“Selling Homosexuality to America”
June 26, 2015
HOW DID we get here from there? It happened, in part, through psychological warfare. In his article, “Selling Homosexuality to America,” Paul Rondeau called it “psychological terrorism.” Once again, we see that the most powerful institution in American life is the media, including the entertainment industry and related advertisers. Rondeau wrote:
The extensive three-stage strategy to Desensitize, Jam and Convert the American public [to the normalization of homosexuality] is reminiscent of George Orwell’s premise of goodthink and badthink in 1984. As Kirk and Madsen put it, “To one extent or another, the separability – and manipulability – of the verbal label is the basis for all the abstract principles underlying our proposed campaign.”‘
Desensitization is described as inundating the public with a continuous flood of gay-related advertising presented in the least offensive fashion possible. If straights can’t shut off the shower, they may at least eventually get used to being wet.” But, the activists did not mean advertising in the usual marketing context but, rather, quite a different approach: “The main thing is to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly tiresome.” They add, “[S]eek desensitization and nothing more . . [I]f you can get [straights] to think [homosexuality] is just another thing — meriting no more than a shrug of the shoulders — then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.”This planned hegemony is a variant of the type that Michael Warren describes in Seeing Through the Media where it “is not raw overt coercion; it is one group’s covert orchestration of compliance by another group through structuring the consciousness of the second group.”28
Jamming makes use of the rules of Associative Conditioning… and Direct Emotional Modeling….[T]he bigot need not actually be made to believe.., that others will now despise him . . . [rather, our effect is achieved without reference to facts, logic, or proof…. [Whether he is conscious of the
attack or not. Indeed, the more he [the bigot] is distracted by any incidental, even specious, surface arguments, the less conscious he’ll be of the true nature of the process-which is all to the good. 29
Jamming is psychological terrorism meant to silence expression of or even support for dissenting opinion. According to one knowledgeable source, “Dr. Laura is only the most visible victim of this new assault on free speech and thought.”
The final stage, Conversion, means the “conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media.” With Conversion, the bigot is shown images of “his crowd actually associating with gays in good fellowship.”3 1 The alleged bigot “is repeatedly exposed to literal picture/label pairs .. .of gays .. .carefully selected to look either like the bigot and his friends, or like any one of his other stereotypes of all right guys. 32
Another tactic is to claim that famous historical figures were homosexual. This associates homosexuals with positive images (symbols) just like advertisers use celebrity endorsements.
Read more here.
— Comments —
James N. writes:
The remarkable recent public acceptance of homosexual rights follows naturally from two propositions, of recent acceptance (although of ancient lineage, as anyone familiar with the Old Testament will know)
1) Sex is not about creating a new life, and, in fact, if two people engaging in sex happen, by some unforeseen series of events, to create a new life, they are to be freed of consequences by whatever means necessary. The corollary – which is that since the purpose of sex is sterile, the receptacle is irrelevant – follows.
2) The marital relation exists solely for one’s personal happiness, and, if such happiness should disappear, even temporarily, the marital relation becomes “dead” and you are to be freed of it, by whatever means necessary.
These two (false) propositions were accepted, overwhelmingly, by 1975 at the latest.
After that, it just took a few decades of propaganda to get America’s strong pro-fornication majority past the icky bits about our small homosexual minority and to allow thomosexuals into the sexually liberated world created by heterosexuals for themselves.
Kirk and Masden’s successful desensitization strategy could not have worked unless the theoretical underpinnings of homosexualism were not already widely accepted.
Laura writes:
Yes, but those theoretical underpinnings were also established, in part, through artful propaganda and invisible censorship.
