82 Comments
User's avatar
EmilyTVProducer's avatar

This has nothing to do with inclusion, obviously. It's subversion and demoralization.

Yuri Bezmenov's avatar

Imagine thinking it is good to ask people if they are gay and refuse to do business with them if they are not.

Susan Canham's avatar

And government-enforced discrimination against straight white males.

James Schultz's avatar

Did you see the whole Keir Starmer YouTube curfew backlash? The people rallying against it think you need gender studies ON YOUR PHONE to survive kindergarten, or any form of school, while the streets burn around them. Wack.

Graham Cunningham's avatar

Of all the correct-think taboos we Westerners currently live under, taking a common-sense look at 'LGBT' correct-think is surely the most outside the Overton Window. Decent people will always take a live-and-let-live view of minority sexualities. But that doesn't mean wanting them rammed down their throat which is what has been happening in our 'Progressive' utopia for several decades now. I wrote about this in this Androgyny Syndrome essay... https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/the-androgyny-syndrome

"Worst of all has been its joyless attack on normal sexuality. Of all the Orwellian Newspeak terms we have allowed to insinuate themselves into the language, ‘heteronormative’ must rank as one of the most poisonous. It is an insidious assault on what is likely the greatest joy in the average person’s life. In politically-correctthink the sexuality of the 95% has been relativised as ‘straight’ or prefixed with ‘cis’..... just one option in a great ‘non-binary’ jamboree bag. These so called ‘straight persons’ that one reads of in the media these days should have no need of any sexual identity tag to pin on themselves as some sub-group in a relativist social universe. They are Mr & Mrs Ninety-Five-Percent of all known sexual activity. They are boy meets girl; yin and yang. Virtually the entirety of civilisation’s artistic expression of sexual love was – until these crass times – about these ‘straight persons’. Tristan and Isolde, Paris and Helen of Troy, Miss Bennett and Mr Darcy, John boy Walton and Jenny – straight persons all.”

William Lomax's avatar

Great argument for sanity vs. the Progressive INSANITY of the last approx. 20 years ...

Graham Cunningham's avatar

Thank you.... hope it'll make you subscribe to STB. Oh and last 40 years more like!

James Schultz's avatar

AND social engineering. What kind of perv gets obsessed with their own sexuality to the point someone telling them to cut it out is "oppression"? Like, seriously. Anti-Indecency laws exist for a reason.

Brian MacIsaac's avatar

This is the crap that infuriates me! Your last paragraph sums it up nicely. The government should not be involved in ANY sort of quota system period! All government contracts should go to the cheapest and most qualified companies. No alphabet, acronyms or union labels required!

These practices are what is destroying California and the USA

James Schultz's avatar

They're not getting any smarter.

Chesterton's Fence's avatar

I'm an electric utility designer who works for a large engineering firm who has SDG&E contracts. Well, they were signed but we've been twiddling our thumbs waiting for SDG&E to assign us work for over a year now. (Fortunately we have other clients).

I thought it was just bureaucratic inertia (internally SDG&E is a mess) but now I wonder if it's because we're not gay enough. But with a company of thousands of employees, with dozens of other clients, how many gays do we need to qualify? What percentage? Over all numbers or just the ones working within the utility sector?

I assume they don't have an answer, because they never do. But from doing customer facing work I can say, their customers just want the electric service. About the "identity" of the engineers, lineman, permit specialists, CAD drafters, etc. no one cares, no one cares.

James Schultz's avatar

At best, the whole "Pride Month" scam is a distraction from issues that actually concern all of humanity, national or otherwise, and trivializes everyone's grievances so they feel better.

At worst, a total intellectual miscalculation.

Stéban Ellis's avatar

Apparently you need LGBT ownership

William Lomax's avatar

Sooooo Right !!!

James M.'s avatar

Things just continue to get crazier in CA. Until California's moderates and moderate liberals grow some spines and begin pushing back against mainstream programming and class-based social desirability bias the descent will continue. It's not longer possible to be politely centrist in Californian politics without supporting disastrous policies... at least implicitly.

"Reality is radicalizing people." - Frank Wright

https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/spencer-pratt-and-the-breaking-point

James Schultz's avatar

Maybe Pratt was right to jump out of the race, considering if he did advance, they'd do everything in their power to shut him out of the ballot.

