|
|
Episode three's 'twist' in season seven of Black Mirror was vexatious by the first ten minutes of the episode because the ubiquitous media cliches from the alphabet activists have become pathetically predictable.
In today's endless victim-group conglomerations, of course the lesbian relationship in the episode would also Venn Diagram the additional interracial element, as everyone knows the highest form of anti-racism and virtue-signaling chic is to have a sexual relationship with someone of a different skin color or sub-culture. Upon looking up more information on the Internet, I came across this article from Out.com. In that article, words such as "brilliant" are used to describe the performances, as well as the bold proclamation that a previous homosexually-themed Black Mirror episode called "San Junipero" was "widely considered one of the best episodes in the series' history." Certainly a stretch of the imagination for the vast majority of the Black Mirror audience who don't consider gay promotion as the most compelling of cinematic tropes. Where to begin here? Let's start with Out.com calling Issa Rae's performance brilliant. Come on people, really? I have no desire to ridicule someone who puts his or her best efforts out there, but Rae's performance is amateurish and wooden at best. If the reader is anyone other than a fan or friend of Rae's, how is he or she supposed to take the rest of the article as anything more than biased propaganda? Next, an older Out.com article about Emma Corrin and her non-binary status is yet another forced exercise in delusion that only the writer and his bandwagon readers see as anything other than complete silliness. Let it be understood throughout the land that using the pronoun 'they' for anything other than a literal plurality of human bodies is demonstrable grammatical nonsense for those populating the legendary city known as Reality. Coming back to the subversive ethos of the episode, it has grown tiresome to hear over and over again about the oppression of sexual deviants in the past, and to furthermore be lied to about a current state of similar oppression. While physical harm and harsh punishment are not fates I agree with for those in society who flout biology's life-sustaining dictates, the shame element that so many falsely claim is still present in the 21st century was not something we should have abandoned in our culture. I neither hate nor fear sexual deviants. Those are both bogus charges from fascist progressive activists, and they are losing their engineered cachet as the world's political pendulum continues to sway toward the right. I say shame should never have been retired because anyone who lasciviously rebels against the procreative system that the Lord Himself designed and mandated for biological life is dooming themselves to destruction. Doomed to destruction because the very first command from the Lord to humanity, to be fruitful and multiply, had the obvious result of generating and supporting life. Sexual deviancy, on the other hand, ultimately promotes death by its non-procreative focus. In the world that the Lord created for us, sex is an amazing, mysterious heterosexual gift that makes filling the Earth with people an enjoyable and fulfilling experience. Clearly in terms of biological design, tab A is meant to be inserted into slot B. Other configurations are deliberately implemented to idolize pleasure over life itself. In 21st century everything-goes western cultures, sex has been reduced to a twisted collection of porn-influenced methods for solo and mutual masturbation and orgasm generation. What's wrong with homosexuality and other non-procreative perversions? The answer is hardly controversial: If everyone indulged in non-procreative sex, we'd all be gone from the Earth in a single generation. Someone please step forward and explain how such a narcissistic contingency could be a morally superior choice that's worthy of pride. |