Pride 1984: The Rewrite of Gay History & Erasure of Homosexual Heroes
Anyone who considers themselves LGB or T and are over the age of 35 can attest to the fact that there is something…different about the modern day gay community. Gays of the past are still present to recall marching in the streets, pushing for equality and a life free from fear and discrimination. No one needed social media or a cartoon graphic to teach them about being gay, they figured it out themselves. In the early days before the internet was alive and relevant, gay rights were intrinsically linked with same-sex attraction, employment and marriage rights. Now, the very definitions of gay, homosexual, and lesbian are not only being redefined, but in some radical LGBTQ circles are actually being shamed as offensive to the modern community. Prominent figures who helped pave the way for gay rights and were present (or not) at historical turning points like the Stonewall bar uprising are being edited and archived Orwell style in favor of actual criminals who better fit the new narrative. Even the military has changed its tune on the LGBTQ rather quickly…But why?
Take Marsha P Johnson, for example. Johnson is hailed in multiple articles across the internet as a “African American transgender woman” and “pioneer of LGBTQ+ Activism.” If you ask ChatGPT to write about Marsha’s life, the AI will tell the same story, painting a heroic picture of a struggling black trans woman who exhibited gender non-conforming behavior which led to ridicule and mistreatment. There is also a claim that Marsha was discriminated against from within the LGBTQ community itself, which is all the more reason to empathize with no questions asked. But anything that can’t be questioned without instigating a heated debate or emotional reaction is absolutely worth questioning, especially if history contradicts the present.
Marsha, also known as Malcolm Michaels Jr., is on camera clarifying the fact that he was a transvestite at most, a man who liked the art of drag and used she/her pronouns only when in character as Marsha. Malcolm is on record laughing at someone who thought he was a real woman, and emphasized the fact that he was a gay man who just enjoyed mild cross-dressing. Modern day radical activists will argue that these details are irrelevant, and if Malcolm were alive today, he would consider himself a transgender woman, since this term wasn’t popularized until after Malcolm’s death. They therefore insist on mislabeling him to better suit their belief system, despite the fact that Marsha P Johnson may or may not align with them today.
Another popular claim regarding Marsha/Malcolm is that he played a vital role during the Stonewall uprising, but Malcolm himself said in an interview with Eric Marcus that he wasn’t there until after the riots had started. “I was having a party uptown,” Marsha is quoted. “And we were all out there and Miss Sylvia Rivera and them were over in the park having a cocktail…I didn’t arrive until 2am.”
So no, Marsha P Johnson did not in fact “throw the first brick” at the Stonewall bar, nor was Marsha a transgender woman. To say so is erasure of gay men and underground transvestite culture of the era. It is dangerous to ignore these facts and apply contemporary terms to a time in which these terms never would have applied. Disclaimers exist for a reason. Why is Artificial Intelligence programmed with a lie? Because so many of our mainstream platforms are actively revising gay history through the lens of an extreme ideology that conflicts with the beliefs of its time. The further we get from the truth by “explaining it in modern terms,” the more ignorant society becomes. Rewriting the past to protect present feelings is treacherous, and circumvents any type of lesson we could possibly learn from. We cannot allow ourselves to be offended by historical facts enough to change them, for if we don’t know the truth of our history, how will we avoid repeating it?
GAY VETERANS MATTER
Stonewall is quickly dissolving into myth and legend, with folkloric retellings changing a little more each passing year. Malcolm Michaels and his friend Sylvia Rivera are both figures used by the modern TQ+ movement in an attempt to support the neo-trans narrative, despite the fact that both were self-identified gay men and cross-dressers who were not present at Stonewall when the violence broke out. Fred Sargeant, a gay activist who founded the very first Pride to commemorate Stonewall, often speaks out against the disinformation rife within the LGBTQ community to set the record straight (no pun intended).
“Malcolm Michaels had zero to do with conceiving, proposing or organizing the first Pride or any other Pride. Hell, he and Rivera even got banned from Pride for their narcissistic behavior.” -Fred Sargeant
Since leading the way for gay rights, founding Pride and representing homosexual men everywhere, Fred Sargeant has been met with hostility and even violence by the modern Trans Rights Activists. In September of 2022, Fred was 74 years old when he was assaulted and robbed by radical TRA’s at a Pride event in Vermont, all because he came to protest leftist misogyny and homophobia exhibited by modern activists. Attacking the elderly is not something TRAs are against; an elderly woman was attacked by a trans rights activist at an event in Auckland, NZ called Let Women Speak, cracking her skull and inspiring a fundraiser for her recovery. All because she wanted to defend womanhood.
Fred has stated in multiple tweets that the attempt to protect LGBTQ youth started by Marsha P Johnson and Sylvia Rivera through their organization called STAR (Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries) actually lead to some very dark scenarios and multiple convicted crimes.
Fred says that the reason Marsha and Sylvia were iced out of Pride wasn’t because they were trans women of color hated within their own community, but because they were toxic narcissistic men who prioritized themselves over others and put young people in danger by enticing them into a life of dangerous sex work and drug use. The truth is very inconvenient for modern TQ+ activists who worship the hypothetical ground Marsha and Sylvia would have walked on, without acknowledging the fact that Marsha and Sylvia wouldn’t have even aligned with them if they were alive today.
“I left home at age 10 in 1961. I hustled on 42nd Street. The early 60s was not a good time for drag queens, effeminate boys or boys that wore makeup like we did. Back then we were beat up by the police, by everybody. I didn't really come out as a drag queen until the late 60s. when drag queens were arrested, what degradation there was. I remember the first time I got arrested, I wasn't even in full drag. I was walking down the street and the cops just snatched me. People now want to call me a lesbian because I'm with Julia, and I say, "No. I'm just me. I'm not a lesbian." I'm tired of being labeled. I don't even like the label transgender. I'm tired of living with labels. I just want to be who I am.” -Sylvia Rivera
Sylvia Rivera, also known as Rey “Sylvia Lee” Rivera, led a troubled early life. As a boy, Rivera was abandoned by his father shortly after his mother committed suicide. Rivera was then taken in by his grandmother, who beat him for his effeminate behavior. As a result, he hit the streets and became a child prostitute at 11 and was eventually taken in by drag queens. Under their influence, Rivera became “Sylvia,” a persona likely invented by Rivera to foster a sense of safety by becoming the kind of person who had rescued him, away from the abused child he once was. While some sources claim Sylvia considered himself transgender, he denied all labels and simply wished to exist without discrimination.
