The End of the Gay Movement

“What do gay men have in common when they don’t have oppression?” asked Andrew Sullivan, one of the intellectual architects of the marriage movement. “I don’t know the answer to that yet.”

Told you.

When the gay marriage issue hit Friday and talk radio land was talking about the end of the world and setting themselves on fire, I made a couple points in the comments. The most important point was that this ruling would be a disaster for the left. Right now, the American voting public is divided 50/50 on elections. The Republicans have claimed most white males and many older white females. The Democrats have put together a grievance coalition of everyone else. The problem with the Democratic coalition, as I've pointed out before, is that it's unstable because they don't share a common ideology. All they have together is a desire to get their pet peeves put into law over the objections of Team GOP.

That means that blacks (the race lobby actually) don't care if women/feminists get what they want or not, they are just using feminists as voting power to get their spoils, e.g. proportional voting, affirmative action, reparations, and ultimately a much larger share of what they see as a zero-sum game economic pie. Feminists, in turn, don't care about blacks or Hispanics or atheists. They want an ERA and for men to be just as weepy and pathetic as they are. Atheists couldn't give a crap about blacks or unions. They want you dumbasses who believe in God to be forced to drop your stupid superstition and this God thing removed from history. Environmentalists don't really care about these other fools because they just want them all exterminated so glorious nature can be free of man. And gays... well, gays don't care about anyone but themselves.

And that is the problem.

That is why the Democrats have for decades now been very careful to never actually give their alliance partners what they want. Indeed, ask yourself why not a single partner got what they wanted when the Democrats held a super-majority in the Senate? The Democrats had absolute control over ever lever of power. They could have passed anything and everything they wanted for over two years.... a carbon tax (or ban), the equal rights amendment, enhanced voting power for minorities, reparations, gay marriage, equal protection for gays, amnesty for illegal aliens, an end to right-to-work laws, and so on. It was all there for the taking. And what did the Democrats do? They freaked out. They started blabbering about how they needed Republican support to somethingsomething and they went to work on passing an Obamacare law that ultimately looked like it came out of the Heritage Foundation circa 1992 as everyone except a couple Senate Democrats went into hiding.

Not a single Democratic wish list item was even voted on.

And this was no accident. The Democrats know that if any one of their constituent groups gets what they want, they no longer have any reason to hang out with the loser club because they just don't care about the other interests. In fact, the interests of the others often conflict with their own. Blacks are deeply religious, and hate the goals of the atheists. Blacks and women are in direct competition for affirmative action jobs, and blacks and Hispanics are notoriously enemies in inner cities, where they compete for the same jobs. Unions and environmentalists are directly opposed in their goals as well. Gay males tend to be wealthy entrepreneurs, tech employees or managers in Fortune 500 companies or government. They are much richer as a class than regular folk and their economic lives are not compatible with unions. And so on.

The Democrats know this, so while they will go full retard in their rhetorical support of these groups, they won't ever actually give them what they want because they can't afford to lose them. The Supreme Court ruling has in essence given gays everything they want. Within a year, laws will be finalized in every state giving them marriage rights, adoption rights, and equal-rights protection. There is nothing more they can want and, hence, nothing to hold them together. To repeat Andrew Sullivan's quote: “What do gay men have in common when they don’t have oppression? I don’t know the answer to that yet.”

The answer is nothing. The gay movement will evaporate and gays will drop out of the coalition. Some liberals will stay. Some libertarian gays will switch sides. The ones raising families will become conservative. And many more will simply go back to clubbing and forget politics entirely. Right now, gays make up about 3% of the population, but they vote in strong numbers. That gives them maybe a 4% punch in the elections... all for the Democrats. Imagine if gays just go back to normal voting levels and 1% of the 3% simply drop out. Now imagine if another third (1%) switch to the Republicans. Suddenly, Republican totals go up 1% and Democratic totals go down 2%. That's a 3% point swing in a 50/50 electorate to 48/51! That represents a permanent run of Republican presidents, a new natural Republican majority in the Senate, and continued Republican dominance in the House.

That is the problem for the Democrats right now.

That is what Sullivan suddenly senses, and what his comment foretells. And he's not alone. Film director and professional homosexual John Waters hinted at the same in a graduation speech at the Rhode Island School of Design: “Refuse to isolate yourself. Separatism is for losers. Gay is not enough anymore.” In other words, please don't go away, please find something other than gay rights to hold the gay movement together. Good luck with that.

Making this harder, I also saw an interesting article in which several gay sociologists noted that gays are not a strong identity groups like blacks or Jews because they aren't born into gay families, they can't be identified just by appearance, and they don't have any holidays or generational traditions that bind them together. Really, oppression was all they had. Heck, have you ever seen what happens when you put gay men and lesbians in the same room? You could power a city off the hate that oozes out of them. Their movement is at an end. The enemy of their enemy has surrendered. The party is over.

Many articles are being written about this on the left. Some are even calling the Supreme Court's ruling "a secret gift to the Republicans." That might just be right.

Thoughts?