The Problem with Queer Theory

I do not know much about being queer, but I know enough to understand it is not another word for gay and is not a replacement term for LGBT. Queer is something else, something different.

The standard explanation of Queer Theory is that it is the study and theorisation of gender and sexual practices that exist outside of heterosexuality and traditional norms. It is a critical theory that analyses our current society through a new prism. It emerged in the early 1990s out of Gay & Lesbian Studies and Women's Studies.

Queer Theory critiques what is deemed 'normal'. It aims to achieve liberation for those outside of what the existing dominant power structure considers acceptable. It promotes the idea that 'normal' is constraining and oppressive.

Queer should not be confused with LGB—an acronym concerning matters of sexual preference, or T—which is a matter of gender identity. Queer is about destroying normalcy in all its forms until everything is ‘queer’. At this point, there is no more 'queer’, it is all paradoxical. The less sense something makes, the queerer it is, for making sense is deemed normal.

Queer Theory is one of several critical theories popular today. Let us not forget the damage that Critical Race Theory has caused in recent years, where various aspects of everyday life, from trains to mathematics, punctuality to classical music, curry to fake tan, voter ID to Irish dancing, and even obeying the law, have been labelled as 'racist'.

A critical theory is an approach to social philosophy that focuses on reflective assessment and critique of society and culture to reveal and challenge power structures. It argues that social problems stem more from social structures and cultural assumptions than from individuals, and that ideology is the primary obstacle to human liberation—oh, the irony!

It has heavily influenced new works, such as Fat Studies and Disability Studies. Both subjects are seen as pushing back against societal norms, and thus offshoots of queerness.   

In the 1960s, American universities began incorporating such thinking into Women's Studies as second-wave feminism emerged. This way of analysing society is referred to as postmodernism: an intellectual stance defined by scepticism towards 'universal truths'. It questioned the learning of the Enlightenment, as all learning, knowledge, and truth is relative and a 'mental construct'. Explanations that claim to be valid for all groups, cultures, traditions or races were dismissed as naive realism.

At the same time, the Cold War was raging and socialist tendencies were frowned upon. Left-leaning professors promoted their views within social justice courses, thus sowing the seeds of the 'woke' movement. They could now fight for liberation against Western capitalism while earning a nice pay cheque. We call this Neo-Marxism, a modern school of thought encompassing critical theory, cultural studies, and some forms of feminism.

Marx believed that communism would only come through violent revolution, a cornerstone of the movement. Lenin argued that revolution must be led by a vanguard of 'professional revolutionaries', people who were fully committed to the communist cause. Neo-Marxism co-opted postmodern theories to intellectualise their argument and distract from the failings of socialism.

I am not saying that all queers are communists, but rather that revolutionary communists support queerness for it has the potential to destabilise society and bring the revolution one step closer. You can argue, to some degree, the same motive for their support of women's rights and LGBTQ rights.

This is why we can have queers, trans-activists, feminists, BLM and the Socialist Worker all marching together under the same banners and shouting the same slogans—the smell of 'equity' is not the only sour odour in the air.

If you dare dig a little deeper into queerness, you uncover an evil stench. Something that offends the vast majority of us—something we all class as abnormal. Paedophilia.  

The vast majority of individuals who support queerness do not abuse children and never would, but through their ignorance and ideology, they are placing children in harm's way. Social Justice Warriors are willing to sacrifice the innocence of children for their dream of utopia. This is not new. Humans have sacrificed children on many altars in the hope of a better tomorrow, healthy crops, and for rain to fall. It is the child's intrinsic value that makes them a worthy offering and a sign of commitment to an ideology.

Thanks to Queer Theory, there is a push to normalise paedophilia as a legitimate sexuality. It has been rebranded, and the new term is Minor Attracted Persons (MAPs)—it is less offensive to paedophiles.

This is the reason why I wanted to write this article. I wanted to highlight the ever-pushing of boundaries and social norms—they are now at the gates of our children's innocence. Some think this is the last great battle involving sexuality and equality—the removal of the unfair prejudice and criminalization of adults who want sex with 'consenting' children.  

This is not a new movement. In the 1970s, we had the Paedophile Information Exchange—a British pro-paedophile activist group. This was not a secret organisation, but an 'in your face' lobby group that applied for and was successful in obtaining government grants. The National Council for Civil Liberties, now called Liberty, supported the group and even argued that photographs of undressed children should not be automatically considered 'indecent' and therefore illegal.

The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a paedophilia advocacy organization in the United States. It aims to abolish age-of-consent laws and campaigns for the release of men who have been jailed for sexual contact with minors that did not involve 'coercion'. I heard about this group when the TV series South Park did an episode on it—for years I thought it was all made up.  

The over-sexualization of children has been happening all through my lifetime. I remember 30 years ago, seeing thongs on sale for small girls with the image of cherries followed by the phrase 'eat me'. It made me sick, yet mothers were buying them. You can buy padded bras for children from many high street shops—why do girls need to advertise their sexuality?  

We have drag artists going into schools for ‘story time’ and even attending children's birthday parties as entertainment. A London library hired a 6-foot rainbow monkey to read children's books—his 10-inch dildo hanging between his legs was a problem. Pride events keep pushing for more kids to attend while kink is on display. The Netflix film Cuties had 11-year-old girls dressed like strippers, twerking and gyrating.

Queer Theory is ultimately based on an interpretation of power that claims children cannot consent to sex with adults. When we view the world through the lens of power, it becomes evident that children do not have the autonomy to choose for themselves. 

Paedophilia is not the only "bat shit crazy" perversion that falls within the classification of paraphilia. It also covers interests in unusual objects, situations, or individuals; thus dichotomizing it from what is considered to be ‘normal’. Examples include sex with animals, urinating on people, dressing up as a baby, ejaculating upon strangers in a crowd, rape fantasies, flashing, dirty phone calls, and even cannibalism. It is clear that the complexity of the human mind can lead to broken mental states. 

The next time you show your support for the LGBTQQIP2SAA community, it is important to examine exactly what you are supporting and why. There is a growing number of gay and lesbian people who have chosen to break away from this continuum. They have recognised the damage it is inflicting on the reputation of homosexuality. When the current wave of queer activism dissipates, it will be gay men who will endure the backlash. Queer activists, on the other hand, will be able to blend back into the general public and remain anonymous.

Ultimately, adults should be able to exercise their freedom of choice and discretion, so long as it does not breach any laws. It is not our responsibility to pass judgement over what other people want to do, but we also do not have the right to impose our views upon them either. Everyone should be free to make their own decisions, even law-abiding perverts!