The internet also paints a saintly picture of Sylvia Rivera, even going as far as claiming there is an attempt to “erase her from LGBTQ history.” Rey/Sylvia testified to throwing change at the police who came into the Stonewall bar to collect a pay off, something that apparently kept them from raiding the gay bar, and recalls a sudden escalation with the appearance of Molotov cocktails. As Fred claimed, Rivera was convicted for a shooting, a record that is now difficult to find and confirm.
Sylvia Rivera tearfully told the same interviewer that spoke to Malcolm/Marsha that they failed to protect the youth they took in and housed in a slum building. Their attempts were futile without proper funding, something no one was empathetic enough to provide under the circumstances. It was only until Rivera’s death in 2002 that the Sylvia Rivera Law Project was founded, and the Latin-American drag queen was labeled as a transgender activist based on his gender-nonconformity. Sylvia is no longer able to clarify or defend this label, and despite the sloppy attempt to “help” LGBTQ youth that failed, the internet reveres Rivera to this day.
Modern radicals will claim that these details don’t matter, and actively choose to apply modern language to describe historical figures in a way that serves present day beliefs best. But this type of historical revision doesn’t make sense. Why does the present-day LGBTQ movement pretend that they don’t want labels one minute, and then refer to themselves with hundreds of new labels the next? Why are Trans Radical Activists so insistent on using these extremely flawed and often traumatized human beings to idolize above other gay activists? Why do these radicals believe it’s acceptable to disrespect old school activists who walked so they could run, only to get punched in the face sometimes literally?
A (DE)TRANS VETERAN SPEAKS
Several members of Gays Against Groomers happen to be older than 40, and therefore remember gay history and its evolution vividly from their own own perspective. All of them have unique stories of the gay scene from the 60’s through the 90’s to today, and all of them are disturbed by the commercialized modern-day gay mob and the targeting of children through the neo-trans agenda. Their first hand experiences attest to the disturbing and Orwellian reality we find ourselves in today. These perspectives matter and need to be preserved as they were if we are to ever understand history in rich detail, regardless of whether or not it offends us.
One such brave member is Austin B., 41, who transitioned from male to female at age 19 in 2002 and underwent half a dozen surgeries from top to bottom before realizing the process still didn’t make him feel authentic. He was completely infertile through the use of cross-sex hormones by age 23. Austin stopped and started hormones over the years, feeling pressured by other trans friends to stay trans and driven by the need to fit in. He now considers himself a castrated man, also known as a eunuch.
“When I was around men, I never felt like I was one of them, and when I was around women, I didn’t feel like I was around them either. They accepted me in their own way, but I never truly felt like I belonged.” Austin confessed. “I just wanted friends and found myself molding to fit with whoever I was around, which is really dangerous and…I don’t recommend it.”
Austin brought up the fact that he was suffering from comorbidities, including an eating disorder, depression and anxiety, and faced abuse that all could have contributed to his body image and struggle to accept himself. Being transsexual is a deeply personal and often painful journey, one filled with twists and turns that can sometimes be life threatening. This is not a concept that a young child with an underdeveloped brain can easily understand. Even Austin, who thought he had it all figured out at the age of 19, felt differently years down the road when there was no going back. It’s a possibility that should not be ignored for all considering the same path.
For decades, this condition, referred to as gender identity disorder, has been classified as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM. It was only in 2013 that this was “updated” in the DSM-5 as gender dysphoria, primarily to enable insurance claims (aka taxpayers money) to cover surgeries and hormones. Austin recalled that transsexuals were originally isolated from the gay community because the condition was considered a mental disorder that had nothing to do with experiencing same-sex attraction. Many gay people feel the same sense of confusion as to how transsexuals got tied to the gay community in the first place, and are even more confused by the modern day ever-fluid definition of the word.
TRANSSEXUALS & SEX WORK
Being transsexual was a rare condition that even the gay community didn’t fully understand, but were more likely to tolerate as a discriminated group themselves. Austin was in and out of gay and trans spaces through the course of many years, and openly discusses using sex work as a means to an end at a young age. In the process, he experienced the dark underbelly of the gay scene, describing gay men who enjoyed the company of young boys, fetishists who used transsexuals like napkins, and gay bars in debt to the actual mafia.
“I struggled with regular jobs because if I couldn’t please a customer, I would be harassed, called names, and humiliated by my manager who didn’t want to lose a customer. I felt degraded at regular jobs making the bare minimum, so I decided sex work would pay more…I was ashamed of it. I always wanted to spend the money right away because I felt like it was cursed.”
Today, sex work is marketed to young men and women alike as an empowering way of taking control and embracing sexuality as a positive, but in Austin’s time it was one of the only ways transsexual people could make money without facing debilitating discrimination that would bring their identity into question, by becoming a niche in the adult industry. One could argue that facing verbal harassment at a “normal” job is far less dangerous than illegal sex work, where one could be killed in a seedy hotel room and authorities would hardly bat an eye. It’s certainly not easy, and not a one-size-fits-all job, but one that many transsexuals fall into after feeling rejected from “regular” society and even themselves.
FACT: Transvestite is NOT the same as transsexual, or transgender. Transvestites, also known as female impersonators, didn’t always perform in drag as queens. In fact, they were often straight men with families who simply enjoyed impersonating women, and often did so with outfits that some would now consider to be conservative. For other men, this behavior was a fetish known as autogynephilia, or sexual pleasure at the idea of dressing as or becoming a woman. See: that lotion-obsessed guy from Silence of the Lambs.
Wanting to meet others like himself, Austin attended Camp Trans, an annual event that originally began as a protest to the Michigan Womyns Music Festival, which excluded trans women from attending. Modern radicals refer to these women now as TERFs, or Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists, a term used negatively as an attempt to shame women for not accepting biological men as women. Austin says this is where he was radicalized by extreme trans activists, many of whom were young, white, affluent anti-capitalists who were pro-sex work and held a grudge against whoever disagreed with them. Especially women.
“These weren’t trans women [the way I knew them],” Austin explained. “These kids usually came from a loving home with two parents, and their idea of sex work was working at a woman owned strip club. Looking back, they reeked of entitlement.”
