Pivoting :: Narrative Management

how Queerists strategise their way out of meaningful discourse

Repeating the messaging and controlling the narrative play a pivotal part in the strategy of Queerists, for whom material reality proves inconvenient and even bigoted. Queerists have designated everything that produces inequitable outcomes not in the direction of their bias as bigoted. Queerists believe that addressing their interlocutor’s points in discourse plays into the opposition’s hands by repeating their messaging. Pause and examine the choice of language — the opposition.

Queerists have no intention of indulging any alternative perspectives, moral superiority has locked them intellectually into Sex Denialism. They cannot swim in any other intellectual waters that challenge their firmly established beliefs about their own ideas, they will Borgishly pivot back to their talking points. Queerists speak of any reality-based discourse deviating from their own as the opposition’s frame, akin to some kind of intellectual kryptonite, and then they emphasise the importance of the need to pivot back to our own messaging.

Queerist Narrative Managers advise their congregants never to allow themselves to indulge non believers in the process of discourse and discussion. In fact, Trudeauvian comms people have crafted a formula to assist congregants in pivoting back to the Queerist narrative. Queerist Narrative Managers urge congregants to deploy this psyops strategy in their person lives, with friends, relatives, colleagues, acquaintances.

1. Emotional Hook. Lure the audience with a relatable message that sticks to them emotionally.

2. Flying Lips. Fly past the main points of your conservative interlocutor’s discussion, and focus on casting them in a negative light.

3. Pivot + Deploy. Rinse and Repeat often for effect, use the phrase “far right” a lot, misrepresent everything, for example opposing gender identity and gender affirmation in favour of reality-based reproductive science is anti LGBTQ.

Figure 1: Queer Momentum :: Facts Over Fear :: Narrative Management

Look at Figure 1. Do you see it?

FEAR. The graphic incepts fear into the mind of the audience. The website itself has no facts to offer, only fear. It seems the introduction of safeguarding and clinical limits that defines provincial policy changes tabled by Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Alberta strikes fear into the minds of Queerists. In that small block of 310 words of text I counted six or seven mention of words that invoke the fear emotion. What message does this website intend to convey, really? Well, it intends to convince the audience to redefine FACTs as those ideas which affirm Queerists—that is, ideas that do not create a mental landscape of discomfort and fear for Queerists are facts and all else are misinformation. Queerists instruct their congregants to designate any idea they find discomforting as bigoted, and therefore something to fear. Readers, does this remind you of the Halal versus Haram discourse? It ought to do.

What effect does this psyops campaign have on discourse?

Paralysis.

It creates intellectual paralysis and it kills social innovation because it introduces a hierarchy that prioritises particular ideas above humans. Incidentally a similar kind of Narrative Management ended the golden age of intellectual innovation and development in the Ottoman world. The Ash’arite versus Mu'tazilite conflict embodies the social processes that I described above. Ash’arites rejected ethical objectivism as a means to morality, they believed in a strict commitment to faith without any requirement for objective reasoning and rational justification. Globally intellectual paralysis has infected Muslim societies, because the faith itself promotes this Ash’aritist dampening of intellectual reasoning.

The objective reasoning rejected by Ash’arites IS the superpower of western human civilisation. I don’t need to explain to my readers how the decline of objective reasoning and the rise of Narrative Management has upended western society. It plays out rather violently on University campuses as I write this. How can we break this impaction in our discourse? Canada, how can we disimpact our public discourse about sex, sexuality, and gender so we can move forward with the business of nation building and mending?