On the fourth episode of Alt Right 101, Bre Faucheux and Mark Collett discussed the dangers of the insidious “LGBT agenda.” And although they took pains to point out that they don’t “hate” individual members of the LGBTQ community, their rhetoric was steeped in virulent homophobia.
Collett has a long track record of anti-gay rhetoric. In 2002 he attacked gay men as “AIDS monkeys,” “bum bandits,” and “faggots” in an episode of Russell Brand’s show RE: Brand. And in a Channel 4 documentary called Young, Nazi and Proud he called AIDS a “friendly disease” because it afflicts black and gay people.
“The LGBT agenda has never been about equality,” the ex-BNP Youth leader told his co-host. “It is about pushing degeneracy.” And he attempted to “illustrate this [point] in a very, very simple way” by comparing LGBTQ pride parades to strip clubs.
“If you go to one of these so-called gay pride events, you will see all manner of sickening and degenerate acts. You will see full-frontal nudity. You will see people walking down the street waving sex toys. You will see people engaging in acts of bondage and sadomasochism. You will see people in fetish outfits. In fact, it’s like something out of a nightmare.”
Just a note to Mark Collett, whom I’m sure has extensive personal knowledge of LGBTQ pride events: Not every pride parade is San Francisco’s Folsom Street Fair, which actually has an 18+ age restriction.
“If you were a father of a young boy who — let’s say he’s about 10 or 11 years old — and you took your 10 or 11-year-old boy to a strip club to see some topless women dance, you would be seen as the Devil,” Collett claimed.
However, “if you took your 10 or 11-year-old son to a gay pride festival”, he would see “full-frontal nudity, he would see sex acts being displayed in the streets, he would see bondage, he would see fetishists, he would see sex toys.”
Again, I have no idea what pride parade Collett is talking about. It certainly wasn’t the NYC Pride Parade, where the most explicit images were of buff men in speedos. And that’s no worse than what kids see when they pass the “Naked Cowboy.”
The pair went on to discuss the health effects supposedly associated with homosexuality, which they say are being censored by mainstream scientific literature.
“I believe it was in the ’60s that the APA — or the American Psychological Association — took homosexuality off of the DSM — which is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for medical disorders — they took homosexuality completely off of it,” Faucheux said. “Meaning any scientist who tries to do any kind of studies on homosexuality, it’s taboo, you can’t do that.”
It’s true that homosexuality was once classified as a mental illness by the APA, and that it was removed from the DSM in 1973. However, it was removed because it did not meet their criteria for what constitutes a mental disorder.
And the upshot of depathologizing homosexuality was not that scientists couldn’t study health risks that affect the LGBTQ community. Rather it was the repeal of sodomy laws, the enactment of legal protections for LGBTQ people, marriage equality, etc.
Studies are still being done on health issues facing numerous minority groups, including the LGBTQ community. But that’s not exactly what Collett and Faucheux are objecting to. They’re objecting to the inability of ideologues to get their flawed studies (see the work of Paul Cameron or Mark Regnerus) published in legitimate medical journals.
As Faucheux put it, “If you come out with anything even in the slightest revealing how homosexuality leads to an increase in suicides, an increase to sexually transmitted diseases, you are ostracized. It is taboo. That’s hate speech. You can’t talk about that. And then suddenly you become the cause as to why homosexuals are killing themselves, because you are so unaccepting of their lifestyle.”
Collett agreed and added that “all studies within the homosexual community have pointed to increased drug use, increased incidents of sexually transmitted disease, increased incidents of sexual abuse,” a “rise in rectal cancer” and “other problems associated with anal sex and a promiscuous lifestyle.”
And no, he did not name these studies or anyone who conducted them. Thus, there is no way of verifying whether these studies exist, to say nothing of their veracity. For all we know Mark Collett has been reading studies in disreputable journals without a peer review process.
To Mark Collett, this is just “truth” being “suppressed” by what he ludicrously calls the “pink mafia” — a “lobby of militant homosexuals who are trying to silence any criticism of their lifestyle” and “pushing the worst excesses of their lifestyle on children.”
And, like many gay-bashers before him, he invoked the “slippery slope” fallacy — by name no less — to argue that LGBTQ rights will lead to the “increased sexualization of children and mental health issues for children.”
Now, I can only speak from personal experience here, but everyone I’ve met who has been raised by same-sex parents has been perfectly well-adjusted. Certainly as much as anyone raised by opposite-sex parents, and definitely more than someone who complains on Twitter about ads depicting interracial families. That’s just weird.