Austin described an underground world lost in depravity and delusion. While he was drawn to the money of sex work, he often felt uncomfortable around radicals who told him to “unlearn” privilege, something he never really felt as someone who at times lived in a trailer. The new radical trans activist seemed practically possessed by a narcissistic entitled spirit that demanded acceptance of these beliefs and shame for lackthereof simultaneously. He says he sees what was once a hidden world not only pouring into the mainstream and normalized, but pulling children into it.
“Pride used to only be a weekend event. I never saw any kids there, but it was known for pushing the envelope as far as what was acceptable. But people weren’t allowed to wander the streets mostly naked like they are now, and definitely not in front of kids.The cops would be there, and they would arrest people.”
According to Austin, who now uses his experiences to warn young people of the risks and nuances of a transsexual life, Pride was a much more low-key event attended by gays and lesbians and the occasional transsexual, and typically raised money for AIDS patients or lesbians suffering with Breast Cancer. However, he brought up the fact that many prominent gay figures, primarily gay men, were not only advocating for gay rights, but for the boundaries of age restrictions to be removed.
“Harvey Milk was known for it,” Austin recalled. “People knew he was living with a teenage boy at one point, and no one did anything about it. He liked teenage boys well into his 30’s.”
Harvey Milk, the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California, is idolized in gay history as one of the most impressionable activists to rise up from the LGBTQ community. He was also known for having relations with men ten or more years younger than him, and in 1964 he was allegedly in a technically legal relationship with then 16 year old Jack Galen McKinley. The age of consent in New York, the state where they met, is 14. But legality is not synonymous with morality, and if Elvis is now considered a pedophile for having a relationship with a teenage girl, isn’t Harvey also flirting with the same predatory line? What stopped Milk from having relationships with men his own age? Surely the pickings were not that slim.
Harvey Milk was also a staunch public supporter of Rev. Jim Jones, a cult leader who in 1978 forced more than 900 people to commit suicide in what is now referred to as the Jonestown massacre. In a letter to President Jimmy Carter, Milk wrote “Rev. Jones is widely known in the minority communities here and elsewhere as a man of the highest character, who has undertaken constructive remedies for social problems which have been amazing in their scope and effectiveness.” In return for his endorsement, Jones provided Milk with resources like a printing press, volunteers, and free promotion through his cult, the Peoples Temple.
Criticizers of Milk are shamed and called homophobic, and while some of his opposition at the time certainly were against homosexuals in general, there is nothing but praise for Milk in the modern world. Questions and criticism are frowned upon, his flaws are embraced, and he can do no wrong in the eyes of modern activists, except perhaps be “too white.” The first elected gay politician who loved teenage boys landed himself on a US postage stamp, has a foundation in his namesake, was played by Sean Penn in a Hollywood film, and also has a naval ship named after him, courtesy of the Obama administration.
THE EARLY PUSH FOR LEGAL PEDOPHILIA
In 1978, one of the most infamous and controversial organizations was formed in the name of gay rights:
The North American Man/Boy Love Association, or NAMBLA.
Originally inspired by the work of the Boston/Boise Committee, which formed in 1977 to defend a group of men indicted for running a boy prostitution ring in Massachusetts, NAMBLA appeared on the post-Stonewall scene to argue for the right and ability of post-pubescent teenagers to consent to sex with male adults. Some extended this further to cover pre-pubescent children. NAMBLA often pulls from history to point out a pattern of man/boy relationships and argues that children are sexual beings capable of having intimate relationships with adult men.
Co-founded by a so-called “gay rights activist” and socialist David Thorstad, NAMBLA has been a target of understandably vehement disapproval from both sides of the political aisle, rejected from states to incorporate as a nonprofit agency, and kept under strict police surveillance. Any members who are publicly identified tend to lose their jobs, and requests made by NAMBLA to meet on the property of public institutions are firmly refused.
Did You Know?: In Aug. 2000, The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) chose to use public funds to defend NAMBLA in court in Curley v. NAMBLA. Parents of Jeffrey Curley had filed a wrongful death lawsuit, accusing NAMBLA of inciting Jeffrey’s death at the hands of Charles Jaynes and Salvatore Sicari through its web site’s literature. The ACLU acted as a surrogate for NAMBLA, allowing its members to defend themselves in court while remaining anonymous. They effectively protected NAMBLA from being dismantled through the case. [source]
NAMBLA has been a source of contention in the gay community for years. LGB and T groups like pride marching committees, community centers, and the International Lesbian and Gay Association have all favored exclusion of NAMBLA, who have remained emboldened by support on social media and maintain a formidable list of publications available in many bookstores and libraries. In other words, NAMBLA has remained despite the years of push back from gay and straight communities alike.
Yes, NAMBLA is still allowed to exist. Gays Against Groomers does not and will never endorse such an organization that has had their foot in the door of our community for far too long. Unfortunately, due to the western popularization of child drag performances, overly graphic and sexual LGBTQ “education” in schools and prosecution of parents in order to give youth power to keep secrets and make decisions without adult supervision, NAMBLA is closer than ever to getting what they want. All they’ve had to do is wait for history to repeat itself in a new way.
There is no known female run equivalent to NAMBLA that has gained the same disturbing amount of traction, though it is not unheard of for women to support convicted pedophiles or the attraction to children in general.
WHAT ABOUT THE LESBIANS?
Enough about gay men. Lesbians were busy breaking female gender stereotypes long before straight women were obligated to step into male roles during World War 2. While it’s unclear when the word “lesbian” was first used to describe women who are attracted to other women, the first usage can be traced back to the 1800s, and became largely popularized in the 1960s and 1970s during the lesbian feminist era. Gay women played a huge role in women's liberation, seeing as they were brave enough to embrace masculinity within themselves by participating in physical activities like sports, joining the military, and challenging men by eliminating them from the romantic equation.
Lesbian culture is rife with secret codes, sapphic poetry, gender bending outfits and original feminist ideals. Lesbians didn’t want to be men, they just didn’t want to be involved with men intimately or require their permission to live freely. Documenting lesbian history in any other way is an affront to the sacrifices lesbians made to become the backbone behind the push for women’s equality. Without the courage of lesbians intent on breaking free from the patriarchy, women might still be asking their fathers or husbands’ permission to drive, work, vote or get a credit card.
