In a recent hit single, “You Need to Calm Down,” Taylor Swift mocks people who stand firm in their beliefs about sexuality, asking that they stop their bigotry and “calm down.” The music video, which went viral, depicts conservatives as ignorant hicks who reject homosexuals and are driven by animus. They are ugly, dated, and lack basic hygiene. By contrast, the LGBTQ folks in the video are bright, happy, and boast perfectly coiffed hair. Moreover, the angry hicks are portrayed as a dwindling minority, while the upbeat LGBTQ folks are shown to be ascendant.
Whether it’s lawsuits for “bathroom rights” or lawsuits against Christian bakers who refuse to craft messages which violate their conscience, the LGBTQ agenda is not advocating “equal rights” but special rights that marginalize everyone else’s. This aggressive push for LGBTQ “equality” may actually be backfiring, causing even young people to feel discomfort and alienation. The LGBTQ agenda is now defined by fighting the truth of biological sex, demanding that gender-bending become an accepted new normal, and filing lawsuits so that biological males can use women’s restrooms. This kind of aggressive, entitled behavior is difficult to acquiesce to, especially when it infringes upon the rights of others who would rather not participate. Instead of hoping people would become more “comfortable” around the LGBTQ “community”, it may be worthwhile for GLAAD and the like to consider the effect their campaign is having on other people. Maybe they’re the ones that “need to calm down.”
Case in point, from Psychology Today, Karen Blair, Ph.D.: Under these hypothetical circumstances, which of the following people would you consider as a potential dating partner (check all that apply):
- a cisgender1 woman
- a cisgender man
- a transgender woman
- a transgender man
- a person with a non-binary gender identification
“Recently, my colleague and I asked this question of just under 1,000 participants and we published our findings in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. Our results indicated that 87.5% of the participants who were asked this very question only checked off the cisgender options and excluded transgender and non-binary individuals from their hypothetical dating pool.” 1 Note: ‘cisgender’ refers to someone whose current gender identity is the same as the one they were assigned at birth, while ‘transgender’ refers to someone whose gender identity differs from the one they were assigned at birth.)
What does the author think about this? For a huge hint, look at how she defines cisgender. Using the term “gender identity” rather than biological sex, she calls gender “assigned at birth.” How did it get “assigned?” The parents and the delivery team looked at the sexual organs! How then, does separating sex from gender make sense? The author and her ilk condemn normal people for responding to their natural biological cues about what is attractive and what is repellant. Is it my fault that I am attracted to women who clearly value their femininity? Am I supposed to find a person of indeterminate sex attractive?
Answers In Genesis comments on that research: “The author writes that social support, namely romantic partnerships, are very important in overall health and longevity, and, therefore, it’s also important that society as a whole not exclude transgender people from the ‘dating pool.’ But, ultimately, what these individuals need is not someone to date or marry them. They need the new life that the Lord Jesus Christ brings! Only by realizing they (like everyone else) are sinners and only through repenting of their sin and trusting in Christ alone for salvation, can they find true hope, meaning, and purpose. The answer isn’t more people being willing to date transgender individuals—the answer is trusting Christ for salvation, receiving his gift of new and eternal life and building their thinking on God’s Word.”