The “Omar Mateen was secretly gay” dialog pushed by the Purveyors of Information must be questioned.

 

Call me paranoid.

 

But I find myself suspicious of this wave of posthumous accusations of lurid historical behaviors that have surfaced hinting at Omar Mateen’s homosexuality, or at the very least, of his secret gay-curiousness.

 

I believe such doubts concerning his sexuality are exceedingly obvious and very convenient for those provokers of the collective Western narrative which benefits entirely if the 49 murders at the Pulse nightclub are spun as being the result of a self-loathing violent homophobe rather than an Islamic declaration of moral judgement.

 

This passage from The Guardian’s article lays out the blueprint whereby pinning Mateen’s acts on his nascent homosexuality excuses Islam from the act, something the purveyors of the Narrative would love to see happen.

 

 

When I interviewed him recently for another article, the distinguished psychologist Samuel Juni told me: “Running away and trying to get in touch are psychologically not contradictory … When you’re running part of you is running from something that you would very much like to be in touch with but you can’t”. The annihilation of Sunday morning may have been Mateen’s final attempt to run away from the thing that obsessed him.
All of this poses a problem for the likes of Donald Trump, who told his Twitter followers, as the blood on the bathroom walls of Pulse was still drying, that he “Appreciate[d] the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism”.
If a heady combination of shame and sexuality were part of what drove Mateen’s decisions that morning, how is that to be policed? How can we, to borrow the language of counterterrorism, ‘eradicate’ the ‘scourge’ of internalised homophobia? Of a feeling that one’s desires are dirty and humiliating? You can’t easily make a homeland secure against self-loathing.

 

 

 

The widely-held perception that homophobic men are secretly gay is not new, or remotely original.  In the case of Orlando, it represents a lazy, convenient plot twist that can only play into the hands of the Islam-apologist agenda of the Western elites.

 

Mateen’s rumored homosexuality, and all posthumous allegations of such, to arise in the public discourse, while not to be outright discounted, should be examined thoroughly. The motives on the part of the one-worlders to turn Orlando into an act of homophobia instead of one of Islamic moral condemnation is blatant and begs skepticism.

 

 

  • sensibleman

    I understand the point- and it’s very astute, and perhaps it’s just splitting hairs, but I have one objection;
    1. Due to not having access to non-familial women in the middle east, many Muslim men turn to homosexuality for sheer reduction of their-T levels/ the impulse of having sex,
    so he is BOTH a Muslim terrorist AND a self-hating homosexual.

    • Wiless

      Esp. with polygyny meaning more women marrying than men.
      That’s why I don’t get advocates for polygamy; it’s usually the vast majority of men who get screwed over in favour of the top dogs.

      • Exactly. Polygamy is, in essence, Procreative Socialism.

        • Wiless

          Everyone gets the promises of utopia but only the top officials get the dachas, etc. Socialism, indeed!

      • sensibleman

        I’ve always just though that women were swiped around (men were limited at 3 wives at one time- so divorces were common)- so there are lots of single men, for extended periods.

        • Wiless

          Well, whether the top dogs pass them around amongst themselves or hold onto them, either way, less than top men get shafted, because there aren’t enough women for both them and those with more than one wife, mistresses, etc. Even unofficial polygamy hurts most men, it just isn’t recognized as much.

  • Blame anything except Islam