Spectator USA

Skip to Content

Internet Life Tech

Women are sick and tired of receiving nudes on gay dating apps

Neo-Marxists are using gay culture as a test kitchen for just how far they can push things

October 21, 2019

5:54 PM

21 October 2019

5:54 PM

Time to put it away, boys, the colonists are blushing.

Gays might be longing for the days when it was only marauding gangs of bachelorettes terrorizing homosexuals in their native habitats. But step into any gay bar today and you’re likely to find multiple disparate clans of shrieking girls haranguing the DJ and pounding fruity cocktails without even sporting Team Bride tiaras and penis straws. It’s one of the ballsier intrusions in this age of tearing down walls and dictating human sameness. And, inevitably, women have crashed the last frontier, gay sex apps, and it’s not going well for anyone.

‘Send me a dick pic and I will cut it off,’ screeched one women on her Grindr profile, a location-based gay men’s hookup app. They seem to fall into one of two categories: the cool, queer, cisgender girl looking for gay buddies or ‘ISO hot bi dudes to suck dick with tbh,’ as one profile I saw read (yeah, right), or they actively bitch and finger-wag at the disappointing behavior of gay men, previously thought to be so fun and sweet until they wandered into our digital sex dens.

Sorry, ladies, time to wake up and smell the poppers. You may think you’ve appropriated gay hook-up culture through slut-empowerment fem-centric TV shows and embodied the male preference for visual stimuli in your shallow little swiping rituals on Tinder…but the truth is, women will never be able to hang with the utter depravity and viciousness of Olympic Gold homosexuals.

‘Don’t ask for nudes. You will be blocked!’ another woman’s profile I recently saw read.

‘No means no,’ barked an overweight blond, as if anyone is asking.

I certainly hope gays are carpet-bombing women with penes on apps like Grindr. It signifies my people aren’t completely lost to every whimsy of the far-left and have taken to staging their own, tiny rebellions where possible. It is, after all, a very funny way to handle these interlopers — just spam them with the most filthy things you’ve got so they can see what really goes on in here. It will also, I’m predicting, lead to the app’s ultimate collapse if women continue to sign up and complain that they’re being digitally raped by armies of cock-gobbling sexists. Get woke, go broke!

During its heyday, Grindr was the most licentious meat market on the internet and one of the last, brutally honest, truly free marketplaces. That put the app in the crosshairs for a leftist overhaul.

A few years ago Grindr, which boasts three million daily users and is now owned by the Chinese, learned it had a problem on its platform with hatred and inclusivity. Responding to negative press and the gripes of the thin-skinned, it launched an aggressive social-engineering campaign suggesting users be nicer to one another. Horny men just breezing around for a quickie were subjected to videos shaming anyone who might have a sexual preference in the categories of biological sex, body type, skin color, age, disability, or HIV status. Ugly people are actually super hot, the message went, if you’re open-minded enough. It also announced biological women and transgenders were to be welcomed and celebrated on the site, with gender and pronoun questions listed on every profile.

The app is now overwhelmingly loaded up with transgenders and trans-chasers and, increasingly, women. Take a thoroughly unscientific gander at almost all the transgender profiles you’re likely to encounter and an inconvenient picture of biological sex binary emerges. transwomen — biological males living as women — tend to advertise sexual desires just as shocking, filthy and lurid as any man. Transmen, on the other hand, biological women living as men, almost always present the same prudish, hectoring attitude as the women on the site.

‘I’m a transguy, if you don’t know what that means, it means I’m not for you,’ read one profile recently.

‘I’m not here to educate you. Asking about my genitals gets an instant block,’ read another.

Men, even gay ones, don’t talk like that. You’d be forgiven if your first impulse was to message such an uptight, transman ninny with something like, ‘sup bro. You hung?’ But jokes aside, the whole thing reeks of a more sinister plot afoot. If you want to know what dictates the priorities of the left, pay attention to what the alphabeticians are up to. LGBT remains the most fearsome, anti-Christian, bully-addled, well-funded, and successful of neo-Marxism’s cultural leviathans and right now they are using gay culture as a test kitchen for just how far they can push things. Everywhere you look the equality argument has morphed into a sort of deadening of love, truth, and passion to remake the world with an oversexed, drugged-up, spiritually-castrated mono-citizenry.

Thinkers have predicted this for the better part of a century. In Yevgeny Zamyatin’s 1924 science fiction novel We, citizens of the 26th century totalitarian society OneState live devoid of passion or creativity under an all-powerful, perpetually re-elected leader known as The Benefactor. Sex, like everything else in the society, is highly regulated. Citizens who fill out a pink form are permitted for one hour a day, known as the ‘sex hour,’ to draw the blinds on their glass-walled apartments and do a bit of bone-storming with anyone they choose by presenting the person the pink form.

Born in the outskirts of Moscow in 1884, Zamyatin is regarded as one of the earliest Soviet dissenters and the first to tackle the horrors of communism through science fiction. We got banned in the Soviet Union, smuggled out, and later was published in English. Though relatively obscure today, the novel influenced the works of Ayn Rand, Aldous Huxley, and George Orwell. In Brave New World, Huxley took Zamyatin’s treatment of sex a step further. Promiscuity is not only encouraged, but law under the totalitarian World State government. Emotional attachment and monogamy are illegal and the urge to get some stank on is required to be satisfied publicly and instantly.

Whereas sex was frowned upon by the English Socialist Party, Ingsoc, in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, Zamyatin, Huxley, and Orwell predicted sexual fluidity would be used to enslave mankind.

In We, like Nineteen Eighty-Four, the novels’ protagonists begin to realize their own individuality through love affairs that bypass state sanction. Human sexuality is messy and complex. One of the most wonderful aspects of it is, no matter what you think may be wrong with you, there’s a market for almost everything, even gingers. In those novels, the characters discover, in effect, the beauty and power of discrimination. Discrimination is the enemy of the authoritarian, the collective, the drab, and mediocre. Some of the greatest thinkers in 20th century literature knew this. And they understood sex could help bring us to the quintessence of our humanity, or be weaponized to subdue it.


Sign up to receive a weekly summary of the best of Spectator USA


Show comments
Close