“Claiming that a group is the enemy of the people and out to destroy Christianity and civilization as we know it has a very familiar ring to it.”

Today’s absolute winner for the most offensive polemic is by Jesse Russell who claims to have a PhD. Perhaps he has an advanced degree in conspiracy theorization. The piece is titled: The Shape of Water: How Americans got duped into accepting bestiality. Apparently he has solved the riddle of the LGBT agenda while investigating the duping of Americans.

For the record I liked The Shape of Water but not overwhelmingly. Nevertheless, with the help of some very imaginative lighting, it was scripted and directed as a lovely fairy tale with a sprinkle of horror. Many people have made the comparison to Beauty and the Beast. Both films are about the power of love and the importance of character.

Jesse Russell has other ideas which are painfully verbose but here is a sample:

The film itself is, on one level, quintessential left-wing propaganda. Released in the printemps of Social Justice Warrior (SJW) activism, there are all the elements that would tantalize unwashed pink haired SJW zombie hoards: revenge fantasies of killing a handsome, strong, and intelligent Western man, bizarre and unnatural sexual encounters, fetishizing of the notion of the gifted outsider or other attacks on the military, and an overall sappy panoply of “dad issues” and weird boyfriend fantasies.

No. It is just a fairy tale. It is no more propaganda than the aforementioned Beauty and the Beast which, by the way, originated through folklore hundreds of years ago. I cannot begin to imagine where this guy gets these ideas from.

Ah, but it doesn’t end just there. As I said, Russell believes that he has unique insight into what LGBT people desire:

However, more than these silly tidbits, The Shape of Water is an unsettling watershed in the trans-movement. As Brokeback Mountain and Lady Gaga’s “Born This Way” provided the right social conditioning at just the right time to rewire the minds of Americans regarding marriage, so too does The Shape of Water oddly forebode a new step in the LGBTQ+ movement: the legitimization of any and all forms of sexual encounter.

I am trying to understand. Is this guy claiming that the film was made to advance an agenda or that an agenda is advanced due to the themes of the movie? I am gay. I consider myself to be a transgender advocate. I have no desire whatsoever to legitimize “any and all forms of sexual encounter.” For that matter, I do not know of anyone else who feels that way and Russell doesn’t cite any statements by anyone to support his theory. Ultimately, this represents what he thinks LGBT people think and he is incorrect. Apparently his mind reading skills need some development.

The Shape of Water was hatched in a 1955 work by Frankfurt School philosopher Herbert Marcuse titled, Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud.

Wanna bet?

Marcuse’s work is largely an attempt to wrestle the thought of Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud away from mid-20th century, “post-Freudian,” conservatives and Christians who had appropriated Freudian terminology and ideas to advocate what Marcuse derides as “(i)dealistic morality.”

Russell goes on and on regarding Marcuse’s work. Russell’s ideas are not consistent with the scholarship regarding the book. He is inserting conservative Christian thinking into unconnected discourse. Whether I am right or wrong in that regard is irrelevant. Russell wants a forum to demonstrate how smart he thinks he is.

Apparently, Russell claims some unique insight into Russell’s literary intent:

While his initial readers in 1955 might think that Marcuse here is merely advocating for consensual heterosexual sex outside of the bonds of Christian marriage, the West traditionally has, even in its murky pagan past, forbade homosexuality, pederasty, necrophilia, incest, bestiality, and rape.

As a result, smashing the traditional Western restraints on and taboos forbidding sexual activity in the West will “free” any and all forms of sexual desire.

There is more to this conspiracy:

One can easily see here how Eros and Civilization became one of the foundational texts of the gay rights movement, which, piggybacking on the legalization of birth control in the 1965 Supreme Court Case Griswold vs. Connecticut, sought to sever reproduction from sex in the minds of the American people.

I thought that the Homosexual Agenda© was outlined in the book After the Ball which, by the way, no gay person seems to have read. Nor do I think that Marcuse’s philosophy was important to the gay rights movement which was engendered by the Stonewall riot.

I am running out of patience with this bloated dissertation. However, it concludes:

We are in the midst of a ferocious cultural war against an enemy that will not stop until Christianity and the West are completely destroyed and every vice and degenerate act is normalized.

It is about time we fought back.

Much of the above attempts to conform conservative Catholic thought to real events and dire predictions. Note the description, above, of Griswold v. Connecticut legalizing contraceptives, something the Church disapproves of. However to perceive that LGBT people (and, presumably, others) are an enemy is incorrect, offensive and dangerous. Moreover, the theoretical agenda of people that he disapproves of is preposterous. Promoting this conspiracy as the real objective of people he disapproves of is also incorrect, offensive and dangerous.

There is something in my DNA and most other Jews that makes us especially wary of language like this. Claiming that a group is the enemy of the people and out to destroy Christianity and civilization as we know it has a very familiar ring to it.

Related content:

By David Cary Hart

Retired CEO. Formerly a W.E. Deming-trained quality-management consultant. Now just a cranky Jewish queer. Gay cis. He/Him/His.