Lucas Lascivious

Foe of moderation, champion of excess

Rebuttal: “No, You’re Not a Bigot If You Only Want to Have Sex With People to Which You Are Attracted”


For all the talk of liberals being “snowflakes,” it seems conservatives will make an issue out of almost anything that even barely offends them. Today it’s Ben Shapiro claiming his heterosexuality doesn’t make him a bigot. His source? A casual article by Samantha Allen examining social bias against transgendered people.

With an article like his, it’s difficult to know where to begin, but I’ll try.

The left reasons that if a man can be a woman, then a man who only wants to have sex with biological women must be a bigot — his desires have been wrongly defined by a society that restricted the definition of womanhood to, you know, women. If only men had been exposed to the deeper truth of gender earlier. If only they’d known that some women have male genitalia. Then, perhaps they’d be willing to have sex with biological men who are actually women. […] If all of this sounds insane, that’s because it is. Straight men are attracted to women, not men who identify as women.

Herein lies his initial misunderstanding: he’s aligns gender identity and sexual orientation as being parallel.

If we just train people that men and women are the same and that even their genitals don’t provide a meaningful difference, men will begin having sex with transgender women, and women will begin having sex with transgender men.

Because that’s definitely how transgenderism works. At this point, his already-fragile heterosexuality is starting to show signs of duress.

Reality isn’t bigotry. People are attracted to those they are attracted to.

Reality also isn’t that every person is a White, cisgendered male (a.k.a. Ben Shapiro), and that some people are transgendered.

What Ben Shapiro managed to do is what far too many heterosexuals do, particularly conservatives: they assume anyone, transgendered or not, with a vagina wants to fuck them. He managed to take it a step further by patronizing a woman who has a Ph.D. while simultaneously misconturing her words to espouse a political narrative. To any sensible person, it should be clear she wasn’t arguing that you’re bigoted for not wanting to have sex with a transgendered person; rather, she was highlighting the fact that, even though someone may be a gender you’re attracted to as a heterosexual, there’s still an anqituated taboo that accompanies being transgendered.


The Gay Heirarchy


Essentially, a dissection of generalized LGBT culture:

At the top of the gay hierarchy are gay men. Somehow we’ve become the poster children for the entire LGBT community, a distinction that’s as ignorant as it is unwarranted. In a patriarchal society wrought with misogyny, though, it’s easiest to demonize the biggest threat to heteronormativity and apply it to a broad group of trivialized people.

Even within the LGBT community, lesbians are an enigma. It’s a disappointing reality. The irony, however, lies in mainstream culture where films, for example, featuring two males doing something as simple as kissing sends the AFA into a frenzy and requires a strict R rating, whereas two women kissing is commonplace, as long as they’re pretty enough lesbians. There are obviously exceptions, but it’s a fucked up notion that reeks of misogyny.

I’ve always subscribed to the notion that everyone is a little bisexual. We all know a lot of hetero males’ egos rely on them trying to be as butch as possible, but, as the saying goes, “the lady doth protest to much, methinks.” Bigots are always saying that being gay is the result of one’s upbringing, whereas I think a lack of sexual fluidity is environmental rather than genetic.

Transgendered people face enough criticism and harassment in daily life, but it’s compounded by people within the faction they should feel safe with. I don’t want to go into a biological litany about XY sex-determination, but essentially, all fetuses begin as females; some of them happen to grow penises and/or lack vaginas. The people who feign trauma at the very notion someone may not be the gender they were assigned at birth can take a seat, because trans people have it so much worse.

In a perfect world, equality would know no bounds, but we don’t live in a perfect world; therefore, we, as a part of humanity and, in a smaller coterie, the LGBT community, have to defy the social barriers that bind us.

The Importance of Recognizing Social Biases


This notion that gays purposely subscribe to stereotypes is an incredibly imprudent assumption, but, realistically, we as humans all feed into societal expectations.

Trying to mold ourselves into an image that feels familiar is a typically human trait. From birth, almost all of us are taught to conform in order to fit an image that’s bestowed upon us, so it’s not necessarily any fault of our own when we unconsciously accept social norms. The difference is people with a same-sex attraction know from a very early age that they are attracted to others of the same sex, but when you’re consistently battered with the perception that heterosexuality is “normal” (a highly subjective term), it really fucks you up mentally. It’s not even a matter of whether or not you grew up in an accepting household or not, though it obviously helps, it’s cultural. When you see yourself underrepresented on a large scale, you feel abnormal by default, because you don’t have an outlet to relate to.

