Andrew Sullivan: thx for the A2A

Andrew Sullivan was last seen here bemoaning the deconstruction of the homosexual identity by tranny politics. He had a point: while many human activities can be performed equally well regardless of the dangly bits, there are definitely areas where sex-specific biology matters. These include sports, the military, and well, sex. The radical feminists who got to have their way with the military probably did not expect the logical conclusion of their struggle to be that any deranged hairy nutsack can demand to be included in women-designated spaces. They of course deserve what they’re getting, but it’s too bad the rest of society has to go the way of women’s sports.

But back to Sullivan and his latest nymag piece titled “The New York Times Has Abandoned Liberalism for Activism”. It’s actually a three-part deal, where the first section relates to the title, while the middle and third sections, titled, respectively, “Understanding Drag Queens” and “Brexit Blindness”, are unrelated to each other or to the first. It’s that second section we shall comment upon, seeing how it covers a topic we had taken an interest in: The Ahmari-French debate. Not mentioned at PTT but indeed discussed at length in the pre-debate polemics and the debate itself was the phenomenon of Drag Queen Story Hour. In Sullivan’s summary, “Ahmari was, let’s say, a little more exercised about this than French but neither ever explained exactly why Drag Queen Story Hours are, in fact, a key symptom of the collapse of Western civilization”. Our paragraph above, hopefully, sheds some light on the connection between men dressing up as women and civilizational collapse (and do also read this piece by Cole). Sullivan hand-flaps this away as conservo-bigoted paranoia:

In essence, drag queens are clowns. They are not transgender (or haven’t been until very, very recently). They are men, mainly gay, who make no attempt to pass as actual women, and don’t necessarily want to be women, but dress up as a caricature of a woman. […]

Children love drag queens the way they love clowns or circuses or Halloween or live Disney characters in Disney World. It’s dress-up fun.

[Did you also get the creeps at his mention of children?] We’d love to take Sully at his word, but given how his promises (which he’d spent the better part of the 90’s broadcasting at the elites through various megaphones) that gay marriage will not affect you InAny!! Way!!! have born out — we’ll take this reassurance with a grain of salt. Sullivan closes that section with a specific challenge to both Ahmari and French:

What is there in the Gospels, in any case, that even suggests that this could be evil? How can reading to kids in a silly costume offend God? Yes, the church does say that men and women should become one flesh etc. and it affirms the complementarity rather than interchangeability between men and women. Fine. But what has that to do with dressing up as the opposite sex to perform comedy? Show me where in the Magisterium it says that drag queens reading to kids is “demonic”, Sohrab. Seriously, show me.

I don’t know what status the Old Testament holds in the Magisterium, but Deuteronomy 22:5 could not be more unambiguous.


Update [8-Oct-2019]. Kids love’m, eh?

One thought on “Andrew Sullivan: thx for the A2A

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s