The New Gay Left, And How ‘Pride’ Became An Angry, Vicious Movement

If local parents don’t let boys play on little girls’ sports teams, the federal government will remove its support from their extracurricular activities, including after-school sports and other programs kids use to stay healthy, active, and engaged.

If local parents don’t let boys into little girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers, then the feds will make sure the poorest children in their community don’t get the school-provided lunches American taxpayers pay for. As many as 30 million kids use these programs, meaning millions could go hungry.

In fact, if parents in any way interfere with trans activist’s demands for how local schools should operate, all federal taxpayer support will be cut off.

Welcome to June — or Pride Month. All of the above are part of the celebration: These plans for schools were announced last Pride Month, and one year later, are poised to go into effect. So very festive.

The changes in the gay activist left’s targets and in their aggression have been building for years now. Long gone are the days of gay pride as a movement that claims it’s for inclusion, acceptance, and self-esteem. While the gay activist movement always fought for a hard shift from traditional, Christian values on things like marriage, today June 1 marks the start of a month of targeted campaigns to force submission to left-wing policies often far afield from even the radical goals of America’s first gay activists.

The signs of the shift are everywhere. But while companies like Boeing and Comcast find it easy enough to change their logo for a month (and executives at Disney openly brag about how many “trans kids” they have, or how they’re going to plant sexual propaganda in their programming), parents are less receptive to this aggressive agenda.

That’s why the federal government is seeking to bulldoze them, using taxpayer dollars to inflict pain on children if their parents don’t acquiesce. It’s a tactic the activists in our federal government have gotten used to: For months, they’ve punished parents who don’t want to vaccinate (or boost) little kids by hurting the children — suspending them from school, regardless of whether they’re sick.

But the American government isn’t alone in its aggressive tactics. A preschool special needs teacher in Wake, North Carolina resigned her job Monday after the state legislature learned she was using gay activist flashcards featuring a pregnant man to teach little kids about colors. In response, local gay activists and their allies in the news media connected upset parents to school shooters, and claimed it was the parents who were “endangering” kids.

Cases like this aren’t confined to blue cities — and they aren’t isolated. Their prevalence is why Florida passed a law banning teachers from talking about sex to children in third grade and under. The reasonableness of that demand is why, despite a media campaign claiming the legislation was homophobic, the American people broadly support the law.

That includes a lot of people who have no problem with “gay rights,” as they thought they understood them; because what does forcing little girls to shower with boys, or hoisting trans propaganda on special-needs babies have to do with “gay rights”?

But more and more, the modern activist agenda is diverging from where it once stood. Police officers who want to march in gay pride parades, for example, have been told by activists across the country they won’t be permitted unless they take off their uniforms.

How is it inclusive to stop gay police officers from participating unless they denounce their oaths and livelihoods? How is that about gay rights? Sure, gay activists claim it’s due to “the pain” of the Stonewall riots, but their predecessors who actually fought police officers at Stonewall let the police march.

Why did they do that? Because they thought a more inclusive movement would further their political goals. Today, no longer. Even the rainbow flag — a symbol debuted at San Francisco’s 1978 Pride Parade — has been changed with the movement.

The original design was conceived as a broader symbol of human inclusiveness. Yellow, for example, was never intended to represent Asian, nor red American Indian, et cetera. But in today’s political climate, broad inclusiveness doesn’t satisfy. So a symbol that once tried to celebrate a radical idea of diversity without any specific race or orientation specified now sports exclusive shapes and colors representing trans, “non-binary,” black, and brown people.

“The rainbow is so perfect because it really fits our diversity in terms of race, gender, ages, all of those things,” Gerry Baker, the radical gay activist and drag queen who designed the original rainbow flag, said in a 2015 interview. “Plus, it’s a natural flag — it’s [design is] from the sky!”

Today, Baker’s radical politics are on the outs, and the new, replacement progress pride flag’s politics are in. This flag was designed “in 2018 by non-binary American artist and designer Daniel Quasar (who uses xe/xyr pronouns).” It features a whole new and visibly intrusive space for transgender, non-binary, and black and brown people — placing, Quasar says, “discriminated minorities at the forefront.”

It’s a flag that stands for hard-left activism, separation, and preferential treatment. It’s a flag that represents the shift America’s seen from a radical form of activism some had come to accept, to a new radical activism being sneaked past parents into schools.

It’s a flag that hung outside Vice President Kamala Harris’s office when she was in the Senate. It’s a flag for a movement that is willing to hurt children to get its way. And it’s a flag that’s in power in America.

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases