The CEO of the Mozilla Corporation, Brendan Eich, was forced to resign recently because of his support for traditional marriage. After discovering that Eich had previously donated $1,000 to support California’s Proposition 8 referendum, gay rights activists protested and made it nearly impossible for him to carry out his duties as CEO of Mozilla. (Mozilla has released an FAQ page with more information.) The irony that those who preach diversity and inclusion attacked and shut down someone who disagreed with them should not be lost on us. However, it is no longer surprising when those who preach the need for equality contradict themselves so obviously: that’s just the way things work in our new progressive culture.
Cultural change is inherently neither good nor bad, but rather depends on the context of such change. This is the idea that liberals seem unable, or unwilling, to grasp. They see change–or, at least, the changes they favor–as good no matter what, and immediately view the state of affairs before the change occurred to be inherently inferior. Disney’s Frozen, and the reactions caused by the film, provides a good example of this trend. Frozen, among other things, is about a princess who does not need a man to save her from her problems as many previous Disney princesses did. Instead of revolving around romantic love, this movie was about the sisterly love between the two princesses. It was, at its core, meant by Disney to be a change from the normal Disney princess movies.
Frozen was a really great movie. But, of course, liberal feminists turned it into something else. They took the film’s change in plot as a reason to bash the princesses of the past for their love for and supposed “reliance” on a male character. Take this video for example. The woman portraying Elsa prances around the scene throwing insults at the other princesses (representing Cinderella, Snow White, and more) because of the fact that their movies ended in the common true-love aesthetic.
Does the uniqueness of Elsa’s circumstances automatically make the other princesses’ stories inferior? Are these princesses of the past now deserving of the insults and disapproving looks thrown at them? In the eyes, of a liberal feminist, it most certainly does.
There is nothing wrong with a princess movie ending the way princess movies traditionally end: a happy-ever-after love story with a prince that saves them from the evil [insert villain here]. People pay to see movies like this because they make us feel happy. There is also nothing wrong with changing this up, and even the staunchest conservative wouldn’t be able to find something wrong with this movie’s ending. Both can be enjoyed by audiences, and both make for compelling movies.
The liberal feminist, however, not only raved about the independence shown by the princesses in Frozen (which, again, is not something unworthy of praise), but also used it as a platform to portray the horrors that existed in previous princess movies. It’s not enough to welcome Frozen‘s fresh take on the genre: the older paradigm must be destroyed.
This is how liberals view change, and the debate over gay marriage is not exempt from their wrath. It cannot be denied that change is occurring in this country over this debate, as many sates have already legalized gay marriage. Liberals, however, now view anyone who still embraces traditional views on marriage as not only wrong, but as people who should be despised and hated. They compare those in favor of traditional marriage to racists and bigots, and compare the suffering of gay people to that of African-Americans during the slave era and Jews during World War II. Obviously, those who support traditional marriage must be as bad as Nazis or Confederate slaveholders.
Advocates of gay rights, however, fail to see the obvious differences in these cases. Jews and blacks were hated in the respective time periods because of who they were, and nothing more. If one was born with dark skin or born of Jewish parents, they were undoubtedly inferior in every way. A Jew would not have been spared if he or she decided to convert out of the religion: their brain, blood, and very breath were forever stained by their Jewish bloodline. The difference is that those who do not support gay marriage do not inherently hate gay people. Rather, they simply disagree with actions they carry out.
The owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, the “Christian” bakery that was found guilty of discrimination after refusing to bake a wedding cake for a lesbian couple did not hate gay people, despite the left’s assertions to the contrary. They simply did not want their brand involved in something that they themselves did not believe in. Similarly, Chick-Fil-A would never refuse to serve a gay person or couple, but since the CEO supports traditional marriage and made public statements to that effect, liberals believed a boycott was in order.
In essence, liberals believe that when change is occurring in their favor, all other opinions must be immediately thrown away for reasons that even they cannot justify or argue. As a result, cultural change is being utterly corrupted for political ends. It makes sense to presume that this liberal idea of “change” perhaps originated from the overuse of the word by President Obama throughout both of his presidential campaigns. He glorified the idea of “change” without ever giving a concrete definition of what exactly it meant: he merely asserted that it would result in good things. Villainizing anyone opposed to this liberal change is now commonplace. As we have seen in the bakery case, the Chic-Fil-A case, and now in the Mozilla case, this trend is slowly but surely taking over American culture.
One of the most common types of people found on American college campuses, especially those on the East and West coasts, are those who would identify themselves as hipsters. There’s no real definition of a hipster, but you know one when you see one. (Spoiler: I’m about to do some heavy-duty stereotyping, so if you are going to cry about it, stop reading.) They will be wearing unique, possibly homemade clothes with a sweet pair of thick-framed, non-prescription glasses. They’ll have a latte from a small, cheap coffee shop (because Starbucks has become too trendy) in one hand and James Franco’s book of poems in the other. At least, these traits have held up surprisingly well in my college experience this far.
Hipsters, who tend to be more liberal, personify the trend I am writing about. Wanting change to occur for the “better” and labeling any other opinion (read: conservative) as intrinsically wrong and even laughable. They preach equality for all, but will completely demonize you if you disagree with their opinions. Hipsters also fail to see the contradictions that their own ideologies create: this article sums up the resulting conflict pretty well. The author straightforwardly points out that “the type of hipsters that enjoy obscure, unique indie bars with cheap drinks are the same people eager to see the minimum wage increase and put these very bars out of business.”
Campus culture falls victim to this same trend. Being a liberal on campus is cool, which, in turn, makes being a college conservative lame. Liberal students or faculty members may preach equality for all, but will completely demonize those who disagree with their opinions. Liberal college students, with hipsters making up a great deal of this group, see the United States as continually trying to progress away from the “bigoted” ideology that is conservatism, and conservatives who are “on the wrong side of history” must have had something horrible happen to them as a child.
Republicans and conservatives are often criticized for their supposed fear of change, or of anything differing from what they are used to. But the real criticism that needs to occur should be against the liberal democrat idea that change is inherently good. It takes a very close-minded population to deem the history of a policy or belief to be not only be irrelevant, but also intrinsically evil.
Maybe the next time a person of influence, like Firefox’s former CEO, claims to be in favor of traditional marriage, the government will do the liberal’s bickering for them by overstepping their authority and forcing resignation themselves.
We can only hope it never comes to that.
Daniel Pellegrino | Franklin and Marshall College | @dannpellegrino