Despite its face-value absurdity, the transsexual movement has a stranglehold on society. Political and cultural elites are shoving the trans agenda down normal people’s throats, no matter the cost. Anheuser-Busch recently took a $5 billion hit for dedicating its Bud Light beers to trans activist Dylan Mulvaney, top YouTuber MrBeast is losing fans for promoting a staffer’s “gender transition,” American staple Jack Daniels faced boycotts for plugging drag queens in a marketing campaign, Disney lost its massive Florida tax breaks for endorsing pro-LGBT legislation, and the list goes on.
The insistence of mega corporations on aggressively promoting trans ideology despite major losses makes clear they aren’t “going woke” to turn a profit: they are committed to promoting trans ideology for the sake of the ideology itself. These same corporations spend millions of dollars annually on marketing teams and statistical analysts — surely some Ivy League–educated numbers-cruncher could tell Anheuser-Busch that the “trans community” makes up an infinitesimally small percentage of Bud Light drinkers, or that Jack Daniels is mostly consumed by college kids and cowboy-wannabes, not drag queens. But no tanking profits will dissuade the multi-billion-dollar society-shapers from normalizing their ideology.
But why would Bud Light want to normalize men masquerading as garish Disney princess caricatures? Why would Jack Daniels want cowboys and coal miners to think drag queens are cool? Why does Disney want schoolchildren to have lessons on gender fluidity?
The author G. K. Chesterton answered those questions in 1930. He wrote, “When all are sexless there will be equality. There will be no women and no men. There will be but a fraternity, free and equal. The only consoling thought is that it will endure but for one generation.”
In simple terms, the old lynchpin of what we erroneously call the Enlightenment has returned to haunt us, with a feverish ferocity: equality. Of course, conservatism and indeed even liberalism (classically understood) promote the notion of equality; however, the Founding Fathers drew that most crucial of distinctions when they wrote that all men are created equal. We are all blessed with equality of opportunity, equality of capacity, and equality of dignity. What we do with that equality is up to us.
The same elites responsible for pushing the trans agenda, plastering Dylan Mulvaney’s stubble-and-makeup-clad face on light beer, and dragging children to drag shows, are doing so in order to advance a very specific form of equality. In years past, the invariably Alinskyan phrase “equality of outcome” — now often called “equity” — was used to promote socialism, which was in turn used to promote full-on Marxism. In more recent times, it has been used with regard to race, sex, and even sexual orientation.
While equality of outcome seeks to suppress or restrict the equality of opportunity and the equality of dignity that God bestows upon each and every human being from the moment of conception, the “equality” behind the trans movement is far more destructive, seeking to destroy any and all true equality, starting with equality of dignity. This is what Chesterton warned against when he wrote of “sexless equality.”
Men and women — uniquely different, not only complementing but actually completing one another — are both harmed if the trans agenda is accepted, as both fail to act in accord with the dignity they possess when they act contrary to their unique roles.
Chesterton’s final line points to the end result of the “equality of sexlessness.” Difference is razed by the trans movement until there is finally equality, but only equality of death, equality of nonexistence.