CindyLouWho's avatar

Pratt didn't "jump out." He lost because leftists ran around the city paying homeless people for their votes.

James Schultz's avatar

Well, I still think those homeless people were directed against Pratt, regardless. And unfortunately, there's nothing I can do about it.

CindyLouWho's avatar

I agree. They weren't just paid to vote...they were told who to vote for.

James Schultz's avatar

Exactly my point. They rigged the votes against anyone conservative.

Abraham's avatar

This creates hostility to gay people among straight people. A straight person sees this as taking away his job opportunities. Those not trying to get those contracts see it as a way of adding a lot of red tape with the associated expenses and inefficiencies utilities. In otherwords this will make utilities less reliable and more expensive. The state may see this as a way to get votes but ultimately the state government is bringing itself done (assuming voter fraud doesn't keep it in power)

Margaret G's avatar

They should never have added "bisexual" to the gay rights moniker. It's meaningless. Anyone who has been vaguely attracted to someone of the same sex can claim special status, when it's actually relatively common. Maybe some of these straight white males can just start saying they are "bisexual". Then the whole thing will become a mockery and hopefully fade into oblivion.

Tom S.'s avatar

Will become a mockery? Sorry, too late for that.

William Lomax's avatar

Some people have already started doing this, even for a couple of decades now.

Roger Beal's avatar

If the Alphabet Community is so meritorious as to have an entire month of self-directed "pride", why do they need contract set-asides? Should not LGBTQ contractors be winning a majority of all contracts, just by dint of their vast merits and talent and qualifications?

James Schultz's avatar

Because forcing them to admit their grievance mob strategies aren't working is to get under their skin, and they'll push you away if you don't talk them out of it fast enough as kids.

Jennie Corsi's avatar

So, a straight, white male was able to obtain a contract as a lesbian woman, by transitioning MtF and codifying his relationship to a woman? His orientation has not changed, only the framing.

Karen Bernstein's avatar

Spot on, as usual. As a taxpayer, I want the best product at the cheapest price. I don't care if 100% of the contractors are pink with purple polka dots. I just want good work that uses my tax dollars wisely.

William Lomax's avatar

D I T T O ..............

Dick Minnis's avatar

This sort of subtle discrimination is what got many of the hiring departments in higher education investigated and sued by the DOJ. I know they have a lot on the plate investigating Governor Gruesome's California Fraud Empire, but one more straw may break that corruption camels back.

Dick Minnis

removingthecataract.substack.com

Alexander I's avatar

Maybe you guys will have some time to also examine the inefficiencies within the mental health industry?

James Schultz's avatar

I say bring back the asylums.

Jrod's avatar

I definitely do not want to know how one proves that one is gay in order to win the contract.

Al Romig's avatar

This began years ago with a San Francisco requirement that suppliers to the city provide benefits to same-sex partners of employees. Social engineering was prioritized over value for taxpayers' money.

Jennie Corsi's avatar

I think they are separate issues. Providing benefits to a same sex partner could easily be construed as giving them equal rights to straight people. However, giving someone additional benefits, based on same sex attraction, to those that heterosexuals can access is discrimination.

Graham Cunningham's avatar

Of all the correct-think taboos we Westerners currently live under, taking a common-sense look at 'LGBT' correct-think is surely the most outside the Overton Window. Decent people will always take a live-and-let-live view of minority sexualities. But that doesn't mean wanting them rammed down their throat which is what has been happening in our 'Progressive' utopia for several decades now. I wrote about this in this Androgyny Syndrome essay... https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/the-androgyny-syndrome

James Schultz's avatar

I hope your essay gets to wider publications.

Graham Cunningham's avatar

Well thank you James...it did get 2000 views on my Substack for what that's worth

James Schultz's avatar

I hope it gets published.

Graham Cunningham's avatar

You could always subscribe yourself to STB .. it's free!

Luc Kenbach's avatar

Ha! GAYYYY! On another note, which individual or group of individuals hijacked the rainbow flag and the words gay and queer and when? It’s never talked about, would be an interesting research project.

James Schultz's avatar

My sentiment exactly.

Alphonse Even's avatar

As everyone’s favorite private would say, Gomer Pyle, Oh Golly……….