Once upon a time, linking climate change directly back to homosexuality was almost enough to get you sectioned. Remember 10 years ago, during the floods of 2014, when UKIP local councillor David Silvester was widely mocked after writing a letter to then-PM David Cameron, warning that the bad weather of the day was due to Dismal Dave’s acting “arrogantly against the Gospel” by planning to legalise gay marriage, thereby angering God Almighty and causing Him to unleash “storms, disease, pestilence and war” upon us all?
Today, the situation is kind of the reverse, and we are now exhorted to propitiate the angry climate-gods after all – otherwise they will punish those homosexuals who walk amongst us with terrible deluges and inundations of a new kind, as shown by the Daily Sceptic reporting last week on a quite pathetic story in the Independent, headlined ‘How climate change is hitting vulnerable Indonesian trans sex workers’. As the DS wrote, “Street-walking in a Muslim majority country undoubtedly has perils”, but bad weather is not chief amongst them.
Rain of Terror
According to the Independent, the problem was that “the rainy season was lasting longer” and “winds were stronger”, causing clients to stay nice and dry at home and use prostitutes there instead. Even worse, 72% of transsexual escorts in the affected region “had increased expenses” when it rained – how much do umbrellas cost in Java these days? Therefore, it was argued, “climate change makes the vulnerable even more vulnerable”. But does it really? If you bother to read the whole report beyond its absolutely mental headline, you will see that most of the ladyboys involved actually enjoyed a, um, happy ending.
The particular transgender street-walkers interviewed for the piece by a brave journalist who sidled up to them after dark armed with a fistful of tourist dollars whilst whispering the words “it’s okay, I just want to talk”, all ended up in plum jobs once they had been forced off the pavements by an amazing extra 55mm of precipitation per annum – or, at least, plum jobs by comparison to the alternative employment prospect of selling their bodies to random all-comers on street-corners.
One became a singer with a transgender arts group, for whose associated theatre company he now runs a social media channel. Another got a place on a special entrepreneurship training programme aimed at “empowering transgender women”, following which he was able to set up his own small business, selling both home-made cakes and home-made smells re-labelled as ‘perfumes’.
So, if climate change really did force these former harlots off the streets (which it obviously didn’t – the last time heavy rain truly ended prostitution was during the happy, sin-cleansing days of Noah), then it forced them off the streets and into much better, safer, better-paid and more stable jobs – so surely the Independent’s headline should actually have been ‘How climate change is helping vulnerable Indonesian trans sex workers’, not “hitting” them?
Intersection 28
Why are the mainstream media suddenly desperate to begin spuriously linking climate change back to various ostensibly unrelated woke issues like transgenderism and prostitutes’ rights? It is all part of the modish neo-Marxist doctrine of ‘intersectionality’, which holds that, because capitalism, white privilege, patriarchy and homophobia all purportedly link together into one gigantic matrix of self-reinforcing oppression. So this fact (if ‘fact’ it really be) can likewise be combatted by highlighting and promoting the interlinked, intersectional potential nodes of minoritarian resistance against this very same nefarious power-matrix – blacks, Muslims, gays, feminists, rain-sodden transsexual Indonesian prostitutes, etc.
If it can be shown that climate change – caused by evil, white male-led Western capitalism – disproportionately affects, say, blind Taiwanese genderqueer midgets on wheels or something, then this finding can cynically be leveraged in order to place profound moral pressure upon our pathetic, liberal guilt-ridden, polluting institutions, industries and governments to systematically dismantle themselves wholesale.
In other words, instead of rebutting critics of Net Zero along rational, policy-based lines – which is often rather hard to do, as the whole policy of Net Zero is thoroughly irrational in the first place – professional Greentards can instead spare themselves the time and effort and just shout “Racist!”, “Whore-Hater!” or “Transphobe!” at their opponents thereby to shut them up immediately.
The logical conclusion of such trends culminates in the following recent online PR meme, spread jointly by the U.S. conservationist group Oregon Wild and someone named The Intersectional Environmentalist, which I promise is genuine and not a spoof starring Keith Lemon:
Less ‘Save the Trees’, more ‘Save the Trannies’. I didn’t realise that even some dryads were now ‘women with penises’ too these days.
