for blackmail. Oops, there goes the argument so popular in the US armed forces…

The first political change came from the left. They embraced gays, knowing full well that most gays aren’t married, don’t have kids, and have consequently more income to spend and tend to do that. Hence, the strange idea that all gays are by definition left-wing oriented. Nothing could be further from the truth. Gays want to be themselves. Nothing more, nothing less.

It seemed for a while everything was going the right way: gay-bashing was almost eradicated. The general populace began to understand the world won’t end if gays are allowed to marry. The Netherlands was the first nation to — almost — give equal marriage rights to same sex marriages.

Almost, for if you ask for a marriage certificate, today, that document still has “husband” and “wife” on it. “Oh, yeah, well, don’t worry about that. That’s because of international treaties and some nations objecting to same-sex marriages. Nothing to worry about.” De jure it means the government doesn’t stand behind their policy internationally. Those nations objecting to gay marriages more often than not have the death penalty for being gay. Should the Dutch government start executing gays, just to be multiculturally acceptable? It seems the present government would mumble: “why, yes, of course”.

Then we got a new pressure group. The ones with beards and long, very long and extremely sensitive toes. These folks quickly replaced the gays as interest group on the left. First of all, because gays aren’t actually very vocal, whereas this group most certainly is. Secondly, this group breeds much faster than your common household bacteria. Thus, a lot of new voters in the near future. The only problem is that they have a difficult time deciding whom they hate the most: Jews, gays, infidels, atheists, women or certain (other) animals. Gays, however, rate very high on their hate list.

Before the year 2000 it seemed everything gays would like to achieve had been achieved. Gay bashing was almost gone, one could marry. No problems getting a job as a civil servant, or in the armed forces. Want to walk hand-in-hand with your partner? Why on earth not?

But after 2000 things began to change. Fast. Gay bashings were committed more and more. Not only in dark deserted places, but right out on the street in broad daylight. An American, Chris Craine, was viciously attacked in 2005 by juveniles of Moroccan origin. The only reason was that he was gay, and they would like to show off the fact that they are not. “Ah, nothing to worry about,” hushed the mayor of Amsterdam, over a cup of tea. “Just try to behave normally, so you don’t offend those people. It’s their culture you know; you have to respect them. And welcome to my gay-friendly Amsterdam!” Fortunately he took another sip of tea, otherwise he might have let slip: “you bloody faggots should know your place!”
- - - - - - - - -
It wasn’t an isolated incident, as the by now desperate (2008) government would like you to believe. Last year during Gay Pride several gay people were attacked simultaneously in broad daylight in different parts of Amsterdam. Groups of Muslim juveniles now prey on gays, no matter where or at what time. One isn’t even safe in the gay red light district anymore. At the moment one doesn’t have to carry a gun (yet), but would surely be helpful and far more effective than the protection offered by the police. Guns are very illegal in Holland, but I would recommend a sturdy cane or strong umbrella. That isn’t (yet) illegal.

Teachers at “black” schools (school where the majority of pupils are Muslim or other ethnic minorities) today have to hide their sexual identity and their partner or spouse, as it is not accepted by their students. The few that were silly enough to let it slip out were pestered until they found employment elsewhere. School management… Well, what can I say? Perhaps that they have magnificent red rugs? Excellent for sweeping inconvenient truths under?

In the meantime, things changed. Remember Pim Fortuyn? He almost became prime minister, despite the fact he was gay, and very vocal about it. Vocal in the sense of: “Me, gay? Yeah. What about it?” You might call him a Teflon politician, but in a positive way. No slander ever stuck on Fortuyn. And believe me, people did try! Fortuyn showed the nation that being gay doesn’t mean you have to be automatically left-wing. It also showed conservative people that gays can be excellent politicians, or highly capable managers. Fortuyn was regrettably murdered, but his performance showed gays could do very well in the conservative camp.

Add two and two together: gays aren’t any more interested in being left-wing that you or me. They want to be themselves. No need to advertise your sexual preference, either way. You don’t shout from the rooftops you’re straight; neither do most gay people find it important to scream to the world they are gay. All they want is to be left in peace, and live their lives as they prefer.