That’s why I particularly loathe the  femme versus masculine bias among gays. “Femme” gays feed into the stereotype that was more or less invented by heterosexuals in order to discriminate against us because we don’t act “masculine” enough, whereas “masculine” gays adhere to the societal expectations of how males are expected to act. We’re all equal when we use intrinsic biases as a faulty excuse to discriminate against each other. We’ve all gone and are going through the same shit, so drop the façade. You’d laugh at any Black person who discriminated against another dark-sinned person because they were “too light-skinned” (which, mind you, is an actual thing that happens), and the notion of discriminating against others within your same sexual orientation category is equally as ridiculous.

The bottom line is that trying to dictate how another person should act is both bigoted and antediluvian. I’m of the belief that, as long as you’re comfortable with who you are—which, let’s face it, far too many of us aren’t—you do you. It’s that simple.

Enough of the “Enoughs” with Hillary


All of her career, Hillary’s been accused of not being “enough” to varying degrees without people recognizing what it means to be “enough”:

She’s not trustworthy “enough.”
Most people I know can barely cope with a single derogatory tweet. Try to imagine being criticized by millions of people over the course of 40 years. You’d be guarded, too.

She doesn’t smile “enough.”
The fact that she doesn’t smile as often as people would like is an incredibly sexist sentiment, and even when she does show that she has a sense of humor by smiling, her laugh is criticized and labeled inauthentic, so it’s a lose-lose. What’s more, if she seemed joyous while talking about gender inequality, terrorism, pervasive racism, or any other legitimate political issue, that would concern me.

She’s not attractive “enough.”
Sarah Palin is proof that attractiveness ≠ intelligence. Personally, as someone who is an American that has to deal with the ramifications of the people who are elected, I could not care less if a female politician is a little too butch for your taste.

She doesn’t care “enough” about minorities.
There’s a reason minorities overwhelmingly support her: as far back as her husband’s presidential tenure, she was fastidiously working to ensure minorities were begotten the same luxuries as white people. Not to mention, she was crucial in raising minority salaries by more than 25 percent, which is too little an improvement, but progress nonetheless.

Realistically, no politician is ever going to be “enough” to satisfy every single person, but if it’s because she’s a Democrat or a woman or outspoken, say that. Don’t lodge easily disproven cavils against here.

Let Me Start by Saying…


Recently, I was labeled a racist by someone who I’ve been friends with for the past 15 years. Whereas I don’t consider myself a racist, it did make me wonder if my pacifistic egalitarianism has actually been a farce. After all, even though I’m a gay person, I’m still Caucasian and male, and, though I believe in the potential and equality of all human beings, the fact remains that, even as a person attracted to people of the same sex, I still have two advantageous, biological traits in a nation wrought with political and social sexism and racism working in my favor.

As much as I like to lean on my liberal credentials, the reality is I’ll never know from a personal standpoint what it’s like to be a gender or racial minority. What I can offer, however, is my own experiences as an LGBT minority as an attempt at understanding the plight of fellow minorities.

I’m not going to pretend to understand what it’s like to have your reproductive rights restricted, because, even though I’ve gone with female friends to have everything from their first birth control administered to having abortions, I have never personally had to face that reality, because I had the luxury of being born with a penis. The reality is you can’t simultaneously restrict women’s access to birth control while slut-shaming them for having abortions; having an abortion doesn’t mean a woman is somehow dishabille and/or a terrible human being, it means they’re mature enough to recognize they’re not presently responsible enough to properly offer the parental support every child deserves.

Similarly, I can never know what it’s like to be born a racial minority in a nation that, for all self-proclaimed patriots’ protests about being a country that was built upon the backs of underdogs where everyone should feel welcome, still openly discriminates against anyone who doesn’t share their exact melanin levels.

So, please, if ever you feel I’m “mansplaining” or being “racist,” point it out to me. My ego isn’t one that’s so fragile that I’m immune to expanding it. I’ve said it many times before, but without expanding your mind, there can never be progress, and I don’t want to be a person who ever stints potential social and intellectual advancement. This isn’t a white man’s plea to excuse my own ignorance; rather, it’s a white man’s plea to highlight when I’m unknowingly using my whiteness as a source of privilege to quell the likelihood my white privilege will present itself in the future.

