Source: Bigstock

Can Americans today really sleep safely in their own beds at night? Not with so many militant homosexuals wandering around.

In late August, the media revealed that a highly qualified lady (she’s brown, left-wing, female, and obsessed with DEI) named Sneha Nair had been appointed as Special Assistant at the Nuclear Security Administration, the atomic security branch of the Department of Energy. So what? Just yet another Democrat DEI hire, like that ridiculous Harley-Quinn-in-brownface woman who’s currently running for President on behalf of the Party? No, because this particular overpromoted minoritarian moron specializes in one particular niche field of DEI above all: queering nuclear weapons.

How can you possibly make nuclear warheads gay? There was a genuine 1990s plan for the U.S. military to construct a so-called “gay bomb” filled with aphrodisiac chemicals designed to make all male troops begin uncontrollably making love not war with one another on the battlefield, meant for specific shame-inducing use against Muslim enemies, but it never got off the drawing board. If you can’t make literal gay bombs, though, then how about making heavy ordnance go gay theoretically instead? That’s a nice little sinecure for some public-sector parasite with enough chutzpah to be prepared to fill it.

Nuclear Arse-nal
People unfortunate enough to have actually read any of the stuff will know that Queer Theory’s main true aim all along was not simply ensuring equality of treatment for deviants, as is only right and proper, but the far wider goal of dismantling the nuclear family wholesale, as a means of ushering in a utopian Marxist Brave New World from its irradiated ashes. Likewise, the subdiscipline of Nuclear Queer Theory seemingly aims at dismantling the West’s atomic defenses wholesale, thereby to usher in an alternative Marxist Brave New World—one dominated by non-white, non-capitalist, non-Western people. People like Sneha Nair, for example.

Nair has not invented this ludicrous nonsubject, but eagerly jumped aboard a preexisting DEI bandwagon. In December 2022, the Vienna Center for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation (VCDNP) think tank hosted a singular webinar, “LGBT+ Identity in the Nuclear Weapons Space.” Here attendees were allowed to vomit words about “the pressures queer people and others face to edit themselves” in the public arena, e.g., when guarding nukes at a missile silo whilst dressed in ordinary military uniforms, not random red leather gimp suits.

After outside observers criticized the webinar as a waste of time after seeing advance notices, U.S. Special Ambassador to International Organizations in Vienna Laura Holgate (she/her—because she’s a woman), who proudly poses as an avowed “ally to the queer community,” spoke up to explain why gayness was now utterly essential to Western military security. Firstly, “DEI is and should be the moral imperative for all organizations,” she explained, regardless of what they are, and how seemingly unrelated to matters queertastic. The use of the term “moral imperative” here demonstrates just what an outright religion diversity has now become in the minds of these fanatics.

For any skeptical non-fanatics out there, however, Holgate needed to come up with vaguely more rational-sounding pseudo-justifications for why nuclear security must now go gay, the best she could manage being this: “Today’s challenges in nuclear weapons policy affect everyone, so we should include as many perspectives as possible in addressing it,” even the utterly irrelevant perspectives of gays, lesbians, and trannies. Why? Because “If you’re not at the table, you are on the menu,” an inadvertently bigoted statement that could have been considered highly offensive to members of the gay consensual cannibalism community like Armin Meiwes.

The Hunt for Pink October
Did anyone ever ask Robert Oppenheimer or Leo Szilard for their considered opinions on the layout of the Los Alamos Gay Club? No, because, being mere humble nuclear scientists, rather than amazing sainted sodomites, they wouldn’t have known anything about such subjects, and so would have had nothing useful whatsoever to offer on pressing issues like what shade of pink the walls should be, or the ideal circumference for the en suite glory holes. Likewise, why should gays automatically have any insights worth listening to about subjects like nuclear deterrence?

According to fellow webinar participant Ray Acheson (they/them), of the Reaching Critical Will peacenik organization, homos are inherently suited toward stopping Xi, Kim, or Putin from irradiating America because their chosen Queer Studies discipline “helps to break down binary choices (such as nuclear war or nuclear deterrence)” and provide alternative scenarios and outcomes instead. Like what?

I understand, at least in theory, that there are other fictional options between the polarized gender binaries of male and female written neatly down on little bits of paper in today’s HR departments, but what are the nonbinary options available between “been nuked” and “not been nuked,” exactly? Can you now be “half-nuked” somehow? Perhaps quantum physicist Erwin Schrödinger and his famously nonbinary cat-in-a-box were homosexualists too? Considering that they enjoy a distinctly Sam Brinton-esque state of wave-particle duality, maybe photons are trans as well?

Using transgenderism as a theoretical model to base your nation’s nuclear defense doctrine upon is, all things considered, just not very sensible. What next? Maybe the USAF could build a network of giant floating arseholes to hover at strategic aerial entry points over the country and gape magnetically open whenever a new phallic enemy missile comes shooting over, thereby to contain the subsequent explosion joyfully and harmlessly within their special lead-lined rectums? Workable nuclear defense requires Game Theorists, not Gay Theorists.