It used to be possible only within the left wing camp to make a career as a gay politician. Fortuyn showed differently, and his stand pointed the way. Today many gays realize their bread and butter are conservative. They make on average more money than socialists find acceptable. They have become an embarrassment to the PvdA and SP; who have found a more profitable source of voters. Voters who have absolutely no problem in spouting as well as practicing virulent hatred, who are protected by a fascistic novel called the Koran.

Anything the Koran says goes. That is the present left-wing policy. Conservative parties have discovered Fortuyn wasn’t a screaming queer in drag. He was a man certainly worthy of leading a nation. So the ice has been broken, on both sides.

It’s now only a matter of time. Panta rei, as the old Greeks said.

Of course gays aren’t going to turn the country upside down, or enforce their sexual preference on others, much as Muslim would like to believe. But the change is there: little by little everybody who supported left-wing policies slowly see they have everything to lose, and nothing to gain by voting left. That is something we can thank those Muslim hooligans for. And of course both the left-wing parties (PvdA, SP, GL), as well as mainstream Christian parties, which in fact would be more than happy to accommodate Muslims here. The prime minister said so himself on his last trip in Indonesia.

Would you yourself be happy voting for, or being member of, a party that would rather see you in jail?

Neither do gay people.

22 comments:

Findalis said...

This is just the beginning. First they will go after the Gay and Lesbians. No one will really care. Then the Jews. They will flee to Israel. Then create an Islamic Nation in the Netherlands. Dutch women better start pricing Burkas now, before they become mandatory to wear.

Zerosumgame said...

If gays are 3% of the European population, then there are at least 15 million gays in Europe, vs. only 1 million Jews.

Other nations can absorb 1 million Jews. They cannot absorbe 15 million gays, even if they had the political will to do it (America may be more tolerant of gays, but not to the point to accept 10+ million of them.)

Jews have the option of fleeing Europe, which frankly, they should have done after the Shoah, as Europe showed its anti-Semitism, was simply out of control, irrational and would never end.

Gays do not have this option. They have to stay and fight. Frankly, they should do one very conservatie thing in that vein -- get guns, even illegally. They will need it soon, if they do not need them already.

ENGLISHMAN said...

This is a bit of a wooly picture,sodomites in England are no longer content to "live thier lives in peace"it seems that thier lifestyle has to be forced upon everyone else,our small children are obliged to be taught about ,but only in a flowery way,they are not taught the facts,such as the disproportunate levels of disease that occur because of thier practices ,and why should they demand to be "married"? for social acceptance?what a person does in the privacy of his own home is not societies business provided that it causes no harm to another,and yet we have to witness "grown" men pretending to be schoolgirls parading down our streets,when to most of us it is a disgusting exibition of a lack of self control,a lack of concern for society as a whole,and an infliction of thier perversions upon a majority through the medium of legislation to sanction thier abnormal practices.They do not breed and therefore give nothing to the state to maintain its continuance or welfare,but force unecessary burdens upon the taxpayer for treatment of selfinflicted diseases that threaten everyone.Very well live your lives in peace,but do not expect my complicity in your mental illnesses,keep it to yourself.

VinceP1974 said...

ENGLISHMAN who do you think is destroying society faster... straight people who don't respect marriage. Are having kids outside of marriage. And who have multiple successive marriages?

Who do you have more contempt for... totally self-absorbed immature irresponsible gay people, or the people in my first paragraph?

Fellow Peacekeeper said...

Right wing politics opened up to homosexuals because most right wing politics dropped all but the least pretense of being socially conservative. As englishman points out, permitting same sex "marriage", adoption by same, pride parades, propaganda towards children ("Heather has two mommies"), speech codes and "hate crimes" legislation are all pretty much symptoms of a sick society. Sick, with the same pc disease that has allowed a nasty infection of western society by islamoids.

Its hard to reconcile at anything more than an individual level (which is why Fortyn was so exceptional), off hand I would cite Lawrence Auster's article (among several others) "Why homosexual liberation is incompatible with our political order".

VinceP1974 said...

Your statement is uninformed. Not all gay people advocate for marriage, speech codes, parades, hate crimes ,political indoctrination in school, etc..

And also, the people who advocate for those things are not exclusively gay.

saladin89 said...

I never understood why people on the right were so against gay people. They are people just like us. People with different opinions on many subjects. It is natural that there are gay people. 5% of humanity is gay, also the same thing is evident in the animal kingdom. Gay dogs exist, homosexual men is a thing people just have to accept.

