A videogame creator’s contributions to “Call of Duty” were stripped from the platform last week after he tweeted that LGBT activists “should leave little children alone.”
In response to a video of parents brawling with LGBT activists over their school board voting to promote sexual programming to kids in June, the gamer who goes by the handle Nickmercs tweeted, “They should leave little children alone. That’s the real issue.”
For that, the “Louder with Crowder” podcast reported, “Call of Duty” removed Nickmerc’s bundle of game additions from its store, with the company’s account tweeting, “We are focused on celebrating PRIDE with our employees and community.” Weirdly, its message indicated the company thinks it’s pro-gay to sexually target children.
This isn’t the only time people attempting to push what they think are pro-LGBT messages tacitly communicate some very disparaging things about LGBT activists’ goals. In fact, it seems to be a trend. As homosexual pride has gone mainstream, so have the arguments that seem to suggest LGBT identification is inextricably linked with pornography, sexually targeting children, sexually transmitted diseases, and other social evils.
In an NBC documentary on cross-dressers wanting to perform sexually suggestive dances for children that came out in May, reporter Antonia Hylton linked new red-state laws against sexual performances in front of kids with “domestic extremism.” The documentary shows men wearing red shirts and masks, making a hail motion like Nazis, as an example of the kind of people who oppose crotch-grabbing dances in front of kids. Get that? Oppose sexual performances in front of kids, and you’re a Nazi.
This “mini-doc” also defends LGBT performers waving their genitals in front of kids by noting that their parents brought the kids to these events. You can’t make this stuff up.
So the left is against parental rights when parents object to showing their elementary schoolers penises and explaining what “fisting” is, but entirely pro-parental choice when their choice is… showing their elementary schoolers penises and explaining what “fisting” is. Clearly they’re not pro-parents, but pro-showing-children-pornography.
That’s just one of many frightfully transparent public sexual propaganda efforts this June. In another, the city publication DCist was very out with a headline directly connecting LGBT partying with disease outbreaks. The text included this: “Based on the 2022 outbreak, the LGBTQ community is at most risk of infection. Men who had sex with other men had the most confirmed cases, both nationally and locally.”
It’s not just leftist media, either. It’s the federal government. Pride flag-waving Joe Biden’s Department of Education argued in May that LGBT kids require access to pornography in school to affirm their identity. Using the same reasoning enshrined into Supreme Court precedent by a colossally stupid Neil Gorsuch, USED argued that a Georgia school district’s “removal of books from schools created a hostile environment for students based on sex.”
Even though the school district put almost all the objectionable books back on shelves for kids, USED claimed that even reviewing the books after parent complaints created a hostile environment. These were, of course, books luridly describing sex, illegal drug use, and masturbation. The aspirational model for a young lesbian in one of the books school librarians put back on the shelves is the fictional author of a book about “Empowering Your P-ssy.”
This book, according to a Common Sense Media review, features “detailed descriptions of kissing and lovemaking between women, sexual fantasies, sexual arousal, masturbation, and periods, as well as extensive discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity and an excellent example of a consent conversation.” Another challenged book on school shelves, “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” describes masturbation and oral sex, as well as “two sexual encounters and statutory rape.”
USED actually argued that removing books containing “graphic details of sexual acts” created a hostile environment in their schools for LGBT kids. Why does forming LGBT kids’ sexual identity require access to pornography and rape fantasies? I thought people were “born that way.” People who are born that way wouldn’t need pornography to form or affirm their identities.
Frankly, it’s not clear that anyone at all needs to be reading any of these challenged books. They offer zero literary or artistic merit. It’s obvious from flipping through them that they are word vomit from damaged people who wish to damage others. There is no legitimate justification for spending public dollars on these books, and it’s a moral crime to give them to anyone, let alone minors.
These books are specifically created to push sexual identities on kids. That’s because pornography exposure and addiction can shift people’s sexual attraction to increasingly weirder kink.
The goal of pushing sexual identities on kids is not a secret, either; the authors of these pornographic books say that in public. For example, the author of “All Boys Aren’t Blue,” George M. Johnson, told NPR that he writes sex stories for kids as part of his activism.
“This is just an extension of the advocacy work that I do,” Johnson said. “Writing is a form of activism. … And any time you do something that’s a form of activism, there’s going to be another side that doesn’t like it.”
What kind of activism is it to write pornographic stories for kids? Why is it “activism” to expose developing minds to things that adults don’t need to see either? It’s awfully telling that top LGBT allies, including the federal government and corporate media, agree that exposing little kids to sex vocabulary, acts, fantasies, and consequences is an intrinsic part of the LGBT effort.
LGBT activists have responded with outrage to the label “groomer.” Yet these same people keep providing public evidence that grooming is exactly what’s going on.