The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

LGBT Ideology as Pathological Narcissism

Posted on | July 1, 2019 | 1 Comment


Now that “Pride Month” is over, perhaps it’s again safe to say that homosexuality is not a virtue. That’s what “gay pride” is really about — gay people asserting that they are superior to straights, and expecting the rest of us to applaud their courage in being proudly gay. Those who refuse to celebrate homosexuality are among the “deplorables” because we are not “inclusive,” but a devotion to Inclusion and Diversity as the highest moral ideals must inevitably lead to conflict, and the inclusion of “T” in the Rainbow Acronym Coalition has proven to be problematic, as the Gender Studies majors might say. Making sexual behavior the basis of a political movement, as part of the general Democrat Party program of organizing support by identity-politics categories, has always generated a certain amount of controversy, but for many years liberal journalists were able to suppress such controversies by portraying critics of the LGBT community as evil right-wing bigots who should be ignored.

The Gods of the Copybook Headings haven’t gone out of business, however, and it was therefore predictable that many people who are entirely sympathetic to the cause of gay rights — including no small number of homosexuals — would become disillusioned by what happened once their ideology was imposed on society by the force of law. The Internet has provided the mechanism whereby people can express dissenting views that the mainstream media would prefer to ignore, which is why we know that lesbian feminists are particularly enraged by the “activism” of transgender militants, many of whom are heterosexual males pursuing sick fantasies inspired by pornography. Lesbians obviously have no interest in associating with men indulging a perverse fetish, but when they voiced their objection to the “inclusion” of such men, these lesbians found themselves demonized as “TERFs” (trans exclusive radical feminists). And this demonization was coming from within the gay community and their “progressive” allies!

Well, who could have predicted this, other than everyone familiar with the history of the radical Left? The Reign of Terror in France ended with Robespierre himself going to the guillotine, you know, and Trotsky, who led the Red Army to victory, was assassinated by Stalin’s henchman. So when members of the gay community found themselves being vilified for their sexual preference — i.e., women attracted to women, who refuse to date men pretending to be women — this was deeply ironic, but it shouldn’t have been particularly surprising. Nevertheless, even those of us who understood there was no real limit to the madness of the Left were shocked by the fanaticism of the transgender radicals who brandished baseball bats as a threat to “TERFs.”


Here we encounter Third Wave feminist theory (the gender binary is socially constructed by the heterosexual matrix, to summarize Judith Butler’s influential 1990 book Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity) rotating full-circle to destroy the definition of “woman” and, in the process, destroying the meaning of homosexuality. If a man can “identify” as a woman, and then declare himself/“herself” to be a lesbian, how is it possible for any Third Wave feminist to say no? Thus we reach the absurdity of Justin “Riley” Dennis — a man over six feet tall, pretending to be a woman — denouncing anyone’s refusal to have sex with him/“her” as “discriminatory.”


Under the new “progressive” dictatorship of our transgender overlords, it is your duty to date Riley Dennis, if he/“she” finds you attractive. His/“her” use of civil-rights rhetoric is not accidental, of course. If disapproval of LGBT behavior is a form of “hate” akin to racism, then your refusal to engage in sexual activity with a member of the LGBT community is an expression of prejudice, because you are denying them their “right” to any partner they may prefer. Of course, this ideology condemns all heterosexual men who aren’t interested in dating “women” with penises, but it also results in lesbians being attacked for preferring actual women to make-believe erzatz substitutes like Riley. Meanwhile, transgender ideology is deployed to persuade unhappy young women that their difficulty in finding happiness means that they are actually men, a problem that can be solved by injecting themselves with testosterone and getting their breasts amputated, like Amanda “Miles” McKenna.

Amanda McKenna in 2014 (left); ‘Miles’ McKenna after surgery and hormones (right).

If Amanda felt like a miserable failure as a woman, what makes her think she’ll be happy and successful as a synthetic imitation of a man? However, because LGBT ideology is based on a belief in superiority, Amanda/“Miles” believes she/“he” is actually a better man than any genetic male could ever hope to be, and any woman who wouldn’t want to date “Miles” is therefore guilty of the hateful prejudice of transphobia.

Heterosexuality is wrong and normal people are inferior — that’s the underlying belief expressed by the rhetoric of LGBT “pride.”

However sympathetic you might be toward the unfortunate victims of this belief system, you cannot ignore the destructive impact that the ideology of gay supremacy has inflicted on innocent people who had the misfortune of becoming collateral damage in the LGBT revolution. Rod Dreher calls attention to Christine Benvenuto, who married a man named Jay Ladin who, after more than 20 years of marriage and three children, decided that he was actually a woman named “Joy”:

It was hard to understand the sudden dramatic change in a state of being he now claimed was lifelong. I tried to convince Tom that he was not a woman. When that failed, I tried to convince him that, for our children’s sake, he could believe he was a woman and still choose to live as a man.
For his part, Tom’s perspective was that if I loved him, I would accept that a transsexual has to do what a transsexual has to do – and sacrifice my own identity accordingly. When he wasn’t telling me that the person I thought I had known had never existed at all, he’d say it was a sign of my limitations that I couldn’t grasp the idea of same person, different package.
“After all,” he said blithely, “the changes I’m making are pretty superficial.”
“If they’re so superficial, why do you have to turn all our lives upside down for them?”
He didn’t seem the same. He didn’t act the same. His values seemed to change along with his personality. . . .
All at once there was the pathos of witnessing a middle-aged man – the husband I loved and had admired – taking pleasure in gazing at the woman he evidently saw when he looked at himself in the mirror. His satisfaction with himself. His in-my-face “I’m going to do this and you have no choice but to accept it” attitude towards me. . . .
From his cheerleaders I learned that in the new political correctness, female solidarity is out. A man in a dress is in. Among women who consider themselves feminists, a man who declares himself a transsexual trumps another woman any day. One of Tom’s supporters would eventually sum up this perspective most explicitly: “He’s a transsexual. Anything he does is what he needs to do.”

This excerpt of Benvenuto’s 2012 book, Sex Changes: A Memoir of Marriage, Gender, and Moving On, highlights the unmistakable element of narcissism in transgender behavior. Cynthia Yockey has discussed this phenomenon in the context of autogynephilia, a psychiatric disorder in which a man “falls in love” with the image of himself as a woman. How does this happen? From perverted fantasies, usually beginning around puberty, when the boy dresses up in women’s clothes (typically “borrowed” from his sister or mother), becomes aroused by the reflected image of his “female” self in the mirror, and masturbates to orgasm as this imaginary persona. This is a self-inflicted mental illness, and it is insulting to demand that we celebrate such deviant behavior.

Pathological narcissism is not “courage,” and should not be applauded.

(Hat-tip: Instapundit.)