Proust Questionnaire



[For reference:]

The principal aspect of my personality

The quality that I desire in a man
Intelligence and a sense of humor in equal parts

The quality that I desire in a woman

What I appreciate most about my friends

My main fault

My favorite occupation (recreation)

My dream of happiness

What would be my greatest misfortune?

What I should like to be

The country where I should like to live
I prefer a nomadic life

My favorite colour

My favorite prose authors
Anaïs Nin, D. H. Lawrence, Poe

My favorite poets

My heroes in fiction
Cal Trask

My favorite heroines in fiction
Ondine, Lady Godiva (as portrayed in Flores Historiarum)

My favorite composers
Wagner, Verdi, Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff

My favorite painters
Collier, Monet, Fragonard, Modigliani, Dalí

My heroes in history
Rimbaud, Nero, Kierkegaard

My heroines in history
Any headstrong woman who has refused to settle for and defied the societal role they’d been dictated based on their gender

My favorite names
Callaway, Parker, Charlotte

What I hate most of all
Unfounded arrogance

How I want to die
Memorably, but painlessly

Faults for which I have the most indulgence

My motto
“I’m the foe of moderation, the champion of excess.” — Tallulah Bankhead

The Right’s Problem (from a Democrat’s Perspective)


Unless you’ve been living in a cave for the past few months, and that cave hasn’t resounded with the banshee screams of an orange-tinted megalomaniac, you know by now that Donald Trump is officially our President. While his being the GOP candidate is a godsend for liberals, it’s left the Right scrambling. At best, most prominent Republican politicians are begrudgingly supporting Trump; at worst, they’re either fervently opposed to him or have spent the past few weeks backtracking their initial denouncements of him.

Essentially, the GOP is a fucking mess.

But, for some reason, they can’t figure out how it got to this point. As a Democrat, let me break it down for you: you pushed for Tea Partiers to be elected into the Senate and had buyer’s remorse once you figured out that almost all of them were bumbling idiots ill-qualified to be participating in politics. The fact a lot of them also happened to be incredibly racist, anti-gay, xenophobic, and misogynistic was just a bonus. Then, after that fiasco, you all tried to regroup in order to “take back the White House,” but your methodology included blatantly disrespecting the sitting President, rezoning voter districts, trying to reimplement discriminatory voting practices, staging government shutdowns, and overall showing the maturity of a toddler combined the erratic lack of self-control akin to the meth addicts on Intervention.

And yet the GOP wonders how Trump became their presidential nominee. It’s because he’s regurgitating the same policies Republicans have been pushing for years, only he lacks the same vocal filter as seasoned legislators. In that sense he’s admirable, because at least his bigotry is flagrant. The GOP is experiencing the runoff of a polluted political party and Trump is the unfortunate anthropomorphic manifestation of that.

A Message to Liberals Voting for Trump

To start, are you fucking kidding me?

Let’s cut to the chase straightaway: we get it, you hate Hillary. While you’re entitled to your opinion, it’s an opinion that Hillary has accepted because of her decades in the public eye, whereas Donald Trump has literally sued others for the non-crime of disliking him.

You call yourself a liberal, but are willing to abandon the basest liberal values to ensure a certified egoist, racist, xenophobic, anti-gay sociopath becomes President, just because you disagree with the Democratic candidate on a few issues? You’re basically a spoiled child throwing a tantrum  because they didn’t get sweets before dinner at this point, since your candidate of choice didn’t become the Democratic nominee, the difference being tantrums among children are usually the most severe between the ages of two and eight, and you’re a fucking adult.

Do I think the Democratic voting system is flawed? Absolutely. In that same respect, did Bernie agree to the rules prior to launching his campaign to become President? Yes. But, your embitterment is transforming you into the Leftist version of Trump supporters; you can’t criticize his angry, idiotic advocates when you’re doing the exact same thing. It’s acceptable to dislike the presumptive Democratic nominee, but when the only other option is Donald Trump, it’s time to call upon the maturity as a voter that Trump as a candidate very obviously lacks.


