—
You may have heard Left-wing political orthodoxy described as a “war on noticing.” Steve Sailer wrote a book on the topic, called “Noticing.” At every opportunity, Leftists will demand that you deny the reality that’s directly in front of your eyes.
We see this over and over again, particularly during any debate involving racial and gender politics. You’re just not supposed to notice that all the mass shooters were on SSRIs, or that the vast majority of violent crime is committed by young black men, and so on.
Closely related to the “war on noticing” is something you might call the “war on showing.” Leftists will happily use euphemisms to describe their policy goals, but they’ll go to extraordinary lengths to avoid showing you what those policy goals actually entail. They’ll talk about the “woman’s right to choose” or “gender affirmation surgery,” for example. But under no circumstances would they want voters to see any footage from an abortion, or a “vaginoplasty” or whatever they call it. They understand that, if most people actually saw the horrific procedures they’re talking about, support for Leftist ideology would collapse overnight.
Nevertheless, every now and then, despite the best efforts of activists who are committed to keeping you from “noticing,” reality occasionally slips through. The masses get a glimpse of the utter depravity that every major institution of the Left — from the media to academia to Big Tech censors — tries so hard to conceal. One of these moments took place over the weekend, when millions of Americans saw this video, which was uploaded by a gay 51-year-old Nashville-based country music songwriter named Shane McAnally. (And yes, that’s actually his name: Shane McAnally). He’s apparently collaborated with singers like Kenny Chesney and Keith Urban, and he’s won a few Grammys. In this footage, which we’ll play in a second, McAnally’s self-described “husband” shows off a five-month-old child whom they acquired through “surrogacy.” And in particular, McAnally’s alleged “husband” attempts to get the baby to say, “who do you want, Dada or pop,” to which the child responds, “Mama.” From behind the camera, McAnally informs the child that “mama” isn’t an option.
Watch:
VIDEO
Source: @shanemcanally/Instagram.com
No matter how much propaganda people have been force-fed by the corporate press, and no matter how much reprogramming they’ve undergone at a university, this kind of video cuts through all of it.
At a primal level, unless you’re completely broken as a human being, this footage is both enraging and intolerable. Your first reaction is that you have to find that child, rescue him from these psychopaths, and return him to his mother. It’s not simply that these two men clearly aren’t interested in properly taking care of this child, or treating him as a human being, instead of a social media prop. The issue is that these two men, as a matter of basic human biology, are incapable of properly taking care of this child. They are not able to give the child what he actually needs, which is a mother and a father. A child needs his mother. Neither one of these men are his mother, and neither one of them can properly take the place of the mother.
That’s what makes the moment so profound, and so unbearably sad, when the baby asks for “mama.” Some commenters have defended McAnally and his fake husband by saying that the baby is just babbling. He doesn’t know what “mama” means. He’s too young to speak using words. And that’s true. But it doesn’t make this moment any less horrifying. Babies say “mama” before they even know what the word means because “mama” is an easy sound to make. This is how the word “mama” came to be. It’s why we call our mothers “mama,” which we usually shorten to “mom” as we get older. And it’s why almost every culture on Earth uses the word “mama” or “mom” or some slight variation.
So we are born saying the word “mama” before we know what it means. In a normal, healthy situation, the adults in the baby’s life — especially his mama — will respond enthusiastically when he makes that sound. And that’s how he’ll learn to attach the sound to the most important person in his life, his mother. He’ll make the sound, his mother will light up and smile, and he’ll learn that the sound applies to his mother. This is the natural way of things. The process works beautifully. It’s engrained in us from birth. It is a beautiful, wonderful thing. Except when the child is torn away from his mother at birth and forced into an unnatural, disordered environment. Only then does this beautiful, wonderful, natural process become tragic and sad.
McAnally and his “husband” have made the decision to exploit the tragedy and sadness of the child’s situation for social media clout. When McAnally posted that video on his Instagram, as you saw there, someone posted a comment that read, “Throw it away and start over.” And McAnally replied to the comment with some laughing emojis. He also uploaded this footage, which has the caption, “6-week old homophobic baby.”
Watch:
VIDEO
Source: @rightanglenews/X.com
The baby’s face suddenly grimaces when he’s informed that he supposedly has two fathers, instead of a mother. And this is hilarious, because you see, the baby is acting like one of those backwards Right-wing bigots, who think children actually need a mother. So he posts the image of this child on his Instagram, and uses his child as a punchline. And then, when the online backlash began, McAnally insisted that the outrage was overblown and that he’s actually, “quite conservative” politically.
Just to be clear about this: If you believe two men should raise children together, you’re not a conservative. You’re destroying the most critical, fundamental bond that a child can have. You are permanently altering the trajectory of their life, for the worse. And it’s not even a close call. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of human nature doesn’t need to have this explained to them. If you don’t believe in conserving the fundamental building block of human civilization — which is the family — then you are not a conservative by any meaningful definition.
And yet, you’ll hear it endlessly claimed that “science” somehow proves that children don’t actually need a mother. They’ll cite all kinds of studies, which supposedly show that children raised in gay households don’t suffer any negative developmental consequences. So a few years ago, a woman named Katy Faust — who founded the organization “Them Before Us” — looked into these claims. She found — unsurprisingly — that these “studies” were unscientific nonsense. Many of them recruited their survey participants directly from websites devoted to gay activism. Additionally, she found that, several years after the Obergefell ruling that legalized gay marriage, only 0.02 percent of all households in the United States consisted of same-sex couples raising children. This is an extremely small number of households, which makes it very difficult to find a sample size for any kind of usable data set. You run into the same problem with all of the studies purporting to show that “gender affirmation surgery” benefits children. All of those studies are absolute bunk because of the methodology used to conduct them. Just like the studies extolling the virtues of gay parenting, these are not blind studies. The participants know what the study is trying to prove, and they are recruited for that purpose. And the sample sizes are so small that no reliable conclusions can be drawn from them.
You’ll find this with any major society-altering change the left is trying to foist on us. They make the change and then 10 seconds later claim to have volumes of long term, scientifically conclusive studies proving that the change is good. But it wouldn’t be possible for them to have that kind of data. If they have the data, it’s because they engineered it. They rigged it to achieve the desired outcome. That’s inevitably what’s required if you want a study to somehow prove that it’s a
