Shame and Prejudice

We once discussed the laws of eugenetic which provide a compass for a correct genetic behavior within the human life framework.
The advent of the LGBTQ movement seems to shake these principles and is therefore of interest to discuss and analyze these trends and what they might imply for the future of society.

What is Sex?
Sex is a powerful covenant between two people, an unspoken oath sworn by the bodies.
Whether this can be kept till the bitter end, it is another story.

Sex was sown deeply into our genes so that we might reproduce, however breeding is not for everybody despite rule 3 of eugenetic.
The fact that more and more people choose NOT to have kids or are attracted to same sex people, could be a natural tendency to find a demographic equilibrium with our planet and the available resources.

On the other end, the choice of not having children or not living our native parenting instincts can lead to psychological unbalances and regrets down the line, at least according to psychologists.

The wiser souls will easily counterbalance these feelings, but let us not forget that we live in a body made of hard flesh and not everybody is wiser or stronger than our hormones or hardwired desires. The average soul should find a way to live the parenting instincts directly or indirectly somehow.

The opposite of sex: Shame
Since mankind has been quite successful at subjugating nature to its will, there is seemingly no boundary to the breeding possibility of men and in fact we have been quite successful at expanding rapidly our demographic footprint across the globe at expenses of other species and ecosystems.

Nevertheless, the uncontrolled breeding allowed by excess food, advanced medicine and the comforts our modern society, can indeed lead to overpopulation and collapse like Jared Diamond teaches us.
The overpopulation problem was especially evident in the older times where there was a very slim excess food margin available.

In order to minimize this issue, Nature invented Shame, and this was subsequently marketed by many religions and cultures through the addition of many corollaries and rules redtaping sexuality.

The feeling of shame or guilt came to be associated to adultery and all these sexual practices that won’t otherwise conform to the sole and only rightful wedlock / long sought and extensively delayed / plain / vanilla / missionary face facing / Pope approved / sexual practices.
All these emotions and behaviors are a software correction implanted in our brains by the genes to moderate the otherwise unruly hardware overactivity of our genitalia.

Changing Shame into Pride
What is happening nowadays, a least in certain regions of the world, is an attempt to socially deconstruction the hardwired genetic (not cultural!) instincts of shame.
Once these are no longer in place, then everything goes, everything is allowed.

On the other side of the fence, we still have the “bigots” or those whose instincts of shame or decency are integrated in their personal traits and they still feel these changes are an existential threat to societal stability.

So how do these novel trends compare to the laws of eugenetic, or our compass to live a life on this physical plane?

First of all let’s think of rule 7: Don’t worry about the rules!
This means that the LGBTQ could indeed be a seed of societal innovation and could help unbigot certain societies from their historical closeness.

Think of Russia (but this is not the only country) with certified ZERO % gay population, also notably because being gay in Russia will get you a one-way ticket to a labor camp somewhere in undisclosed location / Northern Siberia.

Now maybe (just maybe) it wouldn’t hurt the Russians if people were let free to decide what they want to do in the privacy of their homes.
Maybe there is hope for them too, to be free to decide how to live one day, and this will be thanks to the activism of the LGBTQ community today despite the personal risk it entails.

On the other end it doesn’t mean that everything goes and is accepted smoothly without causing any backlash or opposition.
Notably for all that is sport and competition, there is no way we can preserve both inclusivity of biological males and fairness in women sports at the same time, it is either one or the other.
Ideally it should be the way that makes the least number of people unhappy or else we risk to spoil the game and set back women back by decades.

In my personal experience of living with a woman for many years, I can’t imagine why a male in his sane mind would antagonize a woman openly, nevermind doing so to a whole bunch of them in a sport competition!

Transitioning at young age
There is also the issue associated to chemical or surgical castration of young children in the recently discovered tendency of “unshaming” our reproductive organs and openly and verbosely modify them to our free will.
Whilst this might seem appealing to counter the growing pains of teenagerhood, the long term side effects of these therapies and overall quality of life of said patients are all but certain, which is what the detransitioning movement is all about.

If both parent and the doctors concur, then nothing should be denied in terms of therapies, but on the other side beware of rule 2: Heal, or stay healthy, or as healthy as relatively possible given the temporary hormonal unbalances of growing up.

And if we follow the path to its destination once you are chemically or surgically neutered in young age, then you will for sure not pass the genes of gender dysphoria to the next generation, so these practices will weed themselves out naturally at some point in time, either because parents will refuse their children to be submitted to these procedures, or because the parents who didn’t object will not get to see grandchildren.

We must also remember that parents are not the enemy of their children and not everybody is ready to rewire its neural patterns against the genetic emotions of shame and decency.
Not every parent is the best parent, and not every childhood has to be a walk in the park, but still parents are the ones doing their best every day to bring about the adult hiding inside the child.
If parents cannot find a way to raise their children and give them a good start in life, then no one else will, especially not a State that criminalizes parents for not affirming their children in early age or if they object to unproven or potentially unsafe medical practices.

The State wedging itself in and dividing families over sexual matters and education is a dangerous tendency which will cause more harm than benefits.

There could be a higher wisdom one day where children will be for just the most motivated parents, but this is more of a long evolutionary trend, we are completely unprepared to understand this concept today.

Policing the language
Since we are undoing the genetic programing of shame, the genetic programing of language must follow suit.
All kind of new grammar rules are being revised, new pronouns invented, people are asked to comply or face “shaming”.
Not that language is a statice feat, it too is a living organism and it evolves and changes over time, new words are minted every day and accepted implicitly by people without questioning as new feats are self evident and easily incorporated.

Like any other organism, language too seeks its own homeostatic balance and it rejects sudden changes or arbitrary reprograming like our organism repels the flu virus.

This last concept is the essence to understand
Free Speech: Thou shalt use the language whichever way you want!

Along with his passive aggressive cousin
Compelled Speech: Thou shalt not speak what others will want you to!

Language is a big boat in the vast sea of life.
Not all the passengers in this boat will be or can be our best buddies, and yet we must find ways to inclusively live and work along them throughout the journey, without the fear of being thrown overboard for violating new grammatic rules that weren’t there just few years ago.

Far more productive approach would be for people to practice emotional resiliency and inclusivity toward other people and be open to grandfather clause those who have a more traditional approach to language.

Let language evolve freely, at its own organic pace.