This other twin meme, meanwhile, strongly implies transsexuals are an endangered hairy American forest-species, like Bigfoot:
Like the famous old 1960s Patterson-Gimlin Film footage of Bigfoot, however, I think that’s pretty obviously just a man dressed in a suit.
The Absolute Intersection of Insanity
Who is this meme-spreading ‘Intersectional Environmentalist’, with the emphasis upon those final three syllables? It is none other than a professional Third Sector complainer named Leah Thomas, a young American lady who grumbles that, back “in 2017, I was the only Black person [or even “black person”] in my graduating class to receive an environmental science degree”. Because of this sad racial isolation, says Leah, “at times, I felt the pressure to silence parts of my racial identity” (translation: not to spend every waking moment of my life shouting abuse at white people). Then, however, 2020 and the sudden environmental extinction of George Floyd came along, at which point silencing Ms. Thomas about the colour of her skin became absolutely impossible.
“In June 2020,” Leah told readers of Marie Claire magazine (it’s where the cool girls go to get all their latest peer-reviewed climate-data analysis), “as the Black Lives Matter movement reached global proportions, many of my environmental peers remained silent. I was frustrated. When I asked how it was possible that environmentalists and conservationists could advocate for the protection of even the smallest of species, but not Black lives or endangered people, I was met with confusion.”
I bet you were. What the hell does saving the narrow-ridged finless porpoise from extinction have to do with the death of George Floyd? Absolutely nothing, you may have reasonably thought: until, that is, the magic word ‘intersectionality’ is introduced into the mix.
Frustrated at her scientific colleagues’ inability to understand or appreciate her profoundly unscientific theories, Leah Thomas proudly “coined the term ‘Intersectional Environmentalism’” – hardly an ‘achievement’, one may have thought, it’s literally just putting the word ‘Intersectional’ in front of any given noun. Nonetheless, the term went viral online, and Leah somehow got a book deal out of it. Imaginatively, it is called The Intersectional Environmentalist, and has a twee little picture of a rainbow on the front, whether LGBT or rainfall-related in its nature, I do not know. Probably both – it’s about intersectionality, after all.
Leah even now has her own charitable non-profit propaganda-type organisation, which pushes the utterly fatuous line that biodiversity and political diversity go hand in hand: “The Earth and its eco-systems thrive on diversity and so does climate action.” Her own particular evolutionary niche in the current political eco-system of the West, I think, is best summed up by the single word ‘parasite’.
The basic modus operandi of Thomas’s creed – later taken up by the Independent as regards water-allergic Indonesian ladyboys – is as follows. Take any give piece of climate-related news. Then pick any given ‘vulnerable’ minority group. Now link the two, no matter how tenuously, and claim they will automatically be the worst affected – e.g. floods in Bangladesh will naturally impact local 35 stone comatose quadriplegics worst of all, because they can’t swim very well. Then, bung the key Newspeak word ‘Intersectional’ somewhere into your argument, and Bob’s your uncle – an easy front-page on Marie Claire/The Independent/Pravda/Asian Babes, a job well done!
Catrina and the Rising Waves
If you prefer to make the front page of Pink News, however, your chosen intersectional group of climate-euthanised pseudo-victims will, of course, have to be innately queer in nature, as ably demonstrated by the Scottish branch of Friends of the Earth. In a special essay called ‘Why Climate Change is an LGBTQ+ Issue’, written to mark annual Homo History Month, Catrina Randall, a queer-friendly voice for Friends of the Earth Scotland, reverently explained how:
Through climate justice, we recognise that the roots of climate change are tied up with the roots of multiple oppressions. Capitalism and colonialism fuel climate change, but are also a part of LGBTQ+ oppression… Anti-capitalism has long been important to many in the fight for queer liberation. We recognise that capitalism rewards conformity and punishes diversity [wholly unlike Communism, obviously]. It threatens diversity of gender and sexuality in the same way it threatens biodiversity in its quest for profit. Fighting capitalism and colonialism, both present day and the legacy, is key to fighting climate change, but it’s also a key part of queer liberation. Our fights are inherently linked.