It’s Time to Stop Saying the Orlando Shootings Weren’t the Result of Homophobia


By now, if you haven’t accepted the fact that the Orlando shootings were homophobic in nature, you’re living in a state of delusion I somewhat envy. Conversely, to those of us living in reality, it was a blatantly homophobic attack tinged with religious extremism. While it’s encouraging that such a broad range of people have shown overwhelming sympathy and support, it’s farcical to ignore the fact that any attack of this sort has very real implications for the LGBT community. It was only last year that we were commemorating marriage equality, an enormous milestone in both American and LGBT history alike, and now, here we are a year later being served a grave reminder that, to some, our innate sexual orientation still carries a stigma among a far-too-large portion of the population.

The LGBT community has never been one that bows easily to intimidation, but we’re right back where we were nearly two decades when ago when Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. were brutalized and left for dead, and we were subsequently left fearing for our safety. The silver lining is that their deaths brought about the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act (a decade after the fact, but I digress), which made it a federal crime to commit a crime motivated by a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The actuality is that we’re now in a position where we once again have to be cautious about our welfare, even more so than usual.

What the general population doesn’t understand on the whole is that you don’t have to be a murderous, gun-wielding lunatic to inflict injury upon the LGBT community. It’s fortunate that a majority of the country is in favor of seemingly simple ideas like marriage equality, but there are significant factions of people who disagree under the guise of religion and things of the sort. Using something like religion to justify discrimination against LGBT people (or any other group for that matter) inadvertently promotes hostility towards said group of people, so by being an asshole, you’re enabling other assholes to act in the same manner.

Nightmarish scenarios like the one that presented itself in Orlando (and Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech, etc.) tend to bring us closer together as a populace, but like so many highs, the novelty of it quickly wears off. Let’s break that habit and not let this sense of camaraderie wear off like it so frequently has in the past. Like Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr.’s deaths, let’s not allow the travesty in Orlando to be without recompense. The Orlando shooting was the 173rd mass shooting in 164 days in the U.S. so far this year. That’s a sobering statistic. It’s time to stop debating the reasoning behind Omar Mateen’s actions and do something to ensure we don’t have to endure yet another tragedy.

Brexit vs. Trump


With the clusterfuck that is the current American presidential election, it’s easy to forget that there is a world outside of America that exists. Americans generally aren’t particularly attuned to international politics, but there is a current political debate that should be at the forefront of Americans’ minds, and that is the referendum that’s been introduced in the United Kingdom to allow it to withdraw from the European Union. The Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union (Brexit for short) referendum is essentially the result of a pander-based promise made by David Cameron, a.k.a. the British George W. Bush, that if he were to be elected, he would put to a vote whether or not the U.K. should remain a part of the EU. It’s a very important referendum that’s relevant to not only the U.S., given the U.K. is a close ally, but every other country that’s a part of the European Union and/or a U.K. ally.

While European politics may seem arcane to most Americans, what’s proven interesting is the parallels between the debate over the Brexit referendum and the current presidential debate. For example, both Trump supporters and pro-Brexits are primarily comprised of older conservatives who are undereducated. In the same way university graduates are more likely to support Democrats in the U.S., their British counterparts are subsequently more predisposed to favor abdication from the E.U. Additionally, both Trump and the potential Brexit mandate promote isolationism. In the same way that Trump attacks allies that the U.S. shares a border with, the U.K. runs a grave risk of alienation among their neighborly allies by feeding into what amounts to political propitiation.

From an economic standpoint, both Trump and the U.K.’s secession from the E.U. would be cataclysmic, both domestically and internationally. For all his talk about how many supposed billions of dollars he has, Trump doesn’t seem to understand even the basest economic concepts, like free trade, which also holds true of those who are pro-Brexits. As it stands, almost three-quarters of the U.K.’s are the result of them being a member of the European Union. Perhaps if Trump’s perception of wealth wasn’t skewed to the point of blindness, he’d realize that free trade is an essential part of prosperous economics.  In short, national autonomy is a slippery slope that echoes the remnants of Soviet Russia or modern-day North Korea.

In either case, the underlying issue isn’t about logic, it’s about prejudices overruling acumen.

Realistically, there’s no chance of Trump becoming President, just as there’s very little chance the Brexit referendum will garner enough support to pass, but the fact remains that political difference in opinion is marginal, which highlights the fact that perhaps we as supposedly civilized societies aren’t as misanthropic as we think and more jingoistic than we’d hoped.