Megan Mulls It Over

+JMJ

“Snakes couldn’t have turned on me faster than the liberal.”

The Autobiography of Malcolm X

*A Note About Pronouns: In this post, as I have done consistently throughout the course of this blog, I will use pronouns in a way that corresponds with biological and ontological realities, even though this violates standards of political correctness. I will, however, in order to avoid confusion, use the term “trans woman” for a man who identifies/lives as a woman. But even though this will make for some clunky reading, I will use the term in quotes so that my readers will not think I have forgotten that “trans women” are men.

America is burning. The streets in many of her major cities now resemble those of foreign cities she has bombed in her quest to spread her goodness and greatness throughout the world. And even the wokest of keyboard warriors are probably eager, albeit subconsciously, to return to a simpler time when we were inflicting mayhem rather than being afflicted by it.

And the good news is that I do see an end in sight.

But the bad news is that this is the moment when you realize that the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train.

Because the catalyst for the end won’t be something good. It certainly won’t be the achievement of interracial harmony. It might not even be the next best thing, i.e., the U.S. military riding in on tanks that identify as white horses and putting a stop to this mess using tactics more brutal than those of the police. And then getting medals of valor instead of murder charges.

“So what will this catalyst be, Megan? The suspense is causing me mild discomfort.”

Brace yourselves, America, because the stories of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd are about to get co-opted by that annual Leviathan known as Pride Month. Which has most definitely not been cancelled, as I learned earlier this month in Target.

You haven’t really experienced the trainwreck that is 21st century American culture until you’ve seen magazine covers of Taylor and Floyd alongside some truly revolting Pride merchandise. I mean, does your 3-year-old really need a Pride outfit? And how exactly does buying your 3-year-old a Pride outfit align with your disdain for capitalism?

Maybe it’s time for you to admit that the whole time you’ve been shouting “Eff capitalism!” you’ve actually been, you know, effing capitalism.

Ironically, Pride Month and the ever-expanding Acronym have become a way for white men to either gain or regain a spot in the oppression pyramid. Six years ago, singer Sam Smith was just gay. But because everything is about intersectionality now, being gay wasn’t enough for him to be freed from the obligation to “check his privilege.” Because there was still the matter of his being white and cisgender. But then he started calling himself “genderqueer” and, most recently, “non-binary,” and now his marginalization status is about as secure as it’s going to get.

“But Megan, it seems like most white LGBT people are stepping aside to center people of color during this time, particularly black trans women.” Sure, they’re stepping aside for now. But it wouldn’t surprise me if Pride Month ended up being Pride Year, ostensibly for the purpose of “amplifying the cry for justice for marginalized communities.”

Because “The blacks stole our chance to put on leather dog costumes and walk each other on leashes in order to expose the evils of kink-shaming” would sound too racist and creepy.

And it would be soooo unfortunate if the leather dog-dudes were perceived as racist, when the real racists are the people like me who say that “trans women” are men. If I had a heart, I would be hopping on GoFundMe and donating to every single black “trans woman” who is seeking financial help to transition.

Because the best way to show compassion to troubled black men in 21st century America is to LITERALLY FINANCE THEIR EMASCULATION.

But even the people who donate to all the emasculating GoFundMe accounts stop caring about black “trans women” when doing so presents a challenge to other aspects of their worldview. When Muhlaysia Booker was murdered in May 2019, many news outlets seemed convinced that a white man or group of white men were on a racist, transphobic killing rampage. But then when a suspect was charged the following month, that story was buried on page 134Z of the Internet, and I haven’t been able to find any updates. Would any of my readers like to guess why? *Cue Jeopardy music*

If you answered “What is the suspect is a black man?” you are the lucky (and very politically incorrect) winner.

The woke media was ready to condemn Billy Bob Bedford Forrest, who would have killed Booker because his life’s motto is “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam who thinks he’s Eve.” But they weren’t ready to confront Kendrell Lavar Lyles because they never planned for a scenario in which “Justice for Muhlaysia!” would clash with “Stop locking up black men!”

But wait, I just remembered that justice doesn’t have to clash with decarceration. #JusticeForMuhlaysia doesn’t have to involve a jail cell. It could be as simple as sitting down with Lyles and examining the systemic oppression that led him to kill Booker. And then letting him go. And then repeating the process when he kills another black transsexual. And tweeting #BlackTransLivesMatter throughout the entire process.

And while violent black men are absolved, peaceful black men who don’t want to be second-class citizens or lower in their own families become the enemy. One of the biggest myths floating around right now is that the meaning of #BlackLivesMatter is simply “Black lives matter.” Black Lives Matter is an organization with a very specific ideology that is feminist and Marxist. And because I am neither of those (although, full disclosure, Marxists tend to offer great commentary on U.S. foreign policy), I do not support Black Lives Matter.

Unfortunately, I have seen many of my fellow Catholics jump on the #BlackLivesMatter bandwagon either without realizing or without caring that one of BLM’s stated aims is the undermining of the nuclear family. One of the points on the group’s “What We Believe” section of its website is (emphasis is mine), “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

Hey, they didn’t mention fathers. I’m sure that was an accident.

“Come on, Megan. They said ‘parents.’ That includes fathers.” Technically yes. But BLM’s choosing not to mention fathers by name tells me two things, neither of which acknowledges the importance of fatherhood. First, saying “parents” rather than “fathers” avoids triggering single mothers who, so we’ve been told, are the heroines/backbone/heart and soul of our society and prove every day that they can do the job of both mothers and fathers.

Secondly, it avoids triggering the moms who might call themselves something other than “moms.” Even though many of these moms would call themselves “dads” or even “fathers,” the word “father” still has a very cisnormative ring to it. And even the wokest among us are prone to falling into the trap of assuming that “father” means the parent who contributed the sperm. Which is very hostile to every woman who wants us to know that just because she’s given birth doesn’t mean she’s any less of a man.

And let’s talk about that “to the degree that they are comfortable.” Does anyone think that black America is “comfortable” with a family model that doesn’t have fathers at the top? The village model sounds great in corny social media posts and even in real life when times are good. But when you’re being treated to the sound of neighborhood gunfire or your teenage son who’s twice your size giving you lip, it sure would be nice to have a father around.

And what about black Americans who are openly uncomfortable with the village model? Does Black Lives Matter really live by the “to the degree that they are comfortable” maxim when it comes to this group? Or do they assign them the same name as the furry masked critter that eats garbage?

(Side rant: Black Lives Matter is all about assigning labels to people. The tenet immediately following the one about the nuclear family begins with “We foster a queer-affirming network.” So if being called “queer” makes you feel less than affirmed, I guess you don’t have a place in their network. Side rant over.)

“Megan, this post has been like, SOOOO hostile. If there are any people of color reading it, they are like, SOOOO demoralized right now.” So then why are you lecturing me instead of tending to the wounded?

Verso l’alto,
Megan