There have been, arguably, three sexual revolutions in the modern period. If we think of the early stages of feminism, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, that was part of a sexual revolution that included a loosening of heterosexual mores. The roaring 20s included real sexual promiscuity. The early development of film including a booming business in graphic pornography. The second modern sexual revolution may be traced to the legalization of birth control (1962), the legalization of abortion on demand (1973), and no-fault divorce from 1975. Bridging the gap between the two was the post-WWII mainstreaming of Epicureanism in the form of Playboy Magazine. The second revolution was still mainly heterosexual but the 1969 Stonewall Riots foreshadowed the mainstreaming of homosexuality in the media and popular culture through the 1970s and 80s. There was pushback against even this phase of the revolution during the second Reagan Administration in the form of the Meese Report, named after the U.S. Attorney General. The AIDS/HIV crisis was closely associated with the gay subculture. In 1985, Tipper Gore, the wife of a sitting Democratic Senator from Tennessee (who later became Vice-President during the Clinton Administration and who is today mostly known for his hysterical rhetoric about global warming), began a crusade against sexually explicit lyrics in pop music. Even permissive San Francisco shuttered gay bath houses, in the interests of public health. It might seem quaint today but in cities across the USA there were concerted efforts to stem the publication and distribution of pornography and to influence public culture against it. In Kansas City one could purchase yellow trash bags that carried an anti-pornography message in bold black lettering.
The Third Sexual Revolution
Today, however, we are on the cusp of what may be our own “Roaring 20s.” We are in the midst of a third sexual revolution. Hugh Hefner is dead and so is the print and analog pornography business but online porn is ubiquitous and virtually unregulated. Where, in 2008, Barack Obama once said to Rick Warren that he opposed same-sex marriage on the basis of his Christian convictions, in 2012 he announced that he had changed his mind on same-sex marriage. Shortly thereafter the U.S. Supreme Court fell into line. In its infinite wisdom, the Court ruled in Obergefell (2015) that marriage has nothing to do with nature. Rather, the majority argued, marriage is grounded in affection and consent. Homosexuals have affection and they are able to consent therefore prohibitions against homosexual marriage are unconstitutional. The dissenting opinions rightly savaged the specious logic of the majority but here we are.
In this third revolution heterosexuality is largely irrelevant. The closeted homosexual subculture of the 1950s and 60s is out, proud, and proliferating. Most people under 70 know what the initials LGBT signify. Most everyone else knows what Q signifies and even I (inter-sex) and A (ally). The only place for heterosexuality in our brave new world is to cheer on those who reject heterosexuality, which is derided with the cryptic insult cishet. According to one online (Queer) dictionary the neologism (c. 2000) cis is said to be derived from the Latin preposition cis, meaning “on this side,” and “het,” which is an abbreviation of heterosexual. This is a rhetorical attempt to turn the tables, to marginalize the approximately 96% of the population that is heterosexual and to normalize the varieties of sexual orientations and proclivities featured in the seemingly ever-expanding LGBTQIA alliance.
One of the objections made to second sexual revolution was that were homosexuality to be legalized that they would prey upon children. In the popular heterosexual imagination there was a connection between homosexuality and pederasty. The sexually enlightened among us, however, mocked that concern as misguided. Through the 1980s and 90s, we were assured that Bruce and Steve (or Penny and Sally) simply wanted to live among us with all the rights, privileges, and benefits afforded to heterosexual married couples, There were voices from within the LGBTQ world who warned about what was to come. In “The Joy of Presbyterian Sex” (1991) Lesbian scholar, author, and critic Camille Paglia, mocked the “Bruce and Steve narrative” and argued that the point of homosexuality was to be transgressive not repressive (i.e., middle-American, middle-class, respectability).
It turns out that segments of the LGBTQ alliance are coming for your children and they are doing so rather openly. They may not be preying on children sexually (although the number of news reports of public school teachers and staffers having sex with minor students are through the roof) but there are organized movements targeting the minds of young children in public library reading programs and one pro-LGBTQ author has recently revealed a program to change the minds of undergraduates in Christian colleges. A few days ago there was news coverage about a drag queen who was caught on video reading to young children as part of a program. That person was later discovered to be a convicted sex offender. Now that the program has come to light, the Houston Public Library has discontinued it. The American Library Association, however, is out and proud. They have a webpage devoted to the Drag Queen Story Hour. They write:
Many libraries across the country have been hosting or participating in Drag Queen Story Hours. A few have experienced pushback from some members of their community. To support libraries facing challenges we have established this collection of resources. We will continue to add to it and welcome your contributions. ALA, through its actions and those of its members, is instrumental in creating a more equitable, diverse, and inclusive society. This includes a commitment to combating marginalization and underrepresentation within the communities served by libraries through increased understanding of the effects of historical exclusion.