Weapons of Ass Destruction
Once the webinar participants had finished mining one another’s uranium live on film, the inevitable fallout began. Skeptics started tweeting the VCDNP mocking messages like “They should not allow mentally ill people near weapons of mass destruction,” although, given the Queer Theorists’ favored logic of allowing persons with nonstandard outlooks upon the world to meaningfully contribute to military policy, perhaps that is precisely what the U.S. military should now do?

In Pride Month 2023, VCDNP webinar convener Louis Reitmann teamed up with the new Biden-Harris DoE appointee Sneha Nair to pen a pointed rebuttal to their critics, “Queering Nuclear Weapons: How LGBTQ+ Inclusion Strengthens Security and Reshapes Disarmament.” This was not published in some low-rent partisan gay rag like Pink News, but by the prestigious Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, guardians of the famous Doomsday Clock (the “l” now being silent). Here they bemoaned how “Nuclear deterrence is [traditionally] associated with [straight, masculine qualities like] ‘rationality’ and ‘security,’ while disarmament and justice for nuclear weapons victims are coded as [queer, feminine qualities like] ‘emotion’ and a lack of understanding of the ‘real’ mechanics of security.”

As if to prove it, the pair then went on to make a whole series of completely irrational powder-puff assertions of their own, such as bemoaning how the U.S. government currently wastes $60b annually on maintaining its mean and nasty nuclear deterrent instead of spending it on “education, infrastructure, and welfare” and cute babies and kittens. As an alternative, “the queer lens” prioritizes “the rights and well-being of people over the abstract idea of national security.” Except national security is only an “abstract idea” up until the point it is physically breached, and enemy nukes or other ordnance come raining down on you like atomic bukkake.

Ukraine used to have nukes. It gave them up in 1994. In 2022, Russia invaded, which it would presumably have thought twice about doing, had Kiev maintained its arsenal of deterrence. Try telling the Ukrainians national security is only an “abstract idea” and see what their response is.

Nair and Reitmann may not much believe in the “abstract” possibility of nuclear holocaust, but they certainly believe in the far more politically fashionable idea of climate Armageddon, speaking of how, following disarmament, the world’s total nuclear defense budget of $100b per annum could be far better used “to address the climate crisis, which could kill up to 83 million people by 2100.” Yes, but if the U.S., U.K., and France gave up their own nuclear weapons unilaterally, Russia, China, and North Korea could kill rather more than 83 million utterly defenseless white Western imperialist scum not by 2100 but by basically tomorrow—still, that’s decolonization in praxis for you, isn’t it?

Uranian Uranium
Perhaps you are still unconvinced by the idea of DEI for WMD. If so, the authors warn of how, unless black Muslim mutant homosexuals, etc., are allowed to staff missile launch sites, such locations may be vulnerable to attack from sinister unseen forces only they can help spot. For example, if all guards happen to be straight white males, then they will never suspect any other straight white males who work there of being evil Aryan supremacists who may attempt to steal spare warheads to commit acts of nuclear race-terrorism with, like blowing up Harlem or the BLM mansion. However, “women, people of color, and the LGBTQ+ community” are more likely to spot such hidden insider threats, even though they do not appear to actually exist, making them the best nuke guards of all: because they’re utterly paranoid against anyone except themselves.

In another 2023 paper laden with sadly unironic inverted commas, Nair argues that “The hegemonic construct of a [nuclear] ‘threat’ creates an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ dynamic that ‘others’ the threat by creating a preconception of the threat as ‘foreign.’” I think that means Americans should really fear getting nuked more by the KKK than by the CCP…even though only the latter organization actually has any nukes at all.

In terms of wider nuclear strategy, argue Nair and Reitmann, the old doctrine of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) should be torn up and replaced with a policy of GLAAD instead. Supposedly, “Studies in psychology and behavioral science [i.e., ones performed by ideologically compliant left-wing psychologists and behavioral scientists] show that diverse teams examine assumptions and evidence more carefully, make fewer errors, discuss issues more constructively, and better exchange new ideas and knowledge.” For example, “Informed by their life experiences, queer people have specific skills to offer that are valuable in a policy and diplomacy context.” Like what? Offering to fellate Putin under his big desk in return for giving Zaporizhzhia back?

Given that the main pseudo-rationale of DEI in defense is that it allows access to all perspectives upon military matters, not just phallocentric, heteronormative, conservative white male ones, it does seem rather curious that said unfashionable viewpoints shall, alone of all outlooks under the sun, henceforth be excluded from the woke strategy meetings of tomorrow. Nair and Reitmann’s conclusion to their woefully absurd paper is that, when it comes to those who disagree with them, any “Arguments to the contrary are as stagnant and outdated as those who voice them.” That’s not a very diversity-welcoming attitude, is it?

According to the newly queer-friendly Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, due to the sad state of contemporary geopolitics, the globe’s Doomsday Clock currently stands at a mere 90 seconds to midnight. Thanks to the best efforts of bizarre identitarian Dr. Strangeloves like Nair and Reitmann, it seems America’s own domestic civilizational Doomsday Clock is already significantly more than 90 days, weeks, months, or even years past Zero Hour.