If you ever wanted conclusive proof that, no matter how the whole field may have originally started out, the contemporary Green movement has today become little more than a pathetically obvious front for Marxism of one kind or another, then this is it. Biodiversity and sexual diversity are now revealed as one and the same thing – Save the Gay Pandas today!
From a far-Left perspective, explains Catrina, “when it comes to the fight against climate change, the LGBTQ+ community has so much to offer”, as “we have a history of fighting for survival” during things like the Stonewall Riots, so “we are trained for this fight”. Well, if gays have a long history of organising violent street-marches, so do other rival organisations like the National Front. Can we have Intersectional Fascism next? (Some may say we already do…)
According to Catrina, come the forthcoming Environmental Apocalypse, homosexuals will be particularly well-suited to saving lives and distributing succour on account of their alleged widespread past experience in “providing shelter in gay bars during natural disasters”. I’d rather take my chances outside in all the floodwaters, thanks. “We know when we come together we’re a force to be reckoned with,” Catrina ended her essay. We have been warned.
Oh, I Do Like To Be Gay Beside the Seaside!
Even proper full-blown academic journals have now drunk the Queer Intersectional Environmentalist Kool-Aid, as shown by a laughable piece which appeared in the Journal of Climate Change and Health in February, entitled ‘Climate Change-Related Disasters & the Health of LGBTQ+ Populations’.
With issues of biodiversity in mind, this report, quite genuinely, argued that, as gays are apparently now disproportionately a coastal-dwelling species, like crabs or starfish, who inhabit seaside or riverside towns and cities like Brighton and San Francisco in relatively greater numbers than boring old landlubber heterosexuals do, in a special form of microbiome known as “gayborhoods”, they are placed at innately higher risk of being drowned during global warming-triggered flood-events.
Because of such semi-aquatic dwelling-patterns, we are told, “approximately 4% of gay or lesbian people reported being forced to evacuate their home due to a natural disaster compared with 1.2% of heterosexual people.” Maybe UKIP’s David Silvester was right after all, and God really does send out floodwaters to punish deviants? He may also choose to punish them with wildfires, which likewise affect gay lungs far worse than straight ones, as “approximately 21% of LGBTQ+ adults live with asthma and/or emphysema compared with 14% of heterosexual adults”, for reasons entirely unexplained.
Furthermore, global warming will help spread tropical diseases, the authors warn, leaving HIV/AIDS-ridden gay people, with their suppressed immune systems, even more susceptible to infection from the next global wave of Um Bongo Fever than straight people will be. Furthermore, as supposedly proven during the COVID-19 pandemic, “LGBTQ+ Americans were more likely to work in jobs considered ‘essential’”, like being transgender street-prostitutes, meaning they would find it impossible to avoid being infected in a way their non-queer peers would not (no heterosexuals are known to be employed as binmen, delivery drivers, hospital workers, shopkeepers or policemen throughout all of the continental United States).
Even worse, once the floodwaters do strike, “emergency shelters are frequently ill-equipped to support LGBTQ+ people and are experienced as unwelcoming by them”. Shockingly, I would imagine some don’t even have transgender toilets, just chemical ones.
Now that we have been exposed to such profound Intersectional Environmentalist wisdom, I trust Daily Sceptic readers are all now fully aware of the immense and pressing need for every last one of us to cut down on our carbon emissions immediately, lest we accidentally trigger an irreversible Homosexual Mass Extinction Event sometime before 2050. We must all do our bit, and start transitioning away from fossil fuels this very instant, lest we push Graham Norton and Benjamin Butterworth into unwanted early graves. Any single unnecessary emission you create, and it is tantamount to strangling Matthew Parris with piano-wire.
With this distressing thought in mind, I have one final question for all those Intersectional Environmentalists out there, then: what are the CO2 emissions of the average Pride parade?
Steven Tucker is a journalist and the author of over 10 books, the latest being Hitler’s & Stalin’s Misuse of Science: When Science Fiction Was Turned Into Science Fact by the Nazis and the Soviets (Pen & Sword/Frontline), which is out now.