So where were the lesbians during the first gay uprising? One name that some say was a prominent spark in the homo revolution was Stormé DeLarverie, a biracial butch lesbian and drag king born in New Orleans. With her androgynous mixed look, Stormé faced discrimination and violence from all angles. She was either not feminine enough or not black enough for her surrounding communities. Lesbians in Stormé’s time were predominantly masculine, or butch, and often dressed as men to enter male dominated spaces to pick up other women. She is primarily known for defending lesbians of the Village, and is quoted clarifying that the word “riot” is not an appropriate descriptor for Stonewall.
“It was a rebellion, it was an uprising, it was civil rights disobedience – it wasn't no damn riot.” -Stormé DeLarverie
Stormé herself is rumored to have confessed on her deathbed to throwing the first fist at Stonewall. Since there is no existing photographic evidence the public is aware of, the world may never know who is truly responsible for the history made that day. Many seem more concerned with gender confused Sylvia Rivera rather than recognizing lesbians' role in gay rights. It’s interesting that cross-dressing gay men are being given the historical spotlight in present-day. Will lesbians like Stormé be forgotten, if only through revision of what it means to be a gay woman? Or will Stormé be rewritten as a man?
It is worth noting that Marsha P Johnson and Sylvia Rivera, both biological men, are now featured on women’s history websites, and Stormé DeLarverie is featured in an article on GQ, a men’s magazine. While some see this as something to be celebrated, it furthers a narrative that doesn’t necessarily celebrate masculine women or feminine men, but aims to erase gender from western society and neutralize the entire population. In fact, it would seem women are the first target in the androgynous gentrification of western humanity. This can be supported by the recent controversy involving a John Hopkins University glossary definition of gay and lesbian.
As you can see, gay men are still allowed to be defined as men, whereas gay women are re-defined as “non-men.” This oppressive language caused an uproar among gay and straight women alike, and JH subsequently removed the definition to process the backlash. Their explanation? Attempting to provide inclusive language for “non-binary” people. If this is true, why did only the words ‘lesbian’ and ‘woman’ get neutralized? How does one define sexuality without sex as the basis after centuries of the two being linked? And in a long string of new definitions popping up every day to revise their predecessors and label them as “misconceptions,” where is the line in this historical revision? If this was meant to be the “updated” definition, how long until there is no such thing as a man OR woman, much less a homosexual one?
Incidentally, John Hopkins Hospital was the very first hospital to open a clinic dedicated to gender reassignment surgeries nearly 60 years ago. They have built a reputation being The Place To Go for transsexuals for decades.
THE MILITARY 180: FROM DISCRIMINATION TO FORCED ACCEPTANCE
The military has a steadfast reputation of discrimination against gay people. Many psychiatrists classified homosexuality as a mental or behavioral disorder in preparation for World War 2, and in 1942 military regulations began listing homosexuality as an excludable characteristic for the first time. In spite of this policy, hundreds of thousands of gays and lesbians alike signed up to serve their country, choosing a life of secrecy and fear in order to maintain their status, avoid dishonorable discharge and keep their veteran benefits. Thus, gay people started doing the work from the inside to prove to their fellow service members that they were normal, hard working patriots just like their straight counterparts one interaction at a time.
When Bill Clinton campaigned for his presidency, he made a promise to end the ban on homosexuals in the military if elected. But once in office, it was immediately apparent it wouldn’t be that simple, and there was much debate among the administration. This led to the compromise of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” an open ended policy which forced gay American’s to remain in the closet during their service, but also supposedly prevented military personnel from discriminating against or harassing closeted service members they believed to be gay. But this only created an environment similar to pre-DADT, oftentimes requiring gay service members to lie to avoid being thrown out, which in turn was an offense punishable by dishonorable discharge.
Despite DADT, gay service members could still be kicked out “with credible evidence,” which could be just about anything if it was said by someone in a high enough position of authority. Not only could you be punished for lying about your sexual orientation, everyone around you could be persecuted for “enabling your lie.” It was a trap. In other words, life for gay people wasn’t all that different under “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” The only difference between a gay person being discharged before and after DADT was the ability to change their discharge status, so as to either keep their benefits or even re-join out of financial need.
Brian S. (pictured above on the right), Colorado Chapter Leader of Gays Against Groomers, was one of the first openly gay members of the Air Force. He served from 2000 to 2015 and received multiple medals for his deployment to Iraq, as well as a commendation medal in 2015 for an Act of Courage for rescuing a woman from a burning car in D.C. By the time Brian was 9 years old, he knew he was gay, something he couldn’t have learned from school or movies due to the complete lack of representation of gays in media at the time.
“I didn’t come from an abusive home,” Brian explained. “So I wasn’t made gay through abuse or neglect. I just was. I noticed my male friends more than my female friends. I figured it out myself, just like all gay people have done for thousands of years.”
Brian experienced first hand the stress of living in a DADT military as a gay man who went to war. He advocated for the removal of DADT through joining the Service Member Legal Defense Network (OutServe-SLDN). He wanted the secrecy and hostility gay service members experienced under DADT to end.
“It involved a lot of adult conversation,” Brian reminisced. “Sitting down and talking with people, hearing both sides and finding the medium grounds and showing how all of us gays, lesbians, bisexuals are completely normal people and are just trying to work hard and live life in society like everyone else. And it worked.”
But as the repeal date of DADT approached in 2011 under the Obama administration, Brian said, some commanders took it as an opportunity to get as many gay people out of the military as quickly as possible before it was no longer acceptable to do so. Tensions were high and service members were bracing for the arrival of a new era, one the military had never seen. A few months before DADT disappeared, many of these processes were frozen in place, which added stress to those under investigation.
And like the flip of a light-switch, the military switched gears, learning to co-exist with openly gay service members for the first time in history. But the peace only lasted a few years. Once gay marriage was federally legal and gay people were openly accepted by the military, there was nothing left for gay people to fight for. We had proven ourselves as equal members of society. With nothing left to advocate for, many gays were out of a job. Brian watched everything he’d fought for quickly crumble. Suddenly, the military began to prioritize feelings, promote individualism, and power was shifted to the troops, who knew they could bring punishment upon the heads of their commanders for “disrespecting their emotions.” It was completely counterintuitive to military culture.
