Most acronyms and single-letter identifications are confusing, to me at any rate.
I’m prepared to swing with the times, but within a very narrow amplitude. Thus, reading about a new Gallup poll, I had to look up the definition of Generation Z, something that everyone else seems to know without having to consult dictionaries.
Turns out Gen Z, as it’s affectionately called, describes people reaching adulthood in the second decade of the 21st century. Having established that, I decided that Gen Z must be minuscule. After all, today’s youngsters stubbornly resist the arrival of adulthood, hanging on to their immature selves for dear life.
However, even though they refuse to embrace adulthood, the poll shows they are more than willing to embrace everything, or rather everybody, else. Compared to ten years ago, the proportion of young Americans who identify as LGBTQ has doubled to 7.1 per cent.
Add to this 6.6 per cent who chose not to divulge that information, and we are left with a mere 86.3 per cent of steadfast straights.
What further confused the issue is that the now-customary plus sign was missing at the end of LGBTQ. That effectively disfranchised such clearly defined identities as pansexual, Two-Spirit and about 70 other possibilities currently recognised as valid.
As a simple boy from downtown Russia, I find it hard to keep track of this taxonomic profusion. However, assuming that the reticent 6.6 per cent would actually be covered by the missing plus sign, almost 14 per cent of young Americans are sexual deviants.
Moreover, they are multiplying rapidly without, one assumes, the benefit of the traditional method of procreation. Why such a rapid increase?
No one has suggested that mankind, specifically its American sub-species, is undergoing wholesale hormonal or cellular changes. Hence one has to leave the domain of physiology and enter one of culture, defined in the broadest possible sense.
The key is in the word I used above, ‘deviant’. No pejorative connotations were implied – I used it in the literal sense, as someone who deviates from the norm. That of course presupposes that a norm exists, which presupposition nowadays seems unsafe.
Gen Z has been indoctrinated in rampant anomie, either rejecting all norms or accepting everything as normal. That amounts to the same thing because, if everything is normal, nothing is.
The term ‘deviance’ has left everyday speech, meaning that aberrant behaviour is no longer stigmatised even socially or culturally, never mind legally. This is a logical development in a civilisation that foolishly replaced equality before God with equality before one another.
When equality becomes the ultimate social, political and cultural virtue, no authority is recognised – unless it has at its disposal coercive means to enforce recognition. And, since no large group of people can survive even physically without discipline, the central state becomes the only entity whose authority is accepted, if only under duress.
Since in the West the state acquires power by mass appeal, it too has to assert its authority by pledging allegiance to universal equality. It therefore has to anathematise all norms, other than those required for its own self-perpetuation.
Thus, if society insists that the sexual alphabet soup belongs on the table side by side with traditional dishes, the state has to follow suit – or even take the lead. The state has to be what modern illiterates call ‘proactive’.
This is achieved by a two-prong offensive. First, the state shields aberrant groups with a wall of protective laws. Second, it monopolises education and imbues it with propaganda of anomie across the board.
The ball of anomie is bouncing to and fro between state and society, and the harder one side hits it, the harder it’s hit back. Whoever wins this perverse ballgame, traditional morality always loses.
The distinction between crime and legality survives, if in a modified form, because it’s enforced by the state. But such vital distinctions as those between good and evil or sin and virtue fade away. Holding sway instead is Hemingway’s eudaemonic (demonic?) definition of morality: if it feels good, it’s moral.
That’s why one can confidently predict that many other things that make some people feel good will soon acquire an equal status. Necrophilia, bestiality, incest – use your own imagination.
If one ‘community’ feels good copulating with corpses, animals or animal corpses, and the state doesn’t mind, who are we to cry havoc? In the absence of the ultimate moral authority, on what basis can we object?
This anomic tendency explains the results of the Gallup poll. Acceptance, practically encouragement, of eccentric sexuality means that marginal cases see no reason to desist, on the off chance it’ll feel good.
It’s there, on the margins, where I’m sure the numbers are growing. I’d be surprised if the proportion of hardcore homosexuals changed all that much from one decade to the next. The largest British poll I’ve seen placed their number at somewhere between one and two per cent, and I doubt American data would be strikingly different.
The shocking results of the poll shouldn’t really shock us. All we have to do is juxtapose the aforementioned Hemingway aphorism with the anguished words of Dostoyevsky’s Dmitri Karamazov: “‘But what will become of men then?’ I asked him, ‘without God and immortal life? All things are permitted then, they can do what they like?’”
You know the answer to that one.