Progeria: A Sign of the Times

” It is hard to dismiss the signs of analysis, physical and then, that mark our society and humanity”. &nbsp, —Diana West, The Death of the Grown- Up

&nbsp, &nbsp, &nbsp,” An ancient monster

at last sucking on himself&nbsp,

is a crazy view”.

—James Tate,” Pastoral Scene” &nbsp,

Everywhere we look, we discover a world in total chaos, one that is sinking into a pit of inanity and selfishness, a world that is in its last stages of childhood, a world rich with the vanities of gown-up children creating and perpetuating a theatre of embarrassing inanities. I only include the merest few most recent instances of a historical etiology that are prevalent and clearly visible, but which only seem to be getting worse as time goes on. Although this is not necessarily breaking media, it still manages to be both striking and pertinent. &nbsp,

The airline industry is just one more example of the continuous monotony and delirium that permeates the historical ethos. According to cockpit-father-dei-inclusivity” target=”_blank”>Fox News, the Air Line Pilots Association ( ALPA ) has suggested that employees” stop using terms that are allegedly offensive to women and LGBTQ individuals.” Terms like” cockpit” should be replaced with “flight deck”, and “manpower” by “people/human power” .&nbsp,

Masculine conclusions are affront. Does this imply that airline executives and planes will no longer drink alcohol? The ALPA’s &nbsp, diversity, equity and inclusion language guide stipulates that phrases like “husband/wife”, “boyfriend/girlfriend”, and “mother/father” should be discontinued in order” to promote inclusion and equity” and to avoid offending “different family structures” .&nbsp,

The guidebook also advises against using male terms like “men” when addressing groups because “women, transgender people, and people with different gender names are not included in the definition.” Similar to the old politically correct bafflegab that administrations, businesses, and organizations have used for years, but the exceedingly bizarre state of mind it represents resembles that of young children playing around in a custom crèche. It is difficult to believe that these people are grown men and women more than cradle-squatters. &nbsp,

Even from FOX: We learn about the San Francisco mayoral conversation, in which former Democrat Mayor London Breed asked challenger Mark Farrell to name three bring kings and three Gay advisers as an opportunity to “redeem himself” — exactly what is not known. Farrell responded by apologizing and stating that he had two “queer group” people on his team rather than just taking problem with Breed in a manly manner. In addition,” Farrell emphasized his track record of supporting San Francisco ‘s&nbsp, LGBT community” .&nbsp,

A city compelled to reduce the number of its schools owing to crime, budget, and enrollment factors and that has been ranked as the “worst run” city in the U. S. finds itself quibbling over the status of drag queens, gays and LGBQIA++ + communities, in other words, bickering over silly, nugatory, fashionable absurdities that have only contributed to producing a culture of lilliputian dandiprats or parody figures treading the boards. When mature discussion is replaced by asinine codswallop, and severe dialogue by comic, we know the country is in steep decrease. &nbsp,

Nor can one help remarking the disastrous frivolity of the Democrat administration, a real haven for young deviants quite as Tyler Cherry, Biden’s fresh communications director who uses plural pronouns, is married to a man, and is partial to flowing gowns, Biden’s former nuclear waste disposal deputy, drag queen- like and recidivist thief Sam Brinton, and the extremely preposterous transgender Rachel Levine, serving as U. S. Assistant Secretary for Health. They should be understood as adult cosplayers having a blast at a protracted costume party before their mother arrives to bring them home. The instances of piddling pubescence they provide are both embarrassing and laughable. &nbsp,

Then there is the complete idiocy of the university crowd, as demonstrated by the most recent vaudeville production produced by the University of British Columbia. The University is preparing a drag island retreat or queer campOUT for 14- 21- year- olds that promotes “queer, trans, two- spirit, questioning, and allied youth lifestyles” .&nbsp,

The camp director, whose drag name is Gaia Lacandona, wants to encourage ( chiefly male ) participants” to shed their imposed identities, to apply eyeshadow and glitter, wear diverse clothes regardless of their gender assigned at birth, walk the runway, and pretend to be an animal outside or an alien from outer space”. ( Gender is defined as a” social construct”, a playword for” sex” which is obviously not assigned at birth. Sex is given, and is a rigid determinant of gender. This is universally acknowledged by those with sound minds.