Discipline plummeted along with morale, and suddenly all the military could talk about was “the trans/Trans’/transgenders,'' a term that changed weekly and troops were disciplined for getting wrong or questioning. The goal posts kept moving. All resources suddenly shifted from LGB to exclusively T people, without knowing how to define them. Gay service members were blindsided by their sudden abandonment, and horrified when their questions were met with disciplinary action. They had never advocated for transsexuals beyond giving them a Facebook group to network in. Why was the military attaching them to the LGB community, while simultaneously disregarding any other letter?
Silas S., an active duty member of the military and member of Gays Against Groomers, joined the military in 2019 mostly in the closet, out of fear of discrimination. The military’s hard headed homophobic reputation was still alive. But when he arrived, Silas immediately noticed a wide accepting attitude among fellow service members. He also ran into parallel organizations that had updated their support of gay people to include trans people, but did not receive criticism of their ideas well. Then he noticed the definition of trans in the military was wide open, allowing men to identify as female without transitioning physically and adopt female soldiers' standards of hair and makeup. Silas was confused why the standards continued to exist at all. Why not just create a gender neutral standard at that point? But things got more serious when he noticed the medical hypocrisy of trans service members versus service members in need of medical care for different reasons.
“A friend of mine who is out now, much happier because of it,” Silas recalled. “He’s missing a testicle, and since his body was not producing enough testosterone, he had a serious weight problem. I don't know why, but they would not give him testosterone to help with the imbalance. He claimed it was because it's considered a steroid. The thing that made him mad, and rightly so is that trans identifying people can get cross sex hormone replacements. To sum it up, a healthy woman [in the military] could get testosterone if she has gender dysphoria, but a man with a defect affecting his testosterone levels was denied.”
The author is unable to share further details about Silas, his military branch or location out of respect for Silas’ safety and career, which he put on the line to join Gays Against Groomers. We commend him for speaking out and questioning the harsh and demanding agenda eroding America’s military one day at a time.
Before his second term ended, Former President Obama announced a policy in 2016 that would specifically allow transgender people to openly serve in the military as of July 1st, 2017. As some of us know, when Trump took Obama’s seat, he aimed to reverse the policy. After much pushback from LGBTQ groups and debate within the administration, the White House Announced a new policy in March of 2018 that would allow active transgender members to serve openly if they received a diagnosis for gender dysphoria before April 2019. After that date, members would have to serve under their observed sex at birth. Those post transition or diagnosed with gender dysphoria could no longer enlist. Despite his support for trans women in beauty pageants a decade prior, Trump was adamantly against trans people participating in sports and serving in the military during his time in office. A White House memorandum following Trump’s tweets announcing the ban said that allowing transgender service members could "hinder military effectiveness and lethality, disrupt unit cohesion, and tax military resources."
But that’s not to say Trump hadn’t shown support for the gay community before, just as he supported trans women in pageants previously, and most of the gay community does not consider this policy a direct attack on the community as a whole. In fact, Early Exit polls in 2020 showed that Trump’s support from the LGBTQ had doubled since 2016, and in a survey cited by Newsweek of 1,200 queer men, 45% of them said they were planning on voting for Trump.
President Joe Biden overturned Trump’s ban his first month in office in January 2021, but the military had already become hyper-focused on the emotions and identities of its troops, which in turn had lost respect from members who had expected to enter into a tough environment to become soldiers, part of a unit, military property ready for war. Instead, new gay members like Silas are being tossed aside like an old toy in favor of the persecuted flavor of the week: the Trans. With the permittance of fluid definitions and discouragement of questions, the military had gone full woke.
Chris Beck is a walking cautionary tale of the military trans complex. A former Navy seal, Chris announced in 2013 he was transitioning to Kristin Beck, and quickly became the poster child for transgender military members. This garnered glowing attention from mainstream left and center left-wing media, who showered “Kristin” with compliments and praise. However, nearly ten years later, “Kristin” is back to being Chris, and now warns anyone who will listen (which tends to exclude anyone left-wing) that he was used to promote a dangerous lifestyle that made his life a living hell. Beck said his approval for hormones came after “about an hour” explaining his proclivity to wear women’s clothes, a rushed move friends of Chris say the psychiatrist made to secure a book deal. He now advocates for children to grow up naturally, and doesn’t recommend gender transition for anyone under the age of 25.
Gay service members have become jaded by the hypocrisy, still unsure of how the two communities related or why gender was suddenly a fluid concept. We’d never demanded special treatment, just equal treatment, and certainly didn’t require a constant stream of medication to maintain ourselves. Since when was the military synonymous with individual identity and emotions? The adaptation felt like an insulting contradiction to the average LGB military member. After decades of fighting for their acceptance in the military and finally getting it, it was no longer enough to just be gay, and the military was ushering in the next era faster than you could say Stonewall. Morale, respect, discipline and enrollment in the military are at an all time low according to service members like Brian and Silas. In other words, the new wave of discriminated people advocating to join the military in peace are already hindering military effectiveness, disrupting cohesion, and costing extra to accommodate.
The truth hurts.
LESBIAN VETERANS OF OUR TIME
Erica M., 42, grew up in a very conservative family just outside of New York City. Because of her family’s rural background of factory workers, she found herself favoring what would later be referred to as “tomboy behavior,” or “being like a boy.” Her Appalachian grandmother used to describe her as “funny.” Since she was never interested in dating growing up, it wasn’t until Erica joined the Air Force in 1999 that she realized she was the only one in her circle who didn’t know she was gay. The realization thrust her into a world of secrecy, lies, and cover up behavior like dating and flirting with men to avert suspicion.
“If I didn’t give men attention, then they would call me gay,” Erica explained. “I used to date men to appease my mother…The term “beard” didn’t exist back then, but that’s what I did with men.”
The “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” era from 1993-2011 was a grueling Olympics of covert flirting, sneaking around, and avoiding suspicion to serve America and stay employed by the military. And while most gay people would gravitate towards one another to form a tight knit network of support and confidentiality, occasionally they were pressured to betray one another. Lesbians like Erica were groped by gay men trying to prove their heterosexuality, while others were assaulted in horrific ways that left them broken and traumatized. In many cases these women weren’t released from the military for their poor mental health, but for admitting to their homosexuality prior to the assault. The assailants usually got a slap on the wrist, which could involve a few weeks without pay, and typically went on to be promoted in rank.
