Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The cultural revolution spearheaded by the Left didn’t end after Obergefell (not that anyone expected it to). While polyamory is very likely to be one of its next phases, the next two big steps — both presently ongoing — appear to be the replacement of religious liberty as a social right with freedom of worship as a private right and the transgenderism revolution. This is a big deal and worth our attention. As Maggie Gallagher reports in National Review:
New York’s Andrew Cuomo, and the governors of four other states, are banning official travel to Mississippi.
Charles Barkley is asking the NBA to take the All-Star Game away from North Carolina. PayPal is cancelling plans to expand there. And more than 100 corporations are attacking North Carolina over a bill protecting women from having to share bathrooms with transgender biological males.
Meanwhile the president’s administration has unilaterally redefined the gender-discrimination provisions of Title IX so that its rules forbidding gender discrimination now forbid “LGBT discrimination.” Meaning: Your daughter must shower with transgender biological males or else her school district will lose all federal funding.
Before we are all shoved into this brave, new, crazy world, let’s take a glance backward.
There used to be a fundamental moral principle on which the proponents of each successive wave of the permanent sexual revolution would rely: You have the right to engage in whatever sexual activity (or take up any sexual lifestyle) you like, so long as you don’t hurt anyone else or violate another’s rights.
This is the principle I formerly called “sexual libertarianism.” Later I called it “sexual libertinism.” In between I called it “sexual narfblarism,” which was by far the funnest term. (Follow that link to locate my reasons for modifying my terminology.)
Anyway, there was a time when it seemed that sexual revolutionaries actually believed that principle. Back then, we could all agree that women and girls have a right to not encounter male genitalia in their restrooms and locker rooms, and to not be seen in these settings by anyone with male genitalia (at least not without consent).
But with the transgenderism revolution, the same movement that used to trumpet that principle is now turning against it–the rights of those women and girls are now subordinate to the rights of certain others to adopt whatever lifestyle they want.
My guess is that many in the movement never believed it anyway. It was just convenient to their revolution. But I’m open to better explanations.