We are presented with a spectacle of ostensibly serious people in positions of authority acting like comic thespians and intellectual pygmies, not just the peculiar antics of a carnival society. We are now living in a decadent and risible world where men celebrate their heterosexuality with lavishly obscene celebrations known as Pride Parades. What, one wonders, is there to celebrate? Gay sex is now viewed almost universally as a privilege and right. From a cultural standpoint, it’s no big deal. Why are lewd and profane pageants of essentially  naked men  and shameless pederasts exhibiting the prurient twerk of sodomy and other anatomical revelations required in cities and administrations? San Francisco Pride regales us with “nude men riding around on bikes” and “waving to children” .&nbsp,

As C. A. Skeet writes at PJ Media,” Pride was just a parade in the big cities. Then it became a day. Then a week. Now it’s a month. Now it’s in schools, department stores, fast food chains, and library reading rooms”. To make matters worse,” Drag queens and drag shows are intentionally targeting children” .&nbsp,

In this zany barnyard setting, men are encouraged to act like and actually become women. It is not surprising that men are praised for wedring men and calling them husbands in these circumstances; it is irrelevant if it’s a progressivist lefty like Democrat Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg or a libertarian-conservative commentator like Dave Rubin. Politics is beside the point. These people may make up their minds that there is no or little connection between souls and sex, which is admittedly a justifiable and incredibly wise claim. &nbsp,

But the sex is still there, and it is a form of sexuality that is non- puerperal, sterile, unproductive, and ultimately, nothing more than an assertion of fallow and effete self- sufficiency. As Roger Scruton points out in” A Political Philosophy“, “human sexual emotion is a kind of language, the vehicle of a moral dialogue” that may be misconstrued, “directed away from the person to the body”. The issue is that “women who have not learned their language” are at risk.

Perhaps Scruton is right, but for my part, I regard such relations or relationships not as immoral but as ridiculous. No matter how foolish or bizarre people are, people are free to experiment and make their romantic, common-law, or sexual choices. This is not a topic to discuss love and eroticism. Contracting partners, who have chosen to live in the heteroclite and abnormal, are not exempt from the appearance of engaging in an arid grotesquery as a result. &nbsp,

One thinks of the famous injunction of the 16th- century humanist François Rabelais:” Do what thou wilt”. The Book of the Law, a work by Aleister Crowley, asserts the guiding principle,” Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law,” which emphasizes individual freedom and the pursuit of one’s true path in life. As long as one keeps in mind that Crowley’s dictum comes with provisions, there is no objection to it. &nbsp,

” Do what thou wilt” is fine, even if it does not contribute to the flourishing of society, but do not impose it on others whether by coercion or indoctrination, and do not flaunt it. Sexual practices are individual choices or compulsions that are personal, not legislative ones. They should never have been elevated to the status of an institution as a collective tribute to the spirit of barrenness in their absurd form. Marriage is for those who are able, in fact or in principle, to make children, not just adopt them. &nbsp,

This is why the rainbow flag is a contradiction in terms, a symptom of cognitive dissonance. As we read in Genesis 9: 7- 13 ( reprising Genesis 1: 28 ), God instructs Noah after the flood “be ye fruitful, and multiply, bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein” and to seal the bond” I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth” .&nbsp,

A striated emoji is not the equivalent of plenitude, and Gilbert Baker is not. The rainbow flag represents a desecration of the biblical injunction, whereas the rainbow is a representation of natural fecundity. It is the negation of fruitfulness and abundance. Where there is no progeny, there is no succession. Where there is only pretense and affectation, there is no longevity, no communal sustenance. There is nothing but childish playacting and much blatant nonsense. There is only a proscenium of strutting caricatures.

In all of these situations, we are observing the language and ideas of a klatch of young people who have not yet pupated and who have been so lavished and cared for by a wealthy, supra-liberal culture that they have never had to go through the demanding and painful rite of passage from whimsical childhood to productive adulthood. And like children, they are obsessed with games of LARPing make- believe, of trying on new identities, of “let’s pretend”, of épater la bourgeoisie, of sexual hijinks, of violating conventional norms. In the last analysis, they resemble a mob of uncabined preschoolers at their customary mimicries.

Such phenomena are sure signs of prolonged infantilization, not so much the death of the grown- up, as Diana West anatomizes in her fine book of that title, but rather the deferral of the grown- up, the state or condition of maturity that has been suspended, put on hold, prorogued. These individuals have never been raised in the first place.

What we remark here is something quite extraordinary, a race of adult rug rats. It is not quite like The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, a story about a character who transitions from senescence to infancy, but rather a form of progeria, a genetic condition where children age at an extremely rapid rate but still manage to stay young. &nbsp,

Simply put, this is only a metaphor for the distorted and paradoxical development we almost always see in a society of fake adults who seem too young to rule or act or too old to accept their pranks as literally. As purveyors of comedy gold, we should never apologize for labeling them as so ridiculous. Callow specimens of a vacated and aging culture and enemies of good sense, social trust, and communal obligation should not be avoided when compared to what they are.

How one longs to be part of a society of healthy adults, of serious people who believe in merit, competence, normative traditions, good humor, sane commitments, and responsible service to others. In” The Conservative Mind,” political philosopher Russell Kirk discusses the quality of life that mature people seek, including a belief in” the rule of law, equality before God and the courts, a respect for tradition, including the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, and the birth and child rearing.”

Kirk argues for a “vindication of the norms of human existence…despite the follies of the time” — and, we might add, despite the follies of a dwindled folk busy at their farcical agendas. Clearly, we need more than one adult in the room. &nbsp,

Source credit