“Most of us took care of each other,” Erica assured. “Sometimes the gay men would marry lesbians just so they could leave the base, get a house, and live their private lives. We knew who our community was, since our gaydars were at their peak under the circumstances. We did our best to stick together.”
But as the years went by, the dynamic between gays and the military started shifting. Erica explained that some high-level officials would often have adulterous gay affairs with lower ranks, a relationship considered improper in the military and was referred to as fraternization. When the relationship seemed to be headed nowhere fast, junior enlisted gays would blackmail their high ranking lovers, resulting in complicated paperwork that was costing the military time and money to process. They were losing their most qualified and experienced employees, and that, Erica says, is one of the real reasons DADT was repealed. Gays finally had moral hypocrisy on their side, and it was hitting the military where it hurt: its wallet.
Above: Erica M., marching with fellow service members at San Diego Pride Event in 2017
The gays had won the battle, but the day that DADT was repealed that September of 2011, Erica was deployed to war in Afghanistan. In spite of this, Erica described the golden years of gay rights from 2011-2013. Open acceptance in the military was at an all time high, positivity was everywhere, and gay-centric establishments were full of light-hearted celebration. The hate couldn’t thrive the way it used to. But it wasn’t a party for everyone.
“I had this friend, Ernie Gonzolez,” Erica recalled. “He and I deployed together. Happiest man you’ve ever met in your life, cutest dude, little bit on the feminine side. And I saw him and I was like ‘I’m gonna take care of him, definitely.’ But he always talked about his family, loved his family. He was raised Catholic and he just adored his sisters. He never told them that he was gay. We used to share our care packages. He would go to the gym, take tons of selfies, and he seemed so happy. But one day out of nowhere he posted something dark and sad. So I hit him up to see what had happened, and he told me that he’d finally come out to his family and…they disowned him. So he committed suicide. They always tell you there are signs, but there were no signs except for that one post. Losing him was brutal.”
As soon as the party had started, that’s how quickly it ended. Erica watched her favorite gay bars bought up by corporations like CVS and turned into debaucherous shadows of what they once were. The “gayborhoods” she knew and loved disappeared. She witnessed special interest groups come in to “retrain” military members at the behest of politicians and bureaucrats of absurdly wealthy circles scared of losing their money. The sudden appearance of so-called “transgender acceptance” was not just pushing away gay and conservative service members alike, but causing infighting within the gay community. They were successfully distracting, pressuring and dismantling the new-found unity of gay military members, as if to “remind them who’s boss.”
Erica went on to serve a total of 22 years in the Air Force and Army combined, working hard to obtain high levels of clearance as a terrorist interrogation officer, meeting several Presidents along the way. She ultimately retired from the military with a slew of troops from every branch when the Covid vaccine mandate led to a mass exodus, causing the Pentagon to rescind the mandate in January 2023. As someone with first hand experience, and even interactions with the corrupt groups bent on destroying military morale and cohesion no matter the cost, Erica joined Gays Against Groomers June 2023 to help stop the same agenda from reaching children. She now works as a civilian in a large Air Force base on the west coast.
Lesley K. is a 64 year old lesbian who recently joined Gays Against Groomers, and originally made a name for herself running the 2nd ever lesbian owned T-shirt company with her partner just before the online boom. She even attempted to sell one of the first lesbian calendars, an endeavor that was met with rejection and closed doors due to a lack of willing vendors. Back in her day, lesbian persecution was high.
“We were so oppressed, really,” Lesley explained. “If you looked like a lesbian, and you identified as a lesbian it was hard to get a job.”
In Lesley’s time, masculine looking gay women were ridiculed, rejected from jobs, and beaten for even appearing to be a lesbian. This happened despite the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964* because it didn’t protect lesbians from discrimination based on their sexuality, and was chiefly focused on safeguarding against discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, national origin and sex (which is the equivalent of gender, despite what radicals claim). Safe spaces for lesbians were limited, and much of the gay comradery revolved around the AIDS crisis, something that affected primarily gay men. Pride parades almost never involved young children attending except when a lesbian mother (who came out later in life) couldn’t find a babysitter. Even then, Pride was a weekend event, drag queens were strictly grown men impersonating women to entertain other adults, and no one was allowed to roam the streets nearly naked in kink gear. It certainly wasn’t embraced by the majority or commercialized by corporations the way it is today, and to many gay people, this is what made it special.
*FACT: In 2012, the Colorado state ruled that baker Jack Phillips’ choice to refuse a gay couple service due to his religious beliefs was unlawful discrimination. But in 2018, the Supreme Court voted 7-2 that this ruling was a violation of Phillips’ rights covered under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. People not liking you isn’t oppression, and if gay people want respect we must in turn respect the rights of people who do not want to be involved in our lives based on their beliefs, or we are no better than they are. There’s plenty of bakers out there!
Feminine lesbians were few and far between in gay history, and more butch lesbians started to consider gender transition. In the late 90’s, Lesley started seeing a select few of her butch lesbian friends decide to “go FTM,” a phrase used due to the lack of terminology for trans men at the time. It was something lesbians like Lesley didn’t understand, and either couldn’t come to terms with or did their best to support regardless. One of these FTMs, who became known as Mitch, Lesley noticed becoming more unhappy and reclusive after transitioning. In the late 2000’s, she was seeing lesbian bars folding like a tower of cards, and blamed a lack of financial support and demand for public lesbian spaces. Something was happening to gay women one day at a time, whether it was the disappearance of lesbian dominated bars or the abandonment of womanhood and lesbianism altogether.
WHAT IS HAPPENING TO LESBIANS?
“We’re a dying breed,” said Gays Against Groomers’ Assistant Director of Communications Carol H., a 52 year old lesbian who is known online as @rightsidelesbianart. “They’re doing away with lesbians because we were some of the first to push for women’s rights. Now they’re back to not wanting us to exist. We’ve come full circle. I’m experiencing hatred now like I haven’t felt since the early days.”
