When exactly have you beaten Triangle Strategy? Your first playthrough? Your second? Or once you've exhausted all possible routes, collected all possible characters, and seen every twist and turn of the plot? Like a visual novel, this story has multiple branching paths, with different battles in different places with different allies based on your previous choices. I've beaten the game twice now, but that still isn't nearly enough to cover every possible branching path. This is a game designed for replayability, and with a new game+ function that lets you keep all your previous progress, it feels like one long game as opposed to multiple retries.
It's a good game, worth the $60 I plopped down for it. But that still doesn't make it great. It's nothing compared to Fire Emblem, no matter how many extra characters I get to recruit. Nevertheless, I need Triangle Strategy to keep on providing entertainment throughout the month of June because there's nothing else going on. The May drought has extended into the June drought. There are no light novels being released, no visual novels, no video games, no sports, nothing to look forward to. Bastard!! is a troll, it starts in June, but June 30th, so it may as well be a July anime debut like all the others. July is going to be awash in anime and video games (Xenoblade Chronicles 3) so I have no worries once we reach that month, but June is going to be a slog.
I am reading the new Xanth book, slowly, but it isn't good enough to sustain my attention. In this empty month of June it will be helpful to fill in the time, but I can't praise it any further than that. For lack of anything else to watch, I've started my rewatch of Kimetsu no Yaiba S2 and Spy x Family (yes, the one that's currently airing!). I'll finish rewatching them soon, sadly before their blu-ray versions ever come out. But that's okay, these series are good enough that I can always watch them a third time in blu-ray fidelity.
I have to rewatch all anime ranked as great so rewatching these shows had to happen at some point. It may as well be during a drought.
A recent study came out saying 75% of LGBT identifiers also report feeling depressed and hopeless. It also stated that most of the people identifying as LGBT are just virtue signaling and never actually have sex with same sex partners. This makes it all the more ludicrous that we're grooming children down this path. We encourage people to identify as something that will only fill their lives with depression and despair, and they don't even get the benefit of actually having sex with someone at the end. They just identify as mentally ill, become sad, and otherwise remain exactly the same. No sane society would encourage kids down a route we know is doomed to failure 3/4 of the time. For the sake of children's mental health, so that they might have a bright future of a normal heterosexual married life, LGBT behavior and expression should be banned. It's like deliberately spreading poison in the water supply. Why would you want to expose children to clearly harmful toxins, whether physical or mental?
As to any argument that people are 'born' LGBT and therefore society can do whatever it wants and the number of children choosing this depressing life path won't change -- bullshit. We have statistical studies, quoted right here on this blog, showing that children adopted by gay parents are dramatically more likely to be gay than the national average. This should be impossible if 'LGBT is innate,' instead of influenced by your environment. We also have a separate line of evidence showing that the number of LGBT identifiers in the American population has roughly doubled every generation, to the ludicrous number of 40% in the youngest cohort. No one can possibly say the 'gay gene' can double every generation, or explain how gays are reproducing so much faster than straights, such that such a gene could spread so quickly. The dumb explanation given is that due to rising acceptance of gays in society, people who were gay all along are merely identifying as such, and in fact the human population was always 40% gay since the time of the stone age. But this is obviously impossible due to the fact that all those 'crypto-gays' were in fact successfully living lives as married, heterosexual, reproductive couples ever since the stone age. Saying such people are 'gay' renders the term meaningless. If people are 'born gay,' but can live their whole lives indistinguishable from straight people, perhaps forcing them to be straight isn't so hard after all? The argument defeats itself.
Another argument made is that 75% of LGBT people wouldn't be depressed if we were only nicer to them. But this argument also fails in the face of statistics. There has been an ever-rising tolerance towards gays in opinion surveys since at least the 1970's. And yet the plight of gays hasn't improved during this entire time. They have not become happier as they are more accepted by society, in fact, in recent years (since 2012), they have become dramatically more unhappy. The very time their treatment by society has become acceleratingly reverential. It's as though letting their inner demons run loose fully and freely has only impaired them more. As though my theory was right and theirs is wrong.
