And trust me, it’s a doozy.
Vice, known lately for covering super serious news, published a 2,000-word probethis week by Meredith Talusan, a writer who doesn’t identify as either a man or a woman. The central existential question: “Why can’t my famous nonconforming friends get laid?”
Talusan describes the friends in question, Jacob Tobia and Alok Vaid-Menon, both outspoken activists with tens of thousands of followers.
Neither has undergone hormone treatment, so they have “visible body hair that marks them as more obviously trans.” Both have a five-o’clock shadow, high heels and lipstick, and “they” as a pronoun.
It turns out, Talusan says, that while the LGBT community is increasingly accepting of people with such specific and niche professed identities… no one really wants to bed them.
Go look at the pictures. Go on, I dare you. The conclusion of the article is hilarious:
From Talusan’s perspective, the fact that no one wants to sleep with Tobia and Vaid-Menon is a sign of injustice. “Jacob and Alok don’t need more claps or raised hands, more YASSSS’s or SLAY’s,” the article concludes. “What they need is to be found deeply, undeniably f*ckable.”
That’s right: Vice is now pushing pity f*cks for social justice.
They obviously are NOT “deeply, undeniably fuckable.” If they were, they wouldn’t have to be whining about not getting laid. What they actually are is spoiled, overindulged, mentally unbalanced freaks. And honestly? Neither of these two is even particularly good-looking, freakishness aside.
But there’s no laying the freakishness aside. What this is akin to is putting on a clown suit, makeup, a big red nose, a frightwig, and big floppy shoes, walking around town, and then complaining when people point and laugh and call you a clown. Ace points out another big problem here:
I ask this a lot but I’ll ask it again: If it’s fair game for George Stephanopolous to ask Mitt Romney, out of nowhere, whether he’d ban contraception– that is, to ask a Republican about an idea he’d never suggested, just to put him in the position of being associated with a fringe sort of position and also having to distance himself from a fringe sort of position that may be held by some of his potential voters — why is George Stephanopolous not asking prominent Democrats if they agree with the proposition that being “tolerant” of gay and/or trans people means that straight people should be willing to date them?
If we get asked such wedge issue questions about difficult, embarrassing, wedge-issue sexual topics, why the hell shouldn’t Claire McCaskill and Elizabeth Warren and Lord God King Barack Obama be asked if “Love Trumps Hate” means that straight people should repress their own “Born This Way” Sexuality and do some gay dating?
Oh, they’d never dream of it. They already had trouble enough dragging the country along for the gay marriage circus; if they think the Progtards are in trouble politically now, just let questions like that start getting asked on Good Morning America or the Today Show and see how Middle America reacts. The “liberal” media, firmly in the pockets of the Democrat Socialist Party, would never even contemplate doing something so prospectively harmful to their lords, masters, and partners in crime. Sure, they’d be happy enough to establish a double standard for Republicans and hound them about it if they thought it would get them anywhere, but who could possibly be surprised in the least by that, at this stage of the game?
Look, I’m willing enough to concede that gay people can’t really help who and what they are, that they don’t choose their sexuality; they’ve always been a part of the human parade, and always will be, and I’m not interested in persecuting them or harming them in any way. I have a handful of gay friends myself, and they’re great people, and I don’t bear them the least ill will.
But they have always done me the courtesy of acknowledging that I didn’t really choose my sexuality either—that it’s every bit as indelible a part of my makeup as their same-sex attraction is for them. As for “doing a little gay dating”, or bedding either of the two tragic psychological trainwrecks in the article: um, sorry, fellas, but…no. Not ever. Not interested, not under any circumstances. I really don’t care what you get up to among yourselves, it ain’t none of my business. But if the next step in societal evolution regarding gay rights is to insist that straight people MUST be willing to consider romantic and sexual relationships with their own gender—that we are somehow harming gays or are less “evolved” or “woke” because we aren’t interested in any such thing—well, you guys are going to find yourselves in for some pretty rough sledding. And if you think it’s a great idea to somehow push for legislation along those lines to force us into it (and as outrageous and absurd as it sounds, you already know somebody is going to, very soon now), well, that’s when your troubles will REALLY begin.
Trust me on this. Seriously, you guys.