Carol struggled with her homosexuality in a time when gays were completely on their own and in the dark without the internet to learn from or network with, something gays lived through for many years. It was her mother who “dragged her out of the closet,” only to reprimand her and wonder where she went wrong in Carol’s upbringing. Eager to leave home, Carol signed up for the Marines at age 19 in 1989, before “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell" was implemented. During boot camp, she suffered from an injury that required several days of bed rest. She was told she would have to move platoons and start her whole training all over again, something no one wants to hear. Misunderstanding her stressed reaction, Carol was sent to a series of doctors until she landed in the psychiatrist’s office. Anxiety was not recognized or respected as a disorder, and doctors knew very little about panic attacks at the time.
Carol unloaded her worries on the psychiatrist, including her struggles with homosexuality, thinking all was confidential and air tight. But an hour later, she was removed from her platoon entirely and sent through a series of interviews all the way up the chain of command. For one week, Carol endured condescending lectures from multiple superiors who all expressed their disappointment and dissatisfaction. During this time, Carol was not permitted to exercise or wear her uniform and was put on cleaning duties that included polishing door knobs. After these grueling humiliation rituals, Carol was effectively discharged for “failing to disclose” her homosexuality. She went on to march during Pride events for lesbians everywhere.
Coming out was obviously not the openly celebrated experience it is today. Lesbians like Carol and Lesley were called slurs, shamed by their parents, discharged from the military, denied work, and were often victims of sexual assault. Being a lesbian strictly applied to biological women who were attracted to other biological women and held a preference for the female body above their opposite counterpart, the man. Lesbians Carol’s age and older have lived through persecution in their youth only to witness the disappearance of lesbian spaces and experience persecution all over again at the present time by people who no longer think women should be defined by their anatomy. And yet, that’s exactly what being a lesbian meant for two centuries or more: preferring the female anatomy to the male.
But that’s not to say lesbian culture is without its flaws.
“When I was 18 and 19 in those bars,” Carol remembered. “I had butch lesbians in their 40’s chasing me around like there was no tomorrow. I don’t care what any lesbian says…it happens a lot.”
So gay men are not the only ones to chase inappropriately young partners. Actress Sarah Paulson is married to a woman 30 years her senior, an uncomfortable example of the gay age gap phenomenon. The unfortunate stereotype of older gays pursuing younger gays has not gone unnoticed by homophobic critics looking for a reason to demonize the gay community, especially after the arrival of NAMBLA. Carol, with years of clinic and mental health counseling education under her belt, proposes it’s an attempt at holding onto youth vicariously. It’s no secret that high society is obsessed with delaying the aging process and staying young as long as possible. When that ship has sailed, the next best thing is to immerse oneself in young company.
It’s not like straight people don’t do it too. See: Leonardo DiCaprio and every other man in Hollywood since its founding.
Aside from the older butch lesbians that often chased multiple young women simultaneously (much like a straight man might), according to Carol, the second worst thing to happen to lesbians was going mainstream with help from a television drama that aired on Showtime in the US from 2004 to 2009 called ‘The L Word.’ It was immediately clear that the representation of lesbians in popular media was, unsurprisingly, a double edged sword. Shows like this that featured messy intertwining and often times overlapping relationships between lesbians and bisexual women, while occasionally accurate, exposed and glamorized lesbians in a manner that emboldened men to fetishize them more publicly in a flimsy attempt at support, and encouraged a wave of straight women to use lesbians as a kind of “sexy rebellion” against men and/or their parents.
In a way, lesbians had made it at last. Along with the lesbian TV dramas, public figures like Ellen Degeneres rose in popularity, and it seemed a large portion of America was finally ready to embrace The Friendly Lesbian, an androgynous figure that posed Absolutely No Threat To Anyone (that is until years down the line when her staff came forward to expose how mean she really was off screen). In the early 2000’s, lesbian bars and coffee shops still existed, and it became easier for lesbians to find work. The gay scene was healing from the AIDS epidemic. Women were more empowered than ever, and so lesbians were empowered, too.
But when the 2020’s arrived, what were the thanks lesbians received for their role in freeing women from male oppression? A brand new narcissistic movement gaslighting them into believing that they should either abandon their centuries old definition of what it means to be a lesbian, transition into men, or allow biological men to enter into their private wlw only spaces and accept them as women. It was as if men had been playing a long game of revenge against lesbians for their initial boldness to remove women from under their thumbs. Worst of all, some straight women support this invasion, as if subconsciously following their original oppressor’s wishes.
The patriarchy had struck back, effectively turning true lesbians into an endangered species that more and more of society is being programmed to eradicate through the power of language.
WAS GAY MARRIAGE TOO LATE?
Let’s be honest, by the time same-sex marriage was federally legal in 2015, marriage as an institution was already something society as a whole no longer took seriously. When the first no-fault divorce was enacted in 1969 by then Governor Ronald Reagan, while it created a speedy process for couples who felt they had grown out of their partnership and wanted to move on, it also took away much of the weight marriage held as a long term vow. Marriage became something that could easily be dissolved if it “didn’t work out,” causing future generations to view marriage as a fancier version of dating, something they didn’t necessarily have to take seriously.
There are many legal pros and cons to marriage for any couple, gay or straight, but without starting an entirely new essay, some gay people didn’t actually desire the right to be legally married. In some cases, it wasn’t beneficial to do so. For example, if your spouse becomes chronically ill, you cannot always become their recognized caregiver if you are legally married depending on what state you live in. Thus, if you want to take care of your sick partner, it might be better if you’re not married, which again depends on whether or not you meet requirements in your state. Some gay couples were content simply being each other's emergency contact and sharing a bank account.
As the celebration of Pride extends longer and longer, we’re forced to ask ourselves: was it worth it?
WHY IS GAY HISTORY DISAPPEARING?
We are currently wading in the murky waters of a mass rewrite of gay history as we know it. Lesbians and gay soldiers are already feeling the brush of Orwellian level historical revisionism, and the mainstream is pushing censorship of speech and idolizing edited characters from history that don’t necessarily represent the gay movement. We have witnessed a massively unnecessary over correction of how society is told to perceive gay people, while simultaneously redefining what it means to be gay. The word ‘confusion’ doesn’t quite cover it. The public is being pressured to accept reinvented LGB and T people or face the shame of being branded a bad person, and parental rights are under fire under the guise of “protecting kids from hate and discrimination.” But what is the source of this behavioral control? Going mainstream hasn’t helped the gay community, but instead brought a level of attention to gay people that has reignited debate, discomfort and even hatred.