There is no excuse for gays existing in this world. Every argument they make isn't backed by statistics, i.e., reality. Human behavior is flexible and can shift dramatically according to cultural norms. In Afghanistan it's normal behavior for older men to rape young boys for fun, all the while still counting themselves as straight. Because this behavior is tolerated, virtually every young boy in Afghanistan has been raped multiple times, and they all grow up to become young boy rapists themselves. If you tolerate something, encourage it, or devote the entirety of society to promote it, you'll get more of it. That's why the numbers keep doubling every generation -- it reflects how much society has been pushing it in the media and schools. Just as you can eventually get an entire population to be gay, like Afghanistan, you can also get an entire population to not be gay. It's all in the culture. In how you raise your kids. Aside from some mentally ill diehards who probably have lots of other problems in addition to being gay or transgender or whatever, who can simply be culled (killed) from the gene pool and thus solved once and for all, it's clear that virtually everyone on Earth can be gay if they strive to become so, and can be straight if they strive to become so. Why we would want people to be gay instead of straight, when their life trajectories become so dramatically worse down one path than the other, boggles the mind. The greatest good for the greatest number stands directly athwart gay indoctrination shouting 'stop!'
The overlap between gays and mentally ill people is near 100%. Does it even matter that they're gay, then? The answer is yes. Mentally ill people can be saved too by good environmental influences. In a well ordered life, with lots of loving family members as support, mental illness goes down. Stress exacerbates mental illness. The LGBT lifestyle is stressful -- chaotic, unproductive, disordered. Unlike monogamous marriage and raising children, you just float from one relationship to another, often notching up 1,000 sexual partners. The gay deathstyle, which often includes heavy drinking and drugs, will make your disordered mind yet more disordered. A placid 1950's lifestyle can make even the craziest live sane, productive, happy lives. I suspect a few diehard mentally ill people will be crazy no matter what and should simply be culled (killed) from the gene pool. I suspect a lot of these people will overlap with the gays we need to cull (kill.) Jeffery Dahmer, for instance, was a rapist of young boys and a cannibal serial killer. It isn't surprising to see this combination, it's what you should expect. A disordered mind is disordered in all directions.
But for the vast majority of mentally ill people in America, suffering from anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, autism or even schizophrenia, a structured, virtuous life is a panacea. Let them marry and have children, stay away from drugs and alcohol and the grinder/tinder/party scene, and their mental illness will evaporate like dew exposed to the morning sun. Mental illness isn't innate either. It's a gene/environment interaction. Control the environment and the genes won't go haywire either. This means people who could have been straight and mentally hale were first turned gay by the evil education and Disney media industry, then turned mentally ill (depressed or whatever) by their turbid gay lives. It isn't true that 40% of Americans are lost at birth, unsalvageable wrecks who are doomed to be LGBT and mentally ill and depressed and single for life and barren for life. We could bring that number down to 1 or 2% if we wanted. We are choosing to ruin these kids' lives. We are actively destroying them. We are responsible.
The culture society decides to impart and enforce on their children will largely determine the wellbeing of the next generation's lives. Look at life in China between 1970 and 2020. The same exact people, genetically, of the same exact genetic worth. And yet the children growing up in 2020 China have an enormously better life trajectory than the children in 1970. The children of 2020 have access to all of life's amenities, are free of famine, massacres and live in nice homes with flush toilets. It's an entirely different world. Not due to new inventions, in America in 1970 we lived like this already. Due purely and solely to a change in culture. Adults are responsible for the outcomes of their children's lives. You cannot say they were all born gay, born mentally ill, born drug addicts, born opioid overdosers, born criminals, etc. They just weren't. We foisted that upon them. We made them that way. Over the course of 20 years of complete control of their environment, by the time they leave the nest, they have been forged by our hammer blows, millions of hammer blows of educational and media and church and whatever indoctrination. Why else do you think the children of India are all religious believers of Hinduism while the children everywhere else on Earth think it's kooky nonsense? Coincidence?
By we I don't mean the parents. Parents are a small influence on their children's lives, less than their peers, teachers, and the media at large. I don't blame parents for children with screwed up lives (though sometimes, like if the parents are abusive, it is their fault.) By we I mean the entire adult cohort, the people in power making the decisions about what our environment will be like. By we I mean the fixers of social conditions that children are born into and raised under.
I have been beating this drum for a long time now, saying that adults are mercilessly destroying kids by grooming them into bad behaviors that ruin their entire adulthoods. Legalizing drugs, promoting casual sex, now even telling kids to mutilate themselves -- what is the limit? This awful torture chamber of kids, do we want to beat out Afghanistan for the worst child abusers in history? What demented society can claim this is all for the kids' own benefit as statistic after statistic is released showing nothing but growing death and despair in all younger generations? How long are we going to claim this is for their own good when every measurable metric shows they are doing worse than before? How does doing the same thing even harder have any chance of success? Is more arsenic better than less? In what world?
No comments:
Post a Comment