PapaBear said...

The Muslims are not being good guests, and the European welfare states are approaching the breaking point, where the middle class can no longer support the growing, increasingly Muslim, underclass

Civil war is coming. Soon

Afonso Henriques said...

Finally a lucid voice here from Englishman.

I think we all can live without gays. If they want "especial treatments" and being too much vocal about their gayness, wouldn't be sorry to send them to Morocco (here, the sending to Morocco was a way of the local mafia to send their rivals down the river).

I can tolerate gays who are quiet about it and have some respect for the society, to all the others, Morocco is a great place, you know?

This is becoing way too leftie.

Right == three pillars = Nationalism & Capitalism/Free market (few socialism) & Moral Traditionalsm.

Where the hell is the moral traditionalism here?

The illness is too intricated on white people now.

Have you ever heard of vocal gayness or especial treatment for gays in non European societies? Have you wonder why?

It is because (male) guyness is imoral and non natural!

talnik said...

You lost me at "Oops, there goes the argument so popular in the US armed forces…" which makes you ignorant of at least the reasons for that policy. Whatever you wrote after that might be similarly ill-informed. I could just as easily ask an eight-year-old a policy question as finish reading your post. If you want to be taken seriously, research, research, research.

Paul said...

That gays are supporting conservatism is a welcome development. Something to be encouraged. However, has it taken a rising tide of venomous Muslim hostility toward gays to expose the obvious?

While the light is dawning on Dutch gays, gays here in the states continue working to force gay propaganda on our children in schools, using government power against the families of the whole nation. Brilliant move by gay advocates. Englishman is absolutely correct and so is FellowP.

So this is what's coming here in the states: liberal/socialist/not-so-progressive dogma continuously shoved down our throats by arrogant judges et al, until the rising tide of Islam begins drowning more and more gays.

Oh, and we couldn't see this coming?

So what is worse, a crescendo of Islamic propaganda complete with appeasing weasel politicians, or government protected gay propaganda forced down our throats and on our children in schools? Oh that's a tough one. Let me think.

Profitsbeard said...

All alliances of like-minded, freedom-loving people are needed to defeat the resurgent imperialistic, intolerant, anti-intelligence, misogynistic, gay-killing Islam.

If homosexuals wake to the threat of militant, murderous Mohammadism (because their necks are literally on the chopping block, first) then perhaps their plight will help rouse the sympathies in the rest of the Left, feminists included, to the rising danger to their own liberties and lives.

"We must all hang together or we shall certainly hang seperately." -B. Franklin.

The Average Joe said...

This discussion is very interesting as it highlights something I read years ago. In his illuminating book "The Territorial Imperative" author Robert Ardrey offers the following equation: Amity equals Enmity plus Hazard.

Simply put, my neighbor and I can be fighting like cats and dogs until we find our butts in the same sling, whereupon we become fast friends...at least until hazard decreases.

As perception of Islam as a threat (Hazard) increases the acceptance (Amity) of gays and jews as allies will increase and the Enmity factor will proportionately decrease.

The most hopeful aspect of this whole mess is that Islam hates everything but itself. This leaves it with dupes and hostages, but no natural allies.

Rafinha said...

Since your post was published in FreeRepublic under the label of "Homosexual Agenda", you can all but expect your post will be trashed by anti-gay cry-baby from low-IQed social conservatives.

I see that is already happening.

Wormwood said...

"All alliances of like-minded, freedom-loving people are needed to defeat the resurgent imperialistic, intolerant, anti-intelligence, misogynistic, gay-killing Islam."

Actually no it's not. When we finally win over the feminists and homosexuals to our cause we will probably be so far down this road that violence will be the only resort left, and lefties aren't good at that, but conservatives are good at that. My point is that by the time we win their support their support will be useless.

VinceP1974 said...

I laugh at people like wormwood. Maybe he doesn't realize it, but there are plenty of gay folk in the United States who are well aware of the threat facing our nation. It's a continual topic on this blog amoung many.

Maybe you missed the fact that a major gay porn actor/executive Michael Lucas went to Standford and rallied against the brain-dead collect students for their refusal to recognize that Jihad is against everything they claim to stand for.

Which , I suspect, is a lot more than you have done.

Wormwood said...