But we didn’t ask for this.
We didn’t want anything like the Gender Unicorn, or drag queens in cartoons for toddlers, or minors accessing cross-sex hormones. We are ashamed of figures like Harvey Milk, Sam Brinton, and Rachel Levine, who are commemorated by the government itself, and we’re concerned that our real heroes are being erased through language. Bringing children into the equation is something even the gay community has been fighting against since 1978. It is as though someone from NAMBLA has hit the gas pedal in the gay progress car knowing full well the car is going to crash. Veterans of gay rights like Erica, Brian and Carol feel cheated and used, as though they proved homophobic conservatives right by fighting for gay rights. But who is really to blame?
Big Pharma and the education system have clearly identified themselves as secondary branches of the government, a government that hasn’t cared about any of us for decades, one that is full of corruption and deception. The military has caved to societal pressure to pander to a minority that is costing them everything the military stands for. But even higher, at the peak of society’s pyramid, are the aristocratic intellectuals in special interest groups using massive amounts of money to make things happen in all sectors of our world. And by coordinating with a long list of companies to signal to the gay community through their logos and commercials, schools to “re-educate” future generations, and doctors to enable the youth to believe they are different and special and in need of surgeries to love themselves, everything that once bound the gay community together has been thrust into a spotlight and sterilized. Their selfishness is decaying society as we know it faster than ever before. It’s so sinister that not even the indoctrinated realize the harm they’re doing.
Once upon a time, gay people rebelled against the establishment, then tried to compromise with it. Now it’s as though we’ve become the establishment itself. The community has been over-saturated with young LGB and T people who are overly confident, entitled, sensitive, watered down versions of the homosexual rebels of the 80’s and 90’s demanding special treatment, not rights. And before our eyes, the gays of the past are being treated like they were “back then” by gays of the present. Our opinions no longer matter, because they can no longer be used by foundations to generate income while they pretend to care about whether or not we can legally wed or openly exist in the military. After decades of enduring violence and rejection to prove ourselves as regular, functioning citizens of western society, our struggles are being revised and in many cases destroyed in favor of something that none of us understand.
This is not the progress we wanted.
We’re being tossed aside after paving a long, long road of fighting to be seen as normal. We’re seeing people like the men of NAMBLA out in the open, with their interests listed in their social media bios, pretending their fetishes are an identity not to be discriminated against. We’re seeing fully grown adults advocate for teaching children graphic details of sexual acts with pornographic literature like “This Book is Gay.” We’re seeing children cross-dress and perform provocatively for adults, and the public applaud it as “art.” We’re watching the military turn into a bad joke other countries will make for years to come. What’s happening now has only given our silent despisers a reason to spout hatred we haven’t heard since before the internet was around. And how can we blame them, when we see who is being revered in gay history by a government intent on dividing us?
Gay people are just as flawed as straight people, and who we sleep with is not the only thing about us. Many of us love our country, and without capitalism would not have been able to start up independent businesses to survive employment discrimination. Before the term pedophile was popularized, society didn’t know how else to describe a man molesting a little boy. But predators are present in any community, and their behavior shouldn’t be permitted to represent us all, because it doesn’t. Serial killers don’t represent all men just as pedophiles don’t represent all gays. The majority of us are just looking to settle down with a companion without losing our jobs, and we can do just that today! It is extremists on the left, freshly indoctrinated through the government funded education system, military and social media doing NAMBLA’s work for them by advocating for youth liberation and “sex positivity” at any age. The right has no choice but to react, and often does so with equally extreme relish, to contain the integrity and self respect of society before it crumbles into sexual anarchy.
Where is this tug of war headed? Eventually, the rope will snap. Our military, weakened from the attempt at integrating feelings with war, is destroying itself from the inside, as though being punished for briefly achieving solidarity and threatening the pocket books of our oppressors. We could be facing the loss of a war, either external or internal, and new laws requiring all human beings to be raised by the state with no family and no real identity, living as androgynous chemically castrated slaves in jumpsuits who have almost nothing left to argue about. Like a parent that breaks up fighting children, we will have our privileges taken away. That is to say, the government will have a reason to persecute us again for being different in order to avoid conflict. By then, not even the radicals of today will be exempt from complete totalitarian control. But is it really our fault if the financial founders of our government instigated a rebellion in the first place?
“The thing about extremists is they cannot be controlled, only used. Once they’ve served their purpose they’ll be eliminated from the system just like everyone they’re allowed to attack.”
-Carol H. aka @rightsidelesbianart
It all seems rather forced and intentional. Children are feeling pressured to choose a sexual identity as soon as possible, overwhelmed by all the apparent choices. They’re being provided with graphic books like “Gender Queer,” which can’t even be read aloud by parents at school board meetings without protest. We are on a crash landing to legal pedophilia, and the government is using the LGB and T community to do it. Why? The only explanation is that pedophiles have been permitted to rise in high society, and want to remove the shame of their depravity from the top of our system down, so that the public is none the wiser. They’ve been doing it for decades, subtly at first by allowing men like Harvey Milk to reach legendary status while censoring the unsavory details, funding hospitals like John Hopkins to create more permanent medical patients, then all at once by inserting gay culture into the military and public education system to reprogram future generations and eliminate the old ones who remember the truth.
For a brief moment, we were as close to unity as we could get. But now, society is being “reprogrammed” with a new ideology designed to divide us. The less we agree on what being gay means now, the less likely it is that we unify to rise up against corruption. But by pushing the limits of gay progress and dragging developing children into it, the issue stretches beyond politics into the primal protective instincts of parents. We don’t consider it a good thing that parents are being prosecuted for speaking up on how their children are educated, or how they view their child’s identity, for if all parents lose their rights, what hope do we have for the safety of children who could easily be led astray by false heroes like Sylvia Rivera? By attacking parents for not following a brand new ideology, those on the fence over whether or not they approve of gay people are pushed over the edge into disdain. Any hateful person looking for a reason, holding their tongues, have firmly grasped the sudden sexualization of minors under the guise of “LGBTQ acceptance” as a reason to turn against the gay community as a whole. “It’s your fault,” they tell us. “This is what you wanted.”
But it was never what we wanted.