The program itself has its own webpage, on which they say:
Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) is just what it sounds like—drag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and bookstores. DQSH captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models. In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where people can present as they wish, where dress up is real.
As a child I loved my school library and the local public library. Odd as it may seem, I clearly remember our matronly school librarian explaining that books that had been awarded the Caldecott Medal and the Newberry Medal by the ALA were to be considered especially good and worthy of reading. Clearly, the public library is not what it used to be and neither is the ALA. It is now a publicly-funded, institutionally-sanctioned hunting ground for the hearts and minds of children. Drag Queen Story Hour programs have been operating in Greenville, SC, Atlanta, Louisville, KY, State College, PA, Philadelphia, PA, and Huntingdon, WVA among other places. One of the Drag Queens involved in the program calls himself, “Annie Christ.” This, of course, is insanity but we are not finished yet.
There is more. Jonathan S. Coley has published, Gay on God’s Campus: Mobilizing for LGBT Equality at Christian Colleges and Universities(HT Presbycast). The reviewer writes:
Finally, and perhaps most enduringly, Gay on God’s Campus is a manual for achieving social change through activism on Christian college campuses, though of course, Coley refrains from describing his research in such terms. Chapter 4, “Creating Change,” is a thoughtful analysis of what forms of activism work on these campuses and why. He considers activist efforts to change campus policy, campus climate, and hearts and minds. He concludes that effective activist movements on these campuses are often those that repurpose the language in a school’s theology such that it supports LGBT causes, or at least generates dialogue. In an unforgettable example, Coley describes a student group called Bridge Builders at Belmont University. This well-organized group managed to convince the school’s leadership to adopt a nondiscrimination policy, in part, by reframing LGBT issues, not in political terms, but as a theological discourse on Christ’s love for all.
Coley is pursuing essentially the same strategy as the Drag Queen Reading Hour: triumph through hugs and inclusion. Love is defined as affirming LGBTQ sexual orientation and Christians are supposed to accept this redefinition regardless of what Scripture, including our Lord actually says.
The point here is that the LGBTQ alliance is unashamedly, openly coming for the hearts and minds of your grade-school children, your middle-school aged children, your high-schoolers, and your college students. They are doing so with the help of publicly-funded establishments. Your tax dollars are helping to make possible the corruption of your children.
This is not a call to retreat nor a call to hysteria but it is a call to be wise. It is a call to prayer. It is also a call not to be naive about what is happening around us. Public officials who willfully expose young children to drag queens at public expense have not only lost their minds but they deserve to lose our trust. With the loss of that trust, more of the cords that bind us together have frayed.
More fundamentally, we are in the midst of a spiritual conflict. The sexualizing of children is evil beyond words. The propagandizing of children for the LGBTQ alliance is as deliberate as it is wicked. Obviously. our LGBTQ neighbors need genuine Christian grace and love. Many are the victim of some kind of abuse but we ought not to sacrifice our children to the gods of sexual revolution. Christians need to be wise about sending their children to publicly-funded institutions of all sorts. Parents must become involved in their local communities again. Do you know what your local library is doing? Are there parallel programs in your public school system? If so, why are your tax-dollars funding them? Can you imagine the outrage if the same librarians were caught reading holy Scripture to your children? But let someone complain about “Annie Christ” reading to impressionable children and it is sheer prejudice.
The sort of social-moral consensus that existed prior to the 1st and 2nd sexual revolutions seems long gone. We may be grateful for the Lord’s restraining mercies (part of common grace) but clearly things are happening in public life that would have been unthinkable just a decade ago. Had someone said to Barack Obama, “Mr President, do you fear that your change in attitude toward same-sex marriage might lead to outrageous projects such as drag queens named “Annie Christ” reading to children in public libraries?” that reporter would have had her White House press credentials revoked but here we are.
Let the reader understand.
—R. Scott Clark, Escondido