Documenting the West’s descent into Satanic receivership.
‘The Queerness of Babies’
In the course of my journalistic duty to bring you fine people up to speed on the latest transgressions against decency, I recently stumbled down an exceptionally dark rabbit hole that led to the 9th circle of hell — dug out at the intersection of babies and “queer theory.”
Related: Shock Survey: Almost One-Third of Gen Z Now Gender-Queer
In order to “forge a space for working through the contemporary usages of the baby” — and God only knows what horrors those “contemporary usages” entail — the author here examines the “baby as a model for queer ethics of activism.”
“The Queerness of Babies,” via Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society (emphasis added):
The concept of queerness to think through the baby might take a multiplicity of shapes and significations, perhaps the most obvious of which being the baby’s polymorphous perversity theorized by Freud. But there also beckons, among many others, a baby’s “backwardness,” as theorized by Maud Mannoni, and Paco Vidarte’s baby as a model for a queer ethics of activism. What role do babies and their queerness play in psychic, clinical, socio-political and mediatic registers?...
The special issue aims to forge a space for working through the contemporary usages of the baby, and the baby’s own agency*, for psychoanalysts and psychoanalytically inclined queer and trans theorists interested in the mutual permeability of psychoanalysis with queer and trans scholarship.
*The idea that a baby should be recognized as having “agency” coming from someone obsessed with queer babies can only mean one thing — and I think we all know what that is.
Related: Biden's Transgender Czar Threatens Child Suicide If He Can't Trans Them
Being unfamiliar with Freud’s take on queer babies, I turned to the below trusted source, which out of deference to Social Justice™ dogma gratuitously added that “polymorphous perversity” theory is racist.
Via Encyclopedia.com (emphasis added):
Polymorphous perversity is a Freudian term that signifies a person's ability to experience sexual pleasure in a variety of ways in the entire body, beyond the narrow range of genital stimulation that is consonant with reproduction. Sigmund Freud argued in Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905) that polymorphous perversity is a rudimentary stage of childhood sexuality, infants and children can experience sexual pleasure anywhere on the body, and normal development eventually narrows that pleasure to the genital zones, with the aim of ensuring heterosexual sexual intercourse. Noting that barriers to unregulated sexual expression such as shame, disgust, and the sense of sexual morality are absent in childhood sexual behavior, Freud thought that polymorphous perversity was abnormal only if it persisted into adulthood, which it often did, he thought, in lower-class women and non-European peoples. This notion of nonreproductive sexual practices as gendered, lower-class, racialized, and perverse both reflects and extends late nineteenth-century attitudes about empire, race, gender, class, and sexuality.
A value-laden term from a particular cultural moment, the idea of polymorphous perversity validates heterosexual copulation as the most adult and civilized form of sexual behavior while defining nonreproductive sexual expression as childlike, uncivilized, lower-class, and non-Western.
So, basically, the theory is that all babies are sexual perverts and that civilizing influences such as shame and socialized morality eventually, under normal circumstances, eliminate that inborn perversion and cause the developed adult to only desire heterosexual relations for purposes of procreation.
Certainly, purging any sense of shame, disgust, or sexual morality from the cultural zeitgeist is irrefutably a project of the LGBTQ4GF150+++™ social engineers, so maybe Freud was onto something there.
Related: ‘Adult Baby’ Terrorizes Multiple Daycares With Feces
Further down the rabbit hole to hell, I discovered another treatise on queer babies and how best to “use” them “contemporaneously,” “Queering babies: (Auto)ethnographic reflections from a gay parent through surrogacy,” via Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society (emphasis added):
This essay focuses on the figure of the surrogate baby and explores how encounters with this figure disrupt or confirm normative expectations about the ‘babyness’ of babies, the ‘parentness’ of parents, and the interactions between these two. Given their prenatal history, surrogate babies are queer creatures by default: their becoming and existence have to be negotiated through a set of institutionally defined normativities. But can this queerness—whether imagined, experienced, or discursively produced—serve as a window to the queerness of all babies and how standards of normalcy are formed in the world they are born into?...
Dialectics of absence and abundance are always at work in the hierarchies that produce babies—queer or unqueer.
Related: The Harrowing Tale of a Six-Year-Old's Gender Transition
In the end, of course, the LGBTQ4GF150+ agenda boils down to two things: normalizing transhumanism (the idea that there is no “soul” or anything inherently greater about humans than the sum of their parts, which can be surgically or otherwise altered at will), and b.) granting a social license to kiddy-diddling.
The rest — “disrupting normative expectations about the ‘babyness’ of babies” — is just rhetorical masturbation to put lipstick on that very ugly pig.