I see we got the all important gay porn actor support. It's like a weight has been lifted from my shoulders. I feel much safer knowing he's got my back. I don't speak for all conservatives, but if that is the support you offer I don't want it.

I am glad that the gay community has come to realize this poses a threat to them, and I gladly accept their support on this issue, but socially this changes nothing. We aren't going to change our position on gay marriage, and the inclusion of gay material into grade school.

VinceP1974 said...

wormwood: Well since I'm a conservative too, I glad you don't speak for me. I fail to see what marriage and school have to do with this, it's not like I support it.

Afonso Henriques said...

As I felt insulteted by Rafinha's words, "Since your post was published in FreeRepublic under the label of "Homosexual Agenda", you can all but expect your post will be trashed by anti-gay cry-baby from low-IQed social conservatives." I will have to reply:

First of all, if you don't have a thing to do shut up! You can go to the woods make your usual job, I can imagine how IQ it involves...

Now seriously, are those social conservatives low "IQed"?

Why?

As far as I can tell, it seems that no gay can achieve such intelligence once they are, well, gay! I would really like you to explain to me why social conservatives, that I named Moral Traditionalists, have low IQs. I would also like to hear what is it that makes one gay, and how it does NOT reflect some how a deficiency in IQ.

P.S. I am not saying all gays are stupid persons, all I am implicitly saying is that gays, like football players, or poor people in the West seem to have a lower medium IQ than the rest of the population.

Also, Wormwood, you are right man!

Vince, are you a conservative or a Neo-con? Hmm... I heard before that Neocons are not really Conservatives... many of them are lefties in disguised...

Rafinha said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rafinha said...

"You can go to the woods make your usual job, I can imagine how IQ it involves"
What job? I'm virgin, and I'm in no hurry to change that condition. And please, while I'm questioning your intellectual ability, I'm not making comments on your personal life. Try to transcend your low instincts and raise up to my level.

"it seems that no gay can achieve such intelligence once they are, well, gay!"
I had to laugh real hard at that. Try to tell that to F. Bacon, Wittgenstein, Wilde, Keynes... and to the innumerous gay men (and lesbians) who have contributed to the western arts and literature. There are a lot throughout history.

" would really like you to explain to me why social conservatives, that I named Moral Traditionalists, have low IQs."
You haven't named any social conservative as an example of a learned person. I suspect there might be many, but only as exceptions. See, an ideology whose tenets include unquestioned servitude to religion and tradition, and the sacrifice of individuality in the name of that same irrational submission to old institutions is likely to attract not much more than a condescending laugh from the most spirituous individuals.

"am not saying all gays are stupid persons, all I am implicitly saying is that gays, like football players, or poor people in the West seem to have a lower medium IQ than the rest of the population."
Does your bigotry stem from your stupidity and misinformation, or does your misinformation stem from your bigotry? Hard to tell. But I found a precious pearl of information at paleoconservative Ron Guhname's blog.

He writes:

"Looking at educational data in a post last year, I showed that men who report exclusively homosexual sex have above average years of schooling. I'm not sure why, but let's take a look at IQ data from the General Social Survey and look at a broader range of sexual orientations (I've limited the analysis to whites since sample sizes are too small for blacks):


Mean IQ

Gay men 104.8
Bisexual men 98.0
Straight men 100.0
Lesbians 102.2
Bisexual women 99.3
Straight women 101.3

First, gay men and lesbians have the highest numbers. In the earlier comments, someone made the reasonable speculation that smart people are simply more likely to admit they are homosexual. (Keep in mind they are simply asked about sexual behavior, not orientation). But shouldn't the numbers also be high for bisexuals as well? They are not. Perhaps smarter people also have the courage and decisiveness to make a clean break from heterosexual behavior? Or, are gay men and lesbians really smarter for someone unknown reason? They seem smart to me."


http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2007/09/homosexuality-and-iq-looking-at.html

Oh, it seems that, based on chance, my IQ is at least 5 IQ points higher than yours. And I don't doubt the difference is much higher than that.

VinceP1974 said...

As far as I can tell, it seems that no gay can achieve such intelligence once they are, well, gay!

Well if you say so, it must be true.

My IQ is 130. I work in software application design. But what do I know? I'm must be deficient.

Vince, are you a conservative or a Neo-con?

